cantab

In the UK at least Japanese cars tend to do very well on reliability, with Honda and Toyota top. But reliability is only one good thing about a car. And really every company has made some good cars and some awful ones. I find parallel parking fairly easy. Now reverse parking into a bay, that's what I'm rubbish at, it feels like dumb luck whether I line up neatly or straddle two spaces. But generally the manoeuvres are simple-ish. It's the other idiots on the road and the weird junction layouts you have to watch out for.

In general I try and avoid making fairings wider than the stack. So a 2.5m fairing would be appropriate for a ship with the ore scanner. It's still a right nuisance to fit into satellite designs though.

You may be able to snag a Jool gravity assist to help a lot, or even multiple assists to get the desired result. Time could be an issue though, check the contract doesn't expire too soon. Otherwise, yeah, ions. Make sure it doesn't jitter too much in Hold X mode on the SAS, then watch a film or something while your burns run.

Try airbags, they can slow you down in Tylo's lithosphere without overgeeing. Maybe.

No vowels in it, so "kay ess pea" is the obvious way.

On Windows it makes pretty much no difference. On Linux probably the nVidia card, just because nVidia make decent Linux drivers in general and AMD don't.

It's not clock speed that matters but single-threaded performance. Even at the same speed and even running a single thread, some processors are just better than others. The Pentium Extreme Edition 965 and the Core i3 6100 are both dual-core processors with hyperthreading running at 3.7 GHz, but the difference in how they run KSP or anything else will be a vast yawning chasm. That's nine years of progress for you.

Spearka, first is to find out what motherboard you have and what processors it takes, and whether they would be a worthwhile upgrade.

The lift tends to shift backwards which makes challenges for trim. IIRC Concorde pumped fuel around to compensate.

I would say the problems at the OS oe driver level. KSP will support any standard controller. But a NES pad? That's really barebones. I guess you'll have pitch, yaw, throttle up, throttle down, and stage.

Hold it down for extra cheats in career.

Yeah, that middle button on the XBox Pad is still a BUTTON. Let me use it for my games if I want and don't try and forcibly take over it. It's not just a Windows issue, Steam on Linux binds it to Big Picture mode, and I can't find a way to disable it other than not having Steam open. Ugh.

Yeah, I like all sorts. I sent large and complex probe missions to Jool and Titanus, with multiple landers on a mothership. Then for Fearless I changed tack and sent a single ion orbiter, packed with science gear yet slim enough to fit in a 1.25m fairing.

Completely fanless? That's gonna be tough. That ultra-mobile chip might run KSP but not especially well. What are your size requirements? If it's not a major issue and you're OK with building your own, you could do a fanless desktop build, pairing a decent Intel CPU with a fanless PSU and a wisely-chosen case. If you also need something ultra-compact, then I think your best best is to search for "fanless NUC" and see what you can find. Look out for the more powerful "standard" laptop processors, they will run KSP rather well. Typically a model number ending in U is a standard laptop chip, while a model number starting with a letter is a tablet/ultra-mobile chip, but do look up the exact processor model number and some benchmarks.

[quote name='briansun1']On top of what other people have mentioned I'd like to point out that you should get a new mobo since the one you have right now has a PCIe 2.0 slot while the upgraded GPU runs off of PCIe 3.0. Another things is you could probably drop the 2 fans.[/QUOTE]I really wouldn't worry about that, there's still plenty enough bandwidth for any card on a ~£300 budget. Bear in mind it's common for SLI setups to use 8x/8x speed, and PCIe 3.0 x8 is the same as PCIe 2.0 x16 bandwidth wise.

Electric propeller is the big one. Robotic parts would be a great addition too. A limited range of 5m parts. I don't think stock needs a full selection but a few large tanks would really help shuttle builds look good. Basically make DMagic science parts stock. An EVA tether that's automatically there when you EVA, and you get a warning if you release it when you don't have any EVA fuel. Then we can get rid of the bottomless get-out-and-pushing

Looks like it was a pretty nice budget gaming PC when you got it. Pop the side off your current case and check a few things. The size motherboard it will take - I [I]strongly[/I] doubt it takes a full ATX board. The make and model of the power supply, so you can judge how decent it is. How big a graphics card will fit. And what spaces for fans it has. You might also check if your current mobo has overclocking options, information I found seems a bit unclear. Apart from the motherboard not fitting in the case that's not an unreasonable set of upgrades. But as far as my thinking goes: The graphics card is the weak point. A 750 Ti would already be a huge step up and it's a great card capable of running just about anything at 1080p, but obviously pay more get more. I back Kelderek's view that it's not a card for higher resolution gaming. Changing the motherboard may cause Windows licensing issues, usually "OEM" Windows is limited to the original board or a straight replacement. It's also a load of work and a hardware expense. Depending on uses the Core i3 might be all the processor you need, fast i3's do really well in game benchmarks. But if you do want a CPU upgrade and you're willing to buy one second-hand then consider an Ivy Bridge i5 or i7. CeX are my usual supplier for second-hand computer and gaming stuff. Your chosen PSU is reasonable. Depending on what your other parts are you might be able drop the wattage a notch to save some money, but don't buy cheap junk.

None of those.

Not that. And, well, some of both. Parts are more metaphorical, parts are pretty literal.

Not love

Hell no.

Fastest from Heathrow to JFK.

I agree it's not great to be asked to move something that you originally launched of your own choice. Add to it, yes, but not move. Keep the relocations to stuff originally launched for a contract imho. Now if the original launch WAS for a contract and you then co opted the satellite for yourself, it serves you right if you get a new contract to move it and you don't want to

I once chased a rover a few miles down a mountain on the Mun, after I released it from the lander without setting the handbrake. It's the kind of thing I shan't forget again!

Nope.