GoSlash27

I would definitely wait for more info before passing judgement on the fairings. Best, -Slashy

You know... I'm betting that we can find a way to make these fairings work properly. Maybe even clamshell. KSP players are resourceful that way Am I to take it that spaceplane parts will survive reentry by default? They'd kinda have to... Best, -Slashy

Sam Johnson, FAR would definitely break the challenge, at least from the perspective of competition with stock entries. ion gliders operating in FAR have lower drag. Ghostbuzzer, Since the round-8 has been granted a reprieve, I won't bother continuing and documenting my "protest flight" using Starwhip's tank. Thanks to both of you for helping to save the round-8! Best, -Slashy

Starwhip, I'm not planning on running that tank dry on this run, but I'm sure it's fine. Best, -Slashy

Agreed. We should all keep in mind that the folks at Squad aren't in the business of needlessly upsetting their customers. Had they known that the Round-8 was this popular, I highly doubt they would've taken it away and announced it like they did. I am confident that this will all be sorted out, so there's no need to get confrontational about it. Best, -Slashy

Well... the Oscar is pretty much the same size as the current "big" xenon tank, so it would be pointless. Best, -Slashy

Just goofing off. It barely flies, but I'll see if I can limp it to the island. Thanks Starwhip! -Slashy

Actually, it's worse than that; I put this in the wrong thread It's supposed to be in the "green energy challenge" which, in the spirit of solidarity for the Round-8, was expanded to include Starwhip's tank. Sorry for the confusion, -Slashy

This would probably be the "best" option, but it would require a lot more work on Squad's part to implement; work which they're unlikely to tackle at this point. Returning the round-8 to LF&O and either cloning it for xenon or appropriating another tank would be a more likely stopgap. Particularly since Starwhip has already done all the work for them. Best, -Slashy

We *could* manually repurpose any tank to carry anything. We are all aware of that, but it's not the point. Best, -Slashy

Just goofing off. It barely flies, so I'm going to see if I can make it all the way to the island in this thing. Best, -Slashy

Why I think we should keep the Round-8: An essay in 3,000 words or less by GoSlash27 They say a picture is worth a thousand words, so without further ado... Thanks for reading! -Slashy

The Round-8 isn't just another fuel tank. It's the only tank available in the inventory with a hole in the middle, which makes it perfect for mounting in tight quarters with an engine. Clone it or reassign something else, but *PLEASE* don't take away our round-8! -Slashy

I will wear it with pride. The objective in my mind isn't to showcase what the Round-8 can do, but rather to showcase what nothing else *except* the round-8 can do. Thanks, -Slashy

Sounds good. Here's one to get the ball rolling: A compact multiple satellite launch bus. SatBus with 3 comm satellites during injection burn CommSat 1 of 3 during circularization Sat1 deployment. This sort of packaging doesn't work without the life preserver. Best, -Slashy

The beauty part of the round-8 isn't that it's adequate to use in any situation, but rather that it's *perfect* for use in certain situations. A more illustrative challenge would be one where the round-8 fills a mission-critical role where it can't be replaced with something else. Best, -Slashy

We heart the lifesaver! The main reason I'm supporting it is in my sig. Far from "redundant"; it's the only tank available that can share space in the stack with an engine. This makes for more compact staged designs than can be achieved with cylindrical tanks, and that's important in landers. I'm cool with cloning it or retasking something else... but I use the round-8 and there's nothing else that can do what it does. Best, -Slashy

The round-8 is my primary ascent stage tank for munar landers. I'll miss it if they take it away. Best, -Slashy

#1 placing the fuel tank in the middle of the CoM will keep your CoM from shifting. #2 active control surfaces should be balanced around the aircraft to keep it from "infinigliding" into reverse. #3 keep intakes behind the CoL Tiny SSTO Big SSTOs Best, -Slashy

Today's objective was to see what I could accomplish using a single xenon tank. Presenting the Foeton Salamander! http://s52.photobucket.com/user/GoSlash27/slideshow/KSP/Foeton1/Salamander Fully amphibious, tops out at over 70 m/sec and runs a respectable ET of 9:08. As before, I ran it with minimal control surfaces, reaction wheel disabled, and fine control mode. Points tally up to 142, plus any cool points you care to award. Download link here Best, -Slashy

http://s52.photobucket.com/user/GoSlash27/slideshow/KSP/Foeton1 I figured I'd start with a single engine entry. No reaction wheels and as little control surface as possible. I also ran with fine controls to minimize any infinigliding. No reaction wheels: 5 points Max speed 46.1: 45 points Mass: 1.82: 11 points Time: 13:17 : 26 points Xenon Master: 3 points Green Power Elite: 10 points Total: 100 points Best, -Slashy

Ghostbuzzer, We're going to need a definition of "infinigliding", since any inclusion of control surfaces will cause some infinigliding effects. In the meantime, I'll knock an entry together and hope it's acceptable. Best, -Slashy

I did. Apologies, everyone. Glad you carried on without me! Best, -Slashy

^ Yup. The first parts in the current tech tree lend themselves very well to building a rough field STOL airplane... although it's silly that we have to wait so long for landing gear. I'd fuss about the odd tech tree progression, but they're changing all of that. While I haven't had problems with the runway as-is, I like the idea of lengthening/ expanding/ reinforcing/ and lighting through upgrades. There's no good reason to have it lumpier than the surrounding terrain. Best, -Slashy

Sure, why not? I wouldn't expect a new user to ramp up the difficulty to max before learning how to build a rough- field capable airplane. I don't find that runway very difficult to work with for what the player is attempting to accomplish at tier 1. You're pretty much just flying around collecting science and doing part testing. You don't need a big plane to do that. Having said that, it is absurd that the runway is bumpier than the surrounding terrain. Best, -Slashy