Cirocco

I use a slightly modded version of KSP lods used are EVE, KER, procedural fairings. Since 0.25, the game has a tendency of crashing when I go on EVA when landed on a celestial body. When I hang from the hatch and drop teh kerbal, the game crashes as soon as he hits an obstacle. Don't have logs for it right now, will try to get them on here soon, but I was wondering if others had noticed this problem as well or if it is a known bug.

Others have said before me: my Kerman Line is 70 km, but I always aim for at least a 75 km orbit. Usually I go for an 80-85km orbit, just to leave me some room for orbital manouvering.

I very much like the look of that B2 as well. Might model some of my own designs that way.

My guess is he somehow got enough pressure and heat to locally initiate nuclear fusion, thus briefly turning the collision site into a miniature star.

When building spacestations or ships with multiple kerbal-holding parts (command pods or crew compartiments), I feel I absolutely must have them connected by parts that can plausibly be travelled through by kerbals (read: structural fuselages). Under no circumstance do I want to have them connected by fuel tanks or things like octagonal struts. I know it doesn't matter and you can use the new transfer kerbal function to hop between compartiments no matter what lies between them, but it just feels wrong to me to hop them across parts that obviously would not have passages in them. This means that my space stations are horribly inefficient and overweight, and on the occasions that I do need to use things like fuel tanks to connect living quarters because of structural reasons, I feel terrible about it for days after.

As stated by Thomas988, when two ships are docked, fuel can be transferred from any one tank to any other tank. Note that ther eis a difference etween fuel flow and fuel transfer. Fuel flow is the way fuel drains automatically from tanks as your engines are burning. This is limited to certain parts and can be bypassed by using external fuel ducts. I'm not an expert on fuel flow, but there's several really good tutorials on it in the tutorial seciton. Fuel transfer is always done manually by the method describd by Thomas988 here above. Fuel transfer can be done from any two connected tanks, no matter which parts connect them.

Oh wow, I LOVE the design on your station. Very reminiscent of starcraft science vessels. Totally stealing the design idea

Not entirely sure actually. I usually try to go for multi-purpose missions in one go (for example: I'm about to go to Duna in my main career save, but I want to also land and do science on Ike and put a sattelite in orbit around both Ike and Duna). The more I want to do, the more and heavier craft are needed and all the more stages are added. Let's limit ourselves to a simple, single-purpose Duna surface mission though. Get to Duna, plant flag, do all possible science on the surface and come back to Kerbin. 1st stage: launch. 2nd stage: booster separation, main engines are used for insertion. 3rd stage: decouple launch/insertion stage while still on a sub-orbital trajectory to avoid debris. Ignite circularization engine and complete orbit. Usually I try to use the same stage for cirularization and transer to avoid debris, but in the case of larger vesels, the transfer stage may not have the TWR to complete the circularization so an additional stage may be required. 4th stage: appolo-style lander and decoupling of the main command pod to parachute down to Kerbin upon return. so usually about 4 stages I guess. Puts me in with the majority of players it seems Of course this is assuming I don't go crazy and try to SSTO my way over to another planet without ever refueling.... I don't know why I keep doing that to myself...

Oh yeah, that's the guy who submitted himself to various amounts of G-forces to see what would happen, right? Yeah, Stapp was one of the only humans who needed to be reminded not to cross 18g, wich is at the limit of survivability. But hey, FOR SCIENCE amiright?

Well the landing site was codenamed "site J" if I'm not mistaken. So perhaps Jool site would be more apt? Jool is pretty iconic in KSP That being said, ESA is going for the iconic and historic vibe here, so I doubt they'll go with a video game reference

Ah, it always makes me feel quite honored when people imitate/steal/are inspired by my designs The sparrow went through a few small design changes since that screenshot. It now also packs a single RTG for backup electricity generation when making manouvres on the dark side of kerbin. I though about using a probe core as well and usually that is in fact the way I do rescue missions. In this case however, I just wanted to make an SSTO spaceplane with a very small wing surface which is why I went with the Mk II (because it has lift). It was only when I began testing it that I realised that it can perform very well as a rescue plane. Aaaaaaah, that'll be it. On such a small plane, the control surfaces are very close to the COM. Strange that it only happens on elevons and not on the canards though...

