[SSTOs! Post your pictures here~]

Made a smaller version of my last design. This one only takes 2 Kerbals to a station, but it's super stable and can do a Mun flyby.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[SSTOs! Post your pictures here~]

I love how this thing turned out; 18 Kerbals to 500x500km and back.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[What did you do in KSP1 today?]

Took a trip to Laythe

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Designing viable delta-wing'ed aircraft?]

It's certainly viable, you just have to balance the CoM/CoL.

[Tackling memory issues]

64-bit Windows support might improve when Unity 5 comes out. In the mean time you can use mods like Active Texture Management and/or Load on Demand to lower your memory usage.

You can also force OpenGL instead of DirectX, it uses less memory in OpenGL mode but the framerate can suffer.

There's also the 64-bit Linux version of KSP, which doesn't have the issues that the Windows 64-bit version has. However, being Linux it uses OpenGL, so you'll still get lower framerates.

Hopefully Squad will spend some time on improving the way assets are loaded now that we're officially in beta.

[This Will Not End Well (post images of your craft in a precarious situation)]

Woah, hey, what's that thing at the bottom-right you got tellin' ya when to do the suicide burn?

That's just the HUD-mode of Kerbal Engineer.

[This Will Not End Well (post images of your craft in a precarious situation)]

When wings decide to blink out of existence.

[Question to do with RAM]

If you're feeling up to dual-booting with Linux, the 64 bit Linux client is much more stable than the 64 bit Windows client. More info about playing in Linux can be found in these two threads - The Linux Thread and The Other Linux Thread. It made a huge difference on my system with how many mods I can use, and I'm only running with 6GB total of RAM.

The Linux 64-bit version works, but the game runs significantly worse in OpenGL than it does in DirectX.

[I'm considering moving my KSP into steam]

There's no difference between the two versions.

[What did you do in KSP1 today?]

[Should stock include 5m or larger parts?]

5m parts aren't necessary unless they change the scale of the planets. With only 4.5km/s required to orbit the 3.75m parts already make it incredibly easy to get heavy payloads into orbit.

[SSTOs! Post your pictures here~]

Nothing fancy, but this turned out nicely.

[[1.0.5] Adjustable Landing Gear v1.2.0 (mass/cost scaling, tech nodes, drag) - May 30]

Any idea why the wheel bay doors aren't closing? Everything else works great, but the doors stay open after the wheels fold up.

[Remember your first launches?]

Back before the Mun had been invented.

[What is the difference "in real-life" an SAS and Reaction Wheel?]

Here's another related video

[Less memory usage by using OpenGL]

OpenGL definitely shows less RAM usage, but my framerate is halved and the game doesn't render any dynamic shadows with it enabled.

The lower framerate might be related to the fact that I have a dual-GPU setup, but still, it's a pretty big sacrifice for less RAM usage.

[Are Nuclear Rockets "Cheating"?]

It's a proven technology, working prototypes have been made in real life, but never flown. In part due to the risk of dispersing radioactive material in the event of a rocket malfunction.

[Going to the Mun and going to Duna in career mode, lack of difficulty increase]

I think for a novice player, doing an interplanetary transfer is still pretty daunting compared to the Mun.

That said if you are finding it too easy, install Deadly Reentry and TAC Life Support to add some challenge.

[How do YOU land large rovers?]

Here's a few more designs.

<iframe class="imgur-album" width="100%" height="550" frameborder="0" src="//imgur.com/a/8WWzG/embed"></iframe>

[How do YOU land large rovers?]

Not really that complicated, but it's an awesome idea!

Is the rover connected with the frame over the docking port at the bottom? Have you got more screenshots?

There's a decoupler on the frame that's attached to one of the structural panels on the bottom of the rover. It's made so the entire frame drops down a few iches when it decouples, allowing the rover to clear the frame and drive out.

Often I'll put legs on the frame to take the initial impact of landing then fold up, since landing on wheels tends to damage them.

[How do YOU land large rovers?]

Usually with a frame like this, with rockets some fuel tanks on top instead of parachutes if it's a vacuum landing.

Second pic is an earlier prototype but you get the idea.

[Ike's Possible Origin?]

Was there a reason given why this was changed instead of build upon?

No specific reason was given afaik. I assume it's because they thought it was too hard to land on. The atmosphere was so thin parachutes were of little use, and so hot that your engines would overheat in seconds, so you had to burn in bursts with a high-TWR engine.

They removed the atmosphere and overheating when it got an art-pass in 0.18. It used to look like this.

[Just got an "Explore Ike" contract]

Landing on Ike is no more difficult than landing on the Mun, and it's easier to return from than Duna.

[Ike's Possible Origin?]

According to britannica.com, "Moho, or MohoroviÄÂić discontinuity, [is the] boundary between the Earth’s crust and its mantle. The Moho lies at a depth of about 22 mi (35 km) below continents and about 4.5 mi (7 km) beneath the oceanic crust."

What I'm getting is that Moho is the bottom layer of the Earth's crust, and maybe the devs gave Moho the name that is has because it is the "bottom" of the solar system, being the first planet.

In 0.17 Moho was supposed to be volcanic and had a very thin but hot atmosphere that made your engines overheat.

[To those who think part test contracts should be removed... Please read.]

There just needs to be a greater variety of contracts.

Testing parts isn't very interesting, but they make up at least half of the available contracts.