Superfluous J

You cannot alter anything on any planet, other than landed vessels which you put there and the buildings of the KSC which can be destroyed and rebuilt. This - at least so far - transcends mods. No mod allows deformation of terrain or changing (or even adding) weather or climate. Neither do any add waves, which would be a big part of an asteroid impact. It's far too much work for far too little payoff, considering any interesting asteroid/planet interaction would probably end your game if it was Kerbin and not make much of a difference in gameplay if it was elsewhere.

Yes. In light grey in the top right corner of every post is a little triangle that means "share" for some reason but always makes me think of the software distribution platform, Steam. If you hover over it it says "share" and if you right click it and copy the link, it's a link to that post.

I believe what you think of as "backward" is normal. The game is set up such that if you build a ship without rotating any parts in the VAB and launch it, the D key will rotate the ship the same way that it looks like it on the screen. For a similar reason that mirrors swap right and left but not up and down, this causes north and south to look backward on the navball. If this is the case, the only solution is to get used to it.

I believe the command you're looking for is 130 goto 120 Though to optimize it, you could do 120 goto 110 I did similar though for me, it was in Sears while my dad looked at power tools, my mom bed sheets, and my brother toys, I went to the brand new computer desk and broke out to BASIC from the display program (which was written in BASIC) and typed, quickly before getting caught, 10 print "<redacted dirty word> "; 20 goto 10 run

You were so nice to find that challenge thread for me the least I could do is pull this out of my bookmarks https://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?s=fc386076b9f0d214c1d89c8b5615c705&amp;t=22998

My first video game was Pong, and I can't even start to count the games I've played in my life. KSP is in that elite tier of multi year games. Not many of those and I don't think I've stuck with any game as long as I did with KSP. And I'd not be all that surprised if no game ever matches it.

If you're in a space shuttle and none of the other 6 people around are are dentists... good luck. I'm not commenting on the report because I didn't read it and won't read it.

Actually an escape trajectory can be gotten and escaped from with scant little fuel expenditure. You don't need to be moving UP at 3000 m/s, just moving (roughly) 3000 m/s in LKO to escape. Here's in-game the best way to do this. With patched conics (level 2 tracking station) you can SEE it, but even without you can do it by watching the contract itself. Get into LKO. Obvi. Burn forward full throttle until your orbit is a wide ellipse that stretches out past Minmus. At this point, you may actually just accidentally go into "escape" trajectory because a tiny burn makes a big difference at this point. Either way, stop the engines. Until you have an escape trajectory, burn forward slowly. With patched conics from a L2 tracking station, you can see when you have an escape trajectory. It will go from an ellipse to just about half of an ellipse with a little circle at the end. Without patched conics, just watch your contract for the "be on an escape trajectory" checkbox shows up. Once you have an escape trajectory, do whatever the mission asks for. Stage the part, right click and test the part, or just have the part with you. Whatever. Turn around and burn backwards until your orbit closes again. Burn until you're a bit under Mun's orbit. This will take very little fuel; about as much as it took to get to escape from Mun's orbit. Warp to the high point (Ap) and burn retrograde until your low point (Pe) is at about 30-40km. Come in with your craft pointing retrograde. If your pilot can do it click the "hold retrogrde" button. If not, do it yourself. Stage away everything but the command pod and parachute. Enjoy the fire show, trigger the chute, and land safely.

Key word: Basically. Generally all engines in the current stage are the active engines, and X throttles down all active engines which does the same thing as deactivating them. If you have any other engines running you're doing weird things that probably take more planning than AYA was originally written to handle. In fact, it was specifically written because I kept forgetting to set action groups on science and solar panels, so if you're using it with tons of planning you're probably using the wrong tool for your job. You CAN open a bottle with a hammer, of course, but if a bottle opener's handy...

Obviously while rescinding control of the mod I rescinded also its development path, but I figure I'd pop in for a second and comment on why I did not add any options for engines: Button spam and confusion are the two biggest ones, and a close third is that you almost never want to do something to all engines, or even all engines of a specific type. What you generally want with engines is all the ones facing one way to be on or off, and even if the code could find that out (I'm sure it can) I'm sure there would be edge cases where it doesn't perform as expected or desired and then it's just a useless button for that ship, with the added problem that it reads like what the player would want. "Open all solar panels" is straightforward and does what you expect every time. "Activate all engines" does too but is rarely what is wanted. "Activate all in the current stage" is basically what the spacebar does, or Z. "Deactivate in the current stage" is basically what X does. Anything else is - in my mind - confusing and nonobvious, and/or would require forethought and specific planning in the VAB. And if you're doing that why aren't you just using action groups?

Thanks to @Dman979 the thread has been found! It seems really easy until you start doing it and realize how many things you just auto-revert on. (Check Yo Stagin')

That is exactly it. @Dman979, you Dman!

