Charzy

The one I showed you will glide 7.9:1 under the absolute best circumstances. Ultralight trikes cannot glide enough to make any landing safe. The very best you can hope for in the event of an engine failure is that you don't die and only escape with broken bones.

Depends on the plane. An actual glider, like an ASK 21, will glide for ages depending on whether or not it can find thermals or other types of lift about. On the other hand, you have things like Flexiwing Microlights like this which will indeed fall like a brick (they're also too small to carry a parachute, so if the engine fails you get badly injured or die).

Here's an interesting experiment for you to try. Get a magnet (preferably cylindrical) and a non-ferrous pipe (preferably of the same internal diameter as the magnet). Drop the magnet down. It will convert the gravity will convert the gravitational potential energy of the magnet into kinetic energy, which will then be converted into electrical energy which will be generated in the pipe. This results in the magnet going down the pipe very, very slowly (this is not because it is attracted to the pipe, because the pipe isn't ferrous). This loss in speed is because the kinetic energy is being converted into electrical energy and so the magnet loses the kinetic energy and goes more slowly. Your idea would certainly produce electricity, but what will end up happening is that the rotating bit will slow down unless you apply constant torque to the boom via the RCS, and it will rotate very, very slowly and not produce very much electricity.

Because crafts aren't planets, nor are they moons.

One billion watts. That is, 1 000 000 000 joules per second.

Can you clarify what you mean by allowed mods? Are we able to use, say, B9? For the flying around the world one, does that accumulate if we fly around more than once?

The only issue I have with the 1-2 pod is that the ladder is such an idiotic position compared to every single other crew-containing part. If they would put the hatch at the front (like everything else) and the windows at the back, at 180 degrees to the hatch, I'd use it a lot more often. As it stands, having it inline with your other parts means having a rotated navball, making it far harder to navigate using it.

Could we at least have a seperate scoreboard for FAR users?

I got it back when it was "donate $7".

For all the people saying "THIS IS KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM NOT BOAT PROGRAM BOATS DONT GO TO SPACE", can you tell me what the point of rovers is? Would you support the removal of rovers and rover parts so that we can have faster loading times going into the game, and a less cluttered utility tab?

This stuck me as being odd, so I decided to do some calculations. Proxima Centauri is 4.24 light years away, so it'll take us 4.24 years to get there at c. However, the kerbal universe is a tenth the size of ours, so it'll only be 0.424 light years, so only 0.424 years to get there at c. We're going at 0.2 c, so we'll divide 0.424 by 0.2, giving us 2.12 years. Now we want that in days. So, multiply by 365.25 (accounting for leap years, here) to get 774.33 days. Now to get that into hours, so let's multiply by 24. That gets us 18583.92 hours. Obviously, we're not doing this real time. That'd be stupid. So let's apply time warp. KSP allows for maximum time warp of x100 000 We divide 18583.92 by 100000 to get 0.18583.92 hours, or around eleven minutes. With a warp drive part allowing us to get to relatively large fractions of c like this, and perhaps another level of time warp, it's far, far less time that you'd think (assuming my math is correct here) to get to a nearby star system.

Water's problem is that it instantly destroys any part that hits it too fast, without making it explode or bounce at all. As I recall, both water and land have the same "destroy things at this speed", but when you crash on land it causes the part to explode, which slows the craft down a fair bit (the explosion pushed everything else away) and may save the rest of the craft.

Why would you make it heavy?

As far as current science is concerned, it's impossible to know.

That's the point of seperatrons. Like in real life, their purpose is to get those spent stages away from your main rocket.

Oh no. People making theories about an incomplete game for roleplay purposes. How very terrible. Let us ready the stakes to burn these heretics at once.

Why is this needed, though? Electricity is a renewable resource, unlike monopropellant, which means that you're very unlikely to run out. Use solar panels.

YYYY/MM/DD does indeed make the most sense, since it allows sorting, easy usage of calenders and the dates are actually in order.

I've never understood American dating. Why would you have the month before the day and then the year? Having it in order (day, month, year) seems so much more intuitive.

Try changing the mode to air breathing. While in an oxygenated atmosphere, the RAPIER uses oxygen, and then automatically switches to oxidiser once it stops getting enough oxygen.

They may not be holes, but they're also neither stars nor vortices.

SI calls them metres and litres. As it's the organisation that creates metric units in modern times, metre is correct in the same way that colour is correct.

Oh no. They mocked Zelda. How terrible. They must be executed immediately for their crimes against humanity.

Nobody's suggesting changing KSP to use X-Plane's engine. They're suggesting a feature that X-Plane has. If you're going to try to discredit suggestions with no real backing, try harder.

Thanks, it works now!