Dispatcher

Honest answer is: I'll never have the time to build and fly (or drive) all the ideas I have for things to create in KSP.

Welcome. I played mostly stock in v.0.22. I will again use a few mods when Kerbal Engineer and MechJeb are certified 0.23. Then there are my fueled adapters and cones. Whatever way you prefer, enjoy it here!

Nose cones are good. Especially when they hold fuel. See my sig line.

It all depends on your design and your flight methods. It usually takes me about a week to work up a decent spaceplane. It took me about an hour after I tried the 0.23 update to build and fly a 3 engine RAPIER SSTO to orbit. I added the two modes to my engine chart; see my sig line.

They're actually escaped convicts from other worlds, looking for places to hide.

Well, a triple feature. My Own Private Thermopylae: and Kill Your Television: Why watch when you can get and play the game for free? See ya star side!

I don't know "why" Squad spec'd the engine the way it is, but its an interesting part. Right after the update I built an SSTO with 3 RAPIERs in a short amount of time and the spaceplane made it to orbit OK (most SSTOs take much more time for me to develop). I updated my engine chart to include the RAPIER in each mode. I also replaced the "part size" column with "electric charge" generation. You can see how the jet engines (and others) compare to the RAPIER modes; both in specs and in some tests. If you're interested, just use the chart link in my sig line.

Clearly you and Whackjob have some common interests.

6. You can edit your original post to show as "Answered", in the advanced settings.

Welcome, PAG (yeah, maybe not the best acronym for your forum handle). You might try flying the stock KSP rocket Kerbal X. It has enough fuel to get you to orbit and back, but only when you get the moves down right. My style of flight: Turn on SAS (press T). Throttle up full. Fire that ignition. The Kerbal X staging requires that you press space again to release the support clamps. As you slowly climb, you will see that the boosters empty at different rates. When each set of boosters depletes, press space to jettison the empties. You will end up with the large single engine in the central stack. When you reach about 10,000 meters altitude, use your D key to cause the ship to fly towards the East. Settle the central dot so your angle is at the circle marked 45 (degrees). As your stages use up fuel, space again to jettison and fire the next stage. When the ship is about 30,000 meters altitude, switch to map view (M). Tab up the Navball and move your view of the planet so that you can see the apoapsis flag on your line of flight. While your cursor is over the flag, you can see the projected apoapsis. When it reaches at least 71,000 meters altitude or so, press X to shut off your fuel. Press D again until the dot in the center of the Navball view is just above the horizon line of the ball (the dot is still in the blue field). Once your ship icon is close to the apoapsis flag (say, 10 seconds to go), throttle up again. You will see the flightpath grow into a circle and the periapsis flag will appear. Wait until the flags swap positions and press X again. You will likely be in a decent orbit at that time. Your results may vary. Or, watch the plentiful video tutorials out there on the subject, as suggested in prior posts. Good luck! Edit: my suggestion assumes you are in sandbox mode. For Career, what some others say.

http://mods.oni2.net

I made a medium sized (3 engine) SSTO using the RAPIERs; worked pretty well. Prior to that I tested the engine using the same tests I'd done on all the other engines previously. I've updated the results and you may find them interesting. I also swapped out part size for electric charge generated. Note that the chart has two entries for it (the RAPIER): air and vac. See my sig line for the chart link. Edit: Columns shifted; need to fix that. Edit again: fixed.

Cool! Oh, I don't think we see this as a photography "tech wars" thread. It happens that when one learns using one methodology, one may apply it to others. As an example, one can still shoot (or output) images in B&W, which is a good way to emphasize texture and light/ shadow. There are infinite ways we can express what we see or imagine through photography. Still gotta make time to dig through some of my digital work.

I'm updating my engine chart. Mostly done. Until then, the one in my sig line is only v. 0.22.

This is simply an observation; so far I've not encountered a situation where this becomes fatal. Question: is this a "feature or a bug"? I posted this in case others have noticed the same behavior. Thanks. Helpful info: sandbox mode, running on a Mac.

Now that's the rub. Physical copies (and originals) tend to suffer from things like natural disasters or getting buried in the garage. If I dig something up, I'll post it or PM you with it. I might also look at my more recent stuff, since its shot digitally. Good luck to ya!

Well, as long as the "impact" is not literal ...

They are Klones.

If you are into (or don't mind) multiplayer mayhem, this video is for you. It has both death match and team play: The player videos are actually from this group: for Carnage, Apply Within

That's somewhat contradictory, given that you want a budget laptop for gaming and video editing. Sure, a budget machine can play the game. But the questions are, how well and what will it look like? The Intel integrated GPUs cannot perform as well as a graphics card. You should also consider that you may want to play other games besides KSP. Please bear with me here: Whatever you decide on, below is the closest thing to a gaming laptop that Apple offers. If you got KSP via Steam, there would be no need to repurchase the game. The machine is over 5 times your budget, so its given only for reference, so that you will feel better about the Windows laptop that you decide on (in terms of cost): OSX Mavericks (inc. iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Safari), 15.4 inch MacBook Pro, LED backlit Retina display (2880 x 1800 pixels), 2.6 GHz Quad core Intel i7 CPU (boosts to 3.8), 512 GB PCIe flash (SSD) storage, 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3L SDRAM, full size backlit keyboard, Intel Iris Pro graphics and Nvidia Ge Force GT 750M with 2 GB GDDR5 memory, integrated lithium-polymer 95 watt hr battery (up to 8 hours wireless web), 85 watt power adapter, 2 USB 3 ports, HDMI port, SDXC card slot, Bluetooth 4.0, 802.11ac Wi-Fi, HD camera, 2 Thunderbolt 2 ports (can use adapters for other connectivity), 0.71 inches thick, 4.46 pounds. Note that Mavericks uses memory compression, so 16 GB RAM would behave more like 24 GB RAM. It would set you back about $3,000 after taxes; $3,500 if you want a 1 TB SSD instead of the 512 GB SSD. I suppose that if you are unsure of your mentioned laptop choices above, remember that a $600 risk is obviously less costly than choosing Apple's pricey laptop or other gaming laptop (edit:) with the exception of sal_vager's recommendation being nearer your budget).

Nice pics. You haven't lived until you've shot fully manual on film, developed your own negatives or slides, and printed your images. Special effects? Done in camera and/ or in the dark room. Oh, and nothing says "texture and lighting" better than black & white.

Not not yet yet.

Check out the video: Check out the game: http://marathon.sourceforge.net/games/marathon2.php See ya star side!

Correct. You set the shader to one of KSP's shaders in Unity.

Someone did a good job of filling in the backstory of Star Trek's Khan. I wonder if we will see a Kerbalized version of it? Even the name needs no changing.