Bashkire

I think (and please don't quote me on this just in case), the reaction wheel just adds torque to help turn the vessel, whereas the SAS module adds torque AND holds the vessel in the same position.

So... We're all Mek Boyz Nobz? God damnit! I always saw myself as an Ultramarine or a sufficiently lucky guardsman or Commisar Cain!

can you post a picture(s) / .craft file of your vessel so we can diagnose the problem better? As a preliminary, I would say make sure that you don't have anything in the way or clipping with the offending stage, make sure that the decoupler is the right way round, and if you have Quantum Struts (no idea if it's included in any of the mods you've said above, I roll with MechJeb only myself) make sure they're off before hand. Hope this helps!

Thank you very much, guys! Apologies for the late reply, but I've been fairly busy of late with that horrible thing called "life." Cheers for all the suggestions! Not to put them into practice!

Hello, Firstly, my apologies if that has been answer elsewhere, and it it has I would appreciate a link to the thread, but I am reluctant to skim through 113 pages of topics for my question, and the search function has shown me how to get into geostationary orbit, but not over a specific part of the planet. My problem, if you cannot see it in the small paragraph above, is simply thus: I wish to set up a satellite network around Kerbin. Now I have my basic communication satellites orbiting the planet at various inclinations, but of course they will not be able to communicate to the KSC or other parts of the planet if there is no line of site. To solve this issue, I have decided to put 4 geostationary satellites (command communications satellites) at 90 degree intervals around the planet, 1 over the KSC, and spacing them from there. When I try to place my satellite over the KSC, I find that it is infuriatingly troubling to get it into position. I am either too far behind it at it lurks on the "horizon" of the planet, or it is too far in front. Either way, I have a very inefficient satellite. Can anyone explain, preferably with pictures (or even better, a short video) but this is not essential, how one would go about setting these 4 satellites up? If it helps, I have installed the MechJeb 2.0.7 mod to help my accuracy in my endeavors. Thank you all, and I look forward to hearing your suggestions!

It's just a suggestion, but try going back to the circular shape, but disable the gimballing on all the engines apart from the centre one. It might be that your rocket it turning and oscillating because all the engines are over compensating for every twitch the craft makes in ascent.

Come on, guys. These are really good suggestions! - Said no kerbonaught... Ever.

Something you want to also look out for, after I created a launcher loosely based on Mr Manley's and made the same mistake: When you're starting your assent he stays at 100m/s vertical rather than the usual 200m/s vertical that most people use. As long as you pulse that mainsail when you reach about 95m/s vertical, and switch off the jets at around 20,000 ASL to avoid flameout and thereby inducing a spin, you should be fine.

I play 100% stock, simply because I like the extra challenge that that gives. Much as someone else said on here before me, while I am proud of not using any mods or config edits, I do not mind people using them. This game does not have a defined set of rules saying that it must be played 10% stock. Nor does it say that it cannot be, however. What people forget is that the one thing that each member of the human race has in common is that we're all different and therefore we all have different opinions on the best way to play this game. In my opinion, as long as the end user has fun playing it the way they want to then I don't see any problem.

Sorry, only just got back to this topic. If the RCS pack on a kerbal's suit wouldn't work, how about creating a purpose built rockets for it. Problems that I can see right away are, obviously, getting to the right orbit and speed but also the fact that the ship will probably be rather fragile and therefore explode when an attempt to push the debris out of the way is made. Again, thoughts?

What Karlus10 has said above is true. You only need one set of decouplers to attach any extras to your rocket. If you then want it to be more stable then you can use struts found on page 2 of the Structural and Aerodynamic tab. They'll break apart when you decouple so you don't need to worry about your boosters sticking to your rocket when the decouplers have been triggered.

Ah right. Gotcha. Cheers for the info! Now to actually get this plane to take off and not flip around...

Oh, yes, I understand the principle and why they are in the game even if they do nothing at the moment. I'm curious about the way that engines should be built in the future when they DO have a purpose. I mean, which of the 2 methods above should I use to design my engines when the intakes have a purpose?

Apologies to resurrect a dead thread, but while the above items don't do anything how do they work? Do you add them to the front of a fuel pod or to the back and then bolt an engine onto it? For example: [[==]> ___________ 1 2 3 1 = Intake 2 = Fuel Pod 3 = Engine or [==]]> ___ 1 2 3 1 Fuel Pod 2 Intake 3 Engine

Just brainstorming here, but could one push the debris out of orbit? Granted, that would be very hard, but I only use stock parts and it would be good to get a solution going. Now, my theory: Debris orbiting Kerbin at 100,000 meters altitude and moving at 200 mps. Spacecraft takes off from KSP to intercept the debris on the same trajectory, orbital heading and speed. A Kerbal then performs an EVA and, using RCS thrusters on his pack, he pushes the debris back to Kerbin upon which time they burn up in the atmosphere (see crash into Kerbin). The Kerbal then gets back into his rocket and moves to the next debris or returns to Kerbin. Thoughts?