cantab

Redesigned my Kerballed Serran lander to be lighter and more streamlined. I've ended up with something very Apollo-esque: first stage powered by four Skippers, second by four LV-T45's, third by one LV-T45, then a CSM with a 909 and a 2-stage lander. Hope it flies well, because one Apollo feature I don't have is an escape tower! EDIT: Since someone asked after it, here's how I do my upper-stage engine cluster. https://flic.kr/p/xGsjp3 Support piece attached to the stack node of the upper stage tank. I-beam would be better but part limitations, the girder works OKish. Decoupler needs to detach that support piece. In some clusters you might instead have a central engine. Any part attached radially to the upper tank and gizmoed into place makes the engine mounts. Fairing makes it all neat and aerodynamic. Struts from upper tank down to fairing base give required rigidity. I hope.

I'm not sure any Linux distribution will really go down well with a Mac user, despite some shared technologies OSX takes a rather different philosophy to most GNU, Linux, etc software. But the Unity desktop, with regular Ubuntu, might be a good one. I recommend an nVidia card, otherwise it's not too critical, just be wary of parts that are very new or very obscure.

It's a worthwhile point that you can do a lot with partial-efficiency recycling. In USI-LS just stack up on the fertilizer and you can leave your Kerbals on their base for years, even decades. (If only there was a bigger fertilizer container). In TAC it's a bit fiddlier, but I think you can get it so food is your only consumable and it's not *that* hard to ship a big supply of food out.

A simple question about Flying Tiger. They don't exactly have a strong record working with consoles, but do they have a strong record with Unity? Do many of their mobile games run on Unity 5? If yes that's encouraging. If no it's a little worrying.

The "Previous Stable Version" is available as a "Beta" in Steam. I advise backing up your current install first then letting Steam "Delete Local Content" before installing the old version.

My thoughts exactly. It is Squad, not Flying Tiger, who we should call on to ensure the console releases of KSP are satisfactory.Based on their history with the PC version *cough* 1.0 *cough* I'm not confident.

As mentioned, KSP hammers the equivalent of one and a bit cores, thanks to being dominated by a single thread. Windows likes to switch the thread between cores. The last piece of the puzzle is that the CPU usage you see is an average over a period of time long enough that KSP has been switched around the cores, so instead of seeing different cores briefly at 100% you see them all around 30%.The good news is there's no significantly better processor for KSP than what you have. The bad news is there's no significantly better processor for KSP than what you have. Do be mindful that mods can impact on game performance. I know one person running a bunch of mods and getting framerates far below what I feel their hardware should manage, based on comparison with my own inferior hardware that performs better. And one last thing, don't trust the fps meter in the game, it gives wrong values at low framerates. Use a mod or an external program instead.

Funny thing with that image: I see four different Windows logos, and have no idea what each is supposed to mean. Microsoft, your branding sacks.With my serious hat on, Android may be plausible. Though Squad would have a choice: try and port the "full" KSP to Android, or make something simplified and maybe more akin to Simple Rockets. In fact maybe Squad and Jundroo could simply merge, and then Simple Rockets can just get a KSP rebrand.

KSP doesn't use litres for resources, it uses entirely arbitrary units. The mass per unit for every resource is specified in appropriate files. I believe the Community Resource Pack people use litres for their resources (a decision I disagree with), but there are strong reasons to believe that's not the case for the stock resources. Last I check the latest version of kethane no longer broke conservation of mass, it's something like 0.9 kg of product for 1 kg of kethane.

By the way, loading it in Haack fixed this.

I thought the Mechjeb computer attached radially? MRS includes a radial mount probe core, but of course that's only good if you're using that mod.

Many monitors will have VESA Mount screw holes on the back. That can be used to attach the monitor to an alternative mount. They're most often used for wall mounting I think but you can get aftermarket desk mounts too. Came in handy for one of our TVs after I cracked the original flimsy plastic stand, the replacement mount is built like a tank! Sadly not all displays have them. My 1080p screen doesn't seem to.