I made a lifting body (or almost anyway. It still needs a few mini-delta wings as control surfaces) http://imgur.com/4M2M4Vb I present to you: the sparrow. A two seater capable of getting into LKO with close to 2000 delta-V left if you made a good ascent profile. Took a surprisingly long time to get it right, such a small plane suffers a LOT from a shifting COM. It comes in at about 25000 funds, just under 8 tons and -if you manage to land her back on the airstrip- a full orbital flight will cost you less than 300 funds. Also has a surprisingly good glide profile. Seeing as it can carry two kerbals but only needs one to operate, this is my new go-to craft for rescue contracts Also discovered a bug. When I tried to put actual wing surface and elevons on that thing, for some dark reason the game decided to suddenly reverse my pitch controls...

somewhere around 3. I pack extra delta-V for emergencies, but I do use kerbal engineer to try and optimise my stages to keep costs down. I'm also a complete spaceplane nut, but I don't have all the required parts for good (read: cargo-hauling) spaceplanes unlocked yet. That being said, when I'm not flying a spaceplane I don't really care where my return vehicles end up upon kerbin return. Spaceplanes land on the runway, parachuted landers land wherever.

0.22 I think it was? whichever was the one where they added career mode. I remember jumping on board shortly after that was introduced.

1st landing on the Mun Every time I do a transfer between celestial bodies without going to the mapscreen and watch the EMT counter go into the month-year range, realising that in real life it would take even longer and be a million times more difficult to achieve. Just yesterday: did a mun mission, aimed for two objectives: 1) put a science sat in a polar orbit to transmit back data when a contract requests it and 2) plant a flag and come back to Kerbin. Only when I decoupled the sattelite in Mun orbit did I realise that I forgot communication equipment on both the lander as the sattelite as well as parachutes on the lander.... Quite the facepalm moment considering I've been playing for like a year... Thankfully I always bring spare delta-V, so Jeb had enough fuel for a powered landing on Kerbin. The sattelite was sent on an intentional crash course with Mun, I'll have to send up another one soon

huh, that's a pretty good idea. Might do that in the future.

Hi guys, after the release of 0.25 (yay!) I was messing around with the new spaceplane parts, trying to make a spaceplane with exclusively MkII parts and I ran into a bit of an annoying problem: I couldn't put any real torque near the center of mass. I love the fact that we now have LFO MkII tanks, but now I was faced with the fact that we don't have any MkII-shaped reaction wheels (other than the probe core maybe?). So I was wondering, how do you guys ensure you have enough torque on your spaceplanes to manouver in the vacuum of space? Do you just rely on the cockpit reaction wheels? Do you add the regular 1.25m tanks with their respective reaction wheels? Do you rely purely on RCS thrusters? Do you have another inventive solution? Please share!

Messed around with the new spaceplane parts, tried and confirmed some new ways to improve my spaceplane performance (aka how to abuse/optimise the airflow) and started a new career on medium difficulty. Had to restart because of a gamebreaking bug though: if you have a kerbal go on EVA from a landed Mk 1 pod (the black apollo-like one) and drop him to the ground (spacebar), there's a good chance you might get a black screen, possible gamecrash and should you restart, a dead kerbal. And because I absolutely do NOT want any kerbal fatalities in my program, I had to restart the career save. Thankfully I was only about half an hour or so in. Still, I'll be quicksaving at the start of every launch now, just in case.

the difficulty option and the fact that I now have spaceplane tanks that hold both liquid fuel and oxidizer. Thank GOD for that one.

haven't submitted anything yet, but I think I might suggest the "plane awesome" edition

Hello fellow forum-dwellers. With 0.25's new spaceplane parts rapidly approaching, I am once again feeling the spaceplane itch come up. So I decided to have a look at what is possible in terms of planes on other planets. More specifically, planets without oxygen in the atmosphere (So Duna and Eve). I have some experience with flying planes around on Duna, and the new spaceplane parts will help a lot there. However, I now also have my sights set on Eve. Hence my question: do any of you have experience flying planes around in Eve's atmospere? What are the main difficulties? Is it possible to maybe get orbit with one (note that it would NOT be an SSTO plane. I'm trying to think up designs that drop just about all tanks as they run out and ditch the wings on high altitude as well.) Given how stock aero works, I think that the super thick atmo should give me ridiculous amounts of lift as well (and ridiculous amounts of drag too)? I'd have to run it through kerbal engineer, but I think I might get away with a TWR quite a bit below 1 ? But yeah, all of this is pure conjecture and theorycrafting since I have absolutely zero experience with flying winged stuff on Eve. What are your experiences flying winged stuff around in the purple tartarus?

Thank you. It was a bot of a spur-of-the-moment thing but I do like how it turned out

I hate you so much right now

When we finally hit patch oh-point-twenty-five my space program will once again become alive. Once again my VAB will be overflowing with hope and glee. I will sing and dance and be oh so glad, right up to when it all explodes upon the launching pad. But to hell with those rockets I will then say, to the hangar we must be away! To fly them low, to fly them high, to see them soaring through the sky! I shall lose my sleep without a care, because I will see spaceplanes. Spaceplanes EVERYWHERE!

They don't know, the development of Unity 5 is completely out of SQUAD's control. But they have mentioned in the Squadcast that as soon as unity 5 is released, integrating it with KSP will immediately become top priority number 1 EDIT: Wahey, double ninja.