Kimberly

Radial-in (RAD+) and radial-out (RAD-) are perpendicular to your direction of motion, on the horizontal plane. Imagine you're in a perfectly equatorial orbit around Kerbin; in this case, radial-in and radial-out are towards Kerbin and away from Kerbin, respectively. Edit: d'oh, seems I get them switched. RAD+ is away and RAD- is towards.

"Left" means left relative to the probe core. That may not coincide with what your silly human brain imagined as the "left" of your rover, and frequently does not match left relative to the camera.

If succesful suborbital flight is "incredibly easy", what is the use of making it a requirement for anything? There is no progression if anyone can do it. It's like a mandatory tutorial, and nobody likes those.

Makes sense to me, sumghai. The modules aren't supposed to be independent, but to form a part of a whole--I say, if you want them to do something they're not designed to do, add on your own part. People can add probe cores if they feel the need. The reaction wheels, though, make sense. I don't use MechJeb myself, but it seems to me that it only needs to be on the actual command module.

It would be nice if it could be at least a 2.5 kilometer radius. This allows you to build large bases consisting of various modules without lag.

That is intentional. The game does not handle depths below (exactly) 600 meters properly, and to prevent glitching Hooligan has coded ships to be destroyed when they reach 600 meters below the surface. Keep in mind that that's already deeper than most submarines can possibly operate.

Part of that has to do with the colliders the modules use. To account for the recessed docking ports and the EVA grips, the colliders simply have to be more complex than say, those of a fuel tank. Not much to be done about it--Sumghai says they can't be simplified any further without impeding function. It probably helps a little if you remove excess functionality from the part.cfg, I believe it's mainly the colliders. Turning off docking port lights will definitely help. They actually cast light on other things, which is a major cause of lag; the portholes don't do this and hence are much less resource-intensive.

It would surely be a popular thing, but the whole way the current system is set-up goes against it. There is a strict parent-child relationship of parts; a part can have multiple children, but not multiple parents. As a result, it's not possible to make loops, or to connect a part to the common center of several different parts. (Docking is an exception--ships are allowed to dock to themselves, outside of the ordinary part tree.)

That's a good idea, UAL002, but there should be a distance limit (10 kilometers?) from the construction facility so as not to make construction too easy.

And if you're trying to download the file from Kerbal.net, you're trying to download the wrong version.

I like the change, Starwaster. Orbital construction shouldn't be too easy, especially not if you have massive designs. You need a large spacedock for large projects. There is the issue that ships in KSP tend to be heavier than they need to be, but that's not something for a mod to solve; everything else is balanced around that situation. The one thing that could improve Orbital Construction, I think, is being able to start a project you don't have enough rocket parts for, and allow the necessary parts to be committed to it over time. That way, you wouldn't need to have storage capacity for 100 tons to build a 100-ton ship--you could have storage for just 25 tons, and refill the station until the project is ready. This is a bit more realistic.

You will need at least one satellite for each planet/moon, plus one for solar orbits, with at least one dish. You'll need a craft with the same amount of dishes, or multiple ones with fewer dishes, in orbit around Kerbin, with one dish pointing at each celestial body. RemoteTech seems to totally ignore line-of-sight if the target is in a different sphere of influence. In case you want to go for realism, then the satellite requirement doubles (put the two satellites in opposite points of the same orbit), plus you'll need a satellite in orbit around Kerbol with an identical orbit to Kerbin, but 1/4th of an orbit ahead or behind it, to target anything that might be behind Kerbol. And of course, you'll need a satellite network around each planet to propagate the signal from the relays to the planetary surface or other points in orbit around the planet.

I was quite confused, SolarLiner.

What's the fun in that, though? If they want that feature, they gotta work for it. They could just deploy four fixed stations around the area they want to navigate in.

What you want to do is connect modules with docking ports, and then angle the docking port on one end. Use surface attachment and not node attachment to be able to do this. Attach the other docking port perfectly level. Copy this module and its docking ports, then attach the flat port of your second module to the angled port of your other module, and repeat as necessary. If you angle it 10 degrees (two shift+ASDWQE presses), which gives a very smooth look, it will take 36 modules for a full circle. Do bear in mind that you cannot make circles in the VAB; the last set of docking ports will fail to connect. These docking ports can attach once physics kicks in and they become magnetized, however. Do it right, and you get something like this:

Why not upload it to a mirror in the meantime?

Kerbol does not have an atmosphere, and temperature is not properly simulated, so you can achieve ridiculously low orbits--I believe 1500 meters or so is the limit, before you enter a zone that causes automatic explosions. Basically, so long as you're not at risk of entering Moho's sphere of influence, you can have whatever orbit you like.

It's a link to software that will let you open .zip, .rar, and .7z files (among others).

Calling out those who are unreasonable furthers the pursuit of reason, Wesreidau. The idea is not to call those who disagree names, the idea is to remind the world that an overwhelming scientific consensus exists and that people who irrationally deny climate change should not be making policy for the United States. Edit: though on reading the site, they seem a bit lax in their selection. Joe Heck is called a denier because he voted to allow offshore oil drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf...whether you like the idea or not, that's not exactly climate change denial.

I've been toying with the crosswalks a bit, and they're cool, but kind of confusing. How are all the parts supposed to fit together? E.g. what is the right way to orient the docking adapter, and what is the bridge for?

The approach used in Apollo is also much faster, in terms of time. The difference between a few days and two weeks' worth of supplies is pretty significant; if you don't have to put that extra mass in orbit, it can work out to be cheaper overall despite taking more delta-V.

I was describing Extraplanetary Launchpads and its use of Kethane (the mod) to allow you to mine ore.

If you change "maximum elevation" to "safe altitude", you can represent it in 2D. It would be the same as the current graph, except where a safe resonant orbit exists at an altitude lower than the maximum elevation at that inclination, you display that altitude instead.

Sounds like a plan. It will require extensive orbital construction projects to have an equally impressive spacedock.

It doesn't currently do that, but that's not a bad idea, blenderman. Even better if we could do that in reverse, plotting out a route from coordinate to coordinate.