SkyRender

Every Kerbal-compatible part can hold 1 copy of any and all possible experiments. Ostensibly you could have a single instance of every single possible scientific experiment in the game stored in a single capsule if you wanted. You need a second capsule of some sort to store more than 1 copy of anything, though.

Well, let's see. My best mission profile milks the Mun dry of all science, so... somewhere around 9,500 science or so. Not bad for the second Career mode mission, I'd say.

I see nothing wrong with using Kevin MacLeod's music in the final game. It is royalty-free, yes, but it's also excellent music, and has become ingrained in the minds of KSP players everywhere. When we hear those songs, we think of KSP.

Then take it very carefully, and consider multiple passes if you can. FAR is not very forgiving of ships like that.

The problem is that "space station" is not easily defined. Would an orbital robotic laboratory with no lifeforms on board at all still count as a station? It would serve many of the same purposes as a more traditional manned space station in terms of mission objectives, and feature almost none of the standard functions of a satellite.

The only truly "essential" component to a space station is that it remain in a stable orbit. Depending on functionality, any number of features generally taken for granted in stations (habitation, life support, power generation, even docking capacity) could potentially be absent from a station's design. Yes, even docking ports. To wit: a station used to experiment with highly radioactive components you would not want anything living going to, and probably wouldn't want anything that got close enough to dock to it to ever come back.

Generally speaking it's best not to aerobrake mothership-class craft of that size. Landers are made deliberately small for reasons besides just fuel efficiency: smaller means easier to balance aerodynamically. If you're dead-set on getting that whole thing down to the surface of Duna, I suggest you do it in segments. Certainly it won't be landing gracefully with a form factor like that.

I tend to set up Kethane operations on Minmus and the Mun, with the former being the primary supplier and the latter being the emergency supplier. The lowest-gravity body in a given system is the prime target for any sort of Kethane operation, as you'll spend far less fuel ferrying to and from that body to any other body than trying to lug up the fuel from the higher-gravity bodies. As such, Gilly, Ike, Bop, and Pol all get Kethane mining treatment too. For Moho, it generally makes the most sense to just ferry fuel overland to where you landed than it does to establish a surface-to-orbit refueling cycle.

Whoa, I did not expect that! Dwarf Fortress got its first new version almost 2 years today. We knew it was coming some time this week, but I was secretly hoping 0.24 of KSP would edge it out by a day or two.

It sounds like you just have a mild case of burn-out. Take a few days to a week off from the game, let your brain have a break, and maybe just experience KSP second-hand through players like Scott Manley, Danny2462, and HOCGaming. Sometimes all it really takes is a combination of a break and some new inspiration to get the KSP spark back stronger than ever.

Threadcromancy is frowned upon; just a heads-up. Incidentally, I may have come up with a workable prototype for this challenge, and an absurdly lightweight one at that. Only problem: I have Interstellar installed at the moment, meaning the heat levels destroy the turbojets before I can get up to altitude. Bummer.

I like to think that Jebediah Kerman originally started the space program as a hobby with his brothers Bill and Bob, and that the popularity of their launches (and subsequent explosions) in the early days caused the Kerbal government to take notice and give them a shot at running a formal space agency. It seems suitably Kerbal to me.

I sometimes think we've become spoiled by the modern development cycles. It wasn't that long ago that game developers didn't have feedback with their userbase at all until after a product was released, with only a very limited amount of feedback after release in the form of letters sent in. The only way they could really "fix" a game that was unpopular was to release a new game entirely. Game design back then was largely a combination of gambling and intuition for developers when trying to make something innovative. The fact that any game can be made the way Kerbal Space Program is being made, with each new release being guided by user input and the development cycle being revealed in any meaningful capacity to those users between updates, is still amazing to me. We live in a remarkable age; it seems shallow to complain that it's not more awe-inspiring.

KSP received something from its fanbase that Orbiter never got: an identity that's so powerful it's downright memetic. Most people who learn of Orbiter do so out of an interest in Newtonian-style space flight simulators. Most people who learn of KSP do so because they discover one of the more interesting players who showcases just how amazing (or silly, or explosive) this particular space flight simulator can really be. Even in its earliest days this was true: I only ever heard of Orbiter after I tried KSP, and my own discovery of KSP was through an LPer I watched at the time showcasing 0.8.4 by goofing around and failing in hilarious ways. So yes, KSP has found its unique voice, and that voice originated from the very people who discovered it.

