Camaron

I've been experimenting with SSTO crafts that function as rockets on ascent, and as planes to land. It's trickier than I predicted but here are some attempts. Basically, I love the re-usability concept of SSTO's, hate the half-hour ascent and weak payload capacity. If you stay under 300 parts, your plane will probably not lift much, if you try to lift heavy with jets, I hope you can pilot a slideshow. So I thought, what about roakcet style ascents on raw power but with enough plane features to land? Here's my first attempt, which is technically successful, but nearly impossible to survive re-entry and landing. And here's the beginning of my 2nd-gen attempt. Probably wont finish it, since I decided to change direction again. This is why my Kerbin looks like Saturn at times. My newest idea involves just padding the landing with chutes and airbrakes, because plane landings are REALLY Time consuming. Re-entry heating is a jerk to this guy - it takes some finesse to get this anywhere near the ground in one piece. Also, true rockets lift WAY more, WAY more easily. This one, for example, 240 Tons to orbit on a "recoverable" rocket with just over 200 parts (will probably have around 250 when finished.) This one doesn't succeed just yet. What can I say, other than "WIP"

I keep my copy of KSP etched into my soul!

He isn't the only one! I'm still working on this one, trying to make it more reliable on the landing strip. So far I've only successfully landed safely once. Launches like a rocket, lands like a plane, takes 80 tons along for the ride, on the power of three mammoths. It DOES have LVN's but unfortunately they translate to less range than you might wish for, since the darn thing is still over 150 tons completely emptied. The curse of an SSTO, is that shedding tanks is against the rules. The seven jets on this craft are purely to allow it enough flying capability to land. That plane is spectacular, though. Thanks to partscount and structural issues, I wouldn't even try to make a jet-fueled plane that size!

Wow what graphics mods are those?

Din't buy a 28-thread xeon for gamin', friend. (but hopefully KSP will benefit enormously from it, regardless). Also, Intel has seven six-cores and an 8-core in it's i7 group. Also, I meant "threads" when I said "cores" in my previous post.

Gaming computers in late 2015 typically have at least eight threads. Some of us, however, have a bit less sanity than others and.... Well maybe I bought this chip last week.

Someone said "multithreaded CPU Physics" and I'm just like.... "Well, I guess I'll play pokemon for a while till 1.1 comes and then see how that Physics thing works out on a Xeon E5 2695 V3."

I don't think so, look at the rear control surfaces. He's almost certainly using tweak or procedural.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_main_engine Holy hell, you weren't kidding. The real one's putting KSP engines' specs to shame! 1,859 kN, with ISPs of 452 vac and 366 asl. Later upgraded and capable of producing 2,280 kN. Only weighed in at 3.5 tons to accomplish that. That's roughly four times the power of a Skipper!

That actually might be a good thing. If the nosecone is adapted as a structural adapter, maybe that's exactly what should happen. How could I test something like that? Isn't a part's drag just a set number in the config files?

(EDIT) Realized after posting that it isn't quite in the right forum. Mods please feel free to move if you choose). I've been modelling and texturing for ages. I've also been severely underwhelmed by existing nosecones for ages (Both stock and the mod ones I've encountered.) The idea with my nosecone: Why cant it also double as a structural converter part? All I need is correctly placed attach nodes for each of the other sides, at the exact height in the cone where the radius perfectly matches that size standard. Placing one of these would then offer you an attachment point at each of the levels where a smaller part would perfectly fit. I have successfully not only created a nosecone that achieves this, but also did it with a perfectly bullet-shaped form that actually resembles what a real nosecone often is. There is some standoffto make sure the last rim of polygons is purely vertical so that the cone merges perfectly with a cylinder of the right size below it, and some extra polygon investment at the point to create that small roundoff a nosecone should have. The model is efficient, and only takes up around 400 polys. (And yes, I can see that most stock nosecones probably only take up around 120.) I want to hear what you guys have to say about this idea. If I go fully through with this concept, there will be four other versions with base sizes representing the rest of the sizes, including the mod-only 1.875m "standard" which seems too easy not to include, since its only one more model to cover it. The blue blocks are just being used like tags so I dont lose track of which edges are the connector sized edges. And here's how it looks without the lines and dots and reference blocks. (Not textured, but it will probably just be an off-white gentle noise. maybe not even noise. it's smooth, painted metal, after all. That's about as easy as texturing can be. If the general people want it perfectly KSP matched, it wont even be reflective. .......Not to mention stock currently lacks 3.75m nosecones entirely...

