GoSlash27

Yeah, the smiley face has been known for a long time. Best, -Slashy

^ This. Musk tweeted that the rocket was fine, but avionics was chasing an issue from the 10 minute "around the horn" check. They recommended the countdown continue and a hold at 2:00. They did not have the issue resolved at 2:45 (or thereabouts), so even if AF tracking hadn't gone offline, they almost certainly wouldn't have gone to space today. It doesn't matter whether or not something was *actually* wrong with the vehicle. They thought there was something wrong and that would've been enough for a hold (read "scrub"). Best, -Slashy

There's a pretty big difference between launching a rocket from a jet and flying a jet up to a near- orbital trajectory right out into space. Nobody's arguing that launching a rocket from a jet platform is unrealistic and this doesn't make KSP's "turbojet" realistic. Best, -Slashy

According to the chatter, there were 2 problems going on: 1 was a downrange tracking station, but the other was an avionics problem on the launcher. I interpreted it as a selftest problem with the ADI (Nav ball) but wasn't sure. Did anyone else notice the KSP music at the beginning of the feed? Best, -Slashy

I still don't understand why it ran out of hydraulic fluid the first time unless it had a leak. You're not supposed to lose hydraulic fluid, let alone run out of it. Crossing my fingers, -Slashy

Thanks, I'm aware of that and it seems you've missed the point Best, -Slashy

This is true if you're only orbiting passengers and/ or fluid supplies, and I have refueling trucks and passenger buses for my spaceplanes. *BUT*... If you're orbiting cargo it's a different story. You need a way to place the cargo into (or in my case onto) the launch vehicle. That's a bit trickier... Best, -Slashy

This has nothing to do with turbine engine lifters in KSP. You could recreate this proposal more realistically by using basic jets. Best, -Slashy

This is the oldest surviving image from my fledgeling space program. This was not my first vehicle, but it achieved my first Kerbal in orbit and first spacewalk. I called it (unoriginally) "Moho/ Bluerock" My first rocket would've looked similar, but with just a single SRB. Best, -Slashy

I consider a dead kerbal to be a major catastrophe for my space program, and leaving one stranded is unthinkable. I don't mourn them or have any sentimental attachment to them, I just play the game like I'm personally responsible for what happens. *edit* Which reminds me... Mk.1 pod in the first tech level, No choice but to launch manned, and no escape tower until tech level 7 is a pretty horrible setup. The initial tech level should give you a stayputnik and you should get the escape tower with the Mk 1 pod IMO. Best, -Slashy

Liquid paper correction fluid?

Oh, surely it can't be that ba GUH!! Yeah... that's got to go... Best, -Slashy

Oh, okay. Try this: Redo the ascent, and this time keep your angle of attack at 23 degrees. See where it tops out at. If it tops out at less than 32km altitude, you need more lift. Best, -Slashy

Are you using NEAR or FAR, or the stock aerodynamics?

You're using parts I'm not familiar with. Are you using stock aero or FAR? Best, -Slashy

Raykaydos, Yeah, I get all that, but even so... what's the cost savings of refurbishing a rocket over buying a new one? Is that more or less than the cost of jumping through all these hoops to get the engine back? Best, -Slashy

Sounds legit. -Slashy

Magnemoe, Shockingly, that is the orbiter! Not only does it reach orbit, but it does it with those payloads. Turbojets are seriously broken in KSP... Best, -Slashy

I don't know that myself, as the OP was the one who posed it. I took it as "initial" velocity. It also appears that I misread the initial question... Best, -Slashy

I'll tell you exactly what the problem is: 1) You have an unbalanced design, but your canards are masking it. Your spaceplane should be balanced both with control surfaces attached and removed. That means you build the plane balanced with no control surfaces, then you add the control surfaces in such a way that they remain balanced. 2) You have an intake in the nose. At high speed, intakes are the draggiest part of the plane. Flying a plane in this condition is like launching an arrow backwards; it wants to fly any way except nose first. If you fix these, your problem should go away. Best, -Slashy

All true, but it doesn't answer the question The nearest galaxy that I know of with a supermassive black hole is Andromeda, which is a little shy of a Mpc away. I don't see how anything ejected from it at that velocity could ever get here. Maybe something ejected from our own galactic center could do it, but I don't know how much velocity it'd lose on the way. Best, -Slashy

Yeah, I realized that when I went back and monkeyed with it. No difference between "R" and "Shift R". I have no idea why your symmetry would suddenly shift and no idea why it won't let you toggle it back.. If the problem is similar to the tendency in the VAB for parts to assume the symmetry of parts your mouse passes over, you could try holding the Alt key and hit R. This has never happened to me, so I'm not sure it'd work... Best, -Slashy

Might be silly of me to mention this, but did you folks know that hitting "shift R" allows you to toggle radial and mirror symmetry? I stumbled across that the other day. Best, -Slashy *edit* Derp, Nevermind...

That's the million dollar question (no pun intended) How much do you really save by refurbishing an engine as opposed to the costs involved in making it possible? Wouldn't it just be cheaper to junk it and buy a new one? Best, -Slashy

This raises a different question for me: If the source galaxy is moving away from us at an appreciable fraction of C, how would the dwarf planet ever reach us? Let me start over... If the dwarf planet is ejected from another galaxy at 27 km/sec and the universe is expanding at 74km/sec, how would it ever reach us? Curious, -Slashy *edit* correction