Gargamel

Lvl 3 kerbals can use it. Right click on the kerbal during EVA, and the option to deploy should appear.

This. LKO stations are kinda useless for refueling, unless it's some specialized fuel for a mothership that is impractical to haul up in individual launches. ISRU is pretty much useless in LKO, you could launch Ore to the station and convert it there, but it's benefits aren't that great. If it's attached to a large asteroid how ever, then it's a perfect ISRU refueling vessel, but I like those in higher orbit (2k km +) so I'm a bit out of the gravity well. LKO stations, for me, really only serve the purpose of science labs, and holding space camps (with the tourism (?) contract pack). Munar and minmus (and planets other than Kerbin) are well suited for refueling depots, as your landers or transfer vehicles don't need to carry extra fuel, and therefore can be cheaper to launch. You then have to have ISRU capabilities in place to make it the most efficient. They also do well for science outposts, but then you have to consider getting the kerbals there, which can be non-trivial if you're using Life Support or don't have the means to transport many kerbals at once. The base core of any station should have the requisite power and communication parts already on it, be-it in the single launch or after initial orbital construction is complete. Sometimes you do have to add power modules to a station, as you realize you didn't put enough on there. But communication should be handled already by the antenna already attached, and also a cloud of com-sats already in orbit. Adding passenger space is kinda irrelevant in my mind. My stations are usually over built in this regard, just because of the mods parts I use already have plenty of habitation space. I usually only staff a half dozen kerbals at any one time, but I usually have space for 4-5 times that. If you are considering tourism contracts, then you don't need to add space for them. The transfer vehicle you use to get them there already contains the space for the tourists, and docking it to the station adds that space to the station. So think about what it is you want the station to do, and add the modules you are lacking to achieve that goal.

Manley did a bit of reading from the book. Just from the excerpts he read, I want this...

Thanks for the updates @tater. I betcha a lot of troops/councils are really starting worry about their summer plans...

Flexible docking ports perhaps? If not, it's not very clear on what you want....

Are you missing the parachute icons too?

IIRC, almost every update in from the alpha and beta stages (<1.0) broke old saves, so those are not usable anymore. If you really really really wanted to, you might be able to pull out ships one at a time, line by line, from the old files and try to recereate them in the new files, but you'd have to add and remove a lot of stuff, and it'd just be way easier (and safer) to build a new vessel in the VAB and edit it into place. For old mods, if the mod maker hasn't updated the mod, you have two options, you can go without, or take over the mod and update it yourself.

Use a larger fairing base if the first one doesn't fit. Then you can either use a second fairing to complete the taper to the intended size (I don't really recommend this, as it really doesn't do any good, but some people just really like aesthetics), or build your launcher using the larger size, and just reduce fuel.

I'm actually drawing a blank on real life spaceplanes, I'd like to see some. And by space plane I mean a plane, not a vertically launched glider (ie shuttle). The materials really don't matter, as the wings themselves are the cause of the drag. Biplanes were required because of the weaker engines, hence slower air speed, which required more lifting area.

This here is the key to the question. Historically, most of the pollution started when people didn't know they were "polluting". This looks like a wonderful place for a landfill, 50 years later, oops, there goes that wetland. Then when we discover how a method is polluting the environment, getting others to stop in a timely fashion can become very difficult. So, we might do something, now, that seems innocuous, but many yhears in the future turns out to be a bad idea. And also, are we talking about just pollution, or changing the area or environment? A couple replies have focused on mining and such. The concept of mining, taking an ore from the ground, does not itself mean there will be pollution, just the terrain/environment will be different. So maybe a uninteresting spot on the dark side of the moon is completely dug up and re-arranged by a for profit mining company. I'm ok with that. Leaving that area unusable, or requiring great effort by others, in the future I'm not OK with it. And I don't mean some bulldozers pushing dirt around to fill in a hole, I mean requiring superfund esque cleanups.

The g force blackout slider, in the settings menu.

This is already part of the stock game. If you want them more susceptible, adjust the slider in the settings menu.

Played sandbox for 4-5 years exclusively, mainly because that's all there was to start, and then the normal bugs with a new game mechanic, I stayed away for a bit. But I got bored, wanted some direction in the game, and started playing career. Haven't really tried science, as the part of career that bugs me the most is the science grind. Which version is best? The one that brings me fun.

Or any other factual info you want to know about KSP, try the wiki: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Main_Page

As he mentioned, the boat leaves the dock, sails up and down the river, and meanwhile, you've lost all your gambling money, hours before the boat returns to dock, and you get bored.

