Adam Novagen

Another milestone in my journey; the main colony base has been completed, though I have made a few tiny alterations since this video was recorded; more on that soon. Anyway, what d'you folks think? Good design? Bad design?

Today, a milestone has been reached in my mission to colonize Laythe, namely actually landing a rover successfully! Prior to this, the only things outside the Kerbin system I'd actually landed on were Duna and Gilly, so it feels great to finally get that under my belt. Of course, in the meantime, it may take Jeb close to a century to get back home...

If you've been in this thread before: please refer to post #16 for a question from yours truly. Sup folks. So I've been running a mission to colonize Laythe. However, rather than just drop a science lab down and call it a day, I've been building my way up through career mode, building up the necessary science to unlock the parts for a fully restockable and permanent installation that can ferry Kerbals all the way from Kerbin to the Laythe colony and back again. I've been recording it as a series on YouTube, and for some reason it never occurred to me to share it here until now. Feel free to enjoy my ultra-professional antics; I may be great at spaceships, but I'm absolute rubbish at space! ... Oh, and if Let's Plays aren't your thing then you may prefer this little montage of my utter failure to make a halfway decent spaceplane. Enjoy!

The Communotron 16. A straightforward, albeit boring design. The lowest weight of the three antennas, the lowest energy consumption per Mit, and only fractionally more expensive than the Comms DTS-M1. So, my question is... What is the point of even HAVING the other two antennae, when the C-16 is superior in virtually every way? Am I missing something obvious with this one?

I propose that the lander-can on the left be christened "Madness" and the one on the right "Brilliance."

Did you ever by any chance use the old Subassembly mod? It was broken in the .21 update due to the change in plugin handling, but if you still have the DLL knocking about then KSP will be trying to re-load it repeatedly. I had exactly the same kind of problem you're describing; once I deleted the subassembly DLL, performance went right back to normal.