purple100

Does the EVA pack have enough delta-V to do that, though? Won't you just run out of fuel before you get going fast enough?

Delete the file "MechJeb.cfg" in the "PluginData/MuMechLib" folder. It will reset all MechJeb settings and restore windows to default positions.

Rotatrons with decouplers for wheels? Interesting. Does it work okay?

That should only happen if you didn't install MuMechLib.dll in the right place. Double check that you put it in "Plugins".

Those are links from before the forum migrated to vBulletin. I'm guessing that's why they don't work.

The reference does not mention concatenation because it is a feature of Lua, the language the scripts are written in, not Autom8. A guide to using Lua can be found here: http://www.lua.org/pil/

Okay, so I modified an MK16 parachute to partially deploy at very high altitude with a drag of 10. It kept the rocket in retrograde orientation without SAS assistance and allowed me to use the engine to land. Looks like that's the best solution available at the moment.

My center of mass is too high up, then? Hmm, that presents a problem. This thing is coming down with the top tank empty and the bottom 1/2 tank about 25% full.

Behavior persists even after removing the landing apparatus. The simple configuration of command module + tank + 1/2 tank + engine starts turning at 25 km and swings like a pendulum.

The tanks were the simplest solution I could think of to extend the range of landing legs, but they do contribute a fair amount of drag. I'll see what I can do.

I have a rocket with a lander designed for touchdown on Mun with a powered return to Kerbin. Once it drops into lower atmosphere, at 30ish km, it flips over and points nose-down and resists all attempts to change pitch. This is a problem because I can't use the engine's thrust to slow it down anymore. Why does it do this, and how do I design the vessel to avoid the problem?

r4m0n, could you please add vertical and horizontal acceleration to the Surface Info module?

Tip: Don\'t use more than 3 tanks of fuel per engine.

Try this out: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=15207.0 I\'m sure you can come up with some clever way to get the flag upright

Interesting. Definitely needs to be fixed. I thought it was just the aerospike that was imbalanced.

Delete the MechJeb.cfg file in the PluginData/mumechlib/ folder.

The toroidal aerospike engine weighs less than the LV-T30 and LV-T45, produces more thrust, has a better thrust to weight ratio. 1. Is there any reason to use the LV-T30 at all, then? 2. Does the gimballing of the LV-T45 outweigh the increased weight (1.5 vs aerospike\'s 1.0) and decreased TWR (133.33 vs 250)?

After a little experimentation with some small designs, I have one pared down to 2 full fuel tanks, 1 aerospike engine, and a 1-man command module. MechJeb\'s ascent autopilot can take this up to a 71 km circular orbit. Return is performed with a tiny retrograde burn to lower the periapsis to ~8 km, followed by engaging MechJeb\'s landing autopilot 'land' button at about 15 km above Kerbin. Landing is fully powered - no need for parachutes. There\'s not much margin for error in terms of fuel usage. I\'d love to see a smaller/lighter design if there is one. No craft file provided - it\'s more trouble to download and install than it is to just build it

I really like that angling of the engines. That\'s cool. Nice that it can still fly okay.

One rule I follow is to never have more than 3 full fuel tanks on top of one standard engine. I find that it accelerates slowly and wastes fuel.

Past discussions have concluded that you will be safe at 4 kilometers, potentially even less.

I use 'hours per dollar' as my value metric for games, with exceptions here and there. A retail DVD game should give me at least 1 hour per dollar to make it worth my money - otherwise, I\'ll go broke and run out of games to play. Kerbal Space Program has probably given me 3 hours per dollar and counting. What a deal!

Having an SAS module on debris does not allow you to control it with WASD. You need a command module to do that.

3 or 4 kilometers is sufficient to avoid hitting any mountains, I think.

After comparing some of my rockets to other designs, I decided to follow one of Brian Eno\'s Oblique Strategies: 'Discover the recipes you are using and abandon them.' My goal here was to create a series of rockets built upon each other, with different mission goals, and with a crapton of fuel to spare. So here they are. L-Series 100 lander - Suitable for Mun landing/return and safe landing on Kerbin. KO-100 orbiter - Carries the L-Series 100 lander. Capable of Kerbin orbit and de-orbit with no space debris. Also appropriate for delivery of satellites or small space station modules. MM-100 Mun mission system - Incorporates the KO-100, capable of delivering it intact with plenty of fuel to Mun or Minmus. Landing would require some legs, but it is possible. It may even have enough fuel to return to Kerbin orbit without even touching the lander. Again, these are not designed for efficiency. The goal was to over-build them so you have more fuel than you need without making the design complex.