Pecan

It's easy to copy the .craft file(s) you want from one save to another: switch out of KSP (no need to close it), copy the relevant vehicles from saves\<name>\ships\VAB and paste into the parallel folder for the other save.

If you ask the opinion of people "who has had far for a little while" they will say yes, because that's the decision they've made. If you ask the opinion of people who haven't they'll say no, because that's the decision they've made. FAR is different, not harder, but it may also turn out to be different enough to the aerodynamics in 1.0 that you still have to re-learn everything. Choice is yours ... we're all guessing what the future holds. Please see huge discussion, for want of a better term, at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/111541-Thinking-about-making-the-switch-to-FAR

:-) That's the attitude. While the designs will be obsolete and some of the specific design-criteria we all (think we) learnt will be useless the approach to designing will be valuable and fun :-) So - is your shuttle a rocket?

Started with the demo and read tutorials on how to get to orbit. Bought 0.22 (I think) and read tutorials about staging and asparagus. Spent many, many hours creating and testing launch vehicles for various payloads. Looked at career (now science) mode when it came out. Hated the tech tree. Did a trip to Duna just to prove to myself that I could but mostly had huge amounts of fun building Kerbin and lunar stations and bases. Tried loads of mods; machine can't cope with many at a time or any parts-packs to speak of. Loved MJ, KAC and SCANSat. Chatterer too, but had to lose it. Designed a fleet for everything from start to everywhere. Went everywhere to check the designs worked as intended. Fixed them when they didn't ^^. Wrote 'Exploring The System' to explain the design and mission progression. Looked at career (and newly-renamed science) modes when they came out. Hated the tech tree, found most of the contracts uninteresting. Did a bunch of challenges to expand the designs I was creating, just to try something different. Updated the 'Exploring' fleet as new versions and patches for KSP were released. Wrote 'Induction To Construction' for complete beginners as it seemed like something all the other tutorials (including mine) had missed. Broadly, I've moved from making massively over-engineered rockets that didn't work to minimalist vehicles of all types that do. In the mean time I've found that I don't care about cosmetic mods, Chatterer and Probe Control Room excepted because of the immersion they offer. Information mods and instruments I can't get enough of though, especially as my old machine can't cope with them. RPM is the daddy (I can't run it), VV, NavUtilities, etc. I love. Ultimately MJ, SCANSat and PF are the ones that add most for me without adding complications.

Six saves, spread over three installs.

"Second star to the right and straight on until morning" (Everyone knows that's wrong; you won't get there until at least lunchtime!)

Jets will not reduce your dV requirement one bit; they'll just provide the required dV more fuel-efficiently. To get the best from them you'll need to spend more time in atmosphere though, which implies a higher (but still more fuel-efficient) dV budget.

NOOOO! The doors are East and West; you need North/South segregation ^^.

Old KSC/KSC 2/KSC West is not the island airfield you're probably thinking about.

I think you are missing the fact that SSTO means Single Stage To Orbit - start simple, with a rocket. Also remember that 1.0 will almost certainly make all your designs obsolete.

Follow the missions in 'Exploring The System' ... but use your own designs to make it harder/more interesting!

Sit down to learn how to design a launch vehicle, starting with the dV and TWR requirements. Laugh at the inevitability of tens of threads from hundreds of people whining that their old designs don't work any more. Shake head sadly at the thousands of others that have no idea what's going on and won't read a single thing to find out. Start writing some proper tutorials.

KasperVid - any news on the specific form of words Squad want? I'm particularly asking for the written work (with KSP screenshots) that I create ... but currently don't charge for. In 'Induction To Construction' and 'Exploring The System' I use the "I'm not official" statement Ted(?) asked for some months ago and the standard copyright text "The author is not affiliated with Kerbal Space Program or Squad Squad has asserted their right to be identified as the authors of Kerbal Space Program" Is that still acceptable?

Open Broadcast Software; it's free.

