cpast

My program is the best at safely returning Kerbals who have daringly sat on a launchpad.

That was a fun one - I wound up with the BACC booster sending Jeb into the shoreline, but I'd twisted at the last second so the booster hit first. Booster was destroyed, but got the contract completed. Surprisingly, the capsule survived.

Sarbian posted MM 2.2.0 for 0.24.

I didn't know there was one. I just activated through staging. That C7 contract was the first I saw with perfectly sensible and ordinary contract flavor text: something along the lines of "after achieving combustion, we want to dispel moronic rumors that our system won't amount to anything."

Yep. KSP.exe is 32-bit, KSP_x64.exe is 64.

There is no case where testing the unresearched basic jet engine can work, because you unlock it at the same time as intakes (so if it's unresearched, you don't have intakes). That said, I roleplayed that as useful test data: "Oh, so it *doesn't* work without some other parts? Back to the drawing board."

They go bye-bye, without mods.

Please, Squad? Please make it like Majir asked? ^^ like that?

Mods right now: None. I'm far from a stock purist, and normally use tons of mods, but I'm currently waiting for things to get updated.

On the flipside, I'd love if the logos on the contract screen made their way into the VAB somehow, whether as textures on the part or in the tooltips.

No, there are plans for a 30 passenger capsule. Passengers are not crew, and do not control the spacecraft.

The MEGA link doesn't include the decryption key.

Yes, you can (well, not necessarily right now because update, but that's no different than from the store).

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\SteamApps\Common\Kerbal Space Program\KSP_x64.exe (it's not a separate install)

I got the update right about when it was released. No issues.

So...300-page goal failed

Now *that* would be something.

Previous version update. From what someone else said, release likely imminent.

This is why I'm removing all part mods at first for 0.24 (I'll keep things that don't add new parts, e.g. RPM, though). In a week or so, I'll look through and see what mods have been updated with decent pricing.

If you do factor in cost, it does balance out a bit more; MP is 30 cents per kg ($1.20/unit, 4 kg/unit), while LF/O is around 9 cents per kg (80 cents for a 5 kg unit of LF, 18 cents for 5 kg O, and one kilo LF/O is .45 kg LF and .55 kg O).

R&D and companies collaborate. Testing is done both by companies and by R&D; you develop some specs that companies need to meet, but they also have design input and make proposals for things. It's really not very different from how actual space programs work - there isn't a huge division between "this is the job of the space agency" and "this is the job of contractors".

Would what you're asking for even have to be broken into "this update" or "that update", or is it just "here's roughly what we want in by 1.0"?

OK, but the parts themselves don't have to have the flag (I didn't know the flag was added, as I never used it). If they made SpaceX-style parts like they made NASA-style parts but did *not* add a SpaceX flag, I can't see where there'd be a legal issue.

This answer is wrong. That's an entirely separate thing to height/speed restrictions. Selective Availability was a system to prevent non-military receivers from having too much accuracy. Altitude/speed restrictions are to prevent use as missile guidance system. Note that exemptions can be made (e.g. Copenhagen Suborbitals got one), but they are not made for just anyone.

It stops working to prevent its use as a guidance system for ballistic missiles. Under US law, any GPS system without those limits is subject to arms control restrictions. It may or may not be legal in the US to remove those limits, and it is *not* likely to be legal to send it to any other country without permission from the US government.