But where's the fun in that? And nobody would play, as the house's edge would become very apparent, very quickly. At least when you are making the decisions, the illusion of control is there. And I think you just described a slot machine....

Ok, I LOL'd at that one... It does, and doesn't pertain. I was restricting it to decks of 52 cards. Adding just the jokers bumps it to 2.31 x1071, and now we're approaching particles in the universe territory. A lot of brick and mortar casinos, for blackjack, use a continuous shuffle machine, that holds multiple decks, and the waste from every hand is reshuffled into the deck. This negates any advantage a card counter might have. I would assume an online casino would do the same, seeing as it's easier to code a single shuffle each hand, instead of tracking used cards. But the enormity of the situation strikes you when you hold that deck in the palm of your hand, and you realize the amount of complexity it entails, and the fact you can create something never seen before in the history of the universe..... in the palm of your hand. --- Next question, how many years before it's more likely to be a shuffle that has already happened? Well, we'll keep the 50 shuffles a year, but let's bump this to 40 billion people per year. So half of 52! is 4 x 1067 (I sadly used a calculator for that). So 4x1067 divided by (50 shuffles x 40 billion) is... dang.... 2.02 x1055 years.... whoa.... that's a long time..... Somebody check that math, that can't be right. If we did 20% in 200 years, we should do 40% after 400 years, yes? Hmmmm....

But here's something simple that will blow your mind, when put into perspective. Only about 20% of possible shuffles of a deck of 52 playing cards have ever been done. I did the math quite some years ago on this, so I might be a tad off on that 20%. But, simply, there are 52! combinations (permutations?) of a deck of cards. That's 8.066 x 10 67. Only a dozen magnitudes shy of the number you quoted. But lets think about this. Modern decks of 52 cards have been around for 200 years or so. Let's completely over estimate this number, and say there's been 4 billion people, per year, over that same time frame. And let's also say, the average person shuffles 50 times a year. Some vastly more (casino dealers and habitual players) and some never, so 50 seems like a nice average (How many times a year do you shuffle a deck?). (We're getting into Drake-esque territory here). So 200 years x 4 billion people x 50 shuffles... carry the 2.... That's 2 x 1013. (Yup, still around 20%, give or take a bit) Even if you increase the number of shuffles by a factor of 100, or reach back farther in history, it barely moves that number when compared to the number of possible shuffles. So what's this mean is that when you shuffle a deck of cards, you are creating an order which has probably never been seen in the universe before. For perspective (from WolframAlpha) : number of grains of sand on Earth: 1020 - 1024 Number of Stars: 1024 Number of atoms in a human: 7 x 1027 Even if you include the online gaming world, that will at best, raise the number of shuffles by only a couple factors of ten.

First off, that is goofiest awesomest plane I have ever seen. That thing looks cool, and fast. Like something out of the 50's... I have not had any issues like that with symmetry. It looks like you have a bit of yaw input happening. Either you are pulling slightly to one side, or your trim is set to yaw a bit. The yawing would possibly reduce (or increase?) the lifting ability on one side of the plane.

Love it! Glad you did the real speed test, and the stationary test, as the slow speed was messing with my perception of the plane v treadmill. Now we have some practical examples, and a virtual one. But cue the "But KSP physics..." and the "The treadmill wasn't long enough, it didn't take flight!" arguments! I would imagine with hangar extender, and flipping them both around, you could get flight while on the treadmill.

The only time to use MP on a "station" is when that station is actually a mothership, and requires RCS at times for 'quick' (< 2 min turn 180*) maneuvering or docking.

I never mentioned vessel chutes, as those are supposed to be complicated and specific to the vessel, and as such should require a leveled engineer. My point was that a level 1 kerbal should not be able to re-pack a personal chute, but a level 3 or high should. A beginning sky diving student or tourist doesn't pack their own chute, they just get pushed out of the plane. A fighter pilot doesn't pack their own chute. But they can all use a chute. Somebody who has trained specifically to pack chutes, can pack a chute. So since a kerbal has to be level 3 to use a chute, the argument could be made they have taken the time to train in how to pack one too.

First result under "search"

It depends on the forum Engine settings, but sometimes there is a time limit after which consecutive replies will not be merged, or if somebody has viewed your original post. I don't know specifics for this forum, just what I have seen as a mod/admin of other forums.

WELL, ALMOST ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH! My god... it's contagious.... it's spreading to other arguments....