Tourist

Moar boosters? No! Are we making toys for children now? MOAR NUKES!!! MWHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

This is so petty, but here I go. That you can't throttle the engines, or stage in mapview unless the navball is raised, combined with the fact the Navball starts lowered when you first change to map view. Meaning, you'll be launching, as usual in ship view, have to change view and for a second have no throttle/staging control... also it always seems to me that moment when you change from outside view to map view is usually at a critical throttle/stage moment. Don't get me wrong, I've never lost a rocket because of it, and I'm sure efficiency losses are minimal.... but it just gets on my goat. Why can't you either A) throttle with the Navball lowered, have the Navball start raised, who uses mapview without it raised?

People on Kerbin will try to tell you, the Kraken is not real, its a floating point error, a problem with the collision mesh, its a memory leak... any number of "rational" explanations. However there is a place where you can find out the truth. It is a place where the light of Kerbol feels as weak as a fifty cent light bulb in the kind of hotel where you pay-by-the-hour, but where Jool stands at the center of all things, as a majestic conductor, guiding its charges in their stately cosmic dance. There you will find a bar.... the kind of place where grizzled old Kerbals with thousand yard stares, sit on stools at the bar, drink and talk in hushed tones about things they have seen.... things they have seen that are best forgotten. If you go there, buy them a round, shut your mouth and open your ears.... you may hear a thing or two. They may tell you about what the things they have seen. The Mo-hole, the alien monument, the magic bolder. But they will not talk about the Kraken, but you will know the truth. The truth will be written in the way their eyes widen whenever they look out into darkness past Eeloo. And the truth will be evident in the way they act as though something out there is staring back.

At least thats what "they" want you to believe. Really the truth behind the Kraken is a secret that is so dark, so horrible, that were you to truly comprehend the full, unedited truth your sanity would surely be in jeopardy. Its a truth known only to Squad.. or "The Annointed" as they are known amongst themselves, The truth is also known to some of the mod developers, or the "Acolytes", as they are known. Finally, but worst or all... beware the Moderators.... the only group, bold enough to take on no false moniker, to be know widely by their real title.... Moderators.... pray.... pray... you never anger them. The "eye" you describe Tweeker, was an Eye indeed.... the true Eye of the Kraken. You see, most people don't see the Kraken.... they are affected by its invisible touch as it reaches to our world from the place it dwells. However, in the old days, the firmament which separated this world from that place where "it" dwells used to be thinner and more brittle... mortals could from time to time.... and to their great peril I might add... perceive beyond its fragile veil and see truly, with mortal eyes, the true, horrible visage of that which waits in the void.... the Kraken or Dah Krzakenz.. as it is know in the old tongue. ..... or it could just be a programming thing.... I don't know much about computers.

One way or another, we know how this ends. Imposter Jeb steps off the final rung of the ladder and steps off onto the tarmac. Just then, an identical Jeb charges from the administration building leading Val and some KSC security. "Arrest the impostor" says Jeb. The impostor Jeb pulls a pistol from his flight suit and takes aim at the guards. He fires two shots, killing the guards. He is lining up a shot on Val, but Jeb grabs the impostor and a fight ensues. In the tussle, the pistol flies free. Val runs to pick up the firearm, but it has become entangled with some tumble weed and she fumbles it. In the meanwhile one Jeb has a hold of the other from behind and is slowly squeezing the life from his identical rival. Finally Val takes hold of a the pistol and takes aim at the Jebs. The Jebs have separated, but like a deadly game of shells... it is not clear which is which. "Shoot him!!" said the Jeb. "No, Val its him, shoot, shoot!!" yelled the other. Val, stares at the two, but cannot tell the real from the fake. She takes a deep breath, her eyes narrow and she squeezes the trigger. Jeb lets out a relieved sigh, and says "thanks Val. How did you know?" Val blows the smoky discharge from the muzzle, straightens her hair, and winks "I didn't. But the chance of survival was only fifty fifty. You've survived much worse odds than that."

Its true, there are some question marks over Von Braun. My understanding was he joined the SS more for political reasons, in that his membership may assist the program. I also believe he did admit that the conditions in the factories that made the rockets were despicable. Arguably he'd have been shot if he'd protested. Not that we now accept (or should accept) "I was just following orders" or its variations as a defence. He also had a rocky relationship with (elements of the regime) I believe he was arrested by the Gestapo a couple of times. Of course, these stories may be a bit of image repair post facto. I suppose the question is how deeply do you need to acquiesce with the actions of a despicable regime before rehabilitation though your positive contributions is impossible. An average German citizen, maybe even a soldier (but not SS) surely should be required to accept very little collective guilt for the regime, but the higher up you get, the more you know and the more you benefit, the more blame should be accepted.

