samstarman5

I still remember an old Couch Stream vid with Spooty where he was playtesting 0.17 shortly before it came out. You know, where we acquired more planets. He had strapped SRB's on multiple stages, and pulled a Babe Ruth by just pointing where to achieve a rendezvous with Jool. All of this, without any calculations or the like, landed him right where he predicted. To be fair, he was surprised he pulled it off, but it just reminds me you don't need to pull out the graphic calculators or spend two hours before worrying about delta-v and such. Sometimes going for the Hail Mary is what you need to do. That, and adding SRB's in unconventional places, too. You only need enough to escape the solar SOI. Once there, you are interstellar. System escape velocity was achieved back when it was just Kerbin and the Mun, without the Kraken's help.

Well, anything is a hazard once you take the craft out of the VAB or SPH. With an experienced engineer along, you can fix wheel damage. Are you wondering if the thruster ends up out of alignment because of that damage, that it won't return back to nominal position when the leg is fixed? Sounds like an excuse to have Bill take the craft out for a shakedown. That is a rather sweet way that those two do fit together. I will definitely keep it in mind for my future builds.

Only if you have a kerbal next to the fuel port looking like a bored fuel jockey that you'd see at some pump station along Route 66.

In one career I started, I would name the ships after characters or creatures in stories or songs, like Puff the Magic Dragon, and stations and bases after related fictional places, like Honnah Lee.

Missing the childish computer. This is my same thinking, only with science modules. It would require somewhere easy to go to and return, so either an orbital station around Minmus or a grounded base there. Get those miscreants working on science so the good kerbals can focus on other things, like making me money.

Well, it doesn't say anything about a required return feature in the name.

Just a reminder that the Mercury capsule was originally designed without a window.

For large rockets, it really makes a difference where you place your reaction wheels. If placed on the command stage, I may very well have problems during launching(Although not always). However, if I move it a stage down, closer to the center of mass and thrust, there is less wobble. I find if I have a small command stage then I don't need a reaction wheel there as what the pod has does enough when it is down to that stage. For larger then I would include one, but leave it off to allow the launch stage's stabilization to control.

More like sliced lettuce.

When you experience a cosmic wedgie for the first time.

You do realize that is just holographic water, right? Wait....that really does make it a stupid idea! EUREKA!

It probably won't hurt to make a backup after set milestones. Maybe not as early as achieving orbit, but landing on the Mun definitely warrants a backup save and so on.

Cough reactionimage cough, your friendly neighbourhood moderator.

I am sold on the idea as long as there are Groucho eyebrows.

Well, we do already have the Bail-Out Grant, which, like kickbacks, costs reputation. Oh, there are underlying jokes with most of the parts and planets and moons. Considering Squad did a lot of research in spaceflight and astronomy, it is more likely to be the joke. NASA's sense of humor has always been quite strong, and that affair never did demonize the program itself. And it should never be forgotten, either, lest others think it so easy to attempt themselves.

Yes, you can simplify things down to the bare bones to get a mission done. But have you asked yourself if you even want to? Just because you can do a thing it doesn't mean you have to do it. In a way, that's one of the points of tourist and VIP contracts, so as to have someone along on missions. And they are a lot of nice funds to boot. Leaving control of a mission merely to one kerbal and an AI core, as stated earlier, leaves a lot of chance for mission failure. Taking this to the real life standpoint, one big reason you see so many successes and really no utmost failures with NASA has been their mantra of redundancy. One thing goes bad, there is a backup. There are no service stations in the solar system beyond Earth. Anything you send out there has to take care of itself. Your rover probe blows a tire, without an engineer along that tire stays blown. Your probe-piloted lander loses power because of an unexpected shadow, without a kerbal along to deploy a solar panel out into the light(if you have a deployable one included), you are stuck there for a while. You can choose to fly your missions with a skeleton crew. But why would you?

The Stayputnik is handy for a few early testing missions to get you some bumps in funds, and gives you a bit of an added challenge in piloting when things seem to feel a bit too easy. There's no reason to remove it just because you have no reason to use it. I'm willing to bet there are a couple of other parts you have yet to use but haven't. There are those I don't use but I don't call out for their removal, because I know others do find a use for them. As Elastigirl said, "You just have to learn to be more flexible."

NASA fixed it so most stages between Earth and the Moon would either impact into the Moon or would get kicked into solar orbit. Something to think about.

Early players truly know that pain, when you couldn't change the staging outside of the VAB/SPH

Why ask for stock when you are already so deep into mods, anyway? As to OP, I am confused as to what you are hoping for? Are you looking to illuminate kilometers of land with one light? Because that would make things way too overpowered and ridiculous. I can't speak to the landing gear lights, which are really meant to illuminate just where you are landing, but the Illuminator Mk1 and Mk2 do just fine. For one thing, if you are finding land or objects before you are seeing either, then you are going way too fast.

If you are looking to be precise with burn times, power of thrust, and weight ration, then you should be more than willing to find out and do the math. Otherwise, I fail to see the big deal to have to go back to the VAB to adjust.

Just going to be that guy....but what does this have to do with Jebediah Kerman?

Going here might help ya: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/69-technical-support-unmodded-installs/

So they can see why kids enjoy Cinnamon Toast Crunch

Well, 1.1.3 is not 1.2.