FleshJeb

I wish it was all shunted off to a separate crew-management interface, accessed by a single button on the PAW, and/or one of the mod buttons on the right. The whole inventory system is not a level of granularity I want to manage AT ALL, and I think adding it to stock was a mistake.

Median home price in my area is $700k+ I could actually afford to buy a $250k rocket engine and live in the bell. The HVAC system might be a bit over-specced though.

The ridiculously small size of the solar system and celestial bodies in KSP doesn't provide a good use case for orbital fuel stations. In the majority of cases it's cheap enough to travel to and land at mining station nearby. This also reduces the amount of player time and shuffling of craft. Kerbin options that I've used and enjoyed: Launch to LKO and use the onboard fuel to go to a mining operation on Minmus flats. Launch fuel from Kerbin on reusable boosters to an orbital station, then land the booster. It's very convenient from an operational perspective. Catching as

In addition to J's excellent advice: Don't look at your ship, look at the navball. The stock one has all the information you need except for distance to target and rotation, and for most docking, you can ignore rotation.

That's a trifle reductive. The core benefits of AutoCAD in the professional setting are sustained drafting speed, dimensional accuracy, as well as ensuring that the accuracy of what you're modeling is maintained. Command-line input is EXTREMELY fast (and RSI-friendly), as well as being explicit--Everything executed is intentional. This comes at the cost of memorizing approximately 300 shorthand commands, and benefits from autocomplete. AutoCAD is so fast and precise that I actually prototype my Factorio builds in it prior to rebuilding them in-game. (Even considering the instant-build san

Ahem ^ I know a regular user of these forums (not me) with photosensitive epilepsy, so this is NOT a theoretical issue. Perhaps you could hit the Community Manager (author of said GIF) with the clue bat? On-topic: The Mun looks good.

Editor Extensions mod. I won't play without it. You can set any angle you want.

If you've got a week, stuff them in the wastewater treatment system, let the microbes do the work and decant the results. On a sufficiently large spacecraft, the maintenance hatch will be man-sized. If you must disassemble the body, freeze it first--There's plenty of cold to go around. Hacksaws should be in abundance. I used to design and inspect wastewater systems, so I'm hard to gross out and ruthlessly pragmatic. The first step to solving any problem is believing that a good solution exists and then going from there. There's no room for fatalists in space. If we were to appro

Using a corpse for propellant is the ethical equivalent of "feeding the tree" in the Integral Trees, or reclaiming the "gift of your body's water" in Dune. It's not that dissimilar from Soylent Green, except there was no consent involved. While I've read a generation-ship's worth of science fiction and can't specifically recall corpses being used as propellant, I'm certain it's been done before, but perhaps I found it so non-shocking that I didn't note it. Personally, if I believed in an afterlife, I'd be giggling my non-corporeal butt off as my component parts were blown out the engine.

There's an old bug (that I'm not sure still exists) where making the cargo bay the root part of the craft can prevent it from shielding the parts inside. Are you closing it with the slider or the button? Even if the slider is set to 0% and the button says open, it's open. I've never heard of that engine bug, I'm inclined to think it's mod-related. I'm assuming it's a mod engine? Did it work correctly on that planet before? For diagnosing problems, it always helps to have pictures of the craft and a mod list.

(I actually have this book)

More pics and links here: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40391/the-biggest-airplane-in-the-world-has-taken-to-the-skies-a-second-time-after-two-year-hiatus

How does that work if you're flying something like a dropship, where your control axis is horizontal to the planet instead of vertical? "Down" is relative to the craft, not the planet. What you're experiencing is a case of your TWR being too high for a precision landing with the controls we have--It's a design and operations problem. Precision Mode [Caps Lock] can help by giving you finer throttle control, but you can also bind the thrust limiters on your engines to an axis [like H,N] to tweak them in-flight. My favorite solution to this problem is a pair of overlapping spotlights fa

I can confirm that I've had serious warping issues in 1.11. I'd go back to the 1.9s, although 1.7.3 and 1.3.1 are the most stable KSP releases. I've quit playing because I've given up on Squad's quality control. 6000 hours in, and I'm using my energy to tell people not to buy KSP 2 because the current knucklehead management have murdered the franchise.

Shoutout to @mobylettespaceindustriesfor the vid.