Camaron

I'm able to get a plane to safely drop three pods at KSC, but it's ugly, and it just seems to me that it would be way more logical to just land the plane in one piece. Who tears a perfectly good plane apart 200 feet over the runway anyway? That's just....backwards....

Sort of. It's tricky though. Low throttle, still fly the plane afterward, etc. Very touchy and many catastrophic results in testing Ill make something better for fly by drops reliably.

I outdid myself on this one. This idea was new to me. Self de-orbiting capsules.

Currently they don't jettison. The plane lands whole at this point. In fact I'm currently orbit-testing it. Didn't even revert after the test landing Just took right off. I had only spent a tiny bit of the jet fuel in the landing demo anyway. And this thing can just go straight up to the upper atmosphere by brute force. No need to gradually glide to elevation.

New version cleared that problem right up. In the landing test I actually messed up a bit and landed quite hard, but nothing was damaged. It took the rough landing like a champ. Cool angle Coming in to land Landed and unharmed

IT CAN! With the one design flaw that pops the lower two jets off on touchdown. :/ I've got a good idea on how to patch that up though. I'll be honest. I threw this together and it somehow ended up being the most stable Jetcraft I've ever made. It's also the fastest cruiser, and very maneuverable. The craft gently coasted onto the runway. The broken jets was just a positioning issue. This thing is mind-blowingly fast after the rocket fuel (for completing the orbit and deorbiting) is depleted! I'm gonna mess around with this a while and get it nice and awesome. Mainly fix that jet-breaking landing profile. Landing Landed Cruising toward KSC. Still accelerating hard at just over Mach 5, but my exit's coming up.

Oops. Jeb complains that craft is not a Jet. Insists some minor changes be made to make craft qualify as a Jet. Engineers make some small changes so that the craft is now a Jet.

Are you still in need of an SSTO Escape pod craft? Because I built this thing. It can achieve orbit pretty effectively. It's Drone-driven. With some jet engine padding it can land like a feather. Its super-easily controlled, and stable. Has huge room for error - you can fly it like a ******ed dog and still get it in orbit. (Following basic Jet-powered SSTO rules, of course). Carries four Kerbals at a time, and consists of a subtle 63 parts. Built with the assumption that it doesn't need to dock - just setpakc some kerbals to it and be on your way.

This is cool, but why is it a sticky?

Herro? Whackjob dead? Busy with life or cooking up monstrosities?

You could just stick a decoupler in between the booster and the dock, which will cut the crossfeed and let you not have to worry about the extra step.

I'm gonna go ahead and eat my words - I believe the solar panes WERE related to my my problem. I've rebuilt a new ship, named Kruphix IV, instead of Gravidon IV (after MTG's "God of Horizons". I never liked the "Gravidon" name anyway.) Among a number of other improvements, the solar panels have been mounted to a wider beam and the singles have been spaced out. I haven't tested extensively, but in my several attempts to provoke the kraken undocking this new craft, both in space and on the ground, it has remained rock-solid and exhibits no instabilities.

Colored lights are now a part of stock KSP. Right-click them while in the construction mode to tweak their color values which default to white but have full RGB controls.

Coulda just sent up a couple of pods. But. NAAAAH! That would be too easy. State of the Art Spaceplane. That's the ticket!

OH NO! You pulled into LKO FIRST? Good luck leveling it out now, that's best done as far out as possible where speeds are slow and can be easily manipulated. If you're determined to level it from LKO, its just gonna take a while. and probably additional launches for fresh tugs. Best of luck.

I feel like, in the future, you would gain a lot from using one of these fuel ferries to push Hexaflexagon to a higher orbit. Sinking something as big as Triskelion to low orbit can be a lot of extra effort. Overall that was a really cool adventure. Also, I'll be working on giving the next Titan enough kick to put itself into a better (higher) orbit from the start, without having to be dragged there, or use it's core engine's fuel. (Although the center column's purpose is just that - mobility) The last of my new PC's parts should get here by next weekend. Hopefully a little sooner.

