Superfluous J

Yeah I could almost sue them for using my design concepts from the time

This is correct. Though you can keep the chart and just change the numbers. I do like the chart. Although, in my experience satellite wandering will quickly cause one of the three satellite links to fail. That's not a huge deal, as the signal can take the long way around, but I find it's better to make the orbits a bit higher to account for drift and placement errors.

The one thing I don't know is what that percentage means, exactly. Let's say it's 5%. That's 1/20. Obviously it's not 1/20 every second, or you'd find all anomalies in a minute. But is it like when you first arrive it rolls for what anomalies you'd find, and then you can never find more? Or is it like once an orbit, or once a day, or ... ?

Oh sweet. This is almost the exact same concept as the first mod I was going to write, about 2 years ago. But then GoodSpeed Fuel Pumps came out (and I was even less good at modding back then than I am now) and I forgot about it. When the time comes to pump fuel again, I'll be sure to try this out!

Huh I always thought the difference was "output_log.txt rox" and "ksp.log sux". Mostly because nobody ever asked for ksp.log. I should start looking at it when troubleshooting my own mods. I really dislike the lack of timestamp in output_log.txt. That alone makes ksp.log worth another look. Also @NeuroticGamer a lot of times Windows will misreport the sizes of files. Try to use Notepad (or Notepad++. But nothing fancier than that because Word and the like tend to grab hold of the file and disallow further writes to it) to open the file and you may be surprised to find it actually DOES contain information.

I've added a download link to GitHub considering SpaceDock seems to have fallen onto hard times.

I half expect my mod to overwrite anything you set in TC, but it could also be that TC comes in and overwrites my mod's numbers each time. In any case, there's no harm in it except it may just work weird. --- In regards to the mod in general, I've added a download link to GitHub considering SpaceDock seems to have fallen onto hard times.

I haven't. I will, when I get time but that could be who knows when. ---- Regarding the mod in general, I've added a download link to GitHub considering SpaceDock seems to have fallen onto hard times.

You do not. In the "Ultimate Challenge" contest several people went in different orders and nobody that I know of used the order of the contract. The only thing that matters (sequence-wise) is that final clause that reads "Lastly, land your ship on Kerbin." I personally did Eve, Gilly, Moho, Minmus, Mun, Dres, Eeloo, Bop, Pol, and then gave up at Tylo because I couldn't be bothered to send another refueler to my ISRU ship. Seriously. It needed a refueler. More than once.

Oh man the hours of my life I wasted playing with Accrete back in the day... This sounds awesome. I'll be keeping an eye on it (oh for more spare time)

Makes me think of The Ultimate Challenge. Still haven't beaten that one.

I need to play more before I comment, obviously, and I have no plans on launching any planes any time soon. I realize also that the segmentation part isn't even new in 1.2 as you could blow up just part of the runway before. (bowing out)

I've not tested it, but I expect them to play very poorly together. From the OP: COMPATIBILITY: I expect WarpEverywhere to work with most all other mods, with the exception of course of mods that change warp rates. I suggest only using one of those at a time in general.

It was a single block, and planes used to roll down it due to gravity. I don't think making it a single mesh that was still "curved" to fit the curvature of Kerbin would fix the problem. It's not that there are multiple items, it's that there are multiple flat segments that are angled relative to each other. I didn't even really think the original runway was a problem. Once I knew why it was that way I was fine with it. Starting planes with their brakes on would have been a fine "fix" for the problem.

Then you're not using 1.2

This is the first time I realized that I've not launched a plane in 1.2

No Kerbal Left Behind! ...except engineers. They can rot in orbit. As to the request... I don't think the Kerbals are actually generated until you get in physics range. I assume they follow the same rules that other Kerbals do to assign profession to name (until it's manually changed in the cheat menu or by editing the save file) so if someone knows that formula, it could in theory be done. I personally would just edit the Kerbal in question to be whatever profession you want them to be.

Welcome back! Just for the record, I actually do remember you.

You don't need to hack the save (though you can). Just hit ESC at the Space Center scene, click settings, then "Game Mode: Custom" (or "easy" or "hard" or whatever it says) and turn on or off whatever you want. EDIT: Ninja'd by a more thorough answer. I should spend less time arguing on the KSP Weekly thread

While technically true, in a Universe where every single planet's equator is exactly parallel to the galactic plane, I think it's pretty safe to assume a default

We asked that during pre-release, and the somewhat sad answer was "no." Something about those contract is special and it would take a lot of work to make more than 1 at a time appear.

Kerbal Space Ship Flying Game.

I wonder if it's because the sepratrons have fuel, and so GT is not staging them away because that fuel could (in theory) be used to propel the craft.

Sharpy has the logistical answer: I'll give you the programming answer. KER was written with the way things work in 1.1.3. In 1.1.3, radial decouplers do not allow fuel cross-flow, and cross-flow was unidirectional in all things that allowed it. These are two huge changes. KER doesn't calculate correctly now because it doesn't know what "correctly" is.

Oh is that why I totally decimated my Astronaut Complex with my latest "KSP Science Jet Car"?