Gaarst

The stoichiometric ratio is 8:1 (LOX to LH mass), but having excess hydrogen in the exhaust increases the specific impulse of the engine, so in practice it will be lower. It differs for different engines, but it's usually between 5:1 and 7:1. 5:1 for the HM7B, CE-20 and LE-5 5.5:1 for the J-2 and YF-77 5.5 to 5.9:1 for the RL-10 5.9:1 for the LE-7 6:1 for the RS-25, RS-68, RD-0120 and YF-75D 6.7:1 for the Vulcain 2 Note that liquid hydrogen tanks are usually much larger than liquid oxygen tanks because the latter is much denser.

Between 120km and 180km depending on the configuration and the mission for Delta IV. (Source, pp27-31) Most two and two-and-a-half stage rockets MECO over 100km since the most efficient configuration is a large powerful first stage and a very small upper stage. The Falcon 9 is an exception since its first stage is relatively small to allow for easier recovery. Three stages rocket obviously stage much lower but if you consider MECO to be the second stage shutdown for these, then you get similar altitudes (eg: Proton-M stages at 42km and 120km (source, p9), Saturn V at 60km and 170km (source, p27)).

I take it as good news. Squad wants to make sure 1.3.1 will work as intended when released and so are making a pre-release to avoid having to rush a few more patches. Ideally, QA should be enough to make sure a patch works but I'll take what I can get.

No. You can recycle WasteWater into Water and CO2 into O2 at the cost of electricity or maybe another resource; but Waste and Food cannot be produced/recycled. There is no way to recycle Waste into Food, so a mission will always at least need Food resupplying (and Waste ditching, but it gets automatically dumped overboard if your Waste tanks are full).

Fuel is not the only determining factor for a rocket exhaust colour. The RS-68 has a bright orange plume despite burning hydrolox because of the nozzle ablative coating. Also the shot of the F-1 in the test stand is darkened by a great factor. An F-1 kerolox plume appears solid white under normal lighting conditions because it's opaque and very bright, the picture of the Saturn V taking off shows this. Other kerolox engines have a redder exhaust and generate a lot less smoke (RD-107, RD-180, Merlin...), it's probably something to do with incomplete combustion because of the F-1s massive thrust.

And over the million times it has happened, "there is already a mod for that" has never been, is not and will never be a valid argument. Having a community doing great mods is not an excuse for devs slacking. If something in the game is broken, the devs have to fix it, even if a mod fixing the issue already exists. Also, since over a year, KSP has been available on consoles, which do not support mods (at least not for KSP and I doubt they will ever implement it). Console players paying full price for KSP are entitled to have a polished (or working for that matter) game as much as the PCers are, and mods can't fix problems for them. Stock fairings are terrible, whether you prefer PF or stock style fairings, and they need to be worked on. PF doing it better is not an excuse.

The Cheats menu is not currently available on the console ports, but Squad has stated in a recent KSP Weekly that it will be included in the Blitworks update.

M83 is an electronic band, ITS is the big rocket that will never fly.

Older versions are available on Steam if you own the game. The only versions available for free for everyone are some very early Alpha builds, released for free back then.

Pics are helpful to help with this kind of issue. General pieces of advice are using a cockpit with a higher heat tolerance (avoid Mk1 in favour of Mk2/3), reentering with a high angle of attack (>30° at least) to spread the heat load to the entire plane, and setting a high periapsis to reduce the peak heating on your craft.

What legal threat? That you'd sue them because your account violated their TOS and was banned? They are right to have ignored it. Getting banned from somewhere you've invested a lot of time/money is frustrating, but since the offence is proven, you're not getting your account back. You should just move on and forget about it.

The developers that made the original console ports, Flying Tiger, were fired after the disastrous ports. Squad hired a new company, Blitworks, to rewrite the ports from scratch. That was last December. Since then we get very few updates on the work on the console ports besides the usual "we're working on it, we've got good builds and we're doing more testing" routine in the KSP Weeklies; the latest one (one of the most verbose we ever got): It's hard to say when the ports will come out, but since QA has taken a big part in the last updates on the ports, they may be getting closer to the end of the tunnel. Squad has the habit of never giving release dates, all we got was that they aimed to release the new ports in early 2017 back when they were announced...

You're comparing an LSP with a space agency. One makes rockets, the other one makes missions to use the rockets. NASA can launch its missions without SpaceX. SpaceX could launch its rockets without NASA if you forget the billions they get in subventions.

