IncongruousGoat

Well, that's a bummer. Oh well. I suppose this is what we get for building things that exploit strange behavior.

This isn't that exact one, but I've uploaded the original re-entry tube design from back during initial testing here. Again, not exactly the same, but if you're just looking for any old fairing-based re-entry vehicle it should do fine.

Given that we saw the entire landing with no LOS, it's entirely possible

Funky music is on

Separating in interplanetary space is fine.

This is going to be crazy levels of nitpicky, but CGI rocket exhaust plumes in film. They're nearly always depicted as the big, opaque, cloudy exhaust typical of solid motors, even when the rocket in question is very clearly liquid-fueled. I can let it slide if the film in question isn't depicting a real rocket for which good reference footage is available (e.g. the MAV from The Martian)... but if it's a historical film? No. Just NO. There is NO valid excuse for getting that wrong. All the reference footage you could ever want is available for free on the Internet, and it's trivial to look at that footage and observe what the plume & exhaust are supposed to look like. This is not something that's difficult to get right. And yet, movie after movie gets this wrong. GAH. Drives me completely nuts.

Yep, it's intentional (ran into this playing RSS/RO/RP-1 recently). By default, samples can only be transferred on crewed vessels. There's a difficulty setting to allow transfer of samples on probes if it's causing you serious problems.

Delta-V info was added in 1.6, as were the new 1.25m nosecones (the screenshots we've been shown have the pre-1.6 "old" ones). If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say that @Zishan fj is playing KSP on a 32-bit machine, and as such is stuck back in 1.4.5.

I'm over a month late, but John Prine passed away on April 7 at age 73, of Covid-19.

Or rather, a recursive function with a broken termination condition.

Are we doing sad? Because I can do sad. Perhaps a little too well, in fact...

Last night was chicken pot pie. No pics, mostly because I messed up the biscuit topping a bit. It turns out there's an art to spacing the biscuit dough on top of the filling so that it ends up covering everything evenly after it rises. Mine tasted fine, but looked a bit ugly due to the "topping" being more like a bunch of individual biscuits stacked on top of the filling than like an actual topping.

RAM is beside the point here. The main problem here is that phone processors aren't powerful enough to run KSP. There's only so fast you can run a processor that needs to run off a tiny battery for hours with no active cooling, and that just isn't fast enough for something CPU-intensive like KSP's physics calculations.

Welcome back! I'm excited to see how your submission plays out. Don't worry about the part clipping; it isn't against the rules.

Wait, seriously? They bid Starship as a crew lander and got selected? How in the heck did that happen? Well, all I can say is that I did not see that one coming.

If that number turns out to be wrong by an order of magnitude, they're still cheaper than nearly every other launch vehicle flying today, in cost per launch as well as per-ton. So yeah, assuming that the $2M number comes from somewhere real, there's a lot of margin for error that'll leave Starship as a viable source of income for the company.

Hobbyist baker here, and oh boy, do I ever! Bread is as good a place to start as any, and it's not too hard to mess up. If you've got a mixer with a dough hook, use that to knead the dough; if not, it can be done by hand, just with a little more manual effort. If you're just looking to make any old loaf, you can get away with putting the bread in the oven on top of a baking sheet, but if you want to make a square sandwich loaf you're going to need a loaf pan. If you can find bread flour, use that; if not, all-purpose will do. The texture, flavor, and density won't quite be the same, but the resulting loaf will be perfectly edible. If you're looking to make a whole-wheat loaf instead, I recommend mixing half-and-half whole wheat & bread flour. A loaf made with just whole wheat won't rise right, and the end result will be dense and unpalatable. Another good savory option is buttermilk biscuits, which can also be made on a sheet and are nice and fast (meaning under an hour). Good for weekday dinners, and a nice accompaniment to many meals. Another fun option is pizza, which as it turns out isn't that hard to make from scratch. the only caveats there are that A: you need a pizza stone to bake it on, and B: when you roll out the crust, you need to get it right the first time. Pizza dough is a leavened bread, and if you roll it out to the wrong shape you can't just bunch it up and try again like you can with a pie crust. This is because the rolling process has much the same effect as kneading on the dough's internal structure, and it makes it much harder to work. On the sweet end of the spectrum, drop cookies (e.g. chocolate chip cookies) are tasty and can be made with little experience. Or, if you're looking for more of a challenge, I've found pies to be deeply satisfying to make. The caveat there is that making the crust without a food processor or pastry blender is a tedious process, since you'd need to cut the fat into the flour manually. Pie crust is a fat-flour mixture held together with a tiny amount of water as a binder, and it takes some work to get everything incorporated evenly. Feel free to PM me with questions - I'm more than happy to help a fellow forum-goer to learn to bake. It's not as hard as it seems, I promise!

We can't say for certain what SpaceX's finances look like, since they're a private company. However, the majority of their launches are for commercial customers, not the U.S. federal government, and the launch services they do provide to the government are done on fixed-price contracts. For an industry where price-plus contracts and outright subsidies are the norm, SpaceX is an outlier in how little they rely on government funding to get anything done.

I'm originally from Upstate NY (i.e. the part of the State of New York that's not in the metropolitan area of the City of New York), which is mostly notable as a place people know nothing about, and in fact tend to forget exists. These days, I live in the vicinity of Seattle.

I took a look at the dump file, and it still looks like a driver problem. Maybe try uninstalling and re-installing your graphics driver? I know it probably isn't the answer you were looking for, but I don't know what else to recommend. If anyone else reading this thread has some knowledge of the innards of Direct3D 11 and could take a look, that would be great. Graphics isn't exactly my area of expertise, and there could easily be something I'm missing.

I keep on getting close, and then chickening out and shaving it. So, sort of?

Google Drive's probably the easiest way, given that you've already been using Google Docs to send stuff.

Definitely looks like a driver problem to me. The top of the stack in the 1.8.1 and 1.9.1 crash dumps you posted is somewhere in the Intel graphics driver. Based on the register context and what RIP was pointing to, it looks like a buffer-zeroing subroutine in the driver got passed a null pointer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that more recent versions of KSP depend on some functionality that your graphics hardware doesn't support - but that's just an educated guess, and graphics is not my area of expertise. In any case, the driver seems a likely culprit. Does the folder you got those logs from contain a .dmp file, and if it does could you upload it somewhere so we can take a look at it? Having the actual crash dump available might help shed some more light on what specifically went wrong. Oh, and I'd recommend against following those instructions @jimmymcgoochie linked to. Out of that list, the only entry that's likely to help here is updating drivers, and some of the others are downright dangerous.

I find the Antarctica comparison not particularly compelling, for several reasons. First, Antarctica is actually worse (i.e. less habitable) than Mars by some measures. There's less available sunlight, especially during the winter months, meaning less consistently available solar power, and Earth's atmosphere is much thicker than Mars's, which corresponds to faster heat loss. Beyond that, though, there are several international treaties preventing any and all exploitation of Antarctic resources for economic gain, by public or private entities. The population of Antarctica is low because, beyond anything else, it's illegal to do anything there other than research. Were that not the case, I'm sure we would see mining and oil towns in Antarctica, and at least one settlement that could be described as a city (to function as a port of entry, among other things). The population wouldn't be high, by any means - but it would be a lot higher than what it is today.