Gargamel

If the potato cave was vertical, I would say Sulfuric Acid. Easy is a relative term, so large glass containers seems easy enough. Pour out enough on the spuds, and stand back. A chem major probably would know a better, even perhaps safer, acid to work with for the potatoes though. Now if the cave is horizontal, acids won't work, Gravity doesn't go left. I would then go with very high pressure water. A strong enough pressure washer would cut right though the taters. 100ft a day would probably be very easy to achieve. EDIT: Noticing now you said enzyme, so I may have not properly answered the question. But your question does bring some others to mind.

And the identical, cross posted threads have been merged. Please don't cross post. It causes confusion, and makes us use the merge command, which is a sketchy proposition at best.

Well, we have quite a few very good tutorials on reaching orbit, along with a number of good videos that can be found elsewhere. But basically, you launch with a gravity turn. Each vessel will fly a bit differently, but the principle is the same. You launch, and very shortly there after when the velocity of the vessel will allow for reasonable control (like 50 m/s), you tip eastward (90 degrees on the navball) about 5-10 degrees. Let the SAS hold it there until the prograde marker catches it, and then switch the SAS to Prograde. The craft will slowly tip over as it goes up. This sends you upwards in altitude, but is also bringing you closer to your final path in orbit. As you are going up, keep on an eye on the map view, it will show you your Apoapsis. It should be getting higher at a decent rate. Too fast and you're not turning over enough, and will need to burn more than necessary later; too slow, your turn is too much, and you'll spend too much fuel fighting atmospheric drag. With practice you'll get the feel for what this needs to be. When your Ap gets outside the atmosphere (70km, I like to get mine to 80-100km so I have some wiggle room), cut your engines. You will now coast up to the Ap before you start falling back down to Kerbin. You now have two options. You can set a maneuver node at the Ap, firing enough in the prograde to bring your Periapsis (Pe) up to match your Ap. Keep your ship in the prograde attitude until you get near or out of the atmosphere. This will reduce your drag for as long as possible, and will keep the Ap as high as possible, as drag will cause it drop as you coast. Once you break atmo, point the ship towards the node on the navball, and when the burn indicator says to, complete your burn. If all goes well, you should be in a pretty circular orbit. Or, alternatively, you can just eyeball it. This takes a little more practice, but works just as well for the most part. When your ship is about to reach Ap, point prograde, and burn until your Pe is equal to your Ap. The practice part is knowing when to start and end the burn. That's how I fly my ships, but I'm a notoriously bad pilot. Other's will come along and give better tips, but this method works for me.

Moved to add-on discussion.

Guys, Sadly, some of the comments were straying too far into the political realm. After some discussion, we've had to redact some posts, and remove some others. In the process, some replies to the redacted posts also had to be removed. Try to stay away from political and hot button social topic discussion please, they never end well. We appreciate your understanding in this.

And now for something completely different: 2677

Moved to Mission Reports

Moved to Mission Reports.

Moved to Add-on Discussion, and I whole-heartedly object to the use of this Mod. Smurfs are bad M'kay?

The Coastline Paradox

Titanium is 'stainless' too. Loved working with that metal.

You're doing it wrong. I recall seeing a very very similar thread on this very topic not so long ago. Try digging through a search (good luck) to see if you can find an answer. I think there was some automated resolution.

Meh... there's a good reason that one's obsolete. But why stainless in particular? Why not aluminum? Why not just ask for a shiny metallic variant? What does a stainless tank bring that any other won't?

They did that on the test bed to simulate the mass of all the components that aren't on the test bed. And they were hoping for a gleaming cylinder of shininess, but since they used a company that makes water tanks, and not show pieces, all they got was a lumpy shiny flying water tank. Stainless makes no sense as a bulk material in space craft. It's heavy. Aluminum and Titanium are much better choices if you want shiny and lightweight.

Moved to Add-on Discussion.

Oh I hear that. I prefer designing my own. But sometimes I have to look at what others have done in order to get the correct inspiration for my designs. I tend to prefer reusable interplanetary motherships over one and done single use vessels, so when I was building this, the only thing I cared about was getting back to orbit, with enough dv to dock.

Or or or.... when you place a sub-assembly, regardless of what it is, you get a couple little + - buttons that you hit to slide the recently attached stages up or down. That way you can place the staging exactly where you want at build time, and don't have to deal with remembering priority.

Heavy and clunky.

With some testing, and patience, it's not that hard. I mean, it's difficult, but do able. One option to consider is to have the lander land empty, and refuel via ISRU. Save some mass that way In this pic, the 6 man return vehicle landed on it's own, empty, and the rover with the crew landed somewhere else, drove to the lander, refueled it, and then they went home. But it would be pretty trivial to change the design a bit to have the ISRU under the lander, and have it drop off during launch.

Which is true, but I would consider that an easter egg for all the rovers.

That might just be the coolest pic I have seen of all the rovers, clearly showing the relative sizes. I have followed them all fairly closely, I remember watching the Sojourner landings on TV. I wonder if they ever do races around the test track.... Just a few posts up, you'll see it's already in the game...

FYP for ya.... I'm always reading about new techniques or controls that I had no idea existed. Quiet a few "Huh, that's what that does" moments. So for AT's slipping though, I know I've read some threads that vets had no idea what they did.

Just remember folks, modders do this in their own spare time; work on their own projects because they want to. They are under no obligation to you or anybody else to update, release, or abandon their work just because you wish them too.

And so, if you have built your payload, and are bringing in a launcher that you know consists of three stages, you can add three separators to the bottom of your payload, and attach the launcher sub-assembly. The stages should fall right into the correct places. You can then remove the launcher, scrap the separators, and re-add the launcher, and it should be good to go.

When do you get this error? Can you recreate it every time? We're going to need log files. A single snipped line doesn't really tell us anything. As the sticky says, please upload them to a file hosting service, not directly to the Forums. Thanks.