Realism, simulation, these have become such loaded terms and suffer from lack of definition by the persons using them in many circumstances. Is KSP realistic? Your mode of travel through the system is modeled on real orbital mechanics. You don't fly like fighter jets would, as in "spaceflight simulators" of an earlier era, like Wing Commander or Tie Fighter etc. For the same reason, it is also a "simulator". It simulates getting a craft to orbit, and again, orbital mechanics using real world physical principles. Is it greatly simplified? Absolutely. That is why the fun v realism debate is often ridiculous. KSP is fun, because to models realistic (albeit simplified) spaceflight and rocket engineering. Maybe it should be more accurately described as question of Fun vs Difficulty or Fun vs Challenge. Even that is misleading because it suggests challenge and fun are opposed. They are clearly not. So maybe it should just the Easy vs Hard debate. I don't think the proponents of the "Fun" side of the debate are arguing that KSP should be less realistic, that it be less Orbiter and more Wing Commander (in all cases), just that it should not be so difficult or challenging that it is no longer fun. "Realism" doesn't really come into it. So what are the "realism" proponents asking for? I'd argue really they are arguing for greater challenge in terms engineering and mission planning, by adding communications, life support and larger celestial bodies/distances. So, at the end of the long road. Should a Difficulty overhaul become DLC? In a perfect world it should be in sliders, checkboxes at the start of a new game and part of stock. Life support, communications, etc. should all be things which should be opted in/out when you start a new game. Larger celestial bodies/distances, ideally would also be controlled by a slider (ie, Planet sizes 0% - 100%), but still the Kerbal's system (I imagine the technical requirements for Squad to install such a system my make it impractical/impossible with the current program). Our Solar system however, I think would be perfect for DLC, as well as differently constituted solar systems. I could imagine DLC for instance where the Kerbals begin stranded on a colony on an asteroid, and you need to build ships to get back to a habitable world on the system.

Underlying the historical concern with the German scientists impact on the space program and attempts to find a visionary version which minimizes their importance, is a sense that their contribution is tainted by the despicable totalitarian regime in which they worked during the 30s and 40s. I think its important to remember the German Scientists were already keenly involved in many respects in "amateur" rocketry before the regime in Germany came to power. The regime certainly saw the opportunity to create weapons from this interest and research and because of this advanced it from "amateur" to professional... but rocketry advancements cannot be entirety argued to because of the regimes endeavors. (There was also "amateur" rocketry happening in the US, USSR and many other countries around that time) Also while the regime in Germany in the 30's and 40's was absolutely, undeniably and irredeemably reprehensible, we need to ask to what extent do its crimes tar everybody living under that regime at the time. Were not, to a greater and lesser extent, every freedom denied person living in Germany at the time also its victims (obviously to a much lesser extent than the victims it enslaved and murdered of course). Sure the rocket scientists were probably members of the national socialist party... pretty much every non-minority German needed to be at the time. But to what extent are they actually National Socialist Party (the forum does not seem to like the common term for this group... there must be Godwin's law protections on the site) scientists? I haven't read much about the scientists political convictions, is their any suggestion they bought in to the regimes racist policies? Did they support the regime any further than involvement it its war efforts? How much should accident of birth determine whether you are a international "hero" or international "villain".

Most annoying thing in(volved) in KSP... well its me! There is always some part that I've missed, or some stupid action that can't be undone (without losing hours of progress). There's dodgy designing, which could have been avoided by taking an additional second to check things over before hitting launch. There's the impatient time accelerating. And alas, all the returning chickens, I inadvertently invited to roost. Shame on me.

It pales somewhat in comparison to some of the feats described here, but I love the feeling of bringing a spaceplane in for a landing. Bringing it down into the atmosphere, a keeping the nose up to lose speed, watching the continents and oceans racing by below.... then.... as the mountain range west of the KSC appears in the distance, I pull the plane gently over into into a very wide, fiery bank ... I see the KSC below and... just in time, the fire subsides, I have control again. I line it up with the runway, moments later the wheels touch down for a safe landing. It may not be a single stage to Laythe, or whatnot, but it still makes me feel like Chuck Yeager.

