Overfloater

No man, what you really want is 12 tons of beef! I want a 20 bucks.

Establishing civilized nations is impossible in stock game.

...with your 3rd hand.

Can make your clothes invisible!

Moho is still a work in progress. :-l

These are good landing gear (the rockets aren't): I also once tried testing a serial staged rocket, only I couldn't land it, it was long & floppy , much worse than Remkeau's!

I made this Shuttle

Fits comfortably inside a kit bag!

Did you press ] or [ ? This switches between nearby vessels & kerbals.

I'm quite sure there's been no change in aerodynamics. Does your rocket use fuel lines? Is there an upside down capsule/probe on it? Is something generating lots of drag on top of the rocket? Did you rebuild it from scratch in 0.90 or did you use the same file? All of these could be the cause of this problem. Perhaps you could post a picture of this rocket?

I think the Mk1-2 capsule's weight justifies its impact tolerance ._.

O_O it's massless? Then this whole time i've been building my Eve landers wrong. I used only the "tiny" size decouplers thinking they're the lightest, when instead I should have used the giant decouplers to make it more efficient. (xD not really, it would look ugly)

Some control surfaces have lower lift rating now. Be sure to check the numbers of which you use. That's not just in .25, it happens whenever you put a control surface diagonally. Yep. Gear placement is the most common mistake, many people put gear all the way at the back, when its hould be close under the center of mass. And just to point out, 0.25 wings are twice as heavy than the old ones.

We don't need 5m until selecting "hard" gameplay difficulty will mean bigger solar system. 1.875m sounds great, the game's been lacking a Soyuz sort of thing 8-) Doesn't have to be a whole new rocket diameter, but maybe just a capsule and service module - and the small lander can could be the KSP version of Soyuz's round little hab module.

It's aimed at all the hour-long, slow-paced videos. Just saying that many people will not watch it. You can instead compress your 3-hour long mission into a 5-min video, and post-comment it. That's how Scott Manley did his old videos and that's why I liked them.

Try not wiggling your camera all the time, then speed up all the footage at least x2/ x3 the real time - if you want your video to be fluent and watchable. Especially if you use laggy high part count crafts, speed up even more. Who would wanna watch all that lag? You might wanna cut out unnecessary parts from your footage, to make your video more straight to the point. Then commentate your video. At least that's how I would have gone about it... xD

Not too promising, i'd look for an up to 3.40 Ghz(or more) processor and for a graphic processor with 2gb memory(dont need more unless you really wanna use multiple monitors). Those should make a fine gaming computer.

I think it makes sense. It has high impact tolerance and considering its an apollo mockup, it should support a crew for long periods of time, meaning it's 'supposed' to hold more life support resources.

Currently this: it's for x6.4 RSS, puts 328t into orbit.

Yeah, good work, and good landing gear placement.

You could use bandicam, it saves screens as jpg. I was also wondering about something like that, i resize all my screenshots to 66%. Is there a way to simultaneously convert many screenshots to jpg and have them resized?

This is the closest i seen: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/60961-0-90-TextureReplacer-2-1-2-(20-12-2014)/page56 Lololol xD

Im not anticipating a hard core simulator to come out of this but I'd like there to be some side effects from landing on the sunny side of moho o_O

Perhaps the current stock game could be easy difficulty level, x6.4 RSS would be hard, and an intermediate config would be added for intermediate level. (Normal RSS is a bit hard with stock parts isn't it?) Easy and medium difficulties would share the same aerodynamic model(whatever the developers would develop), hard would have FAR aerodynamic.