Proving that crazy stuff can fly in FAR And made it my first KerbalX upload http://kerbalx.com/cantab/Unidentified-How-Is-It-Flying-Object

This is something I'm not so sure of. I'll give a non-exhaustive set of categories I feel KSP mods can be divided into:Pure model and texture mods. Parts packs basically. These clearly don't require any code. "Assisted" model and texture mods. By this I mean mods where the main focus is models and textures but some plugins are required. Firespitter is an obvious example, the Kopernicus planet packs would fall here too, and I suppose everything using Module Manager. These currently require code, but if the stock game was extended to implement the plugins the mod code would no longer be required. Mods such as Deadly Re-Entry and Karbonite have undergone that kind of transition. Plugins adding features that ought to be stock. Kerbal Engineer is the classic example, maybe Alarm Clock, Precise Node, Trajectories, and so on. For the most part these are mods that give information or improve usability. I'll admit what "ought to be stock" is subjective, but nonetheless in the event consoles don't allow plugin mods I expect these features to have a good chance of being made stock. Again, we've seen that with ISRU, with NEAR-esque aerodynamics, and we're set for something like Antenna Range. Plugins that don't have a hope of being stock. These are where the problem for consoles lies, but ultimately I don't think many mods fall into this category. FAR I suppose since Squad are set on a less good aerodynamic model, Mechjeb probably. There'll be others. Ultimately I feel that last category will be relatively small. In a good case scenario, maybe the console version of KSP will only support no-plugin mods, but the core game will have advanced enough that that no longer matters so much.

In my testing adding the New Horizons mod gave about a 5% framerate drop in a test that was primarily in a CPU-bound situation (600 parts 5 fps kind of stuff). Not a massive performance killer, smaller than the variation I've had from changing game settings, but it's measurable and for me unwelcome considering KSP performance is marginal enough as it is.

I have my online backup program pointed to my KSP folders. Saves, crafts, whatever get backed up every 30 minutes without me needing to worry about it.

For what it's worth, if you need to move your whole ship in the VAB/SPH I prefer to do it by selecting the offset tool then clicking the root part (the first one you placed) and moving that. It's much easier to move the ship how you want it that way without it flying off into some stupid place.

1) I believe it's a workaround for symmetry issues with the swept elevons, but it shouldn't be needed I agree, hopefully Squad can fix it. 2) Ctrl+Z is undo. Hopefully 1.1 will fix the clickhtough bugs and lag spikes, but plain old misclicks will still happen. 3) Agreed. The SPH has free camera movement, why not the VAB?

All I wish for in version 1.1 is bugfixes and performance improvements.

Xbox 360 pad for planes. It works great, flying is a joy, and 1.0 made sorting out the rudders much better. I do still need an external program so I can use the D-Pad for trim though. My control layout: Left stick - pitch and roll Triggers - yaw Bumpers - throttle up and down ABXY - gear, brakes, and lights matching the colours next to the altimeter, and stage on the blue one. Start - pause Back - Abort Xbox logo - Modifier. I need to hold it when pushing the dpad for trim, it's annoying but I haven't found a way round it. This mapping needs setting up by editing the settings.cfg Dpad - Pitch and roll, used for trim. 360 pad for long drives on rovers too, it's more comfortable than using the keyboard. Keyboard for rockets, I generally don't need the same kind of smooth control I do for planes.

16:10 is still widescreen and therefore a con In all seriousness, the difference between 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 isn't much, with 20:20 hindsight they would have been fine as a combined entry in the poll. And if anything I find the snag with 1080p is that it's not wide enough - it's more than I need for one window but feels cramped opening two windows side-by-side. I see the appeal of the 2560xwhatever displays for that. But since my 1080p screen cost me 50 quid (second hand) and I have a secondary 1280x1024 screen to go with it I'm not complaining too much.

With USI LS alone you can't make a fully self-sustaining base, you will need shipments of Fertiliser to keep the large greenhouse running in Agroponics mode. I believe UKS makes it possible, but not easy, to make a self-sustaining base.

I used it for my science drone for taking Kerbin survey contracts. I don't like SAS on planes, I prefer using trim and FAR Flight Assistance. I don't like relying on torque either, I prefer to do things properly with control surfaces. The round shape looks good and I think it's more aerodynamic than the OKTO at least if you don't have a good nosecone, and even once the nosecone is unlocked it's still an extra part. I also use it is a "Control From Here" point when I need one, for example I might attach a Stayputnik to the lower stage of a wobbly rocket so the controls behave better during the launch. For that application the lack of features is irrelevant since they'll be somewhere else on the craft.

I'd venture Science Mode is best for new players of all ages. Start with a small selection of parts that makes it obvious what to do, but no worrying about overall mass limits, part counts, money, or any of the other career mode hassles.

I've found apt-get and dpkg pretty reliable and they've been around for years. Even Android auto-updates work well enough. It disappoints me that when it comes to KSP we've still got no good alternative to doing everything manually like we're stuck in the dark ages. (Not really your fault of course.)I did manual mod management before, in the .90 days and earlier, and it ended up being simply that I'd install the mods and never update. Not what I want to repeat.