Kerbart

Fantastic! Take your time; we've gone so long without it that a few more weeks (months?) don't really matter. Better good than rushed!

Those are definitely the main reason to build a cycler in KSP. In real life it means that you will only have to spend DV once for your transfer vehicle with life support, shielding, communications, energy supply, etc on board. In KSP none of these are particularly relevant (unless using the various mods) and is the practical advantage of a cycler far more limited. But never let that get in the way of having fun!

But do those savings offset the cost and mass associated with constructing a waterproof rocket that launches with comparable reliability? Those apply as much to launching from a floating launchpad.

Sea Launch has been doing this for years. Nothing new about it. Edit: Oh wait, without a launch pad? Interesting. Not sure what the benefits are (having to waterproof the rocket, etc) but there's a charming advantage in simplicity.

I'm more headed towards Python scripts these days. But hooray for automated calculations. May I also congratulate you on being friendly on the eyes in your post, and using ex+1 exponential notation instead of the ugly e^(x+1) clutch? We have superscript, why not use it after all, right?

It's easy to check. I did this in Sandbox so I can't destroy buildings, but I'll give it a go one day. It's probably wiser to destroy the Tracking Station at the KSC though. In case the off-site ones turn out to be harder to destroy than the vessel you just spent hours flying towards it can handle.

Is that how it works? Interesting!

So, if you're wondering how those tracking stations look like. I'm going to assume they're all the same. This is Harvester Massif. It surely is massive! Look carefully. (Here's the enlargement on imgur). That white speck, just below the right-most leg... That's Jeb. The dish rotates as well. Pretty cool, and worth a visit!

Two polar orbits on a 90° relative inclination. Give them a decent altitude–1000km will do–and one of them will always be visible from any angle (barring solar conjuctions and the mun interfering). I used this setup as my "second tier" in Remote Tech, with a low orbit first tier of four satellites (90° spaced in an equatorial orbit) to provide a connection to the ground station. Since connecting to the ground station is not a problem, this setup should do just fine.

That's not DLC. That's Pay to Play which is par for the course for Freemium games. DLC is DownLoadable Content. In a way, mods are DLC but in general it's delivered by the vendor after paying some amount. Personally I wouldn't mind DLC like extra planets and parts, provided: It's reasonably priced. That'd be my biggest worry. While per-minute-playtime KSP is incredibly cheap, the current price tag is quite steep especually when looking at code quality and the amount of content offered. It's optional and not a requirement to play the game. Ship parts, surface bases, extra planets; all that's fine. I'd be upset though if the base game suddenly is just Kerbin and its moons, and you'd have to pay for an "inner planets pack" and an "outer planets pack," and if extended information KER style (we can't implement it for reasosn") magically IS available as DLC. It would mean extended development of KSP. With development solely depending on fresh copies of the game, sales ARE going to taper off, and I expect that to be sooner rather than later (it's been on the market for a couple of years now, after all). While 1.2 looks very polished (especially with Porkjet's new parts) it also means that I fear we're nearing "completion" of the game. I'd rather see more stuff coming out in the next five years and I'm more than happy to pay for that.

Launch clamps?! what's next, a parachute for landing, instead of jumping at of the capsule at 5km altitude?

At the same time, as a species we've already evolved beyond that and we're hardly a space-faring race, let alone interstellar travelers. Of course a different species *could* find us reprehensible beyond repair, but I'm going with Sagan on this, and assume that they would not have gotten where they are with such a mindset. we do no longer baptize kannibalistic tribes. Hell, we try to leave any untouched tribe as much untouched as possible these days. Aliens, visiting our world as tourists “A unique opportunity; observe tribes that are on the brink of spaceflight. Witness how your civilization was 2 million years ago*” (units translated for clarity) would more likely to prefer it untouched.

Aaah, so refreshing in the morning. Icing on the cake was the flat earth. It was refreshing to see that this one started with the freemasons, instead of bringing them up half way. Even conspirisists can be innovative!

I'm sorry for your loss, but one can in similar fashion argue that you shouldn't be placing files (and subfolders) in folders you didn't create, even if it is convenient. A simple solution would be to make a folder "laie's backup" and put your files there. another solution is to convert the saved games (folders, really) into zip files and leave them in the saved games folder, if you're after such convenience. I do the same with mods I want to temporarily disable.

Amazing. Just what the doctor ordered. As this is something I see activated not too frequently (useful as it is, don't get me wrong, but it's "set it and forget it"), could perhaps adding a short instruction "alt+click to block part" be added to the window that pops up when you click the janitor button in the VAB/SPH?

Don't forget "airplane parts." Millions of airplane parts. In fact, when new parts get added these days it seems to be limited to airplane parts. Maybe that's the trick. We should be asking for moving airplane parts!

Aside from significantly reducing operating costs, no real use. So what if you can put tourists on the Mun surface for about 15,000 kerbucks per head? Signed Kerbart, aka Evil Tour Operator

I am clueless in this regards, but could permaprune perhaps be done through module manager? also, would it be possible to apply these settings per save? I might want to see RT parts in my RemoteTech save, but not in my Kareer save, for instance.

You can take a look at the haversine formula's for starters. The shortest distance might not be what you want to aim for, as you will likely end up with recalculating your bearing all the time (a course following a great circle rarely ever has a constant bearing). A loxodrome will give you a constant bearing, which is easier to navigate by (but a longer route. However, getting where you want to be trumps never arriving as you get lost, even if the route is shorter). A loxodrome is a straight line on a Mercator projection, by the way; which is why it's popular with seafarers. As a result it's a popular projection despite its shortcomings on size and shape.

Check the latitude, if you have access to it (KER can tell you). At 0° N or S, burn normal/antinormal until your inclination is 0°. You could also burn when the distance to the ascending node or descending node is 0 but that measurement seems to be off in KER (either that or my KER install is borked somehow). At any rate, burning when crossing the equator always works.

It's been a long week. I'm not in the mood to edit and convert it into a gif. Sorry.

A bit less greenish, one would hope!

Would it be similar to Buzz Aldrin's Race into Space game from a couple of years ago? I'm not saying that's a bad thing (apparently I got my subconsious inspiration from the "liftoff" example from there as well), it just gives us something to compare it with. Based on my experience with KSP I have a few ideas on how to differentiate this game a little bit, which might or might come with some challenges that need to be overcome.

Kasper, vaarwel and we hope to still see you on the forums as a regular KSP'er!

For giggles try this out in Kerbin orbit. I don't think it will go very well. Burning virtually continuously to keep formation is going to deplete the little fuel those Cubesats have very quickly, and I wonder how much DV you can stow in a 1U satellite.