6677

How are you going to code in C without someone else writing the assembly code to allow you to write C in the first place. Nowadays C and a good compiler are perfectly valid solutions but you supposedly get more control writing manually (and probably more bugs). I can\'t really talk though seeming as I can\'t write C or any assembly.

I do believe everyone has the right to a fair trial. I would have thought he would be put to death anyway but at least it would have been done legally. Nice gun he had on him though, gold plated browning hi-power. Talking to british troops before they seem to like them quite abit, only complaints I\'ve heard are that compared to some weapons they seem to be a bit more finicky about being properly maintained and they can give some nasty slide bite. Gold plating surely serves no purpose though, plenty of flashier handguns to gold plate.

Its on the bottom of the main post as an attachment

When will the rest be coming?

I personally think hexagonal looks even more spacey and organised. But it does look so cool that way. Don\'t change them. I know what I\'m gonna try and do with this, MUN LANDING (gonna need a carrier craft to get there I think)

The collision mesh could be too small or alternatively I believe there is a part of the config file for your part somewhere that defines how strong an attachment node it. I do apologise but I don\'t know what the parameters are called and can\'t seem to find them anywhere

yeah he does open the .png textures with paint and just save straight away. Fixed.

See here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051361/Gaddafi-dead-Picture-Libya-dictator-captured-killed-Sirte.html#ixzz1bK2KX16h

Yeah, quite badly but then thats what throttle is for. I vote for an absurdly high amount of fuel with next to no mass and very low consumption on the engine aswell. Same for the RCS: high capacity, low mass and low consumption. I want to fly to the moon with this thing, return, and not notice any difference in fuel

I deliberately didn\'t rename it as it was intended as a direct replacement for the original which hadn\'t been updated to include RCS functionality, it seems I have neglected to set the vectors up correctly though

Theres 3 for you

I think we need one of those threads.

Well there was a fair amount of maths in a 10 year old text book and I would have assumed that for it to be in a school text that most of the counter argument would have done through but maybe not.

It worked sorta, just the vectors where off and I don\'t think the particle effects can be placed properly. Stackable RCS basically. Just needs ALOT of playing with the cfg. Wasn\'t really strong enough either. Best solution would be to remodel the main body of the yawmaster as either an ASAS or an RCS fuel tank and then model the nozzles as seperate parts.

The instructions say to place the scrubbers exe in the kerbal folder not inside the ksp.exe

I tried reworking it, badly. Copied and pasted bits of data from the vanilla RCS, forgot to edit anything other than thrust so it doesn\'t vector the thrust properly, wasn\'t until a few hours after uploading that I realised. Its here anyway if someone wants to tinker with it: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=3101.0 Very bad though.

But theres hundreds of assembly languages. Not just the one. X86 is one, AMD64 is another

Wow those scientists are slow, theres a 10 year old text book in my physics class that shows the maths proving the universe is expanding and also proving that if the total matter in the universe has a mass greater than a certain amount then the universe will shrink again, if the mass is greater then the universe will ever continue to stretch. Either that or the guys that give the awards are rediculously slow.

Actually many lancaster bomber pilots during the war reported multiple UFO stories flying back from raids. I personally don\'t believe any of them (do believe that there is life out there somewhere though).

999 crash resistance might be a start, don\'t know if it would be an elastic or inelastic collision though, might not bounce still

guess theres worse choices around. peppa pig for instance

Looks like an interesting parts pack. I lack the skill to make it but I would love to see it finished. I assume the 4 KX2 slots would be simple 1 meter attachment points

Increase crash resistance. Also there is a part called the Mk16-3 on these forums that is exactly what you are trying to achieve

In terms of poly count a triangle based pyramid would be best

Not a bad idea, just turn the old pods into a 0 capacity fuel tank or something, that seems to be the norm for dud objects.