SSTOs are easy and low part-count up to payloads of 100t - 150t but use a lot of fuel (which is cheap, so who cares). The first rocket in 'Exploring The System' is a SSTO, as is the 40t launch vehicle in Chapter 7. Spaceplanes are, of course, a completely different thing and probably not worth working on in 0.90 as 1.0 will change the aerodynamics completely. If you do want a flight-simulator and don't have too much invested in your current designs you may want to install FAR for a better model. Karbonite really has pretty much replaced Kethane but, again and as mentioned by others, 1.0 will change all that by making resources and mining stock. Questions, questions: KSP is awesome. Kethane is obsolete. SSTO means Single Stage To Orbit. Mods are too many and varied to make a single statement, apart from that they can add a lot. In career mode try to complete as many contracts as possible with each launch. READ the contract and don't accept any you don't think you can do. Part-testing contracts are easy - engines don't need fuel, just need to be 'activated by staging', as do decouplers, etc. - even if that seems pointless ^^. For satellite contracts make sure you go the same way around as the 'dots' on the target orbit; many, many people make the mistake of just getting the height/inclination right while going in completely the wrong direction. 'In flight' test contracts and most EVA ones aren't worth the effort until you have a (Kerbin) aeroplane that can easily land nearby (check the terrain).

Hello and welcome. Divide Thrust by Mass (weight), dumb enough? Seriously - in the VAB/SPH when you mouse-over engines their max thrust is shown, so you know that bit. There is an 'i'nformation button at the bottom of the screen that will tell you the vehicle mass. (Thrust / Mass) -> TWR; <1 means you're glued to the ground, =1 means you can hover or maintain vertical speed but that's all, >1 means you can fly! Minimum recommended launch TWR is 1.2, 1.6-1.7 is 'usual'. As you burn fuel your mass decreases but, since the thrust remains the same, the TWR increases. When you jettison stages the whole thing changes so you ideally work all this out for each stage, working backwards from the last (topmost). DeltaV is 'potential change in velocity vector'. 'Velocity' = 'speed', 'vector' = 'in a particular direction'. Together, it's all a measure of how much you can accelerate, slow down (accelerate in the opposite direction) or go sideways. For Kerbin launch you need ~4,500m/s deltaV and gravity and the atmosphere grab most of it, in space once you're moving you keep moving because there's no atmosphere to slow you down. You therefore use deltaV (by burning fuel -> changing 'potential' into 'actual' change in velocity vector) to change where you're going or how fast you're going there. The rocket equation looks difficult but basically means "the more efficient your engines are and the more fuel they have, the more they can do", which makes sense :-) Use a spreadsheet or one of the MechJeb, Kerbal Engineer Redux or VOID mods to work it out for you. Isp is engine "Specific Impulse" (mathematicians are wierd, so that's "I"mpulse "specific" in jargon). Just think of it as the engine fuel-efficiency, look it up in the VAB. same as thrust in 1 above. for the engines you're using and stick it in the rocket equation to calculate your deltaV in 2 above. Worry about that when you start going to other bodies, stick with Kerbin for now! Best answer anyway is look on the wiki

See Chapter 2 of 'Induction To Construction' :-)

Very, very tired - I usually play well past the time even night owls have gone to bed and often until normal people are having lunch. 'Slightly nuts' cause or symptom? You decide.

That 'somewhere' would be in the Infernal Robotics .dll. It's a programme. If you can programme you can mod it, or write your own KSP mod. If you can't then you really don't want to be poking sticks at it.

Late on parade but I have to say go with the bughunting, balance and polish. Many people have said KSP is sufficiently full-featured for a release as it is. Make sure all those features work as they are meant to and as smoothly as possible in order to make the best possible 'first impression' on the rest of the world - you only get one chance. Yes, personally, I'd enjoy more features but I think adding them now would be detrimental to KSP in the future; add them afterwards.

A SSTO: Stayputnik, small IRW, FL-T200, 48-7S. For useful payloads, given the appropriate fuel and assuming 200m/s for de-orbit/landing, a T30 will SSTO approx 1.4t, a Skipper 5t, Mainsail 11t and KR-2L 26t. Other engines are possible but these are the simplest.

You're still underestimating the effort required. A retrograde orbit around any other planet is fairly easy just by tweaking your intercept with it. ALL those planets, and you, are still going the same way around the sun though so it's all 'just a bit' faster or slower. It is reversing the orbit around the sun that makes this contract so hard.

Version and copyright information is shown at the bottom-right of the main-menu screen, so the easiest way to check which you have is to run it. ("Induction To Construction", page 11).

You can show imgur albums using the following BBCode tags without spaces. Note only the album name, not the whole URL, is included: [ imgur ] UQ1Bp [ /imgur ]

Can't see the picture. Navball pointing at the sky?