pincushionman

This. I'd be buying more if there had been dailies. As is I'm only certainly getting Psychonauts, HL Episode 2, and some 20-game bundle of random, non-related stuff. Still deciding whether to pick up Enter the Gungeon or Tomb of the Necrodancer. Any opinions on those two?

Because there's a bug with symmetry not creating symmetrically-stiff structures. As your aero forces increase, this results in bending and twisting that favors one direction. You'll see this once (if) you get in the air, too; a hard pitch-up will couple with a noticeable roll. Some things to try: 1) Move your main gear from the wings to the fuselage, and ensure they're pointing straight down. Reducing the number of joints between the center of mass and the wheels will reduce the flexibility and thus the midmatch in flexibility. 2) Add struts between the wings and fuselage or install the Kerbal Joint Reinforcement mod. 3) Make sure only the center wheel has steering, and re-map wheel steering to a different control than rudder. At speed wheel steering is way too effective, and you're better off forcing (and correcting) turn using rudder only. 4) Invest in a good joystick with a twist grip. This can't fix the problem by itself, but airplanes have different sensitivities in each control axis, and you're in a regime where a tiny yaw input is a very big deal. And keep in mind wheel flexibility has been borked since 1.1, and I haven't heard anything convincing me that it's beed fixed (only that it's "better") in 1.1.3. I fear until 1.2 gets its better Unity 5 version and wheel middleware, we're stuck with wonky wheels.

What do you mean by "is way too much?" Is your measured e way off, or are you simply way past so-called escape? Keep in mind, in KSP "escape" isn't a paranolic orbit where e=1, it's an orbit such that Ap is outside the (arbitrary) sphere of influence of the parent body, and as such is often still elliptical. The game may not even have a special case for a parabolic escape orbit, since you have to go far out of your way to hit e=1 exactly. Rounding errors all but guarantee you're either in a really big ellipse or a really tight hyperbola. Both of which would be indistinguishable from a parabola over the short section rendered.

There's no reason they shouldn't be correctly symmetrical. Unless you're using VAB symmetry, which is rotational, not mirror. If that's the problem, there are two ways to fix it: 1: build your rover in the SPH instead; the default symmetry is what you want there. You can then open the completed rover in the VAB and buld the rocket down from there, if you have to. 2: Switch symmetry modes by pressing "R". Need to think ahead here, though - if you already have parts in rotational symmetry, any new parts placed on them will inherit their symmetry mode, so you still need to start with symmetry in mind. There is a mod to break symmetry, but I don't know if it's up to date. And it might be more trouble than it's worth if symmetry mode fixes it. EDIT: forgot to mention: the mirror symmetry plane in the SPH is for a rover driving out the door. In the VAB, the rover needs to drive parallel to the door.

Piano, trumpet, French horn, guitar. I currently own only a trumpet (which has not been played in fifteen years) and a guitar (which has been played recently, but it would be a stretch to say it was played well). We may be purchasing a used piano sooner rather than later for my sons to begin lessons, though. Because the $100 electric keyboard is not a piano.

This is not correct. What you need to do is EVA and "take data", just like you do to collect the other experiments. When you place the data back in the pod through the RMB menu or by entering the pod, it goes to some sort of "storage," freeing the "active" crew report space for a fresh report. That said, this mechanic is reeeally clunky. The whole science storage and transfer system could use a revamp under the hood to smooth out the rough edges.

If you're not in Eastern time zone, Best Buy is open for at least another hour. Of course, I assume the post was really less "I can't play KSP boo hoo" and more "I'm going to NASM nyah nyah." Where else are you going?

A john boat. Really. You may not appreciate how much energy, and thus size, we're talking about here.

You're "ealy in career." What CAN you do? If you can EVA in space, get out and push. Orient the pod retrograde at apoapsis, SAS to stop rotation, EVA, let go and float away a little, engage jetpack, push against the bottom of the pod a little bit, stop when you have about 1/3 tank left. It sounds much more difficult than it actually is. If you can't EVA, you can intercept with a drone craft (or a piloted craft, if you have no drone cores) that can do the same thing (push). Got to learn to intercept eventually. Or you can wait. Once you unlock in-space EVA, all Kerbals can immediately do it.

I laugh because I'm obviously not familiar with the format these follow, but this implies, to the layperson at least, that "human woman" is a distinct species.

KSP isn't usually GPU-bound, so a graphics shader on a few engines shouldn't bottleneck anybody's game. Plus it's the kind of thing thst should be disableable-able…able…anyway.

