razark

I would be grateful if someone could make a Kerbalized version of this one:

If that's what you feel qualifies as a base. I wouldn't call it a base, but then I use certain mods and don't use other mods, so some people would say I'm playing the game "wrong". Sounds to me like it could be a mobile base for robotic explorers.

A base is whatever you consider a base. It might not match another's definition, but you're playing your game, not theirs.

I would love to have the black meatball shirt. I'd even have to break with tradition and wear a T-shirt to work one day.

I have a Loner Kerman. He's currently orbiting a single-Kerbal craft around Kerbin at 80+million km.

Call it what it is. If a pilot flies its airplane into the ground because it misread the instruments, it's called "pilot error", not "instrument error". It is your responsibility as the operator to know what your instruments are telling you, not to blindly follow them. If you want the machine to tell you what to do, why not just use an autopilot in the first place? And I for one quite frequently do my close maneuvers (down to 1 km or less) on the orbital map, using the navball in target mode. Edit: If you're driving your car in reverse and look at your speedometer, do you assume the car is moving forward just because the meter isn't reading a negative number?

I place Sepratrons directly on the capsule. Abort mode shuts down all engines, fires any retrograde Sepratrons on the vehicle, decouples the capsule, and fires the abort Sepratrons. If the abort engines are unused when the capsule reenters, I fire them on the way down to help slow down. I tend to use three most of the time, but I've been known to use two on the small capsule, or four on the big one. Or a lot more, to abort with a capsule/crew pod.

No way to tell, except that it says "Target" instead of "Orbit"? And if automatic switching is such an issue, how come no one is complaining that it switches from "Surface" to "Orbit" on the way up and "Orbit" to "Surface" on the way back down? It's simply a matter of learning to use the instruments you have, and if you're looking at the velocity, you're already looking at "Target" or "Orbit".

They're about the only ones that do on a regular basis, but an E6B is kinda limited in what it does. (Not that it's not great at what it does, it's just great at a very limited set of tasks.) Now I'm wondering how useful it could be in KSP.

Depends on how you define "work for". There are also people that work for contractor companies that are not directly involved in agency work. Individual companies' HR departments or IT workers, for example. Some employees even have to track whether they are doing agency or company work at any specific time. Edit: What he said.

It's amazing what a slide rule can do.

Because spaceflight is awesome? Yeah, that. Not everyone is a rocket scientist. Most of the people who work "at" NASA don't even work "for" NASA. Contractors outnumber Civil Servants by quite a bit. LIES! EVIL FILTHY LIES!

I dislike this idea. If I need to jump to my higher throttle setting to avoid a crash or unplanned rapid docking event with a solar panel, I hold down ctrl, and... instead of going back up, my throttle decreases. I then press "x", and my throttle jumps up, and then, because I'm holding ctrl, it drops again. Shift and ctrl should be strictly reserved keys for throttle, and not used as modifiers to other actions. It would be a bad thing.

I know there is a config file where you could edit the speed of radio, so you could remove or reduce the delay. Don't know if that's being carried over to the new version. Very carefully. I put a station with control capabilities around Duna, and used that to control a probe to the surface.

Ok, now that I've used it: It doesn't seem as cluttered as I first thought. It's dense, but it's all useful, so I'm not unhappy. Well done!

What are you talking about? It's the Hornet! How could they make sense of it if they go around reusing names? Do you think 90% of the people could name a single US carrier from WWII? And of those that can, how many would mention CV-6? (And how many of those would be thinking of CVN-65, anyway?) I just don't expect many people to care about history. As for people knowing about spaceflight or spaceflight history, most of the people working in my office couldn't tell you much beyond Armstrong and Apollo 11.

That's more attention to history than I expect these days, so I don't see much reason to complain. Just be glad they weren't denying or forgetting it.

I've watched an eight year old child try to teach a sixty-eight year old retired Chief Engineer for the Shuttle Program how to play. I'm sure that says something about the appropriate age level for KSP.

There's a mod: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/26482-0-21-OrbitalConstruction-Redux-4-1-%28Kethane-RocketParts-Conversion!%29

Thank you very much for that. Options are always appreciated.

Honestly, the new version seems a bit cluttered, taking away from the simplicity of the original version. This seems to be showing a lot of information that's already available on the navball.

Pros: -Less griping and repetitive suggestions on the forum Cons: -Not a con, but I have no desire or use for multiplayer gaming

I predict that .22 will contain nothing but wild speculation about what's going to be in .23.

See, y'all just don't understand. Yes, it might be similar to what's already been suggested. It might sound a lot like what's on the "do not suggest" list, but MY idea is so much better than everyone else's lame ideas, and there's no way anyone could ever have thought of it before, so I will just go ahead and post it anyway. The community will obviously see the great wisdom that only I can bring, and will shower me with praise. And the cycle will continue...

B, and put the ladder there anyway.