Also the command pod has the perfect number of seats. one for a pilot, one for a scientist, one for the engineer.... works perfectly. If you had more seats you'd have a Kerbal who is a fourth wheel.. four wheels... that would just be awkward.

I still use the part... largely for aesthetics. Its as close as stock comes to Apollo CM. I don't have that big of an issue with the orientation (although it would be better if you did not have to shift+rotate to align the ladders.) My main problem is that there are very few convenient "opposite sides" where you can attach things symmetrically without covering some graphic detail. Like those little upward facing windows at the top, or the vents. I always find I need to place my radial parachutes asymmetrically to avoid something. (Node parachute not being possible because there is usually a docking port.) Now, I know these things are not functional, so it doesn't really matter, but I like my craft to make visual sense as well. This is pretty nit-picky, I realize.

I should probably have clarified what I mean, its purely the aesthetics. It doesn't look fast enough to reach orbit like a spaceplane.... coming back, certainly it looks like the shuttle. I have no problems with its functionality (although I have not yet managed to get a MK3 spaceplane to orbit from the runway yet.. but that's my fault). Yes, I realize I'm purely judging the old bird on its looks. I should be ashamed.

More space-plane parts would be good. In particular another MK3 cabin, a fast one as opposed to the shuttle one we have now. Although, personally I think Space-planes are rather well served at the moment. What I would like to see is more planetary base components. In particular a living quarters and science bay which is oriented for gravity. The hitchhiker storage unit is clearly designed for space, and no matter which way you orient it on the ground it doesn't look right. If oriented with the attachment points horizontal, the window, the bedding and the ladders are all over the place. If you orient it vertically, then its a pain to connect a "walkway" (usually a structural fuselage) to its side, and of course, in IVA view their is no hatch where it connects, not to mention the occupants sleep strapped to the walls. The Science bay is worse still, its either a ridiculous tower with levels, but no means of climbing or descending the levels, or.... well, the other way just makes no sense in IVA view at all, but looks slightly better on the outside, but still not ideal. (Windows pointing towards the horizon, excellent, but hatch and ladders on top and bottom doing nothing useful.) So yeah, a habitation module and a science workshop for work on planets would be great with bonus points for connecting walkways (preferably with windows... I know, I don't ask much).

You do it the same way you get the Carnegie Hall.... practice. Just kidding, just kidding. Lots of good advice here. My two cents is that it often comes back to design. Make sure you have plane you can control empty. I find my spaceplanes always comeback completely out of balance... I really need to fight to keep the nose up and pretty much can't land (without losing the engines at least) without just a little fuel left to for the engines to lift the nose up and flare.

I use them and think they are vital for that sleek, streamlined look for your rockets with no ungainly batteries, goo containers or other scientific brik-a-brac strapped to the side. I've thus far avoided Kraken assault, but I don't doubt those who say it has lured the Kraken for them.... I also don't think its fair to say its because they don't know how to use them. It would be interesting to know the common factors between those who have drawn the Kraken from those who have not but the use of this handy piece of Kerbaneering. Is it heavy mod use? High part count? Voodoo curse?

Building an outpost on Minmus. However I was a little haphazard in the planning. Long story short, I had a hitchhiker module in place, with a docking port attached radially... decided it needed a science module attached... as well as the multipoint connector and structural fuselages. So in essence what came next was an attempt to dock the heaviest part of the colony, to the lightest part, on the surface of the planet. Geez it was difficult. Had a skycrane, with four nukes and a lot of RCS. Took so long, with so many quickloads after failure. Wish I'd recorded a fail reel.

Ahh the memories. I learnt this lesson during a mission to Jool.... I'd sent a refuelling mission because I'd severely under-engineered my ship. It was floating around with naught but RCS fuel. I just did not understand why I could not get a solid encounter.... until I did... and the answer wizzed by me at many, many, many meters a second.

Nice theory! I've always thought that they lived underground. It would explain how they can be cooped up in a tiny capsule for over a year and be completely fine. They are used to living in tight spaces. There are rational explanations for why the KSC is above ground, where nothing else is. The VAB and launch pad are above ground because a giant mechanical lift would need to be very powerful... easier to build on the surface and move it across to the launch pad... also accidental explosions in a confined environment are much more devastating than in an open space... that also explains the fuel tanks. The tracking station needs to be above ground obviously. Doesn't explain why the admin building or research buildings need to be above ground though.

