Pecan

When I was working on the idea of docking engine modules for my long-duration tractor I simply adapted my standard tug (4 out-rigger nukes around a Mk2 lander can). Extra fuel on the outriggers and large docking ports for the engine, fuel and payload modules. Meant I could add any combination of engines depending on mission.

Another vote for 'yes' - mine looks very much like Kasuha's so it must be good :-) Personally I favour a reusable infrastructure of crew/fuel launches to LKO spacestation, interplanetary tugs/transfer vehicles and destination spacestations with dedicated landers (see link in signature). Lunar stations within a system probably aren't worth it but having one around each planet can be handy, if only as an emergency fuel reserve.

LV-Ns are heavy, but if you're making high-deltaV burns you may still save mass simply because you don't need to carry so much fuel.

:-( Thought I'd done the sixth but totally failed at the last step. Restart that one tomorrow, work is a bigger demand.

I've never actually understood that advice since the vehicles aren't rotating at all. Any appearance of rotation is only relative to the horizon, and there's no point in looking at that at all. That's Navyfish's docking alignment mod. The navball indicator is based on it so works in exactly the same way. The main difference is whether you want the big window on-screen as well or just the indicator on the navball.

Sorry, didn't realise it was a commercial promotion. I was in fear of being bombarded by adverts but as far as I can see this is just the 'livestream' link at the top of the page. No, no reason to turn that off. Is Squad retained by some video company or something though? It's been nagging at me for the past few weeks just how much more videos are pushed as 'the thing' in KSP than any other game I know. Of course, it might just be the community here prefers that, but the amount of it seems odd to me. It might just be because I have a broadband cap (fairly common in the UK) so have to watch download limits that I notice it so much.

And to think I was sweating today docking a couple of 200-tonners ;-0 I think my computer would melt if I had that sort of mass within render distance. What are the part-counts?

:-( In a challenge I just got the transfer completely wrong and ended-up at 310 days ^^. Could I borrow you to drive for the next one? @ TeeGee: What are your source documents for these statements? It teaches them that in KSP there are some people who think pancakes can fly and some people who can fly pancakes? A (computer) model always leaves out some features of the real entity and no-one ever said KSP had to teach people about building things aerodynamically.

Please demonstrate this with a rocket, which Jouni has specifically mentioned a couple of times. ETA for Claw's comment - I think this has become a "stock vs hyperedit" debate ^^ - oh, and I'm not saying it can't be done, because I've never used FAR but I would like to see it done.

Are you sure that a video is the best way to present KSP to people? I've never seen a game where so much emphasis is placed on videos. In this case I think a photo-album or, you know, demonstrating it would be far more valuable. And, no, I'm certainly not recommending a wall of text like my stuff. ETA: To clarify - see "What did you do in KSP today" page 818 - http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/29533-What-did-you-do-in-KSP-today/page818 - I looked at all those lovely pictures. None of the videos have even a chance I'll click on them. They might be wonderful and certainly took a lot of work but I'm not interested in videos. Yes, this is a personal preference, yes video might, in this case, be perfect. No, it is neither the best nor only way to present KSP.

"...but also on the forum's front page!" Is there a way of turning that off?

Many people lift hundreds of tonnes to orbit without using asparagus staging but there is nothing more drag-inducing about that strategy than anything else that uses side-boosters - ie; radial, parallel or onion staging. Unless you are committed to a single-stack, serial-staging strategy you may as well use asparagus - it's only the fuel-lines that are different, after all. By the way - did you post this to update the thread or just say 'happy birthday' to it?

No. It means you have 290 units of fuel. How long that fuel will last depends entirely on which engines are burning it.

It would be easy to write-up but I can't think of any videos about it. What 'all' are you unsure about? Mods' folders live inside KSP's "gamedata" folder - apart from putting them there I don't know of anything else you have to fit together.

I stepped WAY out of my comfort zone, and learnt that payload-ratios and efficient transfers are not the only things to think about: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/82841-The-Kerbal-Amazing-Race%21 The challenge thread isn't much to look at because the missions have to come as a surprise but I've only done 5 of 25 and I'm already sweating :-)

Especially as tomorrow I have to do some other stuff, then stanz's away so you'll catch up ... and I seem to have painted myself into a bit of a corner. ETA: Just posted a link to this in "What did you do in KSP today": http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/29533-What-did-you-do-in-KSP-today?p=1213779&viewfull=1#post1213779

Just finished the fifth - went 100 days behind you on the third, I had a horrible transfer but thought it fairer to live with it than re-start the mission.

Before you go on holiday - could you annotate the leaderboard with which clue number each person is on. That way, someone with a very low time but on an early clue would not be confused with someone further along. How long are you away for anyway?

Pretty much you can't, unless there are some 'chutes for stability, in an atmosphere obviously. That means you'll need to build a self-righting mechanism using landing legs or Infernal Robotics.

Or not - brain too fuzzed still, Doh, Doh, Doh

Ssssh! Are we meant to talk about any of the things we're asked to do, or keep it quiet so as not to spoil it for anyone who plays later? (mine was the lightest = wimpiest I could deliver too).

According to the deltaV maps, Laythe launch requires 3,200m/s. http://i.imgur.com/NKZhU57.png

You don't need Remote Tech 2 (RT2) for unmanned probes. If you DO install RT2 you WILL need to have antennae with the correct range and orientation on every unmanned probe or you won't be able to control them. So, you do not need RT2 for SCANSat satelittes and it is more difficult to create the communications structure you need if you do have RT2. That can be fun but if you're having satellite trouble uninstall RT2.

My third didn't go as well as I'd hoped Starwhip, so well done on yours. Whether mine was 'well enough' too we shall see when the results are updated :-)