Kerbart

Looks like Windows 7 or higher. I don't think you can do that. In the older versions you could (auto-arrange off, obviously) create a temporary icon, put it in the center, select all icons, move the temporary one to the edge (and the rest off-screen) and then delete the temporary one. But newer versions of windows prevent you from moving the icons off screen. If your graphics card driver comes with a multiple desktop app (a lot of them do) you could create a second desktop without any icons. Or you could move them all into a "desktop" folder on your desktop, minimizing the number of icons down to one.

That's a good idea, although with current hardware (but why no build for the future?) of limited benefit, as it'd be likely that at higher physics warp the Physics Delta Time/Frame is hit. So yeah, you'll be running at 32× game time, but game time is running at 1/8 × real time, and you still end up waiting 15 minutes. Not that I mind either; there's floors to be vacuumed and bathrooms to be cleaned, dishwashers to be emptied and laundry to be folded. So it's not that big of a deal to wait. But: with hardware two years from now it will run a lot faster. Hopefully by then the dishwasher empties itself!

Ions have very low thrust, so you only use them for very light probes. As soon as you put crew on your craft you're pretty much in no-ion territory. I don't think ion engines are not used a lot because they're underbalanced. They're not used a lot because the scenarios where you use them are limited. And the burn times measured in hours of course. But that's a compromise for the unpractical reality of real ion engines that run for days or weeks at a time.

Actually, rockets are built to a standard size. There are a few exceptions where rockets were designed and built for a specific mission, but in modern aerospace the rocket designs are standardized and not custom built to spec. Putting together a rocket like lego? Have you ever looked at how Atlas rockets are configured? Pretty Kerbal, to be honest.

After many attempts SpaceX wisened up and let Scott Manley pilot the landing instead of a computer.

Well, all the other tanks hold liquids. Xenon tanks hold gas. With that in mind, the current ratio is really not so bad.

What?! A SpaceX launch is being delayed? *feints shock and disbelief*

Not if the beam is narrow enough and, at a distance, you can still capture all of the beam. It's not like the beam loses energy, the 1/r2 loss is in intensity per square unit. As long as you recover the entire area of the beam, you're compensating by capturing r2 more area which will offset your reduced intensity.

If I'm correct, the 1.25m not being recognized as an ISRU is a bug that is fixed in 1.1; if that's the case I don't see what's wrong with using the debug window to force the contract completed.

I didn't know KSP worked in a multi-monitor setup, unless you mean that your system is set up in such a way that the three monitors behave like a single screen. Indeed, while inconvenient that things are all over the three screens, having them bunched all together in the middle (not utilizing the edges) would be inconvenient for those that play KSP on a single screen. In a true multi-monitor environment it would be much more useful to dedicate one monitor to map mode, one to the regular view and perhaps a third one to IVA, I think.

Apparently Bash will be included in the next windows 10 update.

Ooooh, that's evil! I never thought of that! Brilliant. I did cash in once though, on a contract to test the Wheesley "in flight" which consisted of flying 5m above the runway and landing again. For gathering science at the surface I do recommend a Kerbal (supplied with a large pile a snacks and plenty of reruns of "the Kermans") just because then you can also cash in on those "Flag Plant" contracts. They're not as ubiquitous as in 1.0 anymore but still good for a quick buck.

Apparently I'm unqualified for playing KSP. I don't think I can even build something out of 18 parts that is so unstable that it explodes on the pad. Even my bigger launchers stay in one piece. Help! I'm a failure! Oh well, Space Engineers is on sale on Steam. I'll get that and quit KSP then. Bye everyone..

Exactly! The Tyranny of the Rocket Equation simply means that the margins on any launch are razor thin. If you're going to build in safety factors to get around (relatively—by aerospace standards) sloppy manufacturing then you will simply get not into space.

That's what Thompberry wants you to believe! He's working on taking over your computer!

...but you can, using "transfer crew" you can move any member to any part of the ship (provided there's room). You just can't EVA them straight from a crew transfer, they have to be moved to the unit with the door first. What would be helpful is a separate EVA dialog (mod, anyone?) where you pick the crew member and click on the door you'd like to EVA from. Going back, in the same way, when you board, the game could be asking where the Kerbal should be housed (or cancel if at that point you decide you need to reorganize seating first)

That makes sense, and is reasonable. Some of us including me apparently misunderstood that angle in the initial request (English is not my native language so that might be why). I like @Stoney3K 's suggestion of an "airlock" kind-of part (if I remember correctly somebody actually made a mod for that, of course) with the additional functionality that he mentioned so EVA'ing a specific crew member doesn't become a KSP version of Rush Hour. For now you could attach a lander can to the end (my go-to "airlock") and clip it inward so just the door is sticking out. Yes, you'll have to transfer each kerbal to it in the first place, but I always roleplay that as "prepare for EVA".