I'd have to say the LV-909. Just because seems to be my workhorse early-mid career, about the time I'm doing Mun and Minmus missions. The poodle too, for the same reasons.

I use them for a number of purposes. Satellite Launch contracts around kerbin (could probably reach Mun or Minmus too with current tech level, I just haven't tried yet). Essentially I take a very small, very light probe into orbit in the plane with whatever it needs to fullfill the conditions, small amount of fuel and light engines, and a parachute. Once the contract is done I can bring every single thing except the fuel used back again. No wasted stages. Part recovery missions. Again, a small probe with a claw and parachute, RCS fuel only. Send the plane up, intercept the part, attach the probe, de-orbit and parachute, return the plane. I think its the only way to make such missions economical. Rescue missions around Kerbin. Benefit being, using the method above, not only do I save the Kerbal, but I can return the wreck for a few extra $$. Crew changeover missions for the spacestation.... no in-game real benefit per see, but vital for the health and morale of the Kerbals in my head canon. Also I use this changing out the crew on before interplanetary missions. Usually a lower ranked kerbal will get the modules for my interplanetary ship into orbit and connect them up, but I swap them for Jeb, Val, Bill and Bob just before the transfer window. That is also how I get them back to Kerbin again with the science they have collected. Finally, I do it because it allows me to pretend-time being a hotshot pilot. You feel badass re-entering the atmosphere, flames surrounding the ship, flaring, doing figure Ss, slowing it down, and eventually bringing it safely onto the runway.

Ah, sorry to tangent, but this reminds me of the hassle I had trying to dock myself. I couldn't get a close intercept at first. Sadly, years of playing "space flight sims" like Wing Commander, Tie Fighter and X3 had little prepared me for the process. Your instinct before you learn is to just burn towards your target... which of course will just leave you with no fuel and a really eccentric orbit. It make sense once you learn, but before then, all the burns required seem a little counter intuitive. After learning a bit of the history of Gemini, I felt a bit better about this when I leant they also had some problems with this too (to a much smaller extent) and initially found the process counter intuitive. Then, I managed to get close enough to dock, yay! of course what followed was about an hour of being unable to a wrangle the two ships together, facing the right way, docking ports moving towards eachother. At this point I also discovered the fact that the docking ports need to be aligned the right way.... after about another 15 frustrating minutes of docking ports bouncing off each other. When you get it, it feels like a real accomplishment. Say what you like about the learning curve in this game, but what you pass those spikes, you feel awesome.

It seems a bit obvious considering its the way you build in VAB, but I think its worth mentioning, plan your mission in the reverse of the order you'd play it. So often you're focused on getting stuff up, you rush the other (arguably more important parts). So for example, on a Duna mission, don't plan by saying, right, gotta get into orbit first, lets start asparagusing!. Plan to return back to the surface of Kerbin first. Then how to get to Kerbin orbit. The how to transfer from Duna. Then how to reach Duna orbit from the surface, etc. I find it amazing just how easy it becomes, with just a change in mindset.

Look people, playing KSP is no more cheating, than telling the government you are a leader of an obscure religion with no income and many fictitious taxable deductions to avoid paying tax is cheating. Get over it.

Finally reached Duna with a manned (Kerballed) mission. I've been to Duna before, in early access, but usually with a pretty Spartan, command pod, direct ascent type vessel. No doubt it would not have been very comfortable for the Kerbals on for that duration. If nothing else, it would have been the perfect recipe for stiff joints/space craziness. So to his time I tried to do "proper job" of it (according to my own unique definition of that term). For me, this meant a ship that was large enough to accommodate six kerbals in relative comfort for the duration of the outward bound and return trips. Towards that end, the mother ship had, a command module, living quarters, and science compartment, so the Kerbals have spaces to work, rest, and be mentally stimulated on the trip. It also had a separate an descent/ascent vehicle to reach the Dunan surface and a separate vehicle to land on Ike. Unfortunately I arrived in the Dunan SOI, with far less fuel than planned. This necessitated a pretty aggressive, and I might say white knuckled aerobrake to insert into a Dunan orbit. I then launched Jeb, Bob and Bill to land on Duna and Val and Arcy to land on Ike. In the meanwhile I refuelled the mothership using a tanker I'd sent chasing after the mothership after I realised how badly I'd underestimated my fuel needs. All missions complete and all Kerbals are back aboard, I'm now awaiting a transfer window and hopefully more efficient burn back to Kerbin.