Everything you need to know is here:

If you're looking for a lot of mods to choose from, I have just the right thread for you: (I have zero shame for self-advertising ) If you want to make your game have a more realistic gameplay, look in the "Realism Gameplay mods" category. Though if you want a well round-up and easy to maintain mod for realism, Realism Overhaul is the best you can get. If you want to make your screenshots look like they have been taken from the ISS Cupola, look in the "Planetary/Atmospheric Visual mods" category for mods to make planets prettier, or in the "Visual and Sound mods" category for misc visual enhancements. For a really complete overhaul, take a look in the replicas sections for real spacecraft and rockets, or in the "IVA mods" section to make the insides of your spaceships gorgeous (RPM, cited above, does magic for immersion).

notamod(){ Any mod I guess, though @ManeTI is the one in charge of making the forums work (I think). }

What mods do you have? Unless specified, you shouldn't expect 1.2 mods to work with 1.3.

I'm "done" checking for 1.3 updates, at least in the Updated section, still have to do the Outdated one. As of now, about 450/800 mods are tagged as 1.3, to which need to be added the mods released for earlier versions but still compatible with 1.3. Next major step will focus on these: I'll restrict the Updated section to 1.3 mods only and start moving the 1.2 mods over to the Outdated section (for this I need to go and search through the threads for patches, fixes or comments on compatibility, quite tedious for some mods). Depending on how I decide to order things, I might wait until 1.3.1 to come out before doing it, because I know a lot of modded installs are still running on 1.2 (I still run 1.1.3) 1.3.1 will give me a "hard" deadline for the "end" of 1.2. Other than that, there are still a few other things I need to do, so I'm making a to-do list here so that people can see it and shout at me when they see I'm slacking. To-do: Check for updates in the Outdated section; DONE! Add the mods that were released after April since that's when we stopped massively adding mods to the library; DONE! Move 1.2 compatible mods to the Outdated section; Maybe sort a few categories and re-order mods (the more I'm going through these mods the more I realise our classification can be inconsistent); The spreadsheet thing for translations and getting rid of the dependence to the forum software. (I'll probably do 4. and 5. at the same time). I should have a lot of free time over the next month (unless I find a job or anything constructive to do...) so things should be moving at a steady pace. If they don't at least I won't have any excuse so you'll be allowed to yell at me until I do stuff.

Yes.

I've updated the link! Thanks for the support, and best of luck with your mod!

Yep you are running out of memory because the 32bit version of the game has a hardcoded (as in mathematically impossible to increase) limit of 4GB of allocated RAM. You quickly get to that limit with a few graphic mods. The solution to fix this is to use the 64bit version of the game, for instructions on how to do it, please read the post I linked below, it's an answer to the same issue.

SSTOs, but I've given up on those. Complex gravity assists, but I'm working my way through and have two missions planned (in RSS) with EVEJ and EVEJS trajectories. Bases building and the colonisation stuff, mostly because I'm not interested and never tried. Also include all the mining stuff, for the same reasons. Planes, even though I've been building a lot of planes recently I'm still not capable of building something able to fly over 10km while subsonic. I either blast over Kerbin while on fire or stall.

The Mun, Ike and all of Jool's moons are tidally locked. Gilly and Minmus aren't. A tidally locked moon rotates around itself in the same time it rotates around its planet, this means that it is always showing the same face to its planet. The Moon IRL is tidally locked to the Earth: we only see one side. While a moon may be tidally locked to its planet, it doesn't mean that it doesn't have a night and day cycle. The "dark side of the Moon" is not always dark, it has a day/night cycle as long as its rotation period (which is the same as its orbital period since it's tidally locked): the "dark" side of the Moon is fully lighted by the Sun during new moons. It's the same for all the moons in KSP: they have a day/night cycle where each day lasts one rotation period, whether or not they are tidally locked. When standing on a tidally locked moon, the planet it is orbiting will appear not to move at all even if days and nights happen (it would move north and south in the sky if the moon has a non-zero inclination, like Bop and Pol). For a body to not have any day/night cycle it would need to have a rotation period equal to its orbital period around the Sun, which isn't the case for any planets in KSP.

Because:

Yes, transonic drag is a thing in KSP but as you said it starts under Mach 1 and ends over Mach 1. There's no need for a sonic boom to indicate that you are transonic, your velocity and broad knowledge of the speed of sound (ie: gets lower in higher atmo) is more than enough to know when you're going to need a little push to cross the line; with experience being the best help you can get. A random bang in the middle of the transonic drag peak isn't that helpful. I'm not against a feedback for going supersonic. I'm against using a physically wrong sonic boom effect to indicate it when other options are available, and better for that purpose. I don't mind having a little more camera shake when closing Mach 1, or even something as simple as a Machmeter (a small dial in IVA could be enough since Squad is so hostile to giving us useful information in vessel view).