Slam_Jones

I actually haven't gone high enough to figure it out. Max I usually take it to 7km above sea level (can usually cruise at 150m/s at that height with 4x timewarp, likely faster with a lighter payload), but I think it could hit 10km probably. Not sure where the atmo really starts to thin out, honestly. My biggest consistent issue has been getting the right amount and angle of solar panels to provide enough power at most/all times of day. Lately been moving towards having a row or two of backup RTGs for night-time charging and extra daytime running power. And help charge the capacitor.

Built a Mobile Constructor for my Duna colonization. Haven't had much time to build with it yet, but I did make this little outpost about 50km from KSC3.

If you use Steam, there is a way

The easiest way to tell is to right click the part. There will be a line at the bottom of the infobox that tells you if it is Unsafe/Risky/Safe to open the chute.

Hm, yeah, a land speed record car is a far cry from a luxury-commuter car. Even if such surface speeds were sustainable and efficient in the near(to not-so-near) future, we would need major infrastructure changes just to make it possible to drive on. For a car (not even a commuter car; more like a prototype hyper-car) to be capable of achieving those speeds, you'll have to wait probably 20 - 30 years. And even then, you'd probably never find a piece of road you could get it fully up to speed on (legally, or otherwise...). It'd be like taking a Formula 1 car on a horse trail... it's just not built for it. And you'll be moving several orders of magnitude faster than anything nearby. Very unsafe, to say the least. Not to mention it'd never pass smog, or safety inspections, and you could expect to get pulled over 100% of times you take it out. That's whether or not they even let you keep the rocket engine on it. As a land speed record car, though, it looks great. Always interesting to see where our current tech maxes out in regards to surface speed.

*The story continues* http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/29533-What-did-you-do-in-KSP-today?p=2214338&viewfull=1#post2214338 While kicking rocks around and drifting the rover in the sand, the kerbals at Duna started to get a little bored, and called Mission Control for backup. Pretty soon, a shuttle was dispatched and routed towards Duna. Being significantly lighter than the base, it only performed one aerocapture before popping the chutes and setting down. As the recruits neared the surface, they realized the shuttle was still moving about 10m/s too fast. Thinking quickly, one of the pilots re-engaged the reaction wheels, flipped the shuttle retrograde, and fired the thruster. Luckily, it touched down smoothly, with no damage to the ship. After some calculations, the Kerbals at KSC3 got the heading to the shuttle, and sent Jeb out in the transport plane for the 400km round-trip journey. As he flew gracefully over the red sands, Jeb couldn't help but think how much easier it is to get around via planes as opposed to rovers. Rovers are fun, but they have the constant chance to lithobrake and explode. Planes only have two opportunities for that: take-off, and landing. (Took me about 20 mins to fly there and back... a rover would've taken a week, real-time) The new recruits made it back to the base safely, and got right to work on continuing expansion. While Mission Control on Kerbin was planning new buildings and modules for the base, the Kerbals were busy building an additional tank to store Rocket Parts, thus allowing even bigger construction. It was completed that night. With the storage for Rocket Parts more than doubled, we set out to build a more stable Lifter-Mover rover. The old one worked (sort of) for small modules, but was easily tipped over. Our solution? Bigger and wider. And, it's a LOT more stable. Here it is, lifting a several-ton Hab Mod as if it's made of Styrofoam. It also has a double-hinge in the middle (as opposed to the old single hinge) allowing it to basically fold itself in half. Also includes a Rotatron at the base, so a Module can be rotated and placed accurately without moving the rover. With the addition of the new Parts tank and another Hab Module, we decided to put up another solar tower as well. Despite being more stable, the new LM rover still managed to drop the tower incorrectly once... requiring us to build the tower again. The second time, we got it in place. Some time after this pic was taken, we realized Tieny (one of the brand-new pilots from Kerbin) had decided to take out the D-1 Racer. We're not sure how, or when, but at some point during her flight, both she and the plane disappeared. Dunatians? Kraken? Dust Storm? No one knows, but we mourn her loss nonetheless. (IRL: I think it spawned in below the surface or something... one minute it was there next to the big plane, the next it wasn't :\ ) (Also, if folks are enjoying the narrative, I could submit it to Mission Reports or something )

Wow, I really like some of those buildings... most of my bases look boring as all get-out, so maybe one or two of these will spice things up

Hm, for that you may have to use something like UbioZur PartWeld (I think that's the right name) to make a 'shell' out of wing or structural panels, then some sort of rover to position it. At least that's what I'd do

Welcome to the forums! A personal tactic I use (if I can explain this properly ) is to aim to overshoot my destination by about 1/2 the distance I am from it. As I approach the zone, I burn halfway(ish) between Retrograde and Radial, which slows the vessel down, and keeps the landing area from moving too much. I usually will not fully kill horizontal speed until about 100 - 200m above the target. From there, I'll set my thrusters so I slowly descend to the target. Usually, this means a TWR of about 1.0, give or take a bit to adjust falling speed. (You can use a mod like MechJeb or Kerbal Engineer to get this number) The trick is just to practice as much as you can. It's tricky, but eventually you'll be able to land them right on top of each other I'm not the best at explaining things, but I'm sure others will have tips as well.

