razark

It depends on how you define "stage". My recent landers have had a central core with the engine, fuel, and pod. Radial decouplers on the sides hold extra fuel tanks and the science modules. I'll land, do science, then hop to another location and do some more science. Once I'm done, I jettison the side pods, leaving them at the last landing site, and return in the central core. So how many stages is that?

Yes, but it's just right for planets and moons.

How very unimpressive of a concept. What's the point in a competition to see who can use time compression the most?

But you didn't do it in real time, you did it with time compression. What was your MET? I've seen a video of Kerbin to Mun and back in less than an hour. It was a while back, but I recall that it used a lot of SRBs.

Define "not advanced". Every spacecraft we've ever used has been advanced enough not to be vaporized, and anything less advanced isn't really a "spacecraft".

I'm sure Robert Scott will rejoice at the news when he gets back. He's only 102 years late checking in.

Too many times I've had this conversation: User: "I submitted my form, but now the system can't find it. Me: "Ok, what happened?" User: "Well, it popped up some error message, and I clicked ignore, and now my form isn't showing up." There is an undo. It's called quicksave/load.

So you didn't bother to check that the craft you are deleting is the one you want to delete? That's the purpose of the confirmation pop-up, to give you pause to make sure you are doing what you intend. I get tired of users not paying attention to the message that appear. I put those words in there to be read, because they give useful information. That said, a little checkbox that makes a ship not deletable would be useful.

We have. We will. Many times over, probably. We have. We will. Many times over, probably. It has. It will. Many times over, probably. Get used to the idea, or get out of the game. People will die. Columbus lost one-third of his ships on his first voyage across the Atlantic. A one way trip may be our best option for the foreseeable future. If people are willing to accept that, why do you insist that they be stopped? What risks are you willing to accept? If you want anything even close to Columbus's two-thirds ship survival rate, you're going to be waiting a long time, and spending a lot of money. There's never going to be any certainty of making the voyage, much less the return trip.

I could get hit by a truck walking out to check the mail. What are the chances the astronauts would be stranded with no way back on a one way mission? I'm guessing it's about 100%. If they go to stay, they know they're going to stay. History has shown that some people are fine with that.

I've not really been following development since the original author disappeared, so I wanted to check. Is the wiki still valid/up to date? Is there a better source for command reference for the current kOS version?

If your willing to pay, I'll sell you the one that's siting on my desk right now.

Third costliest hurricane in US history, $37.5 billion in damages. Have you ever seen someone paddle a kayak through your yard?

Spent an entire week without power after Hurricane Ike back in 2008.

Because private companies do things for profits. Governments don't need to. And there's just no profit in going to Mars yet.

There's no technological barrier preventing it from being done. Easy answer: Import everything needed from earth. Land a huge cache of supplies on Mars before you even consider sending a single human. The only limit is how much you are willing to spend to do it.

No, just no. It's not really that much, when you consider what people were doing two centuries or even one ago. Crossing the Atlantic to come to the US was a one way trip for most immigrants. They knew there was little chance that they would ever see the old country again. The best they could hope for was to make enough to bring their family across as well. As bad and as terrifying as it was, though, many people chose to make the trip.

"From space I saw Earth -- indescribably beautiful and with the scars of national boundaries gone." -Muhammad Faris "National boundaries are as invisible as meridians of longitude, or the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. The boundaries are arbitrary. The planet is real." -Carl Sagan "When you're finally up at the moon looking back on earth, all those differences and nationalistic traits are pretty well going to blend, and you're going to get a concept that maybe this really is one world and why the hell can't we learn to live together like decent people." -Frank Borman "I really believe that if the political leaders of the world could see their planet from a distance of 100,000 miles their outlook could be fundamentally changed. That all-important border would be invisible, that noisy argument silenced. The tiny globe would continue to turn, serenely ignoring its subdivisions..." -Michael Collins "The first day or so we all pointed to our countries. The third or fourth day we were pointing to our continents. By the fifth day, we were aware of only one Earth." -Sultan bin Salman Al-Saud I just don't feel the need to divide the planet up. There's too many divisions in the real world, why bother adding it in a game that has nothing to do with it?

I see that you get my point.

Nope, I use all the artificial borders on the map, and nothing else.

I just divide it up along the borders on the map screen.

It's pretty popular in my area. I can't seem to get away from it.

It doesn't matter where it lands. It's a big hassle dealing with a reactor that isn't meant to fly. Launch something nuclear from KSC, let it explode over the Atlantic, and watch public opinion and political fallout wrap you in enough red tape to keep you from attempting another launch for a decade. If you did happen to hit a populated area, the legal fees alone would probably bankrupt your space program, not to mention the possibilities of an international incident

Nuclear engines operating normally aren't so much of a problem. The problem would be the accidental release of nuclear material. Of course, rockets never fail during launch, and what are the chances that a nuclear powered satellite would undergo an uncontrolled re-entry, scattering nuclear material over a wide area?

True, but you don't need to perform Mun/Minmus landings Apollo-style.