hebdomad

Ok, so it's been a while since I've made a spaceplane. Honestly, since I heard about the new aerodynamics, I've been waiting for 1.0 So here is a sneak peek to what I've been working on.

Replies: 3,224 Views: 141,024 you tell me

https://youtu.be/1Df-LvrRcEo

Replies: 3,180 Views: 136,982

Replies: 2,682 Views: 122,753 GO GO GO for over 9000!

Let's hope he doesn't start trolling the hype train.. quick more hype coal so he can't catch us!

People will read this thread one day... and wonder if an actual train was driven?

O_O sounds about right

Thought I might post here before the Hype Train DOSes the forum...

No, but it is worth the extra challenge...

... Or at least that's what I'd write as a headline. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy Lockheed Martin, makers of the billion dollar money pit the F-35, as well as cyber security experts, and wave tidal energy plants manufacturers have developed a nuclear reactor that can fit on the back of a truck. While the US navy have enjoyed their 'portable' nuclear reactors in their boats for years, maybe, just maybe we will see nuclear reactors take to the skies like Russia and the USA did in the 1950s and 60s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear-powered_aircraft Just imagine. Being able to fly without refueling for ten years... of course there would be some slight hazards that might be problematic. But hey! carbon free air transport is exactly what we need right now! http://www.technologyreview.com/view/513066/we-need-nuclear-powered-airplanes-not-solar-powered-ones/

The 70,000 ton figure was from the Swinburne University Facebook page. I think the 13,000 ton figure is more realistic... That said, has anyone being able to calculate the mass of these rocks yet?

An Asteroid ( 2014RC ) just past above Geostationary orbit above New Zealand... Luckily the 70,000 tonne asteroid, travelling at 10km per second did not hit anything... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-08/earths-close-shave-with-an-asteroid/5726692

Ok... So It's been a while since I've entered this challenge. I also thought I'd do something more interesting and challenging. Presenting the Ve Gemini. Transport two Kerbals to low Kerbin Orbit in complete pressurised luxury while using less than a standard tank of fuel. Efficiency, luxury, remote control and self destruct capable... oh, ignore that last point. Just don't hit the stage button too much. Anywho. Here's the video of the first Mk1 Test flight. And here is the craft file for those who want it (limited time only). https://www.dropbox.com/s/2swnc2e5e21f77d/V%20Gemini.craft Part count = 38 Total mass = 5.89t Crew = 2

As this is a newbie friendly challenge, there is no scoring as such... Just completing the mission is an achievement. I will add bonus objectives later for those wanting a bit more of a challenge...

We need a test pilot for this new Spaceplane. That's where you come in. Your mission if you choose to accept it. Download the spaceplane from the link below. https://www.dropbox.com/s/v8pqtjjytmguryd/Challenge%20Craft%20One.craft Fly it to orbit (at least 70km Apoapsis/Periapsis) and back to Kerbin. Post photos and or video of your achievements. You may alter the staging of this aircraft. But you may not alter the parts. Parts are allow to fall off during flight if it is deemed necessary to achieve the mission. Good luck... P.S ... aircraft might have some strange handling qualities, but I'm sure you can figure that out...

Oh I just put this little Jool Mission together not too long ago... Uploaded with ImageShack.com My PC could not handle the extra probes, so I just took what I had... Visited three out of five moons and took a dip in Jools atmosphere... A previous mission using a fifth of the fuel made it to Duna and Ike before landing and refuelling at Dres.

After posting my own thread on the topic and reading others, there seems to be a general consensus that science data should be transmittable/storable, and samples storable/transferable. There should also be mechanics that allow for long term space stations to be viable. Hopefully squad hears us out on this one.