Can't speak to everything, but... This is hard. The key is adding more horizontal velocity during your initial climb, so your trajectory is flatter when you do your circularization. This will mean that burn is done closer to prograde the whole time, which reduces the chance for Ap to go screaming out. If you gravity turn such that you're about 45 degrees by 8-12 km, and mostly flat above 35 km or so, you'll actually do most of your circularization (raising Pe) during the climbout burn rather than at apoapsis, and you're circularization burn will be real short (which also helps). It's hard to do without going to far and flipping out, though; I've only very recently gotten comfortable doing it myself. Also, don't overdo your thrust. Too high a thrust will mean you get your apoapsis set way before you can get much horizontal speed, and you're back where we started. High thrust causes other problems like increasing the risk of flipping out as you try to turn. Don't go above TWR or 1.5 (eh...get the KER mod; you'll be glad you did) for any of your lift stages and that will give you plenty of burn time to pick up horizontal speed without throwing your Ap out of the system. Good about finding out about the 1/2 before - 1/2 after thing; that's what you want. But keep in mind transfer orbits are highly eccentric, and therefore are quite sensitive to small changes in velocity (both speed and direction) and timing. Here's my tip: do the burn from map mode. You'll be able to see your real (blue) orbit approach your planned (yellow) orbit, and when it gets close, pull back on the throttle. Then ignore the node marker and just go pro- and retrograde under real low thrust until you get it about where you want it to go. You will not hit the target orbit exactly, but as Captain Bararossa says, "Eh, they're more guidelines, really." I've gotta agree with the other posters, this sounds like a run-out-of-electric-charge problem to me. Mouse over your resources tab and see if it shows anything in the electric charge bar. If nothing else, press timewarp once and cancel it, and it should cancel out any rotation you've got. This is an exploit, but dammit, you've gotta do what you gotta do. Hate to break it to you, but it has to be complicated because it is that complicated. There is a lot of stuff that is completely non-intuitive about this. But if you perservere (and listen to the folks trying to help you) it'll be oh so satisfying when you finally do see what's supposed to happen and it works. But keep in mind (some of the other posters have shown this already) there is more than one way to skin a cat, so someone may suggest something one way, and another may suggest something that sounds completely different. Suggestions about TWR or mod use are prone to that. But we want you to succeed! If you have more questions about specific problems during your flight, it would be good to consult the "gameplay questions and tutorials" forum; you are not the first player to encounter these problems, and I guarantee you will not be the last either. Oh, and since I haven't seen anybody else post it yet...welcome to the forums. Good luck, I hope you can work through these problems. Have a lot of patience.

I bought SimplePlanes and I'm glad I did. If you're into casual air combat, grab Sky Rogue. You can not have more fun with a joystick.

We're not saying it's not a pun (actually, the puns are the setup, the punchline is the inversion of one, so it's kind of an anti-pun, in the way that the "chicken cross road"->"other side" is an anti-joke). We're saying it's not very funny. Which happens to all of us.

Are you looking at catch-up/fall-behind in the big picture, or are you only seeing the speed right now? A lower orbit has faster average speed, but eccentricities make a big difference - a higher, eccentric orbit will have higher speed at Pe than a circular orbit that rendezvous with it. A picture of your orbits would be of great help.

Exrending the solar panels to slow rotation would mot work because the game doesn't move any masses around during the animations, and thus the moments of inertia don't change. You could accomplish it by pumping fuel from a center tank to saddle tanks on the side, though. you could kludge it with some mod setups, though. Infernal Robotics moves parts around. Some KAS parts can do it, too; Scott Manley posted a video some time ago using a tether for a rotating-centrifugal-"gravity" setup. It was terrifying.

I would imagine this would be a good place for vernors rather than mono RCS.

I'd abandon those long arms you're using to direct the thrust around the asteroid; there's no effective way to stiffen them sufficiently for what you're trying. Use a long girder pole between the puller unit and the Klaw, and angle the thrusters to miss the asteroid instead. And instead of all those tanks, centralize to a few big ones, then glomp an ISRU near the Klaw connection, and suck out the asteroid's own innards to power yourself along! …but if you're already committed to what you've got (or just a little more), ditch everything except your stiffest puller unit on the front, and stick an ISRU (with all control disabled) on the back. Then good luck.

Sooo…it's just like any other asteroid except for the texture? Is that what I'm seeing?

I like me my KER. To be quite honest, the most important thing for me is usually the HUD orbital values (specifically apoapsis) so I don't have to jump between flight window and map view during ascent. I've actually created a spreadsheet that can do the VAB math for me, but adding parts to the configuration involves inserting lines, copying and pasting, which is a little awkward; I'd like to add "add part/delete part" macros to make that smoother, but I don't understand how to spawn/edit/delete form contols by code yet. So I can do it "by hand," but it's a lot easier to just use the mod, especially since I've already proven to myself I've got the math down. However, I did discover VOID while waiting for KER to update last time, and while KER has better flight info windows, I may like VOID better in the VAB, since you can specify body (for T/W) and atmospheric condition (for Isp) by stage, rather than globally. A little torn. Do KER and VOID play well together, or do they stomp on each other's toes?

Airplanes regularly fly with T/W below 1. Way, way below 1. The only planes whose T/W even approach 1 are usually jet fighters, and even that's not a given. The key is wings are far more efficient producers of lift than engines can ever hope to be.

Could also be a procedural parts mod. Either way, mods.

Rotate the camera around so you're seeing your attachment from "the side." The editor seems to not like it when you're trying to node-attach things when looking at a node end-on. Seems to happen more in the SPH than the VAB, since you're more likely to point the camera end-on at a node in the SPH than the VAB.

What's your orbit and speed look like?

Deleting parts? From the file system? Why would module manager support such an option? Or do you mean "prevent the game from loading parts X, Y, and Z"? Not sure that's possible either, since MM edits the loaded data entries, not the part files themselves.