Wanderfound

Turn off your SAS and wait a minute; it's likely preventing the ports from aligning properly.

I don't typically fly RSS/AJE, so I haven't had a go at this yet, but y'all might have some luck if you took something like this and swapped the passenger cabins for fuel tanks: Get up to Mach 5 and out of the breathable air on the jets, then cruise through the near-frictionless stratosphere on the nuke until orbit. Keep the RAPIERs off as much as possible. Worth a try.

No, you really don't. Once you get over 30,000m, you should be able to do any speed you like without worrying about heating, and below 30,000m you'll be fine so long as you're out of the hypersonic. The exact profile will depend on the plane, but a 30° ascent to 15,000m followed by a flat accelerating climb to around 35,000m works for most things. You shouldn't be burning any oxidiser until the jets choke, and they should be doing that at about Mach 5 / 35,000m. See the second post in the Kerbodyne thread in my sig for a piloting guide. Also see http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54954-0-25-Deadly-Reentry-v6-2-1-Oct-12-2014?p=1500490&viewfull=1#post1500490 for reentry tips.

Elevators to a vertical stabiliser: don't. Put some horizontal wings at the height you want the elevators, and attach the control surfaces to that. Or hook a pair of horizontal all-moving winglets (AV-R8's, canards) to the tailfin. Basically, build it as if it were a real plane. Control surfaces go along the trailing edge of wings, not anywhere else. Have a poke through the Kerbodyne thread and look at the screenshots. There's enough diversity of design there that it should give you clues on how to construct most things. Re: tweakables, yes.

Looks nice, but a suggestion: If the command pod isn't designed for reentry, why is it streamlined? Why not something with big windows to facilitate IVA views?

Check upthread. You need to go valley hunting and then buzz some treetops.

Experimenting. Yes, it is possible to catch yourself with your own bomb blast (edit: apparently not. Looks like I crashed into the ground while blinded by the smoke): And if you're both very unlucky and sideslipping in exactly the wrong direction at launch, it is also possible to hit yourself with your own rockets: Ouch.

Right click on one tank, alt right click on the other tank.

Just messing about as a demonstration... Stay on target... Bombs away... Dangit, overshot. Dropped 'em too late. These are the "small" bombs, BTW. Let's try external view... Those are the big ones. Exceptionally stable low-speed low-altitude handling. If you hit the deck, it ain't the plane's fault. Handles pretty well off the deck, too.

On the present version: * The amount of pitch authority you have is tolerable, but at the lower end of what will work. Consider a tailplane built from wing sections with multiple control surfaces. This will also pull your CoL right back, allowing you to shift the engines rearward. * CoL doesn't need to be on top of CoM, just behind it will do. * Make sure you use the tweakables to set the control surfaces to only influence the appropriate axes: yaw for the rudder, pitch for elevators, roll for ailerons. * The wing control surfaces are for roll authority only. The further from CoM the better; move them to the end of the wing. * Your current build will have huge tailstrike problems. Losing the tail boom will help with this: so will raising the landing gear on hardpoints. * If all of those fuselage sections are full of fuel, you've got enough juice to circumnavigate Kerbin a dozen times over. Empty out all but one of them.

As Starman mentions, RCS Build Aid is your friend there; it adds an extra marker in the SPH for dCoM and gives you the CoM/dCoM offset in metres. Try to keep it < 1m.

phemark, it sounds like you might benefit from looking at this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52080-Basic-Aircraft-Design-Explained-Simply-With-Pictures As for the empennage thing...horizontal stabilisers are good for the same reason that vertical stabilisers are good: they add a lot to stability. Basically, in each axis you need stability and the ability to disrupt that stability. This allows the plane to fly straight most of the time, but change direction when you want it to. Breaking is easier than making. To get stability, you use a big airfoil (e.g. tailfins and tailplanes). To disrupt stability, you deflect a small airfoil (the control surface).

In terms of control surface authority, canards and elevators at equal distance from CoM are identical: they're both pitch controllers, and their strength is purely a product of how much air is deflected and how much leverage does it have on the CoM. However, canards tend to promote manouevrability over stability for two reasons: 1) They pull the CoL forwards. The more the CoL is behind CoM, the more stable and less manouevrable the plane will be. 2) Control surfaces react in a stall in opposite ways depending on if they're in front or behind CoM. Rearset surfaces tend to return to straight flight, forwardset surfaces tend to exaggerate the diversion from straight. Note, however, that all of this applies to FAR/NEAR realistic-ish aerodynamics. In stock aero, all bets are off; there are some places where sensible aero design principles apply, but also many where they don't.

