Godot

Actually that´s nonsense IMHO at least with respect to the visual system ... I´d expect every highly advanced tool using society to be in possession of a visual system. Without it I wouldn´t see any way of making the step from ground dwelling to flying ... I´d also see no way how they would get any informations about their own solar system (not to speak of other solar systems) if they don´t possess a visual system.

And it is good that it never would work ... a second sun in our solar system surely would cause havoc to earths ecosystem ... the majority of animals and plants are adapted to a cycle of darkness and light ... now imagine if >= 25% of a year (when Jupiter is opposed to the sun) whole earth would have no night, but just a bright half day followed by a not so bright half day. (while there surely are examples of 24 hrs sun ... the midnight sun of northern countries ... the ecosphere there just empigrated over millions of years, enabling the ecosystem to find a balance with the conditions to be found there ... I am sure that it would be different for whole earths ecosystem, as the change would happen abruptly (within a year) giving the ecosystem no time to adapt

But wouldn´t the sidetrust that would be produced by the Jetstream exiting the blowout panel make the spacecraft going into an uncontrollable spin?

Kerbin, but raised and living in germany

If money didn´t matter, I for my part would buy a Celestron 8 Schmidt-Cassegrain (Reflector with 8" diameter, but in contrast to a Newtonian with the ocular on the back, like in a refractor) http://www.celestron.com/browse-shop/astronomy/telescopes/advanced-vx-8-schmidt-cassegrain-telescope Prices are hard to give, as Celectron has several combinations of C8 and mounts ... some of them with computer control, some of them in standard german mount ... the Tubus of the Telescope alone AFAIK is around 1000 € ... with mount it may amount to maybe 1600 € upwards, depending on the mount )

Well, as you said ... the part is lighter than 10 Goo Canisters and Science jrs. ... not to forget that 10 goo canisters and Science jrs. have the additional costs of requiring more engines and fuel. If you use it correctly (that is, in a station around Mun) then you need only one Spaceship + Lander in order to get Science out of all of Muns Biomes ... whereas using single missions to Mun would require 15 Spaceship + Lander missions in order to visit each Biome once ... something which (according to my calculations from last KSP versions) would cost you 4 times the money that you would require to use the Spacestation + a single Spaceship + Lander to visit all Biomes Using a science lab in a station will become even more useful as soon as Squad begin with the long needed step of putting multiple Biomes to other Planets (like Duna), so that there as well you´ll be better off with a science station and a reusable lander (instead of having to fly multiple spaceships to far away Duna) ... as well as, when Squad rebalances the science and monetary system, so that science and money will be less abundant and has to be harder earned than currently

Dunno abozut DRE in Hard Mode ... in Normal Mode at least, DRE doesn´t cause any problems

Interesting .. I never had any problems with items in fairings

I´d expect a separate mothership (for interstellar/interplanetary travel) and atmospheric landing craft (probably with aerodynamic shapes and enough fuel to get down and back up again even in thicker atmospheres than ours) ... so I guess their mothership/s will remain in orbit, while they will just send in their landing craft to establish first contact. Or maybe even try to establish first contact via radio comm, before going down, assuming they know that the planet harbors a civilization that is primitive, but yet developed enough to communicate via radio

Actually, the usefulness of space launched weapons like Project Thor has rather been demystified ... they don´t seem to be as useful as the creators of the idea thought ... for the one because guidance during rentry requires a lot of electronics as well as fuel ... turning each weapon into an expensive piece of equipment, for the other, because reentry velocities of > 1 km/s rather work against the destructive power of the projectile, by liquifying it. See here: http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/rods-from-god-a-terrifying-space-weapon.html http://fas.org/rlg/030522-space.pdf Even if they came up with the idea of the Goa´uld Apophis, to hurl an asteroid towards the enemy, they would still lack the necessary accuracy during reentry to aim well. Which, I guess, is the reason why we don´t have any US or Russian space weapons yet

Gravity should be known to a certai ndegree, as it can be estimated by the size and type of the planet, which all can be concluded from observations on the ground But I agree that there should be a lot of details (exact composition of atmosphere, hydrosphere and geosphee, as well as possible Resources and maybe Biomes), that should only be unlockable via satellites and specific instruments (which brings me to the fact that KSP definitely is lacking cameras as means to obtain research)

For me it´s easy .... I only do those contracts that give me enough revenue and are considered by me to be worth getting ... and leave out all others. After all we have the choice to not accept any and all contracts that are given to us (and I personally would go mad if I would have to do every contract) As for specific contracts to be annoyed about ... Only those that demand from me to observe conditions that vary too far from my usual mission profiles and/or are impossible to solve

