RenevB

If this is implemented as Yoha said, that when you pick up a part that was added with symmetry X, then the editor changes to symmetry X, that is a good idea. Somewhat disagree. The only options to adding to an X-symmetic part are symmetry X and no symmetry. Whatever the default is, you'll likely need the other one regulary, which is only one push of the x button away. No opinion on this, because I do not quite understand your suggestions. In my experience they always end up in the same stage, but occasionally not all grouped together and that can be annoying if they're put in the wrong stage. So agree.

May I direct you to this thread which is 13 pages (which I did not all read) of discussion about much the same subject.

While I like KAC and feel that (at least part of) its functionality should become stock, I think your particular suggestion wouldn't help much. For burns much longer than 1 minute, it would accomplish exacly nothing, for burns much shorter, you'd feel the arbitrary timewarp restriction forces you to wait through about half a minute of slow timewarp, still looking to turn it off at the right moment.

You can seen the exact number in the persistent.sfs file. Just search for reputation. Like you, I am at a bit of a loss how this compares with the meter in-game.

Exactlty my thoughts.

I think changing this would be a bad idea. It's very likely other people are already used to this situation and expect to load the orbiting ship. It may take some getting used to, but that's all and there's nothing wrong with that. For the specific situation you describe, you should rely on "Revert to Launch" or "Revert to VAB/SPH" options. You could also get into the habit of quicksaving every time you land or just before launching. Another hint is that you can make multiple quicksaves with Alt+F5 and load them with Alt+F9.

I would for the moment like to not thank the KSP team. I have a small amount of unfinished business in 0.23.5, so for me 0.24 was released *gasp* too early. Seriously though, this game is awesome and I'm looking forward to playing a career in 0.24, but as I said before, unfinished business. Now if only this rover would not flip in the next 4.4 km...

I'm playing right now: *drive rover a kilometer or so* *Esc, read 1 page, next page* Oh, 2 more pages have been posted since.

Well, the famous Scott Manley has recently done a new tutorial series. deals with interplanetary transfers. IIRC, it deals with transfers to Eve and DunaAs to your ship: whatever the reason is that it has suddenly disappeard, you could try loading a quicksave (which is separate form autosaves) and see if it's there then. It normally shouldn't disappear at that altitude around Duna. Another tip: you can now make multiple quicksaves with Alt+F5, and load them with Alt+F9. (Replace alt with slightly different keys if on Mac or Linux.)

To elaborate: the game deletes anything moving through an atmosphere thicker than 0.01 atm (on Kerbin around 22, 23 km) and not in your physics bubble (~2.3, 2.5 km away from your controlled ship, I'm not 100% certain of the precise numbers). This (partially) because no physics means no drag, and at some point the game must assume that uncontrolled debris (sometimes sadly spacecraft) reenters and crashes anyway.

I'm actually not on the hypetrain and don't want to get on just yet. I want to complete my last two (sandbox) projects in 0.23.5, then do a clean reinstall. Said projects are taking a Kerbal to the face on Duna (he's about 17 km away, but on an incredibly unstable, crash prone rover) and landing a probe on Pol (currently in orbit).

I don't think I personally can help you much with the second part of your questions. The first part: well, that isn't more difficult than docking. If you have access to the claw, you can use that to deorbit debris. Just bumping it sufficently along the retrograde vector would work equally well, but is slightly more difficult, as you can easily send it spinning. You could also choose the easy mode, and delete the debris in the tracking station.

Maybe try it with a LV-N? I recall a Scott Manley video where he manually decoupled LV-Ns, which left the shrouds on. Logically, you should then also be able to do the opposite, leaving the decoupler on, but getting rid of the shroud.

While what Specialist290 says is technically true, I don't think that this is the problem. If I'm reading jwatte's post correctly, he's in orbit around the Mun, but the game thinks that the ship is still landed. I found someone with a similar problem here, which offers a possible fix.

The first paragraph makes no sense to me. I don't understand what you mean. No, A rocket works by expelling stuff out of the back. It does not push against anything. Wolfram alpha tells me the pressure at 100 km (the beginning of space) is about a million times less than the pressure at sea level. IRRC, water in space will boil before it freezes, again, because the pressure is so low.

If you took a balloon up to space, chances are it will pop before you get there. If you took it up in a pressurized spacecraft, then took it outside in an airlock and it would stay together long enough for someone to puncture it, the gass will be dispersed very very quickly. This is because there is some pressure in your cloud of gas and none* in space. Rockets indeed work by simply flinging stuff out the other end. And yes, an astronaut throwing stuff away will accelerate in the opposite direction, following Newton's law. Though he probably won't go anywhere

Quicktime events? I hate those and they have no place in a game like KSP. Kerbal trips, press "R" not to die, not a good idea. Though I ask myself the same question, one Kerbal does exactly this in the .

On FAR: Why (and how) would an aerodynamic mod change the way contracts work? About the MechJeb discussion of the last few posts: how would contracts 'know' you're using mods anyway?

Take a look at this part of christoks post: 299 792 458 metres = distance light travels in 1 second, by definition. That's the exact and precise definition. Should you want more numbers, any behind the comma (or period, depending on your location) are zeros.

Recently, I've been thinking about this as well, so I think it's a good idea. I also think it should have a very low priority, possibly even the last thing before release.

I've seen multiple people claim this, but it just isn't true. Anything outside your physics bubble moving in atmosphere (above 0.01 atm pressure) gets deleted by the game. The never-unload mod is a way around this, but apparently isn't available any more.

Well, I don't know if this is a good suggestion. I have put quite some hours into the game, so I know how things work. To have a Kerbal scientist pop up every launch and tell me what to do won't really make me happy. I'd like it even less if he tells me where to go, although contracts will probably cover that and I assume you can choose your contracts. Tutorials will be redone next version, so I'd wait on making further suggestions until we see what improvements are made there.

It does not decouple automatically. Basically, it's an unusually shaped SRB that you typically put on top of your capsule. It is probably easiest to make an action group to decouple it and let it fall back to Kerbin when you're out of the atmosphere but haven't started your orbit insertion burn yet, although you might as well do that manually.

Mr. Random, you have an interesting question and my physics instincts say that a wind of that speed at Mars's atmospheric pressure and density would not be enough to keep a rocket grounded. What approximately is the mass of Martian dust particles and what's the kinetic energy? Does this cause any problems for current and historic rovers and landers on Mars? And now I realise you'll likely have the same on the ground as well as while taking off with this rocket. Hmm...

I've seen this suggestion before and I'll answer in a similar manner. I don't see the point of this. Your suggesting would mean driving a plane from the SPH to the runway, where you would end up taking off in the same place, probably with a little less fuel. It would add one small part realism, combined with three parts tedious, unnecessary driving and waiting.