mystifeid

Nice one, but we're using Mechjeb now?

You don't need the KAL-1000. Lots of possibilities. Here is one: 1. Make sure you have assigned keybindings for the custom axis groups in the settings. Not sure about now, but they used to be unassigned by default. Look under Input -> Vessel -> Axis Actions. For each custom axis group you assign two keys - one to increment and another to decrement. Custom axis groups can come in handy for other things besides prop aircraft. I tend to use numberpad keys: Custom axis group 1 - "/" and "*" Custom axis group 2 - "8" and "9" Custom axis group 3 - "5" and "6" Custom axis group 4 - "2" and "3" Custom axis keys also respond to the use of fine control (caps-lock) whereas, for example, the throttle keys do not - or at least they didn't in the past. 2. It used to be possible to disengage the engines in the SPH/VAB but at the moment it appears they are engaged when launched no matter what but you may still want to assign an action group to engage/disengage. Looking at a prop aircraft, these are the assignments - Custom action group 1 - Toggle motor engaged Custom action group 2 - Toggle motor power (full/zero torque) Custom action group 3 - Toggle deploy (of prop blades) Custom action group 5 - Toggle motor direction Custom axis group 1 - Deploy angle (of prop blades) Custom axis group 2 - RPM limit Custom axis group 3 - Torque limit Takeoff procedure is simply (engage SAS), toggle motor power (key 2), toggle deploy (key 3). By default the deploy angle of prop blades now seems to be 60° but you may often want to pre-set a higher angle in the SPH/VAB - especially for a heavy VTOL craft. As the craft gains speed through the air you will need to decrease the deploy angle of the blades to continue increasing speed. It will often be necessary to do this to get a rolling aircraft to lift off. You will need to continue matching deploy angle with speed to prevent the aircraft from falling out of the sky and your speed is affected by things other than the engines/props, such as AoA and air density. The corollary is that increasing the deploy angle works nicely to slow an aircraft on landing approach. There are a lot of possibilities when it comes to choosing prop types, numbers of blades and engine type/size. You will need to perform some experimentation for each craft you build to find the optimum design. Note that for each engine type, it is possible to change the motor size in the SPH/VAB. This affects the cost, power, mass and ec/fuel consumption. A forward facing engine with clockwise rotation (default) requires blades with inverted deploy direction (not default) to move forward. Using pairs of counter rotating engines tends to lead to easier control and increased power/speed. The biggest irritation I find is the necessity of keeping at least one PAW open - to see the blade deploy angle and sometimes another PAW to see engine rpm/torque. There is probably a lot more that can be said and others will doubtless have their own take on the use of the robotic engines.

It's the same with this one when it gets down to the last rocket - it just sounds anti-climactic.

Here are 103 Vectors. No Kraken drive.

Same.

It does tickle...now I've put it there and forgotten to ask - did I do everything? Is it ok to use it?

Cute. How good are you with transparent backgrounds? RUsureaboutthis4 with a launchpad dV of 1154 m/s. Possibly one of the more ludicrous rockets I've made with an ascent profile to match. Took 5 successful launches before I recovered 2581 to stay under 5000 cost. Mission cost - 4590.

Lemme get rid of this one. The Bootcamp Duo. I'm hoping it does enough to earn the Silver Claw, Pearl Escutcheon, Onyx Eyes, Crossed Swords, Vermilion Heart and 1st class Insignia. Initial cost of 9342 less 5000 recovered = 4342 mission cost.

Sats need probe cores.

It looks like the screenshot shows 1162. I can't say this is what happened but I sometimes have the launchpad dV drop by 1 m/s after reverting to launch. Just in case, here is a slightly different RUsureaboutthis3 with a launchpad dV of 1160. Mission cost is 4239. In the beginning of the video are two launchpad screenshots. The first is taken after reverting to launch and shows 1159. The second is the initial launch and shows 1160. I can imagine fixing this would be a nightmare and since few people do create maneuver nodes in atmosphere any fix would be a low priority. Also, I can't imagine this is not known about.

It seems like it needs to be above 70km before it works properly. Someone else can maybe give a better explanation and the cause but I just ignore it until I hit 70km.

The RUsureaboutthis2 makes orbit with a launchpad dV of 1163m/s then deorbits using (the last) 1m/s. Mission cost was 4806. In deference to the OBC committee, a video report is tendered.

Looked like it but it's not that important and given your answer would have been done without realizing it. Seeing the above, this was the main gist of the query. I understand. It can be hard sometimes to remember which are the dlc parts and I can forgive anyone who forgets because I always do. Handy bookmarks: Stock parts Making History parts Breaking Ground parts (use the table at the bottom of the page)

So, are DLC parts allowed now?

Jool SSTA - out and return - has been done. Look further down the page for a thread called "How close can you get to Jool." Watching that video may spoil this challenge for you.

357 Mk1 command pods in a group landing and formation descent. (The recorded video was more than two and half hours long. A large amount has been removed and the rest is played at 8X speed. It may still seem slow.) Not an all out assault but a decent nudge on the number of pods. Pods - 357 (@ 11 pts) Parts - 1610 Cost - 732499 Separation - 0.2081km Adjusted Cost - 38.82 Adjusted Parts - 0.8531 Mistakes were made. Not a great score.

Yeah maybe. In any case I think this challenge is fast devolving into farce. (My fault too). Could be time to move on.

You saw the stripped down version in the AIRS challenge but the original is still my favorite thing. It was used for a polar circumnavigation of Kerbin for which an amphibious vehicle is essential. On the water it is a pretty ugly boat but at 50m/s it has a range of more than 300km. It can climb near vertical inclines such as those guarding the polar icecaps from the sea and when given the right conditions can travel reasonably fast. Drills, a small ISRU and RTG's make it self-sufficient.

On the other end of the scale, I'll see those 150 pods and raise you 5. Along with a 31 Rhino SSTO and a 1098m separation on the ground. Something bizarre is happening with the middle platform. All The other pods land in a pretty tight bunch but those 5...all I can think of is to leave that platform vacant. Plus things are starting to happen in slo-mo and I don't think I've got the patience to go any bigger right now. 155 Mk1 pod group landing.

Well, I thought a smaller basket would be the way to go, so this entry is even more underhanded than the last. 2 pods, 1.7m separation, 3043 cost, 12 parts. Adjusted cost - 0.2587 Adjusted parts - 0.0102 The first time I did this, I got a 1.5m separation but the goal was less than 1m. I suppose I could have left the second one on top but that didn't really seem right.

Hell's Handbasket. I love it.

Wow, not what I was expecting either. Originally I tried keeping the platform as the active craft. When that worked, I made Jeb's pod active when I staged the pods and that was what was shown in the video. It was hands off after 51km. Anyway, the platform had stuff attached to it that obviously isn't needed and which inflates the cost a bit but I think I'll just leave it at that. I'll also leave the engine, fuel tank and decoupler in the part count and cost. 55 parts with a cost of 17128 and separation of .0058km. Sooo - Adjusted cost - 1.1038 Adjusted parts - 0.0354

9 pods landed 5.8m apart? Wait...I can hear something coming...yikes, it's a rule change!

No idea how new this is but there appears to be a chance to quicksave (multiple times) following takeoff at between 300m and 400m. After that a minimum of 500m AGL seems to be a cutoff for quicksaving. But there may be others.

Yeah I probably should have put a strut around that outside ring. I was bit disappointed there were a few rogues.