cantab

I think what I'd do is first scout out an airstrip. A flat stretch of land that's as long as you're willing to look for, preferably near the equator, though if you don't want to spend ages searching there are the ice caps. As mentioned it's OK if it has an overall slope as long as there aren't lots of small bumps. Then I'd mark that out with some simple, low-part-count markers. Probe core, light, RTG, that's it. Then place some infrastructure nearby, but watch the part count. I think I'd put a combined control tower and fuel depot near the runway, and keep a fuel truck on site, but have everything else a few kilometres away.

The solar system is your oyster. Space stations are of course popular, but keep a close eye on the part count or you'll have a lag-fest.

My two cents if that if changing the star can be done with Kopernicus alone then go for it. If it would require bringing in other mods then it might not be such a good idea, that's more to worry about and potentially go wrong.

A wax fire is a known, described phenomenon that accounts for what has been observed. "Additives" in the wax could make such a fire more likely when dousing a candle by making the wax easier to melt through or by making the candle burn more fiercely, but the likely mechanism remains the same - water flashing to steam and propelling the molten wax upwards into the ignition source of the candle flame. If you don't believe that can happen then what's your alternative hypothesis?

Oooh, nice. Definitely sticking with the Boris pack's style and I see some interesting features.

Seems explained well enough. I suppose I wouldn't have expected it because you think of wax candles as solid, but of course the wax melts and vaporises to burn. Thinking about it any candle where the wax is in a container can make a decent pool of molten wax, tealights often completely melt for example. I'll file this away for future reference. If you need to safely extinguish a candle and can't blow it out, snuff it out. A spoon will normally be fine, or maybe a coffee mug.

Regarding the asteroids, it's been discussed before that a class E would not remotely threaten Kerbin. At most it would be similar to the Chelyabinsk meteor. So there's no need to keep deflecting them. The real "Asteroid Redirect Mission" is about grabbing a rock to study more than about protecting Earth from impacts.

All these worlds are yours, except Jool. Attempt no landings there. But as far as stuff the game tracks goes, forget the tech tree, completion is marked in the Science Archives. If you want to fill them out you're looking at Kerbals reaching and returning from every biome of every body. Oh, and hauling an asteroid around with them.

Does anyone have any good solutions for ullage when using RO and Remote Tech? If I'm flying directly I'd simply use some RCS thrusters but Remote Tech's flight computer won't do RCS translation. I tried installing Mechjeb and turning on its "SmartRCS" feature to use RCS when engines are offline, but Remote Tech's flight computer doesn't use that even though it works when flying directly. And not kOS, the syntax of that language is not something I want to program in.

OK, Merritt Island is a peninsula now, but only because NASA built a causeway. Considering the detail level in RSS, what you see is basically right.

In a binary with a visible and an unseen component, the closer the pair is the shorter the orbit, allowing us to detect the changing movements of the visible companion around the barycentre by radial velocity or by astrometry. Nemesis is hypothesised to be over a light-year from the Sun, and as far as I know binary systems anywhere near that widely separated are only discovered where we've seen both components.Nemesis will only be found or ruled out I expect by a comprehensive sky survey that includes parallax measurements of distances. WISE has done that, and I don't think Nemesis exists, but I'm not sure it's been quite definitely ruled out yet.

Back to the original question, try the Mun. Compared to Minmus it's an easier starting point for interplanetary trips because it's orbital period is shorter so there's less waiting for it to be at the right angle for departure. For some destinations it's also viable to depart directly from Low Mun Orbit - for Eve and Duna that is the more efficient approach. In general the delta-V requirement to reach another planet from the Mun's surface is about the same as to reach it from Low Kerbin orbit. If you do your refuelling in Mun orbit then that's around 640 m/s less delta-V your interplanetary ships need to carry at any one time. https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalAcademy/comments/1qu5jv/deltav_charts/

KER can help you explore TWR at various speeds and altitudes. That depends just on the engines and the plane mass of course, so you should soon get a feel for where the different engines work well. Stock has no real SPH tools to study aircraft stability. FAR does, and if you're using FAR you can check the handling of your aircraft at various speeds and altitudes. It won't really tell you your performance though.

If you want a rocket game for tablets and phones, look up Simple Rockets.

We don't know how Unity 5 will change things. The most common speculation is "one thread per ship", meaning more cores only really helps in multi-ship situations. But that's just educated guesswork. What is definite though is that while more cores helps some programs, better single-threaded performance helps all programs. So with KSP as a primary interest I would still recommend a modern Intel processor, they have better single-threaded performance than AMD ones. On a low budget the Pentium G3258 is a lot of performance for the money if you're willing to overclock, if you have a bit more money consider a fast-clocked Core i3.

Started a new Science save and went through the usual starting busywork. It's all pretty ordinary, until you pan the camera round and see something like this: This is part of the "New Horizons" system. From bottom to top it's Kerbin (of course), Sonnah (the gas giant), Aptur, Mun, and Serran

I saw the corrugated-terrain effect in stock once, when returning to the space centre after having gone a very long away from the Sun. Maybe that helps. On inclination, I think there's some tradeoffs involved. At the moment the Sonnac-cliptic is more or less aligned with Kerbin's equator, making travel in the Sonnah system simple but adding considerable complexity to interplanetary trips. An obvious alternative would be for the Sonnah system to be more or less co-planar with the solar system. That would make transfers within the Sonnah system a tiny bit trickier, but really you'd only need to get the hang of launching into the Sonnah-cliptic. In return going interplanetary would be rather simplified, with again the only requirement for most cases being to launch into the ecliptic. Either way, perhaps New Horizons can spur on the improvement of things like Transfer Window Planner? At the moment it really doesn't handle inclined systems well at all, and assumes a departure from an equatorial orbit which is frequently inefficient.

Use the KAS winch and magnet to pull the rover into a docking port. This may work better if you arrange for a vertical docking - the rover has a docking port on top of it, the tanker has one underneath, the rover drives under the tanker and is then lifted up. That approach works with any means to lift the rover, for example thrusters.

The Kerbal school of plane design: Moar Wings!

I think Laythe if you're a spaceplane person, Pol if you're not. Bop's drawback is its high inclination, unless you're clever with gravity assists it's liable to take more delta-V to get to and from. Vall's drawback is it's a fairly big moon really.

Geostationary satellites have propulsion for station-keeping. That's needed because in real life most geostationary orbits aren't stable and the satellite will slowly drift, even if it starts out in *exactly* the right orbit.

That movement would be very hard to detect. Nemesis (the usual name for that hypothetical red or brown dwarf) would have such a long orbital period that over the time we've been observing the Sun's movement around the Sun-Nemesis barycentre would be virtually a straight line, and therefore we could not separate it from the Sun's orbital motion through the Milky Way.

Linux 64-bit here. Though I actually have only 4 GB of physical RAM, and haven't tested my "planets" install at all extensively, for all I know it could turn out to be a disaster when I actually try and visit these places. It looks cool in the Tracking Station though.

Trans-Keptunian will definitely be fine. I'm pretty sure Asclepius is OK. I *think* Outer Planets Mod is OK. New Horizons rearranges the system and includes support for all three of Outer Planets Mod, Trans-Keptunian, and KerbolPlus; if the New Horizons developers don't make mistakes then all the planets will stay clear of each other. Of course adding loads of planets will hog memory. It might not be practical on 32-bit versions of KSP.