Grover

I think someone could give whackjob a challenge for the title of "most kerbal design"

Its possible, you just need to keep your periapse below 70km, so pointing a big rocket at minmus and whacking the throttle open should do the trick

The description of one of the electricity science nodes reads "were pretty sure nobody will need more than 64kw for anything", relating to a comment by a smart guy at Microsoft in the earlier days of personal computers saying that nobody will ever need more than 64mb (or was it kb) of memory... Clearly he never modded his ksp install

Mine was well before the advent of luxuries like manoeuver nodes, ladders and these fancy landing legs, the way to land back in those days was to use aero fins on sticks, and EVERYTHINH was eyeballed, no mollycoddling, no hand-holding, just a kick in the general direction and a bit of guesswork

You can fix it yourself by going to the parts .cfg file and changing the PhysicsSignificance line to 0. Once the aero model considers the mass of the heatshield (which on real pods is damn heavy) any sensible pod configuration will be stable with the heatshield going first, protecting your delicates nicely

Didnt you read the disclaimer before you bought the game and showed your children? Im afraid to say that the bringing of awesomeness into your childs life was strictly your own doing. Maybe in 20 years we might watch Keepbro Jr. Walk on mars for the first time, or land the first colonisation effort on the moon? Who knows how this Awesomeness will manifest when administered from such a young age?

Something like FAR was never going to be added as stock. Whilsg i agree that it does a fantastic job of modelling aerodynamics, it makes craft design significantly harder than stock, Especially for newer players who arent clued up on aerodynamic designs. The magic of ksp is that almost anyone can cobble together a spaceworthy rocket in a few minutes and a few "tests". Making the step from simplified aero (though not as broken as current stock) to realism and difficulty should be a choice. And lets be fair, its not hard to install FAR to an install. With ksp, its often hard to remember that there are thousands of people still struggle to get stuff to LKO. Imagine their despair when once-stable craft suddenly start flipping and tearing themselves apart, and once-agile craft suddenly resemble lawn darts.

ALT key is your friend. It may only be 4x warp, but its faster than nothing... I wish i knew this when i last landed on gilly

I find that Roger is a fine fellow regardless of where his wheels are. Most recently when he waved at me as he rode past on a unicycle!

A thread to express your feelings to the situation developing in France following the "islamist" massacre at the Charlie Hebdo office. Please keep from flaming, in the spirit of free expression if nothing else. im sure we all extend our deepest regards to the victims and their families. No person deserves to be attacked for their own expression, let alone killed in such a manner. May they rest in peace, and the culprits brought to justice. Je suis charlie nous somme charlie

Is your real name Werner? Does this mean kerbals play KSP? Mind blown...

That will just move the problem to the new last part you complete the construction loop with. Think of your craft as a tree, with the root part as the trunk and every part attached to it, as a branch, and (almost) every part can have others branching from it (except certain radially attached parts or struts). The issue for the OP is that he wants the branches to form a loop, which a tree cant do (a mathematical tree cant do anyway), the only exceptions, as mentioned above, are the humble strut, or "space tape", or a docking adaptor (which was connected in the simulation and NOT in the VAB or SPH) which can close your loop

3.61 TWR? I think youve been listening to Jeb too long and reached the near-impossible phase where "moar boosters" isnt the solution to your problems but actually what caused them

Hey i didnt mean literally! What are you guys? A bunch of kerbals with no concept of humour? Oh... The humorous comeback... Strange i didnt think of Apollo 13 when i typed my last, thats my favourite engineering story to explain why simple is always best. And by simple, i mean making sure the monkey with the pegs shouldnt even want to put the square one in the round hole (half my job is in management), in fact, why not have just round pegs and holes? Which nugget invented those square ones? I bet it was that Bob Kerman... Or maybe Bill...

The best way to engineer is round pegs and square pegs ideaology. Make sure the round ones dont fit in square holes and the square ones dont fit in the round holes. Theres no other way to make something kerbal-proof