Boomerang

There's nothing wrong with not enjoying something that's popular, but when you're questioning it's appeal, especially at the time it was new, it's important to consider what the world was like when the show came out. It was right in the middle of the Cold War, conflicts abound and we were never too far from destroying ourselves as a species. Consider that sort of environment when you look at the composition of the crew and their interactions with everything they discover on their travels.

I'll second/third/whatever this. If you're serious about building things via subassemblies, SelectRoot is necessary unless you want to have to start each build with your root part in mind and always leaving an open node on it. It's also useful for temporarily setting a different root part so that you can pull apart a craft in ways that would otherwise be difficult.

The magic boulder lives!

I'm really hoping to see some sort of reset root function in game in the future. I've figured out most of the camera tricks to get planes and such back to near-center, but it shouldn't take editing the craft file to reset back to the center.

I am so excited for these... I love making tiny things and this set will be prefect. Great looking too!

Plenty of people would agree with this, myself included. But apparently there's not much to be done with it, either in terms of a mod or requesting Squad to undo the 'fix'. And prepare to be inundated with messages about how it's not a big deal and how you shouldn't complain and just get used to it, if this thread ends up being anything like the others on the subject.

I've always just edited the persistence file once I've gotten my satellites into near-perfect orbits. If it feels like cheating to you, that's fine, but I think with the lack of station-keeping tech in the game, it's acceptable. Just be aware that if you edit something into a perfect orbit, then focus on that craft later, the orbit won't be perfect anymore. You can always go back and re-perfect the orbit though, if you do accidentally go to a craft you meant to leave on rails. What you want to do, once your satellites are in a near-perfect orbit, is to find the crafts in the save file (just search the document for the vessel name). You'll find something that looks like this (copied from my own save) I only kept the entirety of that there in case you've never seen where exactly the orbit information is. You can ignore everything between the name of the vessel and the ORBIT tag for what you're doing now. You want a semi-major axis of 2 185 180 meters (SMA), with an eccentricity (ECC) and inclination (INC) of 0, for a perfect Kerbin-synchronous orbit. So just change those three values. If you look on the wikia, there's a list of the synchronous orbits for the other bodies as well, the SMA will change in those cases. Hope that helps. Edit: My Kepler-related math is a bit rusty, so I don't know if the changes to the length of the Kerbin day affects the SMA for Kerbin-synchronous orbits, but as long as the numbers are the same for all your satellites, it shouldn't matter unless you've got some ground-based power station that you need a satellite directly over at all times.

This family of mods has grown a bit too big for my current save, just because it's already heavily modded. But I'm certainly considering creating a separate game just to play with all these.

Similar conditions to what you'd find around our poles, I imagine. When the air temperatures are below freezing, sea water can remain liquid due to the salt content. The air will be very dry, but it won't be entirely devoid of moisture either. As an instinctual guess, I'd say that trying to get appreciable amounts of water from the atmosphere in those conditions would be difficult to do with any practicality. I might be wrong though and of course you can hand-wave all sorts of climate explanations for Laythe to make it work.

Anything with an interplanetary destination requires 2x living quarter room not including command pod room. So my typical interplanetary ferry has the Taurus seven-crew pod and in the section to the rear of the pod there's room for 16 kerbals (only due to symmetry issues, otherwise it would be 14).

That would be fun, if you parsed it down to having the USI_Converter as a separate released or if it was packaged with FTT. Then again, you've got what seems like dozens of mods to wrangle, so I don't expect that to be any where near the top of your list

That tiny claw looks great. I can imagine tiny probes like that going to latch onto pieces of debris for deorbiting.

I'll admit that the Karbonite dependency is a bit disappointing. I tried it out quite a bit but decided that it wasn't really needed for how I play, despite how well-made it is. These FTT parts look great though!

I love small part packs, can't wait to give this a go!

Those parts and crafts look awesome. Too many dependencies for me to deal with at the moment, but the graphics work is great.

You might be thinking of B9? SP+ works great currently.

Same here. I've got a spaceplane that I use all the time that has eight of those intakes and there's no loss of performance.

So no means for users to define ribbon titles/descriptions?

I think that's a fairly erroneous assumption there. I certainly don't need or want stock toolbar integration and I haven't seen many calls for it. Some people want it, sure, but I think most prefer Blizzy's Toolbar still, for the small size and the ways in which you can customize it.

I'll second this notion. I still think that the ending of Europa Report did the idea of going there a disservice. It's a film and all, but they could have made the discovery of -simple- life the massive find that it would be.

So I haven't seen any mention of it after a brief skim, so excuse me if I've missed it, but is there any way for users to (relatively easily) define titles/descriptions for ribbons? If there's already a description of 'how-to' somewhere, a link will do just fine

And remember, if you ever want to prank your friends, just stuff their bell nozzles with bananas!

Nope. (tenchar)

On one hand you talk about wanting to foster discussion on this topic (which I don't see happening in a terribly positive way) and then you talk about how this grand idea in your head is going to make everything awesome. You talk about mod authors having to standardize for the future, putting the burden on them, then you talk about your ideas like you've got some great blueprint kicking around in your office. And in both cases you're being very vague. I at least haven't investigated your other threads. So what this sounds like to me is you having some great idea that you can't/won't articulate, but you're going to allude to it while trying to convince the community at large to start an epic cat-herding project to streamline the mod-finding process. Maybe if you laid out these great ideas of yours, rather than just bad mouthing the current system, you'd get some more traction.

Original/opening post/poster. Either the first post in a thread or the author of it.