SAI Peregrinus

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119337 Put a barometer on a sounding rocket, use that to graph pressure vs altitude.

Also your COL appears to be in front of your COM, so the plane will be inherently unstable. That's not a bug, that's just basic aerodynamics. Some stunt and military planes use forward swept wings and computer control to have extreme maneuverability, but without the computer control it won't work.

The fun varies with motivation. Some days I have great ideas and want to try them out. Others I draw a blank and it's not fun at all. It's all about how creative you can get.

Career is basically "grind mode". The early stages can be a challenge, but it gets boring quickly. So Sandbox.

The rocket flipping issue in stock aero comes from the tech tree distribution and the fuel consumption rules. Fuel is consumed by an engine from the farthest tank first. The tech tree starts with only very short tanks available, so several of them need to be stacked within any given stage. Thus, fuel drains from the nose first, and the rocket flips. Fins help. Fuel lines help. Longer tanks help. Career takes those away at the beginning, which doesn't help.

FAR makes things easier. I use the graphs and stability derivatives to save a TON of time testing: I know my plane will be stable before I ever take it out of the hangar. If the only thing in FAR was the stability calculation tools it would still be a must-have mod. With the improved voxel model for calculations it's even beter.

I honestly think that's one of the best things about the contract system. Just like IRL, sometimes someone will try to screw you over. You have to be on the lookout for that. They're contracts and not missions for a reason.

Just did some testing. Rocket was (top to bottom) Mk-16 parachute, Mk1 command pod, TR-18A stack decoupler, FL-T800 tank, FL-T800 tank, LV-T30 engine. 0-8 AV-T1 winglets. The path of the rocket SHOULD go west, due to the Coriolis effect, and the fins will tend to orient it to go straight through the airstream. That would cause a westward tilt in the lower atmosphere. Rockets were all launched at full throttle, SAS off, no control input. Stock, T1 launchpad: 0 fins: Wild tumble at mach 1. 3 fins: Tilts west. 4 fins, +: Tilts west. 4 fins, X: Tilts west. 6 fins: Tilts west. 8 fins: Tilts west. Tier 2 launchpad: 0 fins: Tumbles wildly at mach 1. 4 fins: Tilts west. Tier 3 launchpad: 0 fins: Tumbles wildly at mach 1. 4 fins: Tilts west. nuFAR, Tier 3 launchpad: 0 fins: Tumbles wildly at ~100m/s. 4 fins: Tilts west. All rockets thus performed as expected given a wind velocity of 0 relative to Kerbin's surface.

The SI base units are the metre, kilogram, second, ampere, kelvin, mole, and candela. The SI derived units are the radian, steradian, hertz, newton, pascal, joule, watt, coulomb, volt, farad, ohm, siemens, weber, tesla, henry, degree Celsius, lumen, lux, becquerel, gray, sievert, and katal. The officially sanctioned non-SI units accepted for use with the SI are the minute, hour, day, degree, minute (of arc), second (of arc), hectare, litre, tonne (or metric ton), neper, bel, decibel, electron volt, unified atomic mass unit, dalton, astronomical unit, natural unit of speed (speed of light in a vacuum), n.u. of action (reduced Planck constant), n.u. of mass (electron mass), n.u. of time, atomic unit of charge (elementary charge), a.u. of mass (electron mass), a.u. of action (reduced Planck constant), a.u. of length (Bohr radius), a.u. of energy (Hartree energy), and a.u. of time. The prefixes are yocto, zepto, atto, femto, pico, nano, micro, milli, centi, deci, deca, hecto, kilo, mega, giga, tera, peta, exa, zetta, and yotta. The angstrom, are, barn, bar, millibar, atmosphere, bayre, mmHg, and torr are commonly used but not officially sanctioned. The kilonewton IS an SI unit. The tonne is not an SI unit, but is accepted for use within the SI. The SI is officially defined in the SI brochure: http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_brochure_8.pdf You want Section 3, English, page 121.

In theory you could write a wrapper mod in C# that exposes the KSP API to mods in other languages via standard C bindings, and then use just about any language. In practice, just use C#.

KSP Trajectory Optimization Tool is the go-to program for calculating these sorts of things for KSP. You'll probably want the Precise Node and Kerbal Alarm Clock addons.

I tend to go with Banksian style names. Agorophile Lapse of Sanity Just Like a Simile Still Life With Supernova Immovable Force Unstoppable Object This Is Not A Name This Is Not A Sentence SSK(S(K(SS(S(SSK))))K) (λx. λy. x y x) (λy. λx. y (x y x)) Multifoliate Rose of Death's Dream Kingdom Look On My Ship, Ye Mighty, And Despair If You Can Read This, You Are Literate The Y combinator ones (those with all the parens) are probably the stupidest.

A tip: If you can afford one, get a HOTAS joystick & Throttle. It makes manual flight and maneuvers much easier. Keyboard and mouse are certainly workable, especially with the RKE Onscreen Joystick mod, but a physical stick is great for small adjustments.

Also, they're contracts, not missions. Some of them actually are impossible (for a long time there was a possibility of a contract to test a launch stability enhancer in orbit, it may have been fixed). Don't accept them, they're scams. The offering agency is trying to trick you to profit from the penalty clause. Likewise, many contracts will lowball their reward offer. Don't accept those. Accept contracts only where you can make a reasonable profit, just like IRL.

Could be worse. Could be a contract to test a Launch Stability Enhancer in orbit... Contracts aren't missions. They aren't guaranteed to pay more than they cost, they're not even guaranteed to be possible. Selecting the right contracts to ensure maximum profit is a big part of career mode.

Not exactly. the x86_64 instruction set is a superset of the x86 instruction set, there are extra registers, extra SMM registers, the NX bit, new addressing modes, etc. The page table structure is also (of course) different. It's a lot more than just the ability to address extra memory. Also, 64-bit is just an address/word length, there are 64-bit ARM processors and 64-bit x86_64 processors, which are totally different instruction sets. The DEC Alpha was also 64-bit... and very different from both ARM and x86_64.

Well, mods used to be the reason. It's pretty easy to exceed 3.2GB with a bunch of 8k textures and lots of part mods. Sadly, the instability means that it tends to crash anyway. :/

Comic Sans is the font of Satan. http://bancomicsans.com It's poorly designed, with terrible kerning, inconsistent letter forms, improper lower-case for a comic font, etc, etc. It's ugly, and should never be used.

Kerbals are aspargus frogs.

Missing a "Put out an RC (no new features) before full release, use it to find gamebreaking bugs (crashes and the like.)" Otherwise they risk pulling a KDE4.

I've done it. Landed rovers with a couple of big orange dishes, biggest omnis (LLL Communotron 64s), and a big power source (B9 HX-URC reactors) around Kerbin. Then a constellation of small comsats in LKO to connect them, since there aren't any trans-oceanic fiber optic cables in this game.

Pretty much. Side-huggers increase part count for the lifter stage, thereby taking away part count from the payload. KISS. And of course SSTOs are possible in KSP, so a shuttle-style launcher has most of the downsides of an SSTO but loses most of the efficiency benefits.

Bah. You know about MOAR BOOSTERS. Well, RT problems can pretty much always be solved with MOAR ANTENNAS and MOAR COMMUNICATION SATELLITES. Nice 4-sat constellation with coverage of all Kerbin keeps drifting apart? You could edit the save file, or you could just launch 20 more sats.

If the mod has a .dll built against 0.90, it is almost certain not to work on an earlier version. If it's just parts, then it will probably work.

I use an AutoHotkey macro...