Dispatcher

Thanks for the info. Glad it worked!

Glad you figured it out, as I had no idea how to help you.

This video follows their efforts:

You should try flying that thing. Er, Redrobin's post.

Oh yes! Actually, both versions survived very well; the newer one even more so. In fact, I got the new one to flip right side up after landing upside down, using RCS (WASD keys as needed). Honestly, these things are fun. On Kerbin, they are not prone to flying out of control, so they should work fine at most planets or moons. And with 6 wheels, there are usually at least 4 in contact with the surface at any given time.

I'm glad that you decided to use my suggestion. You may add a collision mesh as a simple shape in Blender, setting it to not be rendered; or in Unity you may set your existing mesh as a collision mesh also. That's my preference. In your configuration file, you are able to set the attachment points. I started by working with a copy of an existing stock part .cfg file. As the others above indicated regarding part scale, set the default scale to Metric. Edit: You may also control scale in the .cfg file. I recommend this link: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/25482-TUTORIAL-Getting-Started-With-Unity-BACK-FROM-THE-DEAD%21

No. I was intimating that you could also try making 3D models. Its fun, so I suggested Blender. Edit: Glad that you are looking into using Blender. I think you will like it.

Really? I think Mars has an abundance of resources, as well as being potentially a place for human habitation.

As to the final question; it IS worded such that a True or False answer is required. There is a difference between being educated about Darwinian evolution and believing in it due to personal or religious views. The question would have been better worded something to the effect that "human beings, according to Darwinian evolution, developed from earlier forms of life". I think the answers would have been a higher percentage indicated as true.

Rejoice Canopus! As a side effect of Activision's ongoing court battle with former Infinity Ward heads ... details of the company's deal with Bungie have been made public in documents posted by the LA Times. ... The contract also gives Bungie the freedom to put five percent of its staff to work on a prototype for a new game referred to as "Marathon" ... As for the Trilogy story, Marathon's Story page has been going since 1995: hold off until you've played the full Trilogy, for there are spoilers for sure. Indeed! Everyone who wants to, may play the games.

Previously learned that rovers roll really well on Minmus: <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7428/12664900164_ae43fa2418_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="oldRover"> New lander and rover combination: <img src="https://s3.yimg.com/so/7351/12664558933_a49916d901_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="newLanderRover"> Detached: <img src="https://s2.yimg.com/sm/5527/12664561473_c29eae9c9f_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="newDetached"> 3 modes-- electric (wheels), RCS and "set and forget" Ion: <img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7303/12664447835_8d08a0b6eb_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="canUseIon"> Enjoying the moment: <img src="https://s2.yimg.com/sm/5501/12664452885_4c2038e3fc_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="roveLandSun"> Alright then, 4 modes of travel: <img src="https://s3.yimg.com/so/7448/12664450355_0edd351efa_c.jpg" width="800" height="500" alt="rollsWell">

Each engine seems to have its niche. If you compare the mass that the air breathers can lift, the RAPIER (air mode) outperforms the jets simply because it can switch to closed cycle. In vacuum mode (only) it compares with the LVT30 & 45 (but these latter can lift more mass). The aerospike can haul less mass to a much higher altitude. See comparisons links in my sig line. Since the RAPIER is intended for SSTO use, their use as boosters only seems questionable given that the turbojet and rocket engines will yield better results.

There are also free modeling apps, such as Blender.

We take Ceres (I know, I want it for a moon of Venus, but first come, first served) and move it into a close orbit around Mars. This provides just enough tidal stress to induce tectonic friction, which warms the planet up somewhat; releasing some gases and binding carbon in the rock. Pressure rises as the planet warms and water begins to flow on the surface. Breathing gear will eventually still be required for you and any pets you take for a walk, but that way you can still enjoy the ultra fine dust as it penetrates into your clothes, etc.

Narcogen and Blackstar automate the process of making huge underground rocket silos:

Without knowing your OS, I'd recommend the free open source browser "Firefox". Try it and see if it will do the job for you. I sometimes use it; most of the time I use Safari.

Similar to Alien Nation, only not slaves (at least, we hope not):

I blame scientists for the fact that Venus is the epitome of Hell. Before we got hard data, fiction writers portrayed Venus as a lush jungle planet; warmer than our tropics, but with a machete and a ray gun, one could eke out a decent enough living. Ah, those were the days! So I suggest that we give Venus a moon; Ceres would be a fine choice. We'd want the orbit to be in the plane of the ecliptic so as to allow a shadow to be cast upon the planet as often as not. Once that phase has done as much good as it can, we detonate Ceres and let the liquid and ice fragments rain down upon the planet. With enough force, the impacts might displace a large fraction of the atmosphere into space, which would form a nice shady ring around the planet. After sufficient time (no idea), the environment there stabilizes and we determine how best to proceed from there. I'd hope that whatever needs to be done in the way of breathing gases for us; such industries could actually be enabled on the planet's surface by then; avoiding the need to float said industries in the choking clouds of our sister planet. Of course, for a jungle habitat, we'd need to import flora and fauna from our own tropics. Then we'll claim Venus, much as the fiction writers of old imagined.

Narcogen and Blackstar are back after a sequencer crash:

Its not what was planned in my case, but how I dealt with unplanned events. It was to be a fairly routine trip to Minmus and back. First, I was able to get a flyby of the Mun on the way. But my stock subassembly launch vehicle and translunar assembly, once attached to my lander/ rover/ return vehicle, mixed some of my staging and I didn't realize it until I'd saved in transit. I had burned some of my lander fuel instead of the orbit to orbit assembly fuel. So I figured out the mixup and reordered it there, then selected the active engines and shut them down before firing the correct ones. Once past the Mun and at Minmus orbit, I transferred fuel from the orbit to orbit stage to the lander. I had never had to do any of those things in any prior mission, so I learned very quickly how to do those steps. Thankfully, I have a reserve of dV (fuel) in each stage so I was able to do that. I still need to land, rove and return but I think I will have success from this point on.

I've posted the gist of this thread at the Suggestions sub forum, so maybe Squad will consider that (if it hasn't already).

One source, while providing the 0C graphic, posts a table thus: 55 km, 27C, 0.5314 Earth atmosphere (bar). That's about 81F. This would be warm, but not terribly hot, yet the ambient pressure would be difficult but not impossible in terms of breathing. I'd imagine habitats would need to be pressurized higher than the ambient outside; in part to keep slow leaks outward, otherwise CO2 would kill. If the source is correct (Wikipedia), this would of course not be the ideal 68F and 1 bar pressure which is often presented in discussions of this kind. Going lower would make it dangerously hot for human survival, not just comfort. Going higher would make it cold but require a sturdier pressurized environment. So as I've indicated above: difficult but not impossible; also from a return on investment point of view, the Moon, NEAs and Mars are much more attractive destinations for industry and colonization efforts. Beyond that, some moons of Jupiter and Saturn may be promising.

The Improbability Drive.

I believe it is about 0C instead of 20C at 50 km, according to the previous chart. Would the lower density of a higher elevation be offset by the stronger winds? I agree that sunlight is more available the higher one goes.

Well, there is the story wherein "the cow jumped over the Moon".