When 0.22 landed it was like a breath of fresh air. Even for a KSP veteran like myself, going back to basics was challenging again, but there was a few things that need improving in my opinion. Now this thread is not about discussing the tech tree or what parts go where, but the manner in which you collect science. Science as you might know is collected through crew reports, surface samples, and running experiments. However it's the limited potential of the science bays that have me worried about the long term, more specificity the 'mid game' and 'end game' scenarios in which these parts are used. While starting out, you only have the option to get crew related science done. EVA's, surface samples, crew reports and the like. This section is mostly fine as it promotes exploration. The real issues come about when individual experiments roll out. After running the experiment, you have the option to send the data and re-run the experiment, or recover the experiment. With my limited time with 0.22, it seems there is no advantage in returning experiments, even with the loss of data factor, as you can just re-run the experiment and send it again. There is also the amount of different experiments that you can run. There are seven experiments you can run. Total. Compare that to the International Space Station that has hundreds of experiments running at this very moment. With the limited about of experiments available, it makes space stations inefficient science wise. One single rocket launch can take care of most if not all the science available in low Kerbin orbit. At this stage, gaining science is like mining. You go to one location, squeeze all the science out you can and then never return. This is bad for replayability. On the subject of science drying up, all flights of significant duration should be rewarded with some science. I can see a lot of new players getting stuck not being able to unlock new parts while having depleted all the science in areas in which they can reach. Players should be rewarded even if their rockets explode mid flight. I believe that what needs to be done is that... Science units need to have a limited if not single use only. > A soil sample experiment might be able to run five times with a bonus for different biomes and distance apart, as well as a value based on how much of that soil you've collected. A crystal or mystery goo experiment should only be able to be run once. Experiments should never really return zero science unless they have been over done to a ridiculous level. Generic science bays. > Surly the Kerbals in the labs have more than seven experiments. A one time experiment that takes a few days to complete would make space stations viable. The same return or transmit mechanics would work fine here also. Science needs to be transferable between ships via docking. > People want to live out their Apollo dreams. Being able to transfer science documents while docked would do wonders. Now I've listed some problems and some solutions. What I've not covered is the end game section of KSP. I am still waiting to see how Squad implement the missions section of Kerbal Space Program. Will there be missions on every body and biome? Will there be generic missions like launching weather satellites, colonising planets or building space stations? I guess we will have to wait until 0.23 ( or 1.0? ) to find out. (note this is a rushed first draft will come back later to fix spelling and grammar )

Yes. While de-orbiting stuff near my orbital constructions. Note to self. Make sure your orbital tug is facing AWAY from your space station / interplanetary mission before de-orbiting. Also docking at high speed it not good either....

After a multi year, multi landing, interplanetary mission.... Doing a soft landing at KSP (with rockets only), nose first. Because landing the right way up is for chumps...

You don't need THAT much fuel to get to Duna. You should be able to do it using about three orange tanks of fuel for a three Kerbal mission.

So you want to land smoothly? What you want to do is line up the runway and come in nice and slow. Throttle down to near zero pull up a little to keep the nose in the air. Remember to lower landing gear. You should be flying so your nose is pointing slightly above the horizon yet you are still losing altitude. Keep your rate of descent nice and slow until your wheels touch the tarmac. If you are dropping to fast, either throttle up or pull back on the stick slightly (raise the nose). Once you hit the ground. Zero out throttle, activate any drag-chutes and or reverse thrust and tap the breaks until you come to a complete stop. Kill all engines. Disembark. Party.

I put some NERVA engines on a tri-coupler as my final stage of a rocket... Instead of separating nicely it blew the whole mission up sending the capsule on a rather sub-orbital flight.

I programmed my own orbiting simulator before playing KSP.... Ok so it was MUCH simpler than KSP, but you could orbit stuff... (check it out here, http://hebdomad.jimdo.com/game-prototypes , it should be called OrbitV905. download and press F1 for help ) There is also nothing in the Kerbal system I've not touched or landed probes on. I've only got to return crews from Tylo, Eve, Laythe, and Eeloo. I'm designing missions for them now, but I'm waiting on campaign mode before I get back into KSP.