roosterr

anything (modern) higher than 3.0 GHz that you can afford. Having a boatload of cores wont make it any better either, 4 is plenty.

Because: 1) you are free to dream, invent, design, plan and USE YOUR BRAIN 2) it is not overstimulating (flashing lights, fast paced, noise, noise, noise) like most games nowadays 3) Zombie killing is so out 4) The developers are clever 5) its constructive 6) it relates to real world stuff with a real history and common challenges 7) you USE YOUR BRAIN! 8) Sandboxes are IN 9) Achieving your goals gives you a better sense of accomplishment than slaying the dragon, rescuing the princess, or killing the mob boss. 10) YOU USE YOUR BRAIN!

Never played the demo. The person that turned me on to KSP, said "dude, just pay the $15 (back then) its well worth it". He was right.

If it is economically advantageous (cost of kerbalnaut training x 3, vs. cost of rescue mission), then by all means proceed. If not, you will have a nice supply of Soylent Green in Eve orbit for future visitors.

I would say that "super fun to fly" IS a practical use

I finished Mike Tysons boxing, a LONG time ago

Another great one!

Hilarious, this was my number one answer and decide to look to see if anyone else had posted it. Yours is post #3! LOL. After BF2 was released, I got sucked into the BF2 Mod "Project Reality" where I stayed for 5 years, played nothing else; until I discovered the planet Kerbin.

The method behind their madness is that gaming drops off significantly during the summer months because of the obvious. So get out of the basement and get some sunshine!!!

I just made my first one yesterday: I will conquer the kerbol system. It should be easy since there are no known life forms other than kerbals and birds.

-setting primer charges -cutting corners -extorting kongress -tenderizing kerbalnauts -wormholing

To go east, simply tap your D button just after launch so your heading bug drives down the line marked 90. Toggle your ASAS on/off between turns. Also realize the difference between SAS and ASAS. SAS uses a torque method of internal mechanisms (I think pendulums and/or internal motors) of rotating your command module. This is more effective if you are in orbit on smaller craft. ASAS will actually steer your rocket motors and/or fins and work best in atmosphere on larger craft.

Welcome!!!!

And to edit your avatar, you do need 5 or maybe 7 posts first. It may appear that you can do this by clicking on your empty avatar place holders since it looks like a link. You dont. Instead of using My Profile (upper right corner) use Settings and you will find it.

an obvious pressure suit failure due to excessive heat. Kerbal blood boiling elongated the extremities. He'll never try that again.

A nice concise explanation, which is hard to do without going off into too much detail.

It took a few days before I understood it, and once I understood it, it took me almost 2 hours to actually dock. And it got progressively easier every time after that. I never did find one single video that covered it all, so watch as many of the popular ones as possible and compare the similarities and you may find a good tip from each presenter. The key is to set your target as a target (always), orbit at a much lower altitude then the target to catch up to it (or much higher alt to slow down), maneuver node closer to it from there when you get closest approach, then use the navball on the close encounters to pro or retro bug (relative to TARGET) to match the speed of the target. Once you are less than 1 KM (stable), use RCS/docking mode to get you the rest of the way home. It still takes me at least 1/2 hour from launch to dock.

I applaud NASA for their great accomplishments, but if you want to do it better, faster, cheaper, let an entrepreneur handle it. The best thing that NASA did was to have competitive vendor competitions ("challenges") that made the aerospace companies compete with their own prototypes and funding for contracts. The team with the best prototype and design efficiency wins.

It is to recover the first stage which will save lots of money. I have not seen any graphics of their ultimate stage recovery plan, but if it were ME, I think a combination parachute and retro-landing system would make sense. As in, parachute back to an appropriate altitude, then cut the cord loose and burn the rest of the way down to a soft landing.

I do appreciate where the original message was going, BUT, separatrons (called retro or ullage motors depending on their orientation) were used on the Saturn V almost 50 years ago.

Elon Musk's goal is to put humans on mars. really.

Gotta love SpaceX. The Grasshopper Project mission is to lower the cost of spaceflight by enabling a reusable first stage (and maybe even stage 2 etc.). Here is the latest "hop" at over 1,000 feet. SpaceX even designed and built the "Hexacopter" camera to film their launches.

I really dont see much harm in the saves breaking, BECAUSE, when the new version comes out, I start new missions and leave my old folders (KSP_18, KSP_19, KSP_20, etc.) available and run the necessary version based on the mission. I learned a long time ago not to fall in love with my creations and missions as new improvement will be overriding it all at some point in the future. And starting out with a clean slate every few months is refreshing.

Ditto, I archive my KSP_** folders. However, I do backup my saves folder in case I accidentally end a flight (like a space station).

My Dad has asteroids and cant hardly sit down most of the time. Also Scott used to work at an observatory. http://www.arm.ac.uk/~spm/