Cirocco

Banned for two blog entries.

no professors in te near vicinity I'm afraid, you'll have to do with a plain ol' engineer. WinkAllKerb'?

8/10. Made me smile and it's nice to see people go for for the silver lining

banned for flagrant lies and slander! I totally have a thing! Possibly even several things!

banned for using twitter.

your crystal ball seems to be malfunctioning, please reboot and try again. Starwhip!

nah, I like stars, I don't whip them and I don't own a whip made out of stars either. Perhaps a certain banana-shaped mod is in the vicinity?

granted. It is non-functional and does not come with a guarantee. I wish for happiness.

Granted. Researchers also accidentally discovered how to make nuclear fusion safe and profitable while they were at it. I wish for awesomeness.

banned for building a space battleship

dude, having a drawing compass and spyglass in your sig is obviously cheating. We're flying rockets here, not ships. And if it's not a compass and spyglass then your sig is confusing, which is even worse when it comes to cheating.

I unleash a horde of excitable, playful and hungry dogs on your skeletal army. My pack of happy dogs.

banned for creating fanfic

8-9/10. you're on the forum games section a LOT

granted, your lifespan is also doubled. I wish I would have enough time and energy to cram all the stuff I want to do into my free time.

Hello and welcome to the forums! As for making money: stay on "regular" staged disposable rockets until you can comfortably afford an SSTO. SSTO's save money with each use, but are very expensive to build. Also, solid rocket fuel is cheap, don't be afraid to use nothing but solid rocket boosters in your first stage.

proper spaceplanes, proper spaceplanes, proper spaceplanes, proper spaceplanes, proper spaceplanes, proper spaceplanes I really like designing spaceplane SSTO's. also: newest version of a kerbin-stationary space station, going to Jool/Laythe. Never been there before.

you're somewhere else? cheater! Everyone knows everyone is always "here".

banned for frequently posting on this thread

A small stipulation that I appearantly didn't convey correctly: I'm talking about interplanetary ships, not launchers or spaceplanes/SSTO's. For launchers: form follows function as has been mentioned many, many times before. Efficient launchers look sleek and cool. But what do you do with interplanetary ships? I find that form does NOT follow function in those. If I skap on all things I need to complete a mission, my interplanetary transfer vehicle either looks ugly as hell or they all end up looking exactly the same way.

granted. Version 1.0 of Solitaire will be mailed to you soon. I wish I had more and better artistic skills.

This is exactly what I feel my problem is! I over-engineer EVERYTHING so that I can do my missions with the least amount of weight/fuel possible. Problem that I feel is that ALL my rocket/deep space ships end up looking the same because of it: long fuel section with a couple of nuke engines, utility section with science or some other stuff, cockpit and lander, either pushed or in the utility section. THey all look the same and they all look ugly to me. While I do agree with that statement (hell, I studied to be an engineer, I feel like one almost all the time ) I sometimes feel like something's missing. I can have a ship that accounts for almost every possibility (not that hard in KSP, missions are very predictable), but still just looks like a chaotic mish-mash of components. The large fuel tanks are especially bad: the difference in looks between the orange tanks, the riveted look large tanks and the painted look of the extra-large and small diameter tanks is so big that some of my creations just look like a bunch of stuff thrown together. I sometimes consider encapsulating it all into structural panels or something but that requires a) skill I often find I don't have and a high degree of clipping that I don't like. so yeah, I'm just a bit annoyed at my own lack or artistic skill I guess

banned for using hashtags in your signature

Something I've been wondering about for some time when I see some of the creations here on the forums: do you think efficiency or aethetics is more important when designing a ship? I see a lot of big (mother)ships here on the forum which are absolutely gorgeous, but where I find myself thinking "what do you DO with all that space?! So much of it must be superfluous!". Things such as more than one science lab, meteoroid shields, or even just simple structural elements for the sake of aethetics. All of these add a crapton of weight which severely cuts down on your delta-V. And being an engineer, I can't help but cringe a bit at such inefficiency. Then again, when I build purely for efficiency, all my ships start to look alike and basically are all butt-ugly. So I personally tend to go for a bit of middle gound: I design for efficiency first, then I'll add some bits here and there or re-organize the design a little to beautify it a little. Lately I've tried my hand at designs that prioritize aesthetics over almost everything else, but I found that I absolutely suck at it

I claim the larger and in all possible ways more awesome hill next to jake9039's hill. My awesome Duna hill.