pincushionman

How massive is your SSTO? If you're hurting for DV, can you jetteson it and still fly with better TWR and DV than you had before? And can you suck out the tanks before you do that?

That's because it IS philosophy!

Do you intend for a significant portion of the game to take place in the "real world," so to speak (i.e., you need to walk your character to the hardware store for a bag of bolts they may or may not have enough of, or you need to bail out one of your engineers after an altercation at the bar), or is it simply background art for some kind of scene selection?

I can't claim to be a Trekkie, but I did see Generations (where the scene in question was from), and it should be obvious to everyone who watched it the saucer section was less landed and more ditched. At the end of the film, the crew was being recovered by a fleet of other ships, not flying it off again, and in its "next" appearance (First Contact), it was a new ship, not a salvaged saucer section mated to a new stardrive. I also had the Technical Manual (not "canon" per se, but it was written by Michael Okuda), and while I don't remember whether the saucer section was said to be atmosphere-capable in terms of flying (body lift maybe?) there were clearly no provisions for landing. First, there were no gear, and second, the main engines were all on the aft edge - unless the maneuvering thrusters described elsewhere were absolutely insane (which, given the other technology magic described in the series, is not out of the question), if the ship is on the ground, it's pretty much hosed.

In reality, such a nosecone should create slightly higher drag than its symmetrical counterpart - on its own. I think. But I haven't done aerodynamics in ten years, so take that guess with a grain of salt. It should also create a side load from asymmetric body lift. What it would really be used for would be to control the pressure field around itself more finely, because of how the pressure fields of different components interact with each other. Which is something stock aerodynamics doesn't account for. It may be effective in FAR, though.

You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door. There is a small mailbox here. …sorry, couldn't help myself.

I'm with kigraham1013 on this one. It looks great, but I'd rather the flexibility of separate components.

Really? On my shiny new laptop win8.1 took forever to boot, but win10 is darn near instant. Is your win7 box much older than the other one, and morr importantly, does it have a buildup of run-on-startup cruft applications from over the years?

This is because both the controls and the navball are ship-centric, not camera-centric. There is no way to make the controls follow the camera. Except for EVA kerbals. Those bastards follow the camera by default. I find I always need to make a feature on my ships to designate the "up" direction at a glance. Especially with docking.

The OP didn't mention SAS, Koby - but since you did, I will as well: Don't. I have yet to have any success with SAS and airplanes. Make aerodynamics work for you for stability tasks (dihedral, pendulum effect, well-sized tailplanes, etc.) and USE TRIM. The issue you're getting sounds like either lack of stiffness or poorly-sized tailplanes/elevators. Or both. As we say everytime in this subforum: Pics would help. Also, joystick >> keys when it comes to planes. I've seen planes flown well on keys, but why torture yourself?

If "disable crossfeed" DOESN'T do this, then what DOES it do?

It should be tied to the control part - if you pick an old one you get an old interface. Just because the state-of-the-art is glass cockpits doesn't mean the old mechanicals aren't still being made.

You mean "'mod' + [ or ]". Remember, Shift is throttle up! But yeah, I have to agree with this.

Whaaa.... Saw it on the KSP facebook - sorry, I'm not sure how to link that here yet - and thought "Is this what we really need?" Any thoughts oh how it might work? Normal throttle control doesn't sound right. More like a RMB action to instantly apply an impulse?

And if you have different engines, it will be a weighted average. Weighted by what, I don't know off the top of my head. Probably mass flow rate.

Is it in the bug tracker?

Take-out meals should be referred to as "fly-by's".

What Squad has done is a step in the right direction. However, I can't disagree that it's klunky, unintuitive if you don't know what it represents, and subject to abuse if you really do. What we need are dedicated "engine core" parts that contain the bulk of the engine mass and represent the power-generating portion of the engine system. They could do this by throwing a flag that is necessary for the nozzles to work, or by generating some kind of engine-power virtual resource that the output devices (the nozzles…or maybe propellers…or even wheels…) use to generate thrust (or traction…or electric charge…see where this is going? It's flexible). It's not as intuitive as stacking fuel tanks on an engine, but it's clear that the CoM offset is causing confusion.

It's hard to make right angles (like for the ends of a cylinder) in a plush, especially a small one. The batting is stuffed inside, and essentially "pressurizes" the figure (it's obvious that's happening at least on his chin; can't tell if his crown is the same or they just didn't try). You could make a "proper" (or at least better) cylinder head if it were much bigger or you used a stiff material like plastic. But the latter would be 1) more expensive, 2) more prone to breakage, and 3) would defeat the purpose of being a plush.

USI takes the "dead weight" approach by turning your Kerbals into Tourists if their Supplies run out. This doesn't mean they aren't dead, though. Thre are plenty of times you could Tourist-ify your pilot and doom your mission because of it. You can currently have a probe core fly for you, but with the new range limitations we may not be able to cheese the system so easily anymore. Jool missions may very much require a well-stocked crew to succeed.

Agree, without a description of the problem it's tough to diagnose. But not knowing anything else I would say 1) remove and reinstall drivers; 2) take apart and clean it; 3) replace keyboard and trackpad components. If any of these fix it, you're golden…for a while, at least. It IS more than 7 years old

Trying to circumvent the pad launch weight limit, are we?

…this is what Science Mode is?

I believe that many people say they are afraid of broken saves, but what they really fear are broken crafts, from changed part behaviors. I think there's little to fear from savegame compatibility unless they change the format and content of the .sfs system. Part behavior changes, on the other hand, can really bork things, especially for missions already in orbit.

I check Steam every Monday - starting at noon, there's a weeklong sale for about a hundred items, some as low as nineteen (19!) cents. A lot of them are utter crap. But there's often a gem or two in the <$5 range, depending on what you like.