Except that in this particular case the game is not supporting it and you're requesting that it should be.

Assuming you don't go back to low Duna orbit first. “But that's what the delta-V map tells me to do...”

Hello @Gouttfi, on the very first page of this thread you will actually find some example scripts to: Autopilot a ship into orbit, display docking guidance information, or examine and manipulate individual parts.

Yep. Same with Yahoo (Flickr). Flickr has (used to have?) it in their TOS that an image always contains a link back to the Flickr page of that image. Various photography forums where people were "### that, I'm not posting the link, pound sand, Flickr!" found out that at one point, Flickr images would no long be shown. On a site like Spacedock you should be hosting your own images, it doesn't make sense depend on an external service (with all the uncertainty it brings) unless it's a service that advertises itself specifically for that purpose (like Amazon's s3 service)

I'm not a lawyer either, but “Fair Use” seems to be the most misquoted part of copyright law and people think that it’s “Fair Use” far more often than it really is. Copying “just a part” doesn't make it fair use, for instance. Or that “education” or “news gathering” in the widest sense of the word provide fair use protection; they do not. Example 1: Street photographer Henri Cartier-Kerman takes a picture of the KSC while it's on fire. He posts the image on his blog. The Daily Kerbal writes an article about the KSC fire, and uses Henri's image without his permission. Hey, it's news. Fair Use applies, right? Wrong! For Fair Use to apply, the article needs to be about the image. TDK will need to pay Henri whatever his going rates are (or, if he doesn't have, whatever the court assumes reasonable rates). If Henri also (not a requirement to start a copyright case in the first place, mind you) registered the image with the US Copyright office before the newspaper published it, he can also claim damages (which, unlike the restitution of the rates, are not “reasonable”) Example 2: Another newspaper, The Kerbal Times, has an article on the content-theft that their competitor TDK committed. In a side bar to the article, the Times places a print of the offending picture (with a caption, but this is irrelevant to the case, of Henri's picture that the Daily Kerbal printed without permission). Smelling money, Henri takes the Times to court as well. Once again, Fair Use is claimed. Is it? Yes! Because this time, the news is about the image. The Fair Use clause is created because certain normal things would become impossible. A teacher would not be able to illustrate a lesson with a copy of some newspaper clippings about a recent event, newspapers cannot report if every image that contains copyrighted material (say, a picture of a traffic accident contains a billboard, a leaked memo from a politician, etc) cannot be published. But it’s not intended, nor interpreted by the courts, as a license to copy anything you want as long as you claim "newsgathering" or "education". A math teacher cannot copy two pages of exercises of some math textbook to be used in his own handouts (just because it happens a lot doesn't make it fair use). However, an arts teacher can copy those same two pages of exercises and use them in a handout to illustrate how scientific typesetting has changed since the last 50 years—you're no longer copying the exercises themselves, but merely using them as an illustration. Commercial intent is not a factor in copyright cases, and “I'm not using it commercially” is not a defense (if you think it is, google "Jammie Thomas"). Using copyrighted material on a website is playing Russian roulette in regards to how far the copyright holder is willing to go. In most cases not very far and you'll be just fine. But you are rolling the dice and if you run into the one litigation-happy content creator who happens to be trigger-happy you'll be up that creek without a paddle (also: US copyright is covered by federal law, making every copyright case a federal case. They tend to require expensive lawyers).

Did you miss this part? The developer of the part itself told you it's a limitation on purpose, to prevent you from using it exactly in the way you're using it. Yet you insist that this part should get a door because then you can use it as a super light-weight solution. What makes you wonder that it invokes sarcastic reactions? Add a lander can. Problem solved.

Add a lander can as airlock. It's only 660 kg. Also see this thread where the mighty PorkJet himself explains why you can't enter the Mk-1 crew cabin directly.

You could turn on unlimited fuel in the Alt-F12 menu and leave all your fuel tanks empty. It's a great way to make light-weight spacecraft. That should more than compensate for adding a lander can as "airlock" to your contraption. Not only that, but the benefits would spread through your entire fleet. Brilliant engineering, if I might say so.