Kerbart

You went streaking and streamed it live on Twitch? Wow. Just wow.

As an extra consequence, because you don't EVA him/her when rescueing... They enroll in The Program with zero stars. Note to self for next time: after boarding, EVA first.

My first thought was that is was odd that for rescue operations I now had Kerbals as icons in orbit. My suspicion was comfirmed as I got closer to the "vessel" to rendez-vous with... Lo and behold! Just to the right of the exhaust of the rescue vessel... there it is, the elusive lonely Kerbal to be rescued from space! I thought they were all in vessels now... Apparently, not!

...but without the convenient 1.25m form factor, or the early availability in career. The Mk-I is very easy to use as an ersatz-2 Kerbal pod, the lack of a radial hatch (let's not forget that the Mk-I has already two hatches...) just lets you work a bit harder for it, balancing the game. There is no wide-spread abuse of the Mk-II as an el-cheapo 4-kerbal command pod (to the best of my knowledge) because there are alternatives. That cannot be said of the Mk-I.

The downside of that is that, in order from the MK1 to become OP, it'd have to have its mass increased. And that would make it less attractive. And who needs four hatches when you use four of them?

But that kills your tourist contracts. And those can be ridiculously profitable. I find that a couple of things help regarding the money aspect in career: Focus on cheap standard designs to get into orbit. A one-Kerbal launcher should cost about $20,000, perhaps even less Build a hub & spoke Kerbin system. I ferry shuttle to and from Kerbin Station, and from there transporters to and from Mun and Minmus station, and from there landers to the surface. There are contracts to build these stations, so they come basically for free. Don't start too early, you want to have some technology (like regular sized docking ports) to prevent you from scrapping and existing one and having to build a new one. And those "send science data from orbit of ..." are a great way to get some extra cash Have faith in space tourism. The countracts start out pretty lousy, but as your reputation grows you'll quickly get these 6-kerbal $80,000/kerbal contracts. Keep an eye out for solar space stations. Those are where the real money is made. Make sure they don't require to have kerbals on board. In my current career I have all buildings maxed and $5M in the bank, without too much effort.

Yes, I did. Thank you for pointing out my error!

One can argue against that on various grounds but i would welcome this option. It should be something that can be toggled on/off in the settings ("auto-allocate kerbals"), though, as there will be purists who'd be unhappy about KSP doing this. Perhaps a solution can be to have the ability to assign a hatch to a part: Right-click on crew part Choose "assign hatch" (toggles with "use part hatch") Click on crew-part with hatch to select the hatch (similar to how you'd transfer crew) When you want to EVA a kerbal, click on the hatch and it will not just show the kerbals in the hatch-part, but also all kerbals in the parts that have assigned that hatch. Similarly, when a Kerbal boards through that hatch, it will go to the first assigned part, second part, etc. if the root part (or the assigned parts) are full. People who feel it's cheating simply don't use the option. And it gives some control over what parts can and cannot be accessed from a certain hatch.

Surveying is a science; this post proves that. "Anymore" sounds like "do you use training wheels anymore" — there's likely going to be a bias effect because a certain amount of MJ users will not even open the thread thinking “here we go again” Ironically there's more detail for "no" (no/ker) than for "yes", despite this being a survey about the use of MJ (or so it claims). Not even half a dozen posts into the thread the survey organizer states that using MJ "feels like cheating." Well, we know what you are looking for. So, instead, I'd have done this (running a survey now is useless with this one on the table): Do you use mechjeb: Yes, and mainly because it does things I cannot do Yes, and mainly because it does the boring things I know how to do Yes, but only for the stats No, I prefer stock only No, I prefer Mechjeb Kerbal Engineer, it's enough for what I need No, I don't like any mod "that makes it easier" Now there's less bias in the answers, and the surveyees can pick an answer without feeling pidgeon-holed in the "wrong" category. Also, you can collate the answers between simply "yes" or "no" while getting some more detail as to why yes or no is picked as well.