I used the wayback machine's url search and it didn't see it, though maybe the url was slightly different these forums are pretty generous with urls. I'll poke around in there and see. I'm sure it was in whatever used to be the challenges forum. EDIT Sadly it's not on page 1 and the Wayback machine doesn't index past that. Also, they don't have an archive from any date where I'd expect the challenge to be on the first page.

Sadly no. All I have is the title and rough date. It was likely less than a week before August 15, 2015

If I had a link to the old forum that is coming up bupkis, and I can't find the page with any google searches, is there any hope it still exists? Here's the old link in case there actually is some hope. https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/131191-THE-TEST

yeah specifically moving over the surface or "about to crash" (i.e. small jumps). You have to get a decent amount of air before the game will allow you to save. I found it! It was named "The Test" which is a very obscure name. I actually passed the video over twice before reading the description and finding out it was the one I was looking for. The post was on the last forum and the link no longer works, so I can't find that. However, here's the video:

Two points: If you said no quicksaves and they quicksaved, that's cheating. If you said don't cough while playing and they coughed, it's cheating. There's no practical way to prove either happened so it's up to them to be honorable, and you to post rules that make sense. "No coughing" of course does not but "no quicksaving" can in certain circumstances. One of my favorite challenges I ever participated in was to start a brand new sandbox save, build a single rocket, launch it to the mun and return safely to Kerbin in one try. No revert. No reload. If you fail you delete the save and never try the challenge again. But if the challenge doesn't say to not reload, I will reload as many times as I want. (I looked for the challenge but I could not find it. It makes me sad because it was really, really fun)

For Mun, you must start with an equatorial orbit of Kerbin. To get an equatorial orbit of Kerbin, launch EXACTLY east from the launch pad (doing an otherwise decent gravity turn) and once in orbit, target Mun and see how you didn't actually launch EXACTLY east because your An and Dn will not be 0. Don't worry, they never are. Hopefully, however, they are close to 0. Say, less than 2 degrees. To make them be 0, burn north at your Dn or South at your An. Do it slowly, and only until they are actually 0. When they flip, they're probably there. Use maneuver nodes for more precision and less headache. Then, when you eject to Mun, do it with ONLY prograde thrust. Depending on how close to 0 your An and Dn actually are, your Mun encounter will be more or less perfectly equatorial. NOTE: This isn't particularly efficient but it's not particularly INefficient if you start with a good launch. If your launch is like 10 degrees tilted to Mun or something, though, that burn at An or Dn is going to start getting expensive. NOTE 2: This only works for Mun. You basically can't just nail an equatorial encounter with any other body without a ton of math and precision that is - frankly - not worth it unless you want to challenge yourself to do so. See this for a challenge I made with Minmus and some of the difficulties doing something that sounds like it'd be simple. NOTE 3: It's almost always easier to just fix your orbit once you're at the world you're orbiting, and it's also almost always easier to just give up the ghost and not worry TOO much how equatorial your orbits are.

I had that happen years ago. Didn't think it was anything special, so didn't even report it. Of course back then (It was before 1.0 I think) universe-destroying bugs weren't all that uncommon :D

Sorry I meant why can't the OP just time warp in the KSC, instead of the VAB.

What is so bad about time warping in the KSC window instead of the VAB? I don't quite understand. Both have a way to launch directly from there. I suppose if you don't like the strobe light day/night cycle or something like that?

With separate, non-return missions? If they can land on Tylo they can land anywhere, though Eve would be interesting. With return missions? Impossible. No caveman tech engine can get you off of Eve. In one mission (ending at Eve without a return)? Even if you could your computer would melt from the sheer number of parts needed. In all cases the difficulty level would be somewhere between Duna and Tylo for all planets/moons, and each would take similar steps and measures. In other words, you'd be occupied in (what I consider) the drudgery of vast volumes of assembly launches for a long, long time.

Sadly the stock game does not have such an option. It will remember the current ship who you put in the command pod in the VAB, but only in the VAB (it won't remember that if you exit the VAB and then launch the craft from the launch pad directly) and it frequently re-forgets it As for mods, I've never tried it but Crew R&R may just be your thing.

I would have by now, but after ... I literally have no idea but let's say 3000? ... hours I'm taking a break and playing some other games. For me the problem isn't the tech tree or the parts or anything else, it's that everything I've ever wanted out of the game, I got. I really haven't played except to test my mods or to do a quick challenge here and there, in almost a year.

When I started there was no tech tree and I did start in Sandbox because that was all there was. It was super daunting and confusing and I had a lot harder time than all those players who are being "babied" by the tech tree. I actually quit playing the game for a few months and only came back to see what had changed in the new update and tried "career" mode (that was what is now science mode). Then I played the game for about 5 years straight. So for me, Sandbox was a really bad tutorial. You can argue that the tech tree doesn't properly serve as a tutorial, but I won't ever agree that Sandbox is better as one.