Eh, honestly, my designs are basic (uninspired) enough that I can replicate them as needed. Not really bothered if they break on update.

Sounds to me like you've discovered ground scatter. On Mun, it shows up as boulders. On Kerbin, it shows up (usually) as trees. It tends to only render within a certain range, which can make it seem like they're popping up out of nowhere. Due to the way it's set up, they have no collision mesh, which means, yes, you can walk right through them. Theoretically, you can find scatter anywhere on the Mun, but maybe it's restricted to certain biomes/elevations.

I believe the Hangar mod can provide some of what you're looking for. Hangars (which came in many shapes and sizes) are 1-part deals that allow the storage of spearate vessels within. While stored in the Hangar, the craft is not rendered (I think it even ceases to exist completely, storing just the data) allowing for better fps. The last time I tried to use the mod, though, every attachment node was very badly misaligned, and the actual interface for storing/retrieving vessels was conspicuously absent. So, assuming it works, it's a great mod. Not sure of other options yet, though.

*Long-winded story warning* So, I've built what I'm calling "KSC3" and sent it to Duna. It includes drills, ISRU, a workshop, and an orbital construction dock, which means it can land, dig up some stuff, and build things out of that stuff. Here it is, in Duna sub-orbit, with the Heat Shield, "swallow-tail" airbrake module, and Nuclear-powered "StarDrive." After at least half a dozen shallow aerobraking manuevers, its apoapsis finally fell below 50km. Since it was no longer needed, we disconnected the StarDrive and let it burn up in the atmosphere. Airbrakes were deployed until it was safe to open the Drogue chutes, and then the rest of the chutes. As it descended, it was still a bit heavy, so we dropped the Heat Shield first, then the "swallow-tail" airbrake module. Once both were dropped, the base balanced and descended at about 14 m/s. It was still a bit faster than I hoped, and it hit the ground hard. Nothing exploded, but every single landing leg broke. Not a big problem, as Bill was more than capable of fixing em. Regardless, it was an exciting moment... all that hard work paid off! We were safely on Duna. (Note: this is the largest non-Munar base I landed safely) Once the dust had settled, we began mining and converting ore to rocket parts. The first on-site vessel was a propellor-driven plane, called the D-1 Duna Racer. (Note: This is the first thing I've ever built off-world ) Jeb took it out and checked out the local scenery. Not much to see, but it was still an interesting experience. Next, we built a small unmanned rover with a claw, capable of moving around otherwise stationary modules. We called it the "Lifter-Mover rover," because (you guessed it!) it lifts and moves modules. Once we had this ready, we built the solar tower. We actually had to build it twice... on the first attempt, the LM rover was knocked over by the tower, damaging both. With the old tower removed and the rover fixed, we built a new one (lucky they're light on Rocket Parts) and managed to shuffle it to its new position. With the new tower in place, we were able to ramp up production to higher levels, allowing both drills to be run at all times. We soon were able to produce a little Habitation Module, thus allowing the Kerbals to sleep somewhere other than the workshop. After that, we built a little 2-seat rover for the Kerbals to take a Sunday drive in. Most recently, we built the biggest off-world item yet: a 5-seat propellor-driven plane. I intend to use this to recover and transport inbound Kerbals (Kerbals themselves being the one thing I can't produce on-site). It needs more solar panels to run at 100% power (Currently I can run it at 60% power with consistent charge), but with KAS and my current facilities, this should be easy to achieve. Due to some lag, we ended up moving the two planes down the hill about 700 meters, which somehow lessens the lag to acceptable levels, and puts them on a flatter surface, potentially making take-off easier. Transport down and up the hill is provided by the rover.

