hypermetric

I think all three of the new gizmos are pretty great. Wing construction is a lot easier now with rotate and offset lets me build planes that are low enough to ground that kerbals on EVA can board (I haven't unlocked a proper ladder yet so there are rungs going around half the capsule). Don't forget about the root tool. Now I can build designs centered on any part or swap command pods without screwing with anything else. Now the command pod subassemblies I always wanted are attainable and practical. Yes squad really outdid themselves this time.

If I even think I have a balance problem I redo all my symmetry. Detach anything you have two of and if there is still two when its detached throw one of them out. Now check out your fuselage on the off chance there is still a problem there. Reattach everything making sure symmetry is on. I find subassemblies helpful here, as well as saving and version control. In previous versions of the game I found it less glitchy to work without symmetry until have attached everything I want to attach. Once I am ready I grab the wing or whatever part connects to the central fuselage and duplicate the whole thing with symmetry.

I don't really know anything about Kerbal Engineer but I'm pretty sure MechJeb will screw with the game balance. I tend not to use mods in my games for this reason. I have been playing the EVA missions in a small plane and I am starting to get a better feel for it, but I still think the navball isn't the best possible tool for this job. Real craft usually have an MFD with a map or a radio/audio signal to tell you how close you are and there would probably be a way to view your coordinates so you can compare with target coordinates.

What exactly is so terrible about clipping?

Oh that will be very helpful for trip planning, thank you. Still though I was thinking about seeing this info in for whatever situation you are in. Any real space agency would be able to tell you at least that much about their spacecraft at any given moment. The game gives you altitude and speed in any situation (not velocity like it says, velocity would be vector and much more helpful). What the game should provide is declination and right ascension at least. Given those readings the orbit could be figured out. I don't know if there is a way to do it with just the altitude and speed. I suppose I could figure much of it out by waiting to reach ap or pe to record speed, but I don't think that will get me further than just the ap and pe altitudes alone do and wouldn't be much help in planning a landing. Though I suppose the lack of info the game provides forces you to get a feel for it, I wish more info was there even as a cheat or something.

There is no way to see how close to the ground you are in map view during landings. I like VTOL aircraft with lots of lights rather than trying to land like a plane if I am trying to reach specific coordinates. I basically am hanging on the "You are now entering ...", "You are now leaving.." dialogue. Walking just isn't that fun. I wish there was some kind of MFD that would give whatever info you need in a given situation. Today I want a terrain map with waypoints, tomorrow it will be orbital elements.

In a plane or rover the navball points at the horizon making it difficult to see the marker. Is there a way to get around this?

Kepler's third law might be helpful then T1^2/T2^2 = r1^3/r2^3. I too have a copy of Fundamentals of Astrodynamics. I find I don't use it much as vanilla gameplay does not provide complete orbit elements. I takes no less than 6 numbers to fully define an unpeturbed obit. KSP usually doesn't provide more than 2. There might be someway to deduce the other elements using in game references points but I haven't figured it out.

Kerbals speak backwards spanish

It takes a little skill (lots of tries) but using a rocket to complete low altitude survey contracts is not impossible. I find if I drop down from the upper atmosphere as close to normal as practical I don't have to worry about air resistance screwing up my trajectory. I go for pin point longitude and aim a little east on latitude. Anyways its good practice for latter when you get base construction contracts. I do wish there was a way to see the waypoints on the ground (not map view), especially for the EVA contracts.

This movie subscribes to a model of time travel where only one timeline can exist though free lunch paradoxes are OK. Believe it or not some scientist like this as opposed to time travel that can create alternate timelines because it allows internal consistency within a single universe. To quote TARS "They didn't bring us here so we could change the past." At the end of the movie everyone ran out to use the bathroom. The only thing this movie needs is a brief intermission. The opening sequence blends real interviews of dustbowl survivors with original footage. Well there are some sticking points. My biggest issue is that during the climax they perform a slingshot maneuver around Gargantua, the massive black hole which they were already in orbit of. Now I am a big fan of gravity assists and doing it with black holes is genius if you are on a trajectory that can take advantage of it's relative angular momentum. But have you ever tried to get to Minmus from Mun via Kerbin? Dunna from Kerbin via Kerbol. Of course not. Gravity assists don't work that way.

So I am incredibly pumped about the film Interstellar. Renowned astrophysicist and black hole expert Kip Thorne worked closely with Nolan's VFX team to produce highly realistic and stunning visuals. According to Thorne he granted Nolan some artistic license but other than inside the wormhole and event horizon Nolan really didn't take any. But it makes me think about artistic license in space depictions in general. Here are some common sins. Shadows show evidence of specular diffusion and backscatter when there shouldn't be any. Planets and moons orbit way to close taking up more than half of the sky. Blue giants look exactly like smaller stars shot through a blue filter, but in reality they don't have surface convection cells. Nebulas have a color pallet consistent with false color images of nebulas. Galaxies have visible spin (I'm looking at you Episode V). High contrast and low contrast things are visible in the same shot (like the sun and stars). The list goes on.

I thought the textbook scene was a not so subtle anvil to the heads of the conservative legislature behind Texas's education system. But the truth is conservative and liberal politics will probably be unrecognizably different in a post military world 60-70 years from now or whenever the movie is supposed to take place. The movie does have a strong political message though and that message is that humans aren't meant to save the earth, we are meant to leave it.

During launch or flight?