blizzy78

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/35998-Kerbal-soundtrack-stock-royalty-free http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/51682-Couldn-t-find-a-better-place-for-this-possible-legal-issue

Well like you mentioned, you can always build from top to bottom (or the other way around.) It's a bit sad that the editor treats the root part as special. It really doesn't have to be that way.

Check your debug log (press Alt+F2) for errors.

Right, it works perfectly fine. And if it ever won't, I'm pretty sure it will be picked up by someone should the original author no longer maintain it. It's just too useful

You can use the SelectRoot mod to designate another part as the new root part. For example, build your lander as usual, place any probe core above it, select that one as the new root, and save the lander as a subassembly. Now start a new craft, build the CSM, and place the lander from the subassembly under it. Then put the lifter stage below that. Voila, there's your Apollo mission.

Your payload fraction is way too high. You will get a result that should work much better with a payload fraction around 15%. No. The TWR constraint is only for the complete vessel, ie. at liftoff. As you get further out of the atmosphere, the TWR doesn't matter as much, since there is less drag. In space, it is essentially irrelevant as long as it is >0.

Sounds like a job for IButton.Important

It says: DynamicHeapAllocator out of memory - Could not get memory for large allocationCould not allocate memory: System out of memory!

Did you install Kerbal Alarm Clock correctly? It should be under KSP\GameData\TriggerTech\...

I don't have access to that.

Post your output_log.txt, that is much more helpful.

I sincerely doubt that the Toolbar Plugin is causing massive lag.

You can always practice on the surface of Kerbin by hacking gravity from the debug menu (Alt+F12.) This way you have the surface as a reference for your motion. And as others have already said: Don't panic, and stop mashing the buttons. Remember, there is no air drag in the vacuum of space, so the longer you thrust, the faster you will go. (This is really common sense, but sometimes people just don't think of it.)

You cannot promote Jeb. Jeb promotes you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens

Doesn't work so well with this picture as long as you don't add in something that wasn't there before.

It does seem so, but then again he mentioned a clean install. In which it makes no sense getting an error popup about NavyFish's plugin.

As far as I know, this has long been fixed, has it not?

Umm... what? Please provide a screenshot.

Exactly, that's why I'd like to suggest adding one, because it adds a lot of flexibility without having to resort to other parts. Aside from the fact that those have their size, too.

Are there any plans to add some sort of ball joint in addition to the hinges? (Please note that I didn't read through all of the 191 pages of this thread. It might have been discussed before.)

This checkbox will restrict calculations to only consider radially mounted engines for the "radial" spot. If you don't check it, it will also consider smaller regular engines, like the LV-T30.

Exactly what I'm talking about, just without the EVA part. And I wish it wouldn't wobble so much all the time :-(

Care to elaborate?

I wonder if there is a way to build something like the Power Data Grapple Fixture for Canadarm2 on the ISS? The way it works is like this: The Canadarm2 has its grapple mechanism on either end. Using that, it can attach to any PDGF anywhere on the station, using either end of the arm. It can then attach to another PDGF with the other end, and release the first end. That way, it can move about the station as desired. So far I've used the magnetic hook from KAS to hold onto things (only on one end, with the other end being fixed in place), but I'd really like to use something like the PDGF mechanism. Is it possible?