Wahgineer

Apollo, Mercury, Gemini Though technically not modern, if they could do it in the 60s, what is there (hypothetically) to stop us from doing the same in 20teens?

Uhh... So from what I hear, this plugin should allow me to look at a plane and say: "since it looks a lot like a real plane, it should at least fly like one.". What I'm trying to say is that if I build an airplane, the more it looks like a real plane, the better it flies; where as with regular KSP aerodynamics, the more it looks like a real plane, the worse it flies. Is this true? Also, would the plugin allow me to build a capsule with a slightly offset CoM so that when I tip it during re-entry, the capsule generates lift?

to solve radial docking port problem: why not make 'adaptable' textures ? For E.X.: I have a 2.5 meter cone adapter modified to be crew transferable (which makes sense that it be crew transferable). The basic texture is a gray wall with some hoses or cables to break up the monotony. Radially attached are two clamp-o-tron docking ports. In Iva, a special texture is added that shows the interior 'entrance' to the docking port relative to the docking port on the outside. The number of the textures and where they are located corresponds with the docking ports. This approach has the advantage of being able to universally fit with every part. While in some cases it may be odd (ex: docking port placed behind a seat in the hitchhiker), these cases are rare enough not to warrant concern.

To those who complain about optimization for older computers: please stop It's 2013, for crying out loud. If you have a computer that's from 2005 that you use to play KSP, it's time to upgrade. I didn't wait until my family got a new computer until I bought KSP. Yes, the computer was bugging out and nearly dead, but it was 10 years old. I understood that ksp wouldn't run on it, and that it would be pointless to get the game and then complain about it to the Devs. It's like complaining to a car company about not making spare parts for your car that has been out of production for the past 55 years. If your computer can't handle ksp, try looking at the date of manufacture as to a clue why. The rest of us on the forums who have competent computers hate it when people suggest optimizing the game for an old or out-of-date or crappy system. We don't want a crummy game meant for new and old computers. We want an awesome, beautiful, and amazing game for awesome, beautiful, and amazing computers.

There have been worse necros than this (try ones on the order of 2-3 YEARS instead of 2-3 months).

Instead of the (obviously flawed) Verne cannon, we should just stick with the much safer Orion. Why is Orion safer? can be moved to any location to launch (empty desert) doesn't need to be launched with nukes (chemical explosives in low atmo., nukes in upper) accelerates at a much more reasonable pace (let the reader use discernment on the meaning of reasonable.) can be constructed in orbit accelerates slowly enough to be considered man rated.

Solution to low-thrust ion engines: loads of batteries+RTGs loads of Ion engines

Couldn't you just remove the collapsible bladders?

^What he said. If you looked into it, you'd actually find that not all reactors need steam to generate power. How could they get the RTGs to be so small anyway?

As far as I know, it's job will be to process uncollected/nonreturnable samples, as well as make an onsite base more feasible. It also helps since you won't be able to spam the transmit button anymore, you will actually have to take samples to it, process them, and then transmit the results back home.

I believe that there is a simple solution to the problem of missions/contracts/tasks: difficulty settings Much like minecraft, these settings could determine whether you want to play sandbox with science+money, limited parts with science + money with lightly structured missions, or Manley Mode, with structured missions, politics, reputation, low budget, low science returns, and Permadeath (i.e.: if a kerbal dies, you will never see him again. You also will have a limited number of kerbals.). instead of bickering back and forth over whether career should be sandbox with money and science or Manley Mode, why not compromise, and make those options witch the player decides?

Thanks to the devs, this mod could be called redundant before it gets a beta release. Why? 0.23=new orbital science lab+revised science+all around general optimization=redundant mod

No Uber realism. I would like to get to the nearest star within the next 12 hours, even if via warp drive. Also, with warp drive, their are plenty of nerfs that balance it out (can't work in atmosphere, need to be far away from the sun to use it, needs to be charged up, can only go so far/fast on a charge). It's a game people, it's ok to be a little unrealistic. No procedural tanks (procedural fairings/wings make sense/are ok). The whole point of having set tank sizes is to challenge you.

Sorry bradley101, but mods that use plugins are incompatible with KMP right now. You can still use the romfarer missiles, but they won't be guided.

SLS For being the son of the Saturn V and the Space Shuttle A match made in heaven, if you ask me.

Who said we have to trade back resources? The way I see resources, they're meant to make career mode easier. How? Material and manufacturing independence: By mining, refining, and storing resources in space, you reduce your need for materials and equipment to be shipped up from kerbin. Need an interplanetary tanker ship? Don't construct the components on the ground and launch them to orbit! Build it in orbit to your specifications from the materials you mined and processed yourself! The only thing that you'll have to launch from Kerbin is the kerbals themselves. Economic Independence: Ships are now virtually free, thanks to the mining bases and refineries you run yourself, as well as the orbital shipyards that you own. The only money you have to pay is for the rockets that bring more kerbals to orbit.

When they said that the kerbals would have limited piloting abilities, I would think it'd be like Mechjeb's Smart A.S.S, but you still have to perform burns (and kerbals wouldn't be 100% accurate).

zerg rush How does one get to orbit

I got the game when it was 0.18.4: The Unity Update Basically it was: Get all the mods! Get mechjeb! 0.19 Less mods,still used mechjeb landed on the Mun (mechjeb got me to orbit and then to the mun and home, But I did the landing and the rendezvousing) 0.20 Not much 0.21 didn't really play at all 0.22 ever since science, I've been playing stock, no mechjeb, the only mod I have being Tiberdyne Shuttle Launch System (it's awesome!) that basically sums up KSP for me

You can't How to travel interstellar?

This actually works. (not a lie)

Mars is a dead, barren rock. So far, no bacteria have been discovered on its surface/in the atmosphere. We are certain that no intelligent life lived, is living, or will live on Mars in its present state. Letting ethics get in the way of terraformation would be idiotic, especially if there is nothing to get ethical about.

Here is how servers should work: they should be community owned/operated. Why? 1. Because most of the people running it will be forum members, who are, as far as I know, reasonable, responsible, and intelligent people. 2. It can be set up so you need to have a forum account to log on, which makes sense. (optional) Also, I have faith in the fact that the game's complexity will discourage all of the squeakers/lowlifes/hackers/imbeciles/trolls/griefers from participating in the game. In this sense, it seems like the game is its own best moderator.

If you read Stephen Baxter's Voyage, he talks about a manned mission to mars using chemical engines. In the end, you could just take his design and run with it.

your parents obviously have not heard of the immense potential that computers and the internet have. They also don't know that lcd screens aren't black magic used by the govt to control our minds.