Kerbal Space Program uses what is known as a "waterfall" development model. In this model, every key stage of development has a "reality check" with the interested party/parties on how well the progress of the software meshes with the expectations and needs of said party/parties. Changes in development focus and scope occur based upon this feedback. The end result is that the product seen by the interested party/parties (that's those of us who have paid SQUAD for a copy of the game) is in flux as it approaches various levels of completion, generally approaching a more "complete" state with each new release. One of the most important side-effects of this model is that the end product will almost always be different than the original spec in important ways.

Really, I'd put Tylo as harder to return from than Eeloo; Eeloo just takes a long time to reach, and a relatively high dV. The gravity is so low, however, that you're unlikely to waste much dV in landing, nor are you forced to design your lander to be heavy-duty. The only body I haven't really done a return mission from yet is the surface of Eve. Mostly because I never really got around to it. The last time I considered it, I discovered Kethane not long after, and that just put a damper on the whole thing.

Awesome, a fellow DFer! Ever post anything to the DF forums, by chance? I stopped visiting there a while back, around the time KSP really took off (0.17), but now I'm curious if we've encountered one another there before. I usually stuck around the DF Dwarf Mode Discussion forum, and focused on megaprojects and ways to break the already broken economy even further.

(Seriously, though, I don't mind the wait at all. This wait is nothing to any of us who are Dwarf Fortress fans. The last time DF got an update, KSP 0.15.2 was the newest version. And it's still in active development, mind you.)

Amusing. Let's see... +20 points for having an account +10 points for taking part in this challenge +25 points for having an image for your account +400 points for 2 full years of being a member No official friends registered, not that that means much. No blog entries; I tend to stick to posts. +1438 point for forum posts +148 for 1.48 posts per day I don't really post articles... Trying to figure out how many threads I've posted that have gotten replies is a fool's errand, if only for the accidental forum purge of April 2012. My guess would be that 50 would be a reasonable ballpark estimate, so +1000 +1430 points for reputation accumulated +(2112 * 0.5) points for each visit to my page = 1056 Total: 5527 Awards: Back in My Day (0.11 was my jumping-on point!) Olympian (first to get top score on the Apollo-style Mun mission challenge) Knowledge - Pass It On (Lots of early tutorials I made for docking, rendezvous, etc.; also, I'm the author of one of the more iconic delta-V maps) Contributor Better than MechJeb (You play a game near-daily for the better part of 3 years and not log a lot of hours!) I Survived the Forum Massacre Well-Rounded Probably Should've Brought a Heat Shield (Changes to the aerodynamics model is a hot topic, it turns out!) Forum Master Level 4 (2 big challenges that hit off well, a controversial discussion on aerodynamics, AND a comedic HHGttG compendium. Go me!) Knight in Shining Armor (The Bobcat Colonization Challenge thread got featured in this very forum once!)

Power is such a dangerous thing... He who uses MechJeb should look to it that he does not become reliant upon it. And when you gaze long into an auto-pilot mod, the auto-pilot mod also gazes into you. In short, use MechJeb responsibly. Just my advice; do with it as you will.

Most LEO debris are in orbits that are high enough above the bulk of the atmosphere to cause their eventual deorbit to take decades at minimum. Much of that debris is also small enough that it takes much longer (less surface area plus rarified atmosphere equals less drag, meaning much slower speed loss than something as massive as the ISS). On a long enough timeline, everything in LEO will deorbit due to a combination of 1.) micro-atmospheric alterations, 2.) gravitational inconsistencies, and 3.) human inattention or inability to station-keep, but that timeline could easily span thousands of years for some of that debris. Kessler Syndrome can easily cause near-space to be untenable for launches for the entire lifespan of a civilization if allowed to manifest on a large enough scale.

Clearly the multitaskers would have the job of Rocket Man. All this science they don't understand, it's just their job five days a week.

It's not quite in the spirit of the challenge since it's actually 3 missions on level-0 tech, but that doesn't make it any less impressive! Well done!

This is from WAY long ago, version 0.18 if I'm not mistaken.

Pretty much anything I'd like to see in KSP is either A.) already there, B.) about to be added, or C.) can be found via excellent mods. Though the stock rover wheels having their strange issues fixed would definitely make my day, seeing as they haven't been really usable since about 0.20 or so.