Greenfire32

For me, the aerodynamics absolutely need the most attention before the 1.0 update. Since 1.0 will be the first "official" update, you don't want new players coming in only to find out that the "released" game they just bought is going to undergo a huge game-changing fix that could potentially ruin everything they've built thus far. So my priorities are this: 1. Fix aerodynamics 2. Fix bugs and stabilize KSP 3. Release 1.0 4. Work on new features (multiplayer!!!)

Kerbin. It's the only planet that supports life.

Get into a stable orbit first. This way you're not fighting the planet while raising your AP at the same time. ----EDIT---- Wait...I seem to have misread the OP... You're talking about around Kerbol, not Kerbin aren't you? If so...I can't help you there. Sorry.

With the exception of space stations, I usually just load up the VAB/ SPH and go nuts. When I do space stations, I usually build the entire thing as a "Concept" craft and then build the individual pieces as needed. This allows me to see how "cool" the station will be before I go through the trouble of launching and assembling everything...and then de-orbiting the station because I hate it.

NASA isn't refusing. The US Government is. And since the government controls the money NASA gets, they've forced NASA to take a "Pro-America" stance. Also, there's laws and stuff that forbid NASA to do more cooperative ventures.

ALL updates are free...as they always have been...

So if I'm reading this correctly, what you're basically saying is: "As a Russian citizen, I'm upset that Russia would rather spend it's own time and money on a station when there's already a perfectly good one up there and I'd rather see that time and money go to something more meaningful like a Russian Moon Program." If I read that correctly, then I would have to say that is a valid complaint I hadn't thought of.

Exactly.

Why? The only thing that I can think of being "off limits" would be if the Russian station had some sort of weapon that could nuke cities from orbit. I have no problems with the Russians building their own station. Just like I have no problems with China's rover on the moon. There's no reason to be upset.

Some time ago when I was a kid, some other kid's mom demanded that no one dress up in costume for a Halloween party because someone might dress up as a vampire which was offensive to her religion and by extension, her. Similarly, I had to stop being friends with kids who parent's thought Harry Potter was the devil's magic and took extreme offense at the mere existence of it. This is what I mean when I say: Some people get offended by things they have no business being offended by. There are people out there who will go out of their way to ruin the fun for everyone simply because they thought something was "offensive." Now, I'm not saying the OP is this kind of person. Not at all! All I'm saying is that those kinds of people exist, that this particular issue is really a non-issue, and that striving for "total-equality" for the sake of not hurting anyone's feelings isn't necessarily the best approach in all instances. The phrase, "you can't please everyone," exists because there will always be someone who gets offended at something. Making everything "equal and unoffensive" runs the risk of offending people who view creativity in high regard. Likewise, making everything creative will only offend those who enjoy the "streamlined corporate style" of things. Know what I mean?

Moar boosters! Moar struts! Pointy end towards space!

It's become generally accepted that "Manned" and "Mankind" is genderless. Sort of like how a lot of females preferred to be called "Actors" instead of "Actresses." Also, it's not a big deal. Being politically correct because you might offend someone isn't necessarily the right course of action. Some people get offended by things they have no business being offended by, know what I mean?

Wobble happens when the weight of the rocket is too much for the "joints" to handle in a stable manner. The hard way to fix this (and better way) is to rebalance your rocket so that all joints receive an equal amount of the load. This could be as "simple" as redefining where the center of mass is. The easy way to fix this is by reinforcing your joints with struts, thereby increasing the amount of load they can handle. Of course, wobble problems are best evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but without a visual, the above should cover most wobble woes.

There's really no such thing as a perpetual motion device, but there are devices out there that "extend" motion. I had a magnet powered spinner that would take the energy applied from the initial spin (my hand) and continue to spin for about 20 minutes before it lost enough energy to maintain itself and collapse. The reason why these devices don't exist (and the reason why they're so sought after) is because they claim to make energy out of nothing. It's the same as saying a perpetual apple device makes apples out of nothing when in reality you need apple seeds, apple trees, and the molecules and atoms that make up those things. Even if we did discover a "perpetual" motion device, it would still be pulling energy from somewhere else. The ZPM's (Zero Point Modules) in Stargate: Atlantis seemingly pulled energy from nowhere, but they actually just pulled it from a small contained bubble of sub-space. Even in Sci-Fi, there's no such thing

I never really noticed until I played KSP that my fingers twitch ALL. THE. TIME. Stage lock is a god-send.

RCS allows for finer movements. RCS doesn't gobble up your fuel supply. RCS is more than strong enough for most crafts. Verneers are for the huge crafts that need it. Not the small crafts that want it.

Then you'll be waiting for a loooooooong time. Years possibly. Source: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/328-The-future-of-Windows-64-bit-builds-for-KSP

I don't think it's even possible. Mods or not, the game doesn't really keep track of crafts that aren't currently active. Rover's would need physics applied to them and the planet would also have to be loaded at all times...I'm just not sure the core game is even capable of doing that. Best case scenario would be the rover just...appears at the destination instead of actually driving there.

I guess we'll just skip the part where the joke flew over your head...

Looks like my Kerbal type is ABB positive. Do I get a cookie if I donate?

I think it's a great idea! On paper!

I like to view this as the game's way of saying "Kerbals have 'this' much technology. They know there are other rocks out there, but here's the ones they can find." The problem with this is that even though they wouldn't be rendered, they'd still have to be plotted and kept track of by the game. Especially if they're going to have course-correcting events such as collisions with other asteroids.It's a good idea, but it's also just not yet feasible. At least in my opinion.

Would an impact with micro-debris cause "sudden temperature spike?" I find it a little hard that a satellite with 20 years of operation under it's belt would just spontaneously combust due to some interior problem.

stupid question: does anybody besides us Americans and the Russians even use the ISS anymore? Or is it mostly just the American/Russian "High Flyers Exclusive Clubhouse?"

Currently, satellites, rovers and off-world bases serve no real purpose. However, once the next update lands, we'll have resources and I'm hoping all three of those things get some serious love in that respect.