memes in space
-
Posts
94 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by memes in space
-
-
godspeed fellas. free speech is dead and Take 2 killed it.
-
Slap a large nosecone on it. That usually works.
-
Just a minute ago I screwed up a plane (because all i have are the terrible juno engines right now) and I instinctively hit F9 instead of revert. Now I'm multiple science points behind. Fade me
-
Mun, minmus- wait, planets? I've sent a probe to eve and jool man
-
and my life is boring
-
No lag here. Got a great graphics card, an ok processor, NASA levels of RAM (8 GB) and HDD (1 TB)
-
I never make these, but if I did I'd put one in LKO because its easy to rendezvous, not out of the way
-
54 minutes ago, Wallygator said:
EDIT (and minor peeve): By the way - Since the forum rules strictly prohibits conspiracy and other types of threads --> Why is there STILL a loading tip that states "Staging Mun landing..."???? Can that particular tip be removed? Seems it is poorly framed in my opinion. OR is it ok to allow it since it is only talking about the Mun rather than the Moon? I know it is supposed to be humorous - but this particular tip always make me cringe a little and think "On no, not again' when it pops up. @SQUAD, thoughts?
Even a 'humorous' acknowledgement of an 'Anti-science" conspiracy theory in a "Pro-science" game acknowledges and propagates a dangerously negative meme in my opinion. There are plenty of other humorous loading tips that can make everyone smile - I don't think folks are going to miss this one if it were to disappear.
relax
-
I'm not "updating" if there are literally no advantages. Throttle is set to 0% which is literally useless, kerbals can't make maneuver nodes because Take Two hates fun, and for some reason they put a swear filter in a singleplayer game???
-
* Default throttle setting to 0%.
Why? What use is a 0% throttle? It should default to 100%. Also why did you take away kerbal maneuver nodes
-
The gees would be freaking insane on that that thing, that won't happen. I mean you could try putting a mk3 plane on top of a big srb
-
But can you do it in half an a press?
-
On 7/20/2017 at 0:04 AM, Lo Var Lachland said:
HOW DARE YOU!! The F/A-18 is one of the most popular fighter aircraft of the past 2 decades! And Boeing does not "suck." Commercially, they built the 737, which
wasis a great plane. Besides that, they built:- The V-22 Osprey. (Okay, so maybe that one kinda maybe did suck)
- The F22 raptor, (A very successful plane, mind you)
- The Apache helicopter,
- The F-15,
- the 'friggin B-17, (Which had a very nice reputation for coming home half exploded)
- The B-29, (Which dropped the Gosh darn ATOM bomb,
- The B-52, a VERY nice bomber, (which is still being used)
- The VC-137/707, (The first Jet Air Force one)
- the CH-47 Chinook,
- The KC-135 stratotanker, (I have a friend who was a pilot on that plane, and really enjoyed it)
- THE FREAKING SATURN V!!!! (Well, most of it. *heh* heh*)
- The 747, (which is the MOST successful airliner in the WORLD, with a VERY clean service record)
- The E-3 sentry,
- The B-1 lancer,
- The 737, (Which is another, maybe first most popular airliner in the world)
- Space Shuttle DISCOVERY,
- and VC-25. (AF1)
- They also built the X-45, the first operational carrier-based drone,
- and the KC-10 tanker.
Btw, my Father worked at Lockheed for a short time, so if you dare insult them....
1. There you go
2. Only a small part.
3. True
4. True
5-8. we're talking about fighters
9. True
10. Yeah that was awesome.
11. Most of it. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
12. Airbus is better mate
13-14. We're talking about fighters (I'm making exceptions for helicopters and things i thought were cool)
15. Airbus is better mate
16. The space shuttle was a waste of money. it sucked.
17. Literally the 747 but with features
18. they made drones? wow nobody's ever done that!
19. Also cool.
And don't worry, Lockheed is way better. Just because Lockheed is freakin awesome doesn't mean they haven't made the FF-35
-
comvlad, russia has best fighters. filthy americans will try but they will never escape the gulags.
seriously though, i'm from america. i don't know any russian jets.
-
1 hour ago, MiffedStarfish said:
McDonnell Douglas! The F/A-18A-C are great, I don't really like the Boeing E-F variants.
Yeah true but most F/A-18s in service are super hornets, and those are trash
-
On 7/16/2017 at 0:22 AM, Lo Var Lachland said:
Eugh. The F-16 looks HORRIBLE. I like how sleek the F/A-18 is.
Also the F/A-18 is boeing so that's another reason why it sucks
-
7 hours ago, The Dunatian said:
The F-35 is the best air-to-air fighter except the F-22; and the F-22 is the best air-to-ground fighter except the F-35.
i mean the fact you're calling the f-35 the best at anything is kind of sad.
-
1 hour ago, S4qFBxkFFg said:
I'd guess the F22, but as others have said, how do you define "best"?
One-on-one it could probably knock anything else out of the sky, but it would cost the same as 2-and-a-bit F16s.
Yeah but money isn't a concern. Some aircraft are awesome but couldn't be produced because 1 would cost billions.
-
6 hours ago, JAFO said:
Ever heard of backing them up to CD/DVD?
Not many people have blank CDs. I don't even know if my computer has a CD-RW drive. (Probably though, but I never bothered to check)
-
KSP for me in a nutshell:
1. Either get bored, or get annoyed with Steam being terrible at assigning permissions to folders
2. Quit
3. Wait a few months
4. Come back
5. Go back to 1
-
Yet another mod I can't download because there's no SpaceDock link. Sucks. but I'd rather miss out on a KSP mod than get a virus.
-
from what I can tell it's actually called a barrel roll.
-
I suck at building SSTOs, but I finally made one that works! It barely gets to orbit, but it does technically work.
-
1 hour ago, regex said:
I think they were more referring to the mod rather than actual IRL fuels but you are correct in that their understanding of Real Fuels is wrong. Real Fuels is a spin-off of Modular Fuel Tanks which means that each fuel tank has a volume that you can fill with whatever fuel is needed for whatever engine, and customize each tank as needed. Of course, you might need a Service Bay type tank to handle monopropellants like hydrazine for RCS which rules out it's use for Kerolox storage, but that's beside the point.
hm. well ok
Kerbal Space Program update 1.4 Grand Discussion thread.
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
Played 1.4 for an hour.. and back to 1.3. This seriously sucks. We get parachutes, a terrible EULA and way too many bugs.