NASI Director

This is, without a doubt, one of the most prettiest things I've seen on this forum. Exceptionally well-done!

Someone has discovered this! Not so much a tweakable, but it works nonetheless

Totally worth it. I'm just glad that my post caused several people have feelings

I've always considered Mun being the adjective of it, even though it is a moon. Similar to The Fast Cat, The Mun (moon)

It is, but thinking as a Kerbal would think... Exactly! They're willing to have no leg room so their feet can touch the ground later!

I'd have to say a tie between Vexx, Super Monkey Ball, and Morrowind.

It could be compared to how a dog or cat needs you to take care of it, and not neglect it.

Random Gravity Music Starts Playing Why do we play Kerbal Space Program? Is it the allure of the science that brings us? Is it the constant action in the game that brings us in? Or is it none of the above? For some, it could be both, however for me it's something much different. I play because I feel I owe it to the Kerbals. They've approved an unlimited budget and all the resources on their planet to the space program and have also appointed me as their administrator of their space program in hopes I can lead them to, hopefully one day, entire space colonization. I've set them off constantly. "I need to do this, I have to do that," yet I haven't done anything to further their last hope other than a probe on a couple of moons and planets. These Kerbals will (sometimes) happily risk their life for the greater good of all Kerbalkind. The engineers and scientists will work 24/7 for you, to continue their dream, their destiny, and possibly last hope. They work for you as an ant works for its queen or as a bee does for its hive. No human idea has this kind of dedication, initiative, or ambition. The mission controllers and researchers have dedicated their life to the only thing on their awfully small (but incredibly dense) planet. YOU owe it to them, as administrator of their most funded agency, department, or even branch of military, to send them where no Kerbal has gone before, to let them reach their limits and then some. They are volunteering and sacrificing their time so YOU can help and lead them. When you put off KSP, you let down the ones that made you their leader. You were their last hope and you failed them. Get on KSP! Go to your limits! Push yourself even farther! Go make a Grand Tour VTOL SSTO! Go without boundaries, for the only thing holding you back is yourself! Your skill level is irrelevant, only your experience counts but you will not make it anywhere being on the forefront of safety, being in your comfort zone! As a famous KSP Forumer once said: "I do not fear failure. Failure is data. I fear not learning from failure. Failure to learn from failure is stupidity." Progress in KSP is measured both in failure and success. Your crash in a manned mission to Duna proves to be a learning experience for later on when you send an armada to Jool. Your success in achieving orbit for the first time gives you the information you need to do it time again and again. Your successive launches from Kerbin tell you what you need to know to orbit on Laythe or even Eve. Your many attempts to make it out to Eeloo are what the Kerbals strive for. That's what they will live and die for, whether or not they live to see it. KSP is much more than just a game with explosions; it's almost a responsibility to those who depend on you. Now go forth, fellow space program administrator, fellow space defense contractor! Go forth my fellow commercial space entrepreneurs, go with your comrades, the space enthusiasts and your science followers. Even you there, the forum lurker, join us and lead your space program to its ultimate achievement. The Kerbals need us, my fellow partners in space travel, let's not keep them waiting.

Was most impressed by the videography and the missiles! Great job!

That seems weirdly entertaining... Too bad no parks for about 10 miles around have swings

I must say, the AC-130's fuselage was amazing.

I wish I had some pictures to post, but this probably tops them all. I don't use the quicksave/load. I don't. Mainly because I don't think about it until after the incident. Anyway, I had finally decided to make a Mun base. I have never done this before, and to be honest I was nervous. I constructed an unmanned lander that would land, and have supplies for me to start linking up the pieces (I had KAS as a plugin). That went smoothly, and I landed in the southern part of the northern crater (mind=blown). Now I send up my manned lander, and it goes fine. The inclination change, blah blah. I initially landed within 1.1km of the first lander, and with plenty of fuel left, I started heading towards the other lander at a pace of about 0.4km per hop. Eventually, I had gotten within 50m of the unmanned lander and then disaster struck. I accidentally killed my vertical velocity without doing the horizontal first and went legs in about 200m/s hitting the ground. Luckily, it survived but I was spinning to rapidly to change my attitude so I finally met my demise across the side of a mountain. This is where I slapped myself. I had wrongly assumed that the game auto-saves when you go into a new SOI, so I had quickloaded. Unfortunately, the quicksave I had loaded was bout 3 days back, before I had even landed on the Mun ever. That is where I called quits and left the game because I messed up. >:c

If we use the same engine, and the same amount of starting fuel, then is it more efficient to burn slow,* or is it better to burn fast? My theory is that it is the same, because fuel consumptions goes down if you throttle down, and goes up if you throttle up. However since you're burning slow you spend more time burning and more fuel is used in that longer time. But if you burn fast, the fuel consumption goes up and in that short time to complete a burn you used up more fuel. What is the truth here? Is there some sort of mathematical formula that can be done to see if my theory is correct? If I use a Skipper that had the same Isp as a nuke (theoretically), which would be better to use? Is Isp the all-reigning dictator in fuel consumption and it doesn't what I do? These are the real questions being asked here! EDIT: Also, if I wanted to figure out the Isp of an engine, say throttled down to 50%, then would I just multiply the Isp by two? EDIT EDIT: How do I calculate burn time for said engine?