Wanderfound

I've got a few things that can do most of this as-is (see the last few entries in the Kerbodyne thread, and pictured below), but I'll see if I can whip up something bespoke for an entry.

As per the OP, Tweakable Wheels is allowed (and recommended, you can drastically tighten your turning circle with it). I wouldn't try any other performance enhancing mods, but I'd assume that non-performance things like Kerbpaint or Enhanced Navball are fine. Keep in mind that the tracks are tight; cornering and acceleration are likely to be more important than top speed. F1, not Indy.

BTW, Arsonide: a slightly far-fetched idea for an eventual possible contract feature: Allow players to generate and share contracts. Basically, a way of turning the forum challenge threads into in-game contracts. Maybe even allow spacecraft crossover: "I need a satellite in orbit X, but I can't do it myself; I'll pay you √X if you do it for me". I haven't the foggiest how you'd implement something like that while still maintaining game balance (maybe have the challenge proposer actually pay some sort of price, based on how rewarding the contract is?), but it strikes me as an idea with interesting possibilities.

Several, but they all have rather unpleasant and unintuitive UIs. Just Google "Kerbal Action group mod" and you'll find a bunch.

The Mk2 docking ports will also fail to shield things from drag under FAR (to paraphrase Ferram, "if you want stuff shielded, use a damn cargo bay; that's what they're for"). So, yeah: if you want to get your assorted widgets through reentry safely, use a small cargo bay as a service compartment. Good for batteries, SAS, science instruments, etc. And stick the landing gear on the outside as designed; they'll come through reentry just fine.

Also note the much simpler way to avoid the problem: use an odd number of engines. You should be shutting engines down as you ascend in order to extend your flight ceiling, so that by the time you get to flameout altitude you only have one or two jets still running anyway. If you're running even numbers of jets it'll be two, and asymmetric flameout is a danger. But if you have an odd number of jets, the last-to-be-shut-down engine is on the centreline, and asymmetric thrust is no longer a problem.

It's a good list already, but I'd add a couple. Fine Print. Absolutely essential for a good career game; it massively expands the depth and variety of the contracts system. Due to be integrated into stock in the next update. Kerbal Construction Time. Not quite as essential as Fine Print, but close. It makes both construction and research take time; no more pumping out twenty rockets in a day. If you want to hit that launch window, you'd better start building your launcher a month in advance and cross your fingers against launch failures (or build a back-up launcher as well, or use the "simulation mode" to test it out before the real launch...). Scansat. Orbital radar mapping and anomaly hunting. Lots of fun, and combines exceptionally well with RPM. Send up a mapping probe in advance to scout out good landing sites while you build your Munlander. -- Agreed with Nathan on NEAR/FAR, BTW. The one legitimately difficult thing about FAR was the hair-triggered aerodynamic failures. With the new tweakable wing strength, that's no longer an issue.

Just starting to play around with Tweakable Wheels; it's actually possible to roll the car now. Better beef up the crash safety...

DaMichel's Kerbal Flight Data is my go-to for this sort of stuff. ...if not doing it IVA with RPM data screens:

Wait for .90. Better landing gear are on the way.

That's up to the voters. Enter, and see how you do.

The S2's also work nicely on tiny manned rovers. Surprisingly stable.

A dozen Vernors on the underside should cover that. Again, balance with RCS Build aid.

Do you mean a vertical SSTO, or a spaceplane with VTOL ability? For vertical SSTO, you want a big Mk2 fuselage based rocket powered by a dozen RAPIERs and a couple of nukes or aerospikes for space propulsion. If you're going interplanetary with spaceplanes, you also want nuclear. For VTOL, the key is to turn the thrust limiters on your non-VTOL engines down to zero while you use RCS Build Aid to properly position your VTOL engines. See the last few entries in the Kerbodyne thread. Something like the Dropbear with the central engine replaced with a nuke should have the range needed.

With the new Kerbodyne KZ3, the boys from Team Kerbodyne Racing... ...continue to have some mishaps in practice.

I'm thinking of landing strut based powered hinge mechanisms, as used in the crane shown at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88566-100-Reusable-SSTO-Cargo-with-Satelite-Crane-download

Since about a week after 25 dropped. Tailfin weight balancing and the like allows all sorts of tuning trickery.

How about locked control surfaces mounted on unlocked landing struts?

Playing career mode, but having trouble getting to the turbojets and RAPIERs and stuff? Who needs 'em? Not you, when you've got a Kerbodyne Alphatek to fly. Nothing beyond tech tier 5. Self-launches at around 130m/s. Get some speed and altitude from the jets... ...before closing your intakes, lighting the fireworks and climbing into the stratosphere. Flatten out in the upper atmosphere to shorten the circularisation burn. Plenty of delta-V to play with, and a probe core on board so it can be used for orbital rescues. Beautifully behaved airframe. Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4va1y0wwjr2xjym/Kerbodyne%20Alphatek.craft?dl=0

Okeydoke, will fix. Is continued car-tuning permitted through the series, or are we locked in to our designs once the first race starts?

Docking mode isn't required (in practice, anyway; I don't write the rules, but I'm not reading them as forbidding normal mode driving), using it just allows you to have the RCS auto engage whenever you accelerate instead of needing to hit H. OTOH, not using docking mode allows for active aerodynamics; the Kerbodyne car is built so that the rear spoiler lowers during acceleration and raises during braking.

Yup, FAR's all good now.

Go test it; make a basic plane, then remake it with some wing bits replaced with structural panels. Look at the aero analysis screens, then test-fly and compare. Turn on the FAR lift/stall/drag visualisation toggles while flying and look. For the FAR visualisation tools in action (as well as some other mods), see

Yeah, it was just the first thing that came to hand. These might be a better examples:

Current Mk2 fuselages provide substantial body lift: Most of the lift on that isn't coming from the wings.