"technology X cannot be used for the world's energy needs, there's all these technological problems that make it unfeasible for large scale. Use technology Y instead. Sure there are problems but we can solve these over time.” Y’all need to step up your game a bit, yo. The reasoning has as many leaks as a basket. Any technology can be improved, the biggest problem is that people think there is only ONE solution. Tesla's showing how there's a place for solar cells. If they look like regular roof tiles in any form or shape then there's no reason why it shouldn't provide for a good chunk of our energy needs. Obviously wind power has it's issues but it hard to beat it's density as a renewable source. So there's going to be room for that. To be honest, fission is the most uncertain. It's not that it cannot be done safe, if that by nature (it's costly, so you need big plants to be cost effective) when things go bad they go really bad. And the nuclear industry has proven time and time again that they shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to dealing with that, making it nearly impossible to gain trust of the general population. There will always be a major problem, and as long as it continues to be downplayed at first and “nothing happened, the system worked” is always preceding a major disaster, then you cannot blame the public for distrusting “it's perfectly safe, nothing will happen.” That's not to start a discussion about nuclear safety here, it's just that the nuclear industry has serious trust issues with the general populace that will be very hard to overcome. Eventually we'll figure out fusion. We have to. And by then we're so good at solar power and wind energy (and tidal energy and other renewables) that it will supplement it, not replace it.

For Duna just the botanist should be enough.

You realize what the word meant in certain languages, right? It's not exactly something you want your mother to hear coming out of your mouth regardless of your age. And this is a game marketed as "appropriate for all ages..." which it is. So it was kind of a no-brainer to remove it, as it didn't serve a purpose in the game (if the word "launch" meant something bad... well so be it, it's hard to avoid. But this...).

In all fairness, this is where most scientist fail miserably in debunking perpetuum mobiles and inventions like these in the first place. Crazy Inventor: Look at this! I have invented something THAT PROVES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS ARE WRONG! Eureka! IT WORKS! Scientist: It violates Newton's laws of motion. Notice that for the inventor, the scientist actually agrees with him. Yes, it does violate Newton's laws of motion. That's the brilliance of the invention! It's marketing 101 why these people get so far because they feel they are not opposed by the scientists in their ivory towers. Sadly, most scientists are above taking that marketing 101 class. Which is why we end up where we are. Now, it's not their job to debunk PM inventors, so you cannot blame the scientists for that either, but if the story you're telling promises enough rewards it'll always be possible to find somebody to bankroll your attempts. Even with the chances of a reward so small, the rewards will be worth the attempt. Not realizing that the chances are zero...

Simple: union regulations. The Kerbal Union of Spacefarers and Airkerbals have negotiated that they will only board fully enclosed cabins on the launchpad, ensuring protection from the environment and the vacuum of space. Wait until you found out what the International Brotherhood of Hinges and Rotational Plates Manufacturers had to say about Squad. In case you're ever wondering why those kind of parts are not stock.

Maybe it's supported through the extended gizmos (whatever they're called but I'm sure you know what I mean)? I'm transferring crews with right-clicking on crew-containing parts all the time. I love that option as the hatch doesn't always work (for instance with the Orb). I don't have any mods installed that would add that functionality. Unless it's a MM/KER thing but I doubt that.

I've heard about the arches. I've seen them in pictures and videos. And boy, was I surprised when I landed at [censured] and saw one myself! Now I'm going to build a base nearby to study the thing.

I feel so bad for Squad. They carefully picked a company with a stellar reputation and a bulging portfolio of succesful ports, instead of going with some shady shop with a so-so reputation and now this happens. Note: before reacting to this post make sure your sarcasm detector is properly calibrated.

But you don't know for sure. Because you're not checking it. Instead of running a check while you're sleeping—and confirming or dismissing a hardware problem—you prefer uncertainty? And expecting energy from the community to solve a problem that might be caused by something they have no control over? Ok.

1.2.1 nor 1.2 haven't crashed for me outside a (meanwhile fixed) KAC bug. If your vanila 1.2.1 is crashing I would start running memory tests, I wouldn't exclude the possibility of corrupt memory, given how stable 1.2 tends to be.