Nope, no problem here

Game: Stronghold 3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stronghold_3 Not only was this game delivered in a state that was far buggier and more feature incomplete than many games in their Alpha State (and I am not only talking about KSP or Dwarf Fortress when I say this), and, when Firefly officially stopped patching 3/4 year after its release, it still hd a lot of bugs and was still missing features that were expected to be included (for example the ability to order your troops to build a moat). Despite being a Castle building game, the walls of the castle are more or less worthless against attackers ... even normal soldiers can tear the walls down within seconds, and the balustrade obviously bears no protective value against attackers, as javelin throwers can wipe your walls clean of your archers without any problems (hell, in one single player map I, as defender, just abandoned all walls and assembled all troopes (ranged and melee) in the inner courtyard, as defending the walls would mean sacrificing them, without making any impact. There are other shortcomings as ell, for example no base building AI (unlike the last 2 parts of the series) that I won´t mention in detail. Especially bitter IMHO is, that the former parts (especially Stronghold 1 and Stronghold 1 Crusader) were Jewels and are still worth playing ... but with Stronghold 3, the reputation of Firefly Studios with long standing fans of the Stronghold series fell through the bottom. So, yes, I guess this all and the fact that I spent 20€ on the game when I bought it without reading reviews, makes it one of my most hated games

As mylargest telsope I have a 70mm Refractor (that means a still rather small telescope) with equatorial mount and it is sufficient to make out (and draw) the major cloud bands of Jupiter and get a good view of Moons Features. Inside a city that is, that means, inside an area with lots of light pollution (which makes a big difference as you can already see with the naked eye ... with light pollution you see only a fraction of the stars, whereas without it, the whole ....ing stunning band of the milky way lies before you) 2 Advices I can give you regarding your purchase (no matter whether you buy a telesope or a night glass): 1. (if not already included, as is usually the case with a Telescope) buy a good stable Tripod as well. It is rather awkward to observe the sky, if the hands holding the nightglass tremble from its weight 2. An alt-azimuthal mount will suffice for your first telescope (while I mentioned some advantages of the equatorial mount in my last posting, it takes some time and knowledge to setup) As for what to get ... aside from nightglasses, a reflector (especially the simple newtonian ones) AFAIK still offer the largest diameter for your bucks. So maybe this is preferable over a Refractor, if you want to spent not too much money

I have the strong feeling that kOS or KMP/DMP would enable you to program such a feature for yourself

Well, but I guess, nothing beats Venus´ rains of sulphuric acid

For me it is quite the contrary ... in past versions of KSP I worked a lot with Standardization, in KSP 0.24 on the other hand, almost each rocket is individualized, because on almost every mission I combine the primary mission goal with several test contracts, making an individual rocket design necessary. The only design I have used more than once in 0.24 is the design for my Kerbal rescue ship. When there are longer missions (that require some hours of flight in between, for exaple Mun missions) I love it to go back to KSC and do some missions for the time where the other mission flies to target ... often these are test misions, some times however, these are orbital rescue contracts with no other test missions combined ... and my design has been proven time and again to be ideally suited for this task (and allows me to get a lot of the ship back to Kerbin for Recovery, despite me using Deadly reentry)

DebRefund and much more chutes than before I also do more things with unmanned spaceships, especially tests within the atmosphere ... due to the light weight of the probe CPUs, I can keep the spaceships smaller than before. For the same reason, my first Mun mission (in order to fulfill the "Explorer Mun"-Contract) was a robotic Orbiter + Lander ... and my first manned mission (to fulfill "Plant flag on Mun") is just a lander ... in contrast to my usual procedure of sending an Apollo-Type Spaceship + Lander-Combo. My next step will be a station with an MPL lab orbiting Mun, so that I can gather science with a reusable lander that travels between surface and station, making individual missions cheaper than before

Actually I remember reading about shrinking primordial black holes who might then "die" already in Stephen Hawking (maybe even in "A brief history of time") ... 2 decades ago. Although, AFAIK he didn´t write anything about what becomes of the BHs materia ... this may be the thing that is new (by these 2 scientists)

You can use the mod DebRefund for it ... it recovers stuff when it reaches the 2.5 km limit ... that is, if you put enough parachutes on it (reason why my robotic probe had so many chutes on the lifter stage ... recovered 17k of the 47k). But, i for my part, don´t slavishly try to recover everything ... my missions are always in Plus nevertheless (due to careful selection of contracts and putting several contracts together for a mission)

Mabe they are the ones who are the first to erect a six star luxury hotel on Mars

My robotic probe (orbiter + lander) that fulfilled the "Explore Mun"-Contract cost me slightly less than 50k As Scientific payload the lander featured a Goo-Container + Science jr + Thermometer, the Orbiter 2 Goo-Containers and a Science jr.

Dunno about Helicopters, but in germany for Birdstrikes on planes AFAIK it is upon the jurisdiction of the captain, whether he aborts the takeoff or proceeds with it

Nope, I don´t, at least not now, as I wait for the standard beta in 3 days, before I´ll start playing it