If its anything like the way it was when I tried it out, that program isn't automated. Its more like a tool with the necessary things available to sort of play the game the same way you would anyway, just digitally. You have to tell it what number to set the life to, change the number of tokens yourself, tap the appropriate stuff on your own. It doesn't have the rules built in, its like the TABLE in a real world scenario. It doesn't really do anything for you beyond holding the cards, tokens, and dice off the floor. It will hide and draw deck cards and stuff for you though, and if it doesnt have networking, you can easily run it over skypes desktop share or something of that sort and have it work as intended that way.

3) Spacepilot.

My names are all pretty much decided and are iterated in Series. My Fuel stations are all the Antares Series. My Extremely heavy fuel stations are Andromeda Series. Modular landers built as planes are the Terranova Series. Large Drilling ships are the Cygnus Series. SSTO's and interplanetary ships are the only thing that get individualized names instead of serial ones, except for the ones which classify as a Terranova.

I'm currently on a 660 Ti. I do recommend it. Great card, and if you're looking on ebay, great price. As for the many Computers in my house: 1) My personal Gaming System: nVidia 2) My Weak business-only Laptop: Intel 3) My Roommate's main PC: nVidia 4) My Roommate's Macbook Pro: nVidia 5) The four rendering systems in my living room: Some sort of built in mainboard graphics. Maxwell or something. 6) The low-mid gaming PC in my living room used solely for emulators: AMD (But soon to be upgraded to my 660 Ti when mine is swapped for a 760 Ti after my roommate kicked out his 760 Ti for twin 770's.) 7) The spare graphics cards in my drawers: all nVidia AMD cards will often exhibit behaviors that are only caused by cutting corners, like when they lag to bits over Photoshop brush tool for some reason. Other than the fire-spitting 400 series, nvidia also generally stays cooler, and typically performs around the same in games for a bit less power. There's some big buzz going around about AMD's newest graphics advancement which may very well be amazing new tech, and possibly turn the tables, or at least turn up the pressure on nVidia for once, but I haven't had a chance to personally try out AMD's latest.

Probably been asked before, many times....sorry. In a recent update, Jet engines have been altered so that they consume fuel evenly across the entire craft....which is great for those who couldn't build a balanced plane, but now it's causing me a real problem. I'm building a plane that is a hybrid, like any SSTO out there, and the Jet engines will invariably drag huge clods of perfectly-ratioed rocket fuel away from tanks that don't belong from them. So the short question is: How the heck can I get the Jet engines to stop eating rocket fuel and stay on their own diet? - - - Updated - - - It's worse than that, actually - its following the decoupler-counting mechanism of the Xenon and monoprop. This was a terrible idea. How the heck am I supposed to control the Jet Fuel like this?? The only solution I can see within stock is to connect the Jet Fuel into the Rocket System which is a really lousy solution. Anyone know of a mod where I can either reset the Jet Fuel to old logic, or gain control of fuel tanks through the action groups?

Moving to the location of your choice is always a thing you could do. As for the upcoming multithreading, I have a bunch of PC's in my house ranging from a Dual core with H/T to a ten-core with H/T, so I will definitely be benchmarking KSP to some extent.

For anyone hoping to access Asteroid Day Mod, which I've been using since it dropped, Here's my copy. https://www./?98j3hb7ce27yz3p

Not me at the moment... My personal system runs 16GB with an i7 5820K and a GTX 660 Ti. But at one point about four years ago I had a twin-processor system with 96GB, but that's obscene. I only did that for a few days just because I could, before selling that hardware off because it was merchandise from the start. To me, even though I could easily afford it, running a $7,000 PC is stupid and wasteful. I gave my best friend an Intel QF7D. That thing is one hell of a CPU. Ten cores with hyperthreading, and he has it locked at 3.4 GHz with all 20 threads running.

Still gong four hours later. I messed around a bit with timewarp and quickload. Ended up with a shorter stick. I was wondering if I shouldn't try to cause this same thing to happen again, with a minimalist "Ship" attached to it to send a Kerbal on a long journey that denies physics.

Seems to me that testing launch clamps is space is totally legit. I don't see why we're having problems. (To be perfectly honest I have no idea how I caused this to happen) Next stop, The Mun!

No. It wasn't. That thing is currently over 1100 parts and will probably push near 2,000 when finished. I mean....I got this much resolution for the gif by pressing F1 a bunch. It isn't a video capture.

WRONG! It's "Z, T, Space." Noob. (Joking around, obviously.)

Just... you know. THIS. Never mind that the payload ship is over 9,000 tons. That stage separates with a ring of fire!

Just using massive rings of fire to drop boosters during a test launch of "King Nerva", a 9090-ton Liquid Fuel Tanker.