From a fuel-only point of view it doesn't make sense to refuel in Mimnus orbit. It's always going to cost more fuel than going straight to your destination from the Kerbin surface. From a mission point of view it might make perfect sense. You're starting at the edge of Kerbin's SOI, so you'll need to carry far less fuel at that point to burn for the intercept. This also means you can get away with a lighter ship, less fuel to launch it, etc. In the end you'll have to refuel and carry that up from the surface of Minmus, likely destroying your fuel savings but on the whole you can work with smaller, cheaper craft. As others point out, there's a million factors that determine if it actually does make sense or not. If you already have a refueling station around Minmus it probably does. If you need to build the entire infrastructure for this one mission, it doesn't.

A bit more Pythonic would be: body_data = { 0:{'name':'Sun','g':1.746}, 1:{'name':'Moho','g':0.275}, 2:{'name':'Eve','g':1.7}, 3:{'name':'Gilly','g':0.005}, etc, etc } and then: celestialBody_number=int(raw_input("Choose celestial body ")) print('You have selected {}.'.format(body_data[celestialBody_number]['name'])) g = body_data[celestialBody_number]['g'] It would be easier to maintain, easy to extend with other data (say, the radius of the body) and reduces the amount of code. On a side note, raw_input suggests you're using Python 2.7 (well, Python 2.x but I'm guessing 2.7). Python 3 has matured a lot these days and it's not like a couple of years ago where a lot of popular libraries were P2 only. If you're starting out with Python I would highly recommend switching over to Python 3. There are very few differences (for beginners most notably print being a function and not a statement, and / no longer being an integer division for integers, and input replacing raw_input, obviously) but I suspect that you're going to be running rapidly into a situation where some things don't work as expected as examples online are more and more written for Python 3, and not Python 2. Besides, it's the future!

I've never gone there but based on my limited knowledge an ocean-bottom expedition a-la Trieste would be incredibly cool, especially since the vehicle as whole was very Kerbalesque (and very reproducer in KSP)

Would the Janitor's Closet mod be of any use for this?

There's a lot of online material available as well. I can highly recommend to install Python through a package. There's nothing wrong with downloading a bare installation from python.org, but packages like Anaconda and WinPython (the latter is Windows-only, I use it and I'm very happy with it) offer a full suite with practically every (scientific) library you can imagine. Which is not very useful at first, but at one point you want to do more complex things. Maybe create a PDF file as output. These scientific packages contain every single library you could possibly imagine so you're not wasting time figuring out how to get "matplotlib" to work (although a "pip install" in Python usually does the trick and is really, really easy). The arrival times of my son's school bus. I run a Python script on my iPad that records the arrival time and then plots a control chart for me. This way I can optimize the time we're outside, waiting for the bus to arrive (winters in New Jersey can get quite cold) There are many tutorials about Python you can find online. Code Academy has a tutorial, and there's a learn python site. I don't know how good they are but it never hurts to try them out. I even found a Python 101 on the PyVideo website although it's likely to be a bit information dense (one of the nice things about Python is that there is a large community out there that is very fanatical about advocating Python). But most important, get your hands dirty and start writing software! Are you playing KSP through Steam? Start with a script that copies yours Steam installation over to a folder in, say, "My Documents." Ooh, wait, you don't want the "steam specific" files. So exclude those. And actually, wipe out the destination folder before copying over, so you get a clean install. Well, wipe out everything except your gamesaves and gamedata of course. Except for the Squad folder in Gamedata. And so on. In the end you'll have a script that quickly makes a fresh copy of KSP but retains your saved games and mods and applies your preferred settings to the game's config file (bonus! ). That's what I did at least and it served me well when 1.2 was rolled out. It's just an example of something relatively simple to start with, but at the same time it teaches you about adding all those extra conditions that can make things a lot more complex than you'd initially thought (experienced programmers are usually a lot more pessimistic about timelines than new ones).

My father did not understand math. When I was thirteen and asking for help with my homework I was told “from here you're on your own.” He was also a talented coder. I've encountered some solid coders who couldn't differentiate (see what I did there?) between integrals and matrix calculations. Sure, there's certain code that requires math. I'm sure KSP will be very hard if you don't grasp quaternions or tensor math (I don't, and I'm not going to try). But for everyday business processes you really don't need to either. If one's intention is to be a programmer at JPL's orbital mechanics department, then yes, expect to need solid knowledge of math. But those are basically business rules for those programs. "Repeat this segment of code until a <= 0" doesn't really require anything beyond basic arithmetic.