Basically, your plane is drastically undersupplied with elevators, and adding the canards partially corrects that. Canards are essentially just forward-mounted elevators. Tail mounted elevators should be built off a horizontal stabiliser. Like so:

I've been having a lot of luck with LV-N powered spaceplanes lately. Up to Mach 5/30,000m on jets, then spend ten minutes cruising around the world on the nuke at 45,000m. Works well.

How well do the effectiveness of these scale with size (i.e. are the big bombs appropriately stronger than the little bombs)? And how much punch do the bombs have? What sort of blast radius do they have (damage, not just visual)? What sort of bombload would you expect to require to trash one of these: I'm running a challenge (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/98836-Kerbodyne-Bomber-Challenge?p=1515705#post1515705) and I want to be sure it's doable.

There are some targets scattered around KSC. They look like this: There are six of them: In the hangar is one of these: Which is full of these: Which allow it to do this: -- So, a simple challenge: how many targets can you hit, and how fast can you do it? Start with a stationary screenshot on the runway to show your start time, finish with your plane stationary on the runway for a finish time screenshot. Screenshots of the final state of each target, and as many action highlights from in between as you like. Use quicksave/quickload if you want, but feel free to brag if you don't. Feel free to post pics even if you dismally fail to hit anything. It will take a direct hit to destroy a target; however, each action group releases multiple bombs. Get roughly on target and you should have a decent chance of a hit. Plenty of fun to try and fail, though. Requires the Bombs mod (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/95510-0-25-Bombs-v1-5-ROCKETS-RE-MODELLED). The save file with targets and bomber (a Kerbodyne Tartaglia) is at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/tpq2yzxrjkecqra/AAB-utnHielHPNYxOtiT5vGOa?dl=0 Feel free to change the action groups or control surface tweakables, but otherwise leave the plane unaltered. The bomber is designed for FAR, but will probably work in stock. Let me know if it doesn't. Default action groups are: 1: Toggle turbojet. 2: Toggle basic jets. 3: Fire outer rockets. 4: Fire inner rockets. 5: Drop small bombs #1. 6: Drop small bombs #2. 7: Drop large bombs #1. 8: Drop large bombs #2. 9: Drop large bombs #3. 0: Open bomb bay.

Still keenly awaiting the Mk2 version. My passengers are complaining of burnt feet when disembarking...

New from Kerbodyne's "hey, we just make the planes, it's not our fault what you do with them" division: the Kerbodyne Tartaglia. For all your precision gravity research needs. Turbofan power gives easy liftoffs even with heavy loads. Turbojet propulsion ensures that high Mach speeds remain available. IVA cameras assist in target acquisition. Spoilers help keep the nose on target while controlling altitude. Substantial carrying capacity. A substantial amount of rocketry. And plenty of gravitationally delivered crackers. Enough grunt for a quick getaway. Virtually stall proof above Mach 1. Tolerates extreme AoA. Smooth handling. Well loaded. Action groups: 1: Toggle turbojet. 2: Toggle basic jets. 3: Fire outer rockets. 4: Fire inner rockets. 5: Drop small bombs #1. 6: Drop small bombs #2. 7: Drop large bombs #1. 8: Drop large bombs #2. 9: Drop large bombs #3. 0: Open bomb bay. Requires the Bombs mod (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/95510-0-25-Bombs-v1-5-ROCKETS-RE-MODELLED). Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/1n0fzxlw027jb7z/Kerbodyne%20Tartaglia.craft?dl=0

Whatever you're having fun with is cool, but: 1) LV-N plus docking port. 2) Fuel tank plus several docking ports. 3) Klaw plus docking port. Voila: arbitrarily large asteroid mover. You can get the whole thing into orbit using nothing more than a single Mk2 cargo bay.