Astronomer's Visual Pack Page says 0.25, might still be compatible. I'd ask someone first (I haven't used it personally... my PC isn't quite strong enough )

Duna base (I call it KSC3), able to mine and build new modules, planes, rovers... (Also, it's my first mid-to-large-scale base outside the Kerbin system, and first off-world vessel creation!) Currently consists of main modules (workshop +), solar tower, Hab Module, Lifter-Mover rover, a 2-set rover, a 1-seat Duna Plane, and most recently, a 5-seat Duna plane. The 5-seater will be used to move Kerbals around, and it's first mission will be to pick up a crew of 2 engineers coming from Kerbin. I'm hoping they'll touch down within a few kms of KSC3, but if not, the plane still has great range (during the day, at least). More to come!

What I'm asking is this: if nothing is actually something, then there is no such thing as nothing, right? If every instance of there be nothing could be covered by calling it something, the word "nothing" would cease to be used, as it doesn't apply to anything. Again, my question stands. If it doesn't exist, in any way shape or form, why is there a word for it? By definition, nothing is nothing. There is a word to represent the nothing, but it is still nothing. It's a little like the concept of 0. It is a number, sure, but it represents nothing. It is the absence of anything. If it is "something," then it can be counted, or quantified, in some way. 0 is a perfect example of this. The concept it is putting is across is that there is no number: there is a void. But we have to represent the void somehow, otherwise how would we talk about it? Just because the void has a label (which exists simply for the purpose of identifying it, but in no way changes its properties), doesn't make it any less of a void. Now I think you're confusing yourself... it can't exist, but it is a thing? The word is a representation of the concept, not the concept itself.

If nothing is something, why do we have a different word for it?

While all the above is, technically, true, there's no reason not to dream past our current technology. Jules Verne wrote about the Apollo missions to the Moon... except it was over 100 years before it actually happened. And sure, some of the minor details were off, but the majority of it was pretty close to what really happened. I'm sure people back then were shouting about how it's impossible to get to space because whatever silly notions they had at the time. But despite that, we did it anyway. You can say inhabiting Venus and Mars in the ways we currently have planned will never happen, and maybe you're right. Maybe they'll be a bit different, due to advancing technology, etc. Regardless, I have no doubt man will one day inhabit many worlds.

May have been mentioned, but I've been consistently using KAS (Kerbal Attachment System) for a while, and it makes things very stress-free. The ability to place connector ports anywhere on your vessels, and connect them via a Kerbal on EVA, is invaluable. No need for precision docking... just get it close enough and link it up. Then, simply unlink when ready to depart. At least it works for me. This is from back in 0.90 or earlier, but you can see the pipe and one of the connector ports. Same idea, but a drill attached to a large fuel tank with boosters strapped to the side.

I think I read an article somewhat along these lines a few years ago, except the intent was to provide power to an orbiting spacecraft, allowing vessels to be lighter (due to not having to carry their own fuel or generators) and able to travel further/faster/something like that. Haven't been able to find it again, could well have been an April Fool's joke. Sure makes you think, though...

(No offense) OT: Simulations have certainly been a part of video games for a long time. Some of the first games I played were SimCity (the original, even), Age of Empires, etc. For a long time, I wasn't interested in FPS shoot-em-ups, but I've learned to enjoy them. As long as people are interested in a certain type of game, there will be those who wish to profit off of it, ergo, games of that type. But it is pretty awesome how the more our technology improves, the better the simulations we can run, to the point where we can actually (as stated in OP) help direct and understand science.

^^ As far as automation goes, it's getting better by leaps and bounds. Yesterday I saw an article about some drones that had been programmed to be able to analyze and area, and then build a bridge (stable enough for a human to walk across) by working together. http://www.cnet.com/news/watch-a-swarm-of-drones-build-a-rope-bridge/ So in 10, 15 years, who knows how advanced they'll be? Possibly precise enough to build such a big telescope in orbit.

^^ Ah, right. Well if it is filled with dark matter, then that's something at least. I don't think the tree falling is a nothing thing, because the tree itself has mass, and volume, and is physically affecting it's environment. (Occupying space, taking in chemicals and releasing different chemicals) regardless of whether something is observing it. I think of it kinda like a variable in a program. If no variable is declared, then it is nothing. There is no mention, there is not even a spark of an idea. It is empty space... un-observable (if that's a word), since it doesn't exist. Once the variable is declared (whether or not it's used), then it is occupying space, affecting it's environment, and can be quantified. Even if there is no data attached to it, and it's basically a label hanging in a vacuum: it has a name, it has a declared area that it (may) take up space in. It has a room, even if that room is barren. If any of that psuedo-science makes sense

Hmmm..... My thoughts exactly.

Nothing exists, absolutely. Most of space is filled with nothing. The problem is, once you label it, it becomes something, because now there's data associated with it (a label that says "Nothing," in this case) So if nothing is to remain nothing, it must be left alone.