AnalogAddict

It was the first run, look through your Science Archives and you'll see where some experiments (not limited to the Goo Canister) do not have a full return value. Its interesting to say the least.

How does one maximise the gain on returning science containers. Take note of the Recovery value: 50 - yet the bar is approximately 75% full. Is there a way to up the value of returning science to its full potential?

For Kerbin, you might want to stay above 34km(dependent on drag of your craft) to avoid dropping like a rock to the surface.

Lower Jester 4's orbit from AP. You'll see the Orange and Purple "closest approach" indicators move around the planet as your orbital period decreases you'll catch up to your target, you should get an encounter with low amounts of delta-v. Conversely, you can raise Jester 4's orbit, increase your period and allow the debris to catch up to you -> from their positions, I would wager this move to be more delta-v intensive as you will increase the amount of relative speed to your target at your closest approach.

Kudos sir, I enjoyed the read.

I've had pieces and parts get literally trapped in 3d space. When you try to take off the piece of the craft literally stays hovering x meters above the launch pad. Each time this happens to _me_, its a 110% chance that a strut was placed inside of some object. I find that its best to rebuild the offending section of your ship to ensure good new code on the .craft file. As this is a beta game I suppose it could be any number of things occurring which are breaking your structural integrity.

Definitely if you're sitting still with brakes engaged then it may take a few seconds before they "disengage" and you begin to roll. I've never had the gear snap off, just had my plane tip over anchored at the forward landing gear.

Hey, take a look at this post and video. The video goes to orbit 3 times so you should be able to work up a valid flight path. There is some valuable information on flying SSTOs, tips, tricks, plus a couple DLs for working planes. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/44759-Nobunaga-Interceptor-quick-agile-spaceplane

Hmmm, I never looked at it like that. Perhaps you're on to something here! My newer thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/44759-Nobunaga-Interceptor-quick-agile-spaceplane?highlight=nobunaga

I use Open Broadcaster Software http://obsproject.com/ to record video. I use Cyberlink PowerDirector http://www.cyberlink.com/products/powerdirector-ultra/features_en_US.html?&r=1 for finishing and what have you. I think the Deluxe edition is 50 USD and the Ultra is around 80. By far, this is the fastest rendering I've found for the price, probably due to their implementation of OpenCL.

Oda Nobunaga - a great leader and military strategist. I figure he deserves a line of strategic ships. Thanks for the compliments gents.

Its very delicate when it comes to flameouts, monitoring speed I've found is most important. I'll try and re-tool the flight plans for a less aggressive approach, I'm sorry you're having problems. @ Sauron, perchance I'm investigating multiple solutions for small SSTOs.

I've added the Nobunaga The Nobunaga Interceptor - a tiny spaceplane. Download Link: Nobunaga Interceptor

Ah I apologize, by straight to the moon I figured you meant a direct burn from the surface of kerbin to the mun surface, which could be accomplished during that period. Yes I can see how it depends on the rocket, fortunately for me any mun bound craft I've ever built makes it out of the atmosphere in time. I frequently align the moon before launch and burn directly there, observing the oberth effect as well as kerbal-proper ascent guidelines.

Pm me Clayton. We shall discuss further if you'd like. I find it difficult to articulate what I'd like to say without writing a novel in a forum post. Sorry for the ambiguity.

If I'm not mistaken, the moon should be right near the horizon. For instance, Day 0 Hour 0 of a new game has the moon in perfect alignment to burn directly there. I say, start a new game, observe the positions, profit.

Updated the challenge to be more specific... Any takers?

I see impressive things come from folks of all ages in this game. Earlier today a post was made about a 1st or 2nd year kid who stayed after class to ask his instructor about space planes and where center of mass and lift should be. The only challenge I can present to anyone playing KSP (any myself) is to overcome your own ego, laze, doubts, and frustrations. Maybe take a lesson from the aforementioned; seek assistance.

The simple answer is: Its a long game of trial and error, launching the craft, save file editing for half or quarter-full tanks, and multiple flights at various altitudes at each of those fuel levels. If you disable ASAS you will see the nose pitch up or down and that tells me if the CoL is ahead or behind the CoM. Eventually you'll begin to see where your fuel needs to be in relation to your engines which is where the theory for this craft came about - I wanted to use the nukes to counter balance some of that weight from the turbofans when the fuel tanks were empty.

That works as well! I'll check it out.

I'm very interested in this, and seems you take the great care and diligence designing a useful space plane. I too employ a methodology in design to ensure the craft performs well during any phase of flight. PM me the video when you get it up if you would, please sir.

My large rockets always weigh in from 550~800T and depending on the mission the part count goes from 160 for a refueler, all the way to 750 for some intricate landers / rovers. My space planes, however, are small efficient littler boogers. Usually they weigh in around 20T and have 50 parts.

My spaceplane entry, from the runway to orbit and back... three times without refueling. Video available here. Getting to orbit three times without refueling. Image Album.

Hence the challenge begins!

Amended the Challenge; Get to orbit as many times as possible in your SSTO spaceplanes.