New from the Kerbodyne Suborbital Division: the Kerbodyne Scapa. Perfect from sea level to the edge of space. Effortless takeoff and climb. Flies with perfect stablity on either engine. Highly maneouevrable. Virtually immune to high dynamic pressure. Even when combined with high-g manouevres. Or high levels of time acceleration. Perfect handling to the edge of space and beyond. Self-correcting stability at Mach 5... ...Mach 3... ...and Mach 0.8. Perfect handling from sea level... ...to the edge of space. Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/jz5caf0nn7z84m0/Kerbodyne%20Scapa.craft?dl=0

GabeTeuton: see http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-0-25-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-14-3-2-10-21-14?p=1418414&viewfull=1#post1418414

Thirty-four Kerbals, one flight, direct from the KSC runway to the planet of your choice. The Kerbodyne Invasion. Also available in a paratroop version with ventral crew hatches. Simple liftoffs. Sufficient performance. Level out to build speed and close the shock cones until required to minimise drag. It's a big ship; use a shallow ascent. Gets up to speed easily if flown as required. Kick in the nuke once the air-breathers begin to struggle. Keep the RAPIERs in jet mode for as long as possible. Engage Vernors at high altitude to aid stability. And top it off with a pure nuclear burn. Use closed-cycle RAPIERs in short bursts if necessary to maintain ascent. Runway to interplanetary range; refuel in orbit to extend further. Tech Specs: Price: √135,266 Weight: 70.623t wet, 36.823t dry Part count: Action group key: 1: Toggle nuke. 2: Toggle RAPIERs. 3: Toggle Turbojets. 4: Switch RAPIER modes. 5: Toggle shock cones. 6: Toggle nacelle intakes. 7: Toggle solar panels. 9: Toggle monoprop RCS. 0: Toggle Vernors. Flight Instructions: As described in the pictures above; use a shallow ascent, maximising the use of air-breathing and nuclear propulsion. If you're in a hurry and can afford to refuel in orbit, a steeper ascent on the RAPIERs is also possible. Add a dozen Vernors to the underside if you'd like it to have low-grav VTOL ability for Mun/Minmus colonisation purposes, or stretch the cargo bay to make room for a command chair lander shuttle. Aerodynamically polished: Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/2y2rv7jy6gd33d2/Kerbodyne%20Invasion.craft?dl=0

In an updated version of the classic, Kerbodyne presents the Wedgetail XXV. A medium tanker that is as enjoyable to fly as it is useful to own. Not the largest fuel hauler in the Kerbodyne range, but unmatched for when you need a rapid top-up in orbit. Easy takeoffs. Performs like a much lighter craft. Not slow. Plenty left in the tanks after reaching orbit. Superb aerodynamic design. Even at extreme angles of attack. Tech Specs: Price: √98,847 Weight: 66.511t wet, 25.511t dry Part count: 107 Action group key: 1: Toggle Turbojets. 2: Toggle RAPIERs. 3: Switch RAPIER mode. 5: Toggle intakes. 7: Toggle solar panels. 9: Toggle monoprop RCS. 10: Toggle Vernors. Flight Instructions: Just give it the usual: climb to 15,000m as rapidly as possible, then level out and crank it up to Mach 5 on the way to 30,000m. Stable enough to fly hands-off at 4x physics acceleration. Keep the Vernors off unless needed; toggle the standard RCS off while using the Vernors in order to avoid wasting monoprop. Craft file available athttps://www.dropbox.com/s/qxhv6nl5f6xizj2/Kerbodyne%20Wedgetail%20XXV.craft?dl=0

For all your rapid transit light cargo needs: the Kerbodyne Skua. Takes off easy... ...and climbs steep. Extra-strength wings, able to handle large aerodynamic stresses. Vigorous speed... ...and ample cargo capacity. Tech Specs: Price: √64,200 Weight: 25.825t wet, 12.925t dry Part count: 66 Spectacular aerodynamic polish. Stable and smooth at all speeds and altitudes. Action group key: 1: Toggle central RAPIER 2: Toggle lateral RAPIERs 3: Switch mode central RAPIER 4: Switch mode lateral RAPIERs 5: Toggle intakes 7: Toggle solar panels 9: Toggle RCS thrusters 0: Toggle Vernors Flight Instructions: However you like. Deliberately designed to be tolerant of inexpert handling. Easy, tailstrike proof takeoffs at anything above 100m/s, self-correcting stability and the wing strength to tolerate extreme angles of attack. Not an aerobatic specialist, but as close as you'll get to it in a serious cargo plane. Just give it the usual pattern: get to 15,000m, level off and crank it up to Mach 5 while you climb to 30,000m, shut down the outer RAPIERs and ride the central jet for as long as you can then kick all three engines into rocket mode. Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4b4y3jqmkuk9s1i/Kerbodyne%20Skua.craft?dl=0