Superfluous J

I toss an OKTO2, and a docking port on every stage that I think might need decoupled in orbit. Assuming I leave them with fuel (which is easier to do when you know you'll collect them some day) I use Kerbal Alarm Clock to set a closest approach with the nearest refueling station, and then when the time comes I can dock and either unload the fuel or keep the stage for use later. And before you ask, my first presence on ANY world - moon or planet - is a refueling station.

I just did a Let's Play on Youtube for the ship in that thread.

Whether or not it's intended, it's not logical and it's not there to keep you from building in a loop. I can usually get around it by adding pieces, moving things around, and then deleting the extra but that doesn't always work. In your example there, you could delete the middle struts now that you have the orange tanks where you want them. Maybe. Unless KSP deletes the tank too.

Why don't you just try it? If it doesn't make it, rebuild I just keep throwing boosters and fuel at the problem until it's fixed.

I've found that if you right click on the zoomed-in map and select "save image" (in chrome at least) each row has a different number. So the top row is 31.png, all the way across. If you're careful, you can save the first column of that row as 31.png, the second one as 31 (1).png, the third as 31 (2).png, etc. Of course, you'd have to do that 31 times which seems about 62 times more than I'd be willing to do personally. But if you take a lower resolution it might not be THAT bad. Note that without the permission of the site owner or some proof that the pictures are in the public domain, you should not redistribute the images. And you can't assume pictures THIS hard to gank off a website are in the public domain

I decided to embrace Kebal Alarm Clock in all its glory. And therefore launched a mission to Moho that never left Kerbin's SOI before I launched a mission to Mun, and then launched 2 missions to try to grab the debris from my poorly planned mission to Mun that would orbit Kerbin for all eternity. My first grabber's arms broke off due to no problem on my end (KSP collison physics did not like it when my ships refused to bounce off each other), and I had to admit defeat and delete those extra debris pieces (I can't imagine trying to grab all of those!). I was able to deorbit the grabber craft itself, but not the spent stage it was supposed to grab. So, I launched a second grabber that will hopefully do the trick. However, It never reached its target as I'm waiting for closest approach and planning my robotic mission to Minmus

Welcome to the Internet! My age has not changed since the last poll, but my "Playing KSP" state has. I didn't even know about the game 2 months ago.

More "simply put" here from me, but I'm a simple guy so that's what you get If you have a huge rocket with a lot of fuel, and a tiny rocket with less fuel, and you start them out floating in space together, burn their engines at full until they run out of fuel, and they are both now going 10,000 m/s, they both have a delta-v of 10,000 m/s. It doesn't matter what the ship is like, just how fast it can go with all of its fuel. Both of those ships could launch from the pad and orbit Kirbin. Actually I think they could escape it but I don't pay that much attention to the numbers. It gets tricky when you're fighting gravity (and atmosphere) because those take delta v but you're not actually gaining velocity. That's why not every rocket can get into orbit even if they have the same delta-v. If you're too slow off the launchpad, you're going to spend more time near the surface which saps delta-v. If you speed up too fast, though, you'll start to slow down in the thick atmosphere, which saps delta-v. I honestly don't know the details, just try to design my rockets to hit 10,000m at 200m/s and hope I'm doing it right!

If it's keeping you from doing pretty much anything else, I'd say no. I don't want it per-se. It'd be cool but not as cool as, say, being able to rotate the skybox.

Actually it's 8 months old, but the point is still the same. Isn't there a "sphere" object in Unity? Can't they just slap a 600-km radius one down instead of this mesh? /not a programmer. //it shows.

I don't know the details of modding KSP, but it may be possible to feed the Kerbal's name in as the seed to a random generator which then would produce a unique face/body/suit/whatever for that Kerbal which would be the same every time. Then modify the algorithm to make Jeb look like a badass, and who cares what the rest of them look like?

Okay I've taken the 2nd map from http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003800/a003895/index.html and turned it into a 2048 skybox with maximum quality JPGs which is what everybody seems to say is the best for this. I don't see the need for a 4096 one as this one pretty much maxes out on the pixel density of the image it seems. If you're in Kerbal-view and you zoom in all the way you can see pixels, but otherwise it looks beautiful on my monitor. [defunct site link removed by moderator] , unzip it into your GameData\UniverseReplacer\Textures\Skybox folder. Post any issues, though I may not get to it for a day or so.

You can build it, though you probably need a pretty good computer considering the part count

You don't need to make the orbits the same to rendezvous. All you need to do is set the target, get your closest approach down to a KM or so, and then when you get to that closest approach burn so that your speed relative to the target is almost 0. Boom, you'll be in almost the exact same orbit and then you can thrust your way slowly to the target.

I've got 8 but will have 12 soon. For some reason my gaming laptop only has 3 slots

If you're looking for some sort of directed play, give the Mission Generator a try. I've found it nice to have some sort of goal.

Thanks for the starmap links Apatheticjester! I'm sadly on a crappy connection right now so can't download the high quality images (or upload the result) but I'll try to get a good skybox up in the morning based on both of those. I pretty much gave up trying to draw the galaxy over the star maps earlier in this thread, so hopefully those ones will make a better tilted galaxy for me Dumb question time: Is it possible to just tilt the sky box in-game? Seems like it'd be a very simple solution to the problem of getting the galaxy tilted the way I want.

Yeah, I would like to see a source for this as well. SubAssemblyManager is the one mod I can't live without, and anything that cuts mods out is a good thing

I have always assumed that career mode wouldn't have a revert option. The idea would be that you would build and test stuff in sandbox mode and only when you were really sure of it, you'd fly it "for real" in career mode. I just hope at that point (or before it), sandbox mode will have some sort of "start me in Mun orbit" option so I can test my munar lander without spending the 30 minutes getting it there, which I know I can do with 100% accuracy.

Click the orbit and select "Maneuver node"

Very cool, even though I eyetwitched when you left all that debris in orbit at the end If I ever need that much fuel (or even if I don't) I will remember this video.

SRC is the source code, which many have asked for as well. I wish the OP would just state that in the post so people stop asking

5/10 I know not why. What the others said.

Kerbal Space Program, the only space program where getting out and pushing is the best option.

Try rotating that one tile 180 degrees. It's what I had to do with CubeTheSphere's output.