I'm afraid it probably isn't the solar. Not only can I fold and unfold them normally up to the point where I undock, but also, previous versions of the craft (using the exact same solar wings) don't do this behavior either. I've also undocked with the ship folded up and SAS off. Still shreds. Maybe it is though. maybe its such a borderline case that it doesn't cause issues except in the "perfect storm" circumstance. Mybe nine in a row is barely ok - ten crosses the line. I don't know yet. Come to think of it, the to row might be colliding. One constant here is that the battery always snaps off the ship and remains stuck to the docking point. I've had similar oscillating implosions occur to a number of ships of radically different designs and sizes since the update. I believe some part of the physics update is responsible. I just never had Gravidon III do it before, and that makes me sad. This craft and it's brethren have been proving exceptionally capable among Ion landers up to this point. I'll review it's many variations and see if there isn't some critical difference between them that may have destabilized the latest model. Come to think of it, I think my Dres landing had one freak-out as well (albeit much less catastrophic), and its the same version. Could be some clues in that. In the past, struts are usually the solution to this physics bug, but struts could really hurt the performance of a lightweight like this one.

I'm loving the helmet reflection in the first Dragonfly photo. Surreal.

So, here's the deal. I'm orbiting low over Eeloo, preparing to try my landing - with a proven craft, I might add. A craft that, with minor variances, has landed on Dres, Moho, and both Kerbin moons. So, I go to try and undock the ship to head in for my landing, when the Kraken decides to strike, immediately ripping my ship apart. I have F5/F9'd at least ten different times, trying different things, but to no avail. I would love any tips onto how to solve this, and/or why it has never affected this ship before. Here's a frame-by-frame of the carnage. Dang! I was excited, too. Due to the amount of time investment needed to intercept Eeloo, I've never come here before. And now my ship is magically self-destructing, and that's sad.

Am I missing something? Why do so many people use these gold-orange Ring Tanks? I checked their numbers, and it seems they have a higher Container weight - to - Fuel weight ratio than anything else. Seems to me they would be nothing but detrimental. Or did I misread the specs?

Here are some Ion crafts on Dres and Moho. I took this Ion craft to two planets that were previously untouchable to Ion crafts to demonstrate what they can be capable of. My main design requirement with the Kruphix series is to carry the Lander Can along, as a true standalone spacecraft and lander manned by a Kerbal. I like these pics cause they show how drastically different the solar conditions are between the two planets. Also, they're really good pics anyway Kruphix III - Moho Edition Kruphix III on Dres Kruphix V is under development to reliably target Vall.

My vote is for the landers to make the trip if it's within their ability. Think how much fuel Triskelion would destroy circularizing, compared to a lander. Not to mention how much fuel it would burn breaking back out of said orbit, too. Worst case - So long as your lander can make it back to any orbit, Trisky can always go get it after that anyway.

I want to see you succeed.

Now wait just a minute!. I feel like you've made a bad engine choice here. I feel the 48-7S (the tiny round engine) would be more suitable- 50 better ISP and 50% more thrust, while only 10% heavier. Also, you should only need one generator on that ship. If you don't have the "weightless" cubic strut for engine mounting, the JR. Dock can be used like a mounting point, too. If you optimize the ship in these ways, I'm betting you could cut that second tank back off of it, and make your trip a LOT lighter. Here's a very similar lander I built to show you what I mean: http://imgur.com/a/CJVAZ With six of the 48-7S engines, I've used one of the fuel tanks to land on the moon from a 60k orbit and return to it afterward. I used much smaller RCS tanks as well. your RCS should not be running at any time except docking, really, so I didn't use a speck of the 120 this craft had. (It's a landing demo, not a docking demo). One Generator keeps the craft alive just fine because engines generate power anytime they're running anyway. Weight savings and efficiency are vital for a good lander. Also, on the side, I recommend NEVER putting your RCS equipment on a diagonal to your control source if it can be helped - lots of Monoprop will get wasted bursting at a 45 degree angle to the intended movements, and conflicting with itself.

How are you running quad-LV-N's? They melt when I do that.