LittleBlueGaming

This might be helpful to show just how big the gap is between the 8 current planets and Pluto/others. Yes, 100 is technically an arbitrary line, but it's an arbitrary line that makes a lot of sense.

My parents used a 6-letter word with the first letter capitalized for EVERYTHING for the longest time. It was a huge success to get them to start using Xxxxxx## I use LastPass and KeePassX, most of my passwords are randomly generated 16-character things, only a few do I have memorized.

Should we just call all planets, moons, asteroids, and comets 'planets' and get it over with? It's part of our basic nature to seek to understand things, and to notice differences. When we notice differences, we start classifying. It's a useful tool. Pluto hasn't changed, so calling it a planet or dwarf planet or minor planet or trans-Neptunion object... what we decide to classify it as won't change the actual thing. What it will change is how we understand and teach things. It's no different than any other classification system. I'd rather my children learn the differences between planets, moons, comets, asteroids, etc... they'll surely have a better understanding than if they were just taught that there are all these Orbital Objects revolving around the Big Bright Central Orbital Object, ranging from the size of a grain of dust to larger than Our Orbital Object.

That's the best thing about science, anything can be overturned. It goes against the very essence of science to hold on to an old idea just because it's the one you're familiar with. If we just, today, discovered everything we know about in the solar system, how would we classify it? Pluto makes sense as a planet when you're shown a simple diagram in school, but not so much when you're looking at a more realistic representation of the solar system.

By their definition, it is. 'Clearing the neighborhood' in this sense is a technical term.

I don't believe on holding onto old ideas just because they are old. Our understanding of the universe evolves, and classifications evolve too. Or maybe we shouldn't classify the sun as a star, because historical value

http://press.web.cern.ch/press-releases/2015/07/cerns-lhcb-experiment-reports-observation-exotic-pentaquark-particles Just saw this, sounds exciting but I really have no idea what it implies.

I'm comfortable with transfers, rendezvous, docking, atmospheric flight, SSTO launch and landing, modular base/station building, aerobraking/aerocapture, and dealing with asteroids. Still haven't landed anything outside the Kerbin system though My advice would be for docking: Take it slow. I used to just dock visually, just keep checking at 90 degrees to make sure you stay lined up as you close in. Then I tried the Docking Alignment Indicator mod, which is especially awesome for IVA flying, and makes it even easier once you get used to it. You can do pretty close to the same kind of lineup with just the navball as well, line up your prograde with the target, used WASD to keep yourself aligned, and IJKL to keep the prograde marker aligned. On my list of things to figure out is what the heck an ejection angle is, and other useful things for planning efficient transfers.

Yeah, hiring them is too expensive. However, since it is so expensive, it makes the rescue contracts some of the best contracts in the game. I kind of like rescuing 4 kerbals in one launch, knowing their value is over $2 million.

After attempting this a few times, I've come to the conclusion that I'm not even close to a good enough pilot to pull this off I was gonna do a S.H.I.E.L.D. Globemaster + JumpJet combo, but no dice.

Mechanical linkage to the cockpit using struts is the obvious answer. Proof: using a probe core without power means the probe can't engage the actuators. Manned missions can still do it as long as there are sufficient snacks on board. - - - Updated - - - Killjoy

That must be it... it definitely explains the change in distance between exhaust particles, just interesting that it effects the sound too.

Probably because the descent profile is too steep for the mass/cross-section. Spending longer traveling horizontally through the atmosphere also helps slow your vertical descent.

I hadn't been to Jool yet, so just flew a mission there seeing what all the hubbub was about... sure enough, instant destruction. Kerbal physics

Something like 40/25 science in high Kerbol orbit, it's not a great science generator and you can't use it in planetary orbits. It is really good for passive income though.

It works in high, and presumably low(haven't tested) Kerbol orbit. When it's on, it detects asteroids facing away from Kerbol in a cone-shape. While it's scanning, you'll see asteroids coming into and falling out of detection.

I'm not sure, I'm only missing 3 nodes in my career game, the heaviest rocket nodes and the last electricity node, and I got them. Might need to refuse a few to get one to pop up. So far I've seen two 2-star contracts and one 1-star, all for Kerbin.

Mapping is a continuous process, and the contracts should be available as soon as you have the tech unlocked.

Pretty much all of it.

Yeah, didn't even have to shift my Sentinel between the first and second contracts. Second gave me 700k funds, took about 160 days.

Not much for science I'm afraid... it would be nice if it acted like each planet you observe was a new biome, but looks like only high/low space around the sun.

At that location it maps asteroids that pass near Jool's orbit, so it seems to be the closest celestial body further out from you. You also need to be aligned... if I change my Pe to be inside Dres it says 'Misaligned with Jool' or something like that. Same thing if you're too far out of coplanar.

Playing around with the parts, seems fun. I'm seeing RemoteTech-like asteroid mapping constellations in my future In action:

Ok, this is pretty cool. I'm just going to consider this part of stock.