Wanderfound

How are you attempting to activate his EVA pack? By default, his EVA pack is off until you hit "R" to toggle it on. And are you using any mods that could be messing with his EVA fuel supply? - For the splashdown folks: while the simplest cheap way to do splashdown tests is with a thrust-limited and mostly-defuelled RT-10, the absolute cheapest is the beach buggy method: build a rover, drive it into the ocean, test part, drive back out onto the runway for 100% recovery.

Ooh, shiny. Now if I could just convince Sarbian to add a "no, don't wait for the next window, take me now" option to the interplanetary transfer function on Mechjeb Manoeuvre Planner.

Like how FAR/NEAR planes don't work in stock aero and vice versa? Or like how I always need to strip the RPM IVA cameras off my planes before I post them to the Spacecraft Exchange? Or the routine occurrence of "hey, you said this was stock and it isn't" followed by "whoops, forgot to pull the Mechjeb unit off". That's always going to be an issue, unless they lock the game down tight and try to force everyone to play the same way. Integrating these things into stock should reduce that issue, not increase it. Once Porkjet's stuff gets immortalised, I won't have to put a "requires SP+" tag at the bottom of everything.

Take a poke at a couple of the ones I've posted; there's some strutting there, but none of it is hidden (if you look from underneath). I only ever use clipping to overcome misbehaving symmetry (i.e. perfectly symmetrical parts, one green, one red). Small ones shouldn't need any fuselage strutting at all; big ones might want a few pairs, but not usually more than that. A bit of strutting on SP+ wings is pretty much compulsory though, at least until they fix this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80796-0-24-Spaceplane-Plus-1-3?p=1377054&viewfull=1#post1377054 It's also worth thinking about which part you choose to use as the attachment point when you're putting together multi-fuselage stuff.

Also keep in mind: the launch window is when it's easiest to go interplanetary, but it's not compulsory to wait for them. Most of the other times, you can still get there, you just need a bit more ÃŽâ€V. A lot of the time, it isn't even very much more. See http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/

I just tried to land a plane where one of the sets of rear gear had the brakes activated and the steering locked (as it should be) while the other had no brakes and unlocked steering (as it very much shouldn't be). Couldn't steer, couldn't stop, RIP Kerbal, at the end of a lengthy spaceplane mission. This was shortly after slamming a plane sideways into the ground because the spoilers only activated on one wing. Could y'all please do something about the bug that causes action groups and tweakables to go screwy as soon as you relocate a part placed with symmetry?

Bob rather than Jeb, but this works just as well for any of the Kerman brothers: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/87491-Farewell-to-Bob

BTW: http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=612 & http://darthsanddroids.net/episodes/0001.html

I fully agree that "crazy" characters can be fun for all involved, if done right. I was quite fond of clerical necromancers (with accompanying zombie congregations) and halfling assassins (who needs strength when you have an invisibility ring and a crossbow?) back in the day. But the "if done right" part is key. Done wrong, it's a sure-fire way to ruin the game for everyone. For a first-time player like the OP, something a bit more sensible and conventionally heroic is a much safer option.

Munbase Alpha! Gotta get the cast there somehow.

Not sure about that flat-topped TB2. Curvy and bulbous was kinda the point on that one.

To expand: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLoonie

I'd advise against it. "PC that does random destructive things for no good reason" is exactly the sort of character that is likely to irritate the other players. You want to allow every player to enjoy the game, and if the other players are into heroic posturing, careful tactical planning, ninjaesque sneakyness or delicate diplomacy, having a Leeroy Jenkins come rampaging through the middle all the time makes that impossible. As with KSP, start sensible, save the crazy for when you know what you're doing.

First up, the Deadly Reentry mod is nowhere near as lethal as its rep implies. Ferram's aerodynamic failures are a much bigger threat. Second: circularise first. Don't try to go directly from Minmus to KSC. You can still use aerobraking to circularise, but you need to stay out of the lower atmosphere until you've pulled it back down out of the hypersonic range. When I'm being sensible, I try to stay above 30,000m until I'm at Mach 5, and above 20,000m until I'm at Mach 2. When I'm not being sensible: & & Canards work quite well as coal-mine canaries.

BTW: if you look at my series of pics at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/93347-The-Vomit-Comet-%28YASPC%29?p=1410321&viewfull=1#post1410321 and zoom right in on the fourth image, I swear you can see a little temporary crater made by Bill. Am I imagining it?

Yes yes yes yes yes. The big problem with the stock aero and intake issues isn't that they allow players to build and fly silly, unrealistic things. If that's what you're into, cool; have fun. It is a good thing that the game permits that. The problem is that if you try to build something that isn't silly and unrealistic, then it often just won't work, and even if it does fly it'll usually be massively outperformed by the LOLplanes. This is extremely Not A Good Thing.

Yup, this. I don't really care about the effects of this suggestion on stock aero, because the soupmosphere is so bloody awful that I will never fly in it again (praise be to Ferram, rep be upon him). But a jet engine should not consist of a massy point source hanging off the back of a plane; that's just not what they are. I'd actually like it if they went all the way and required a line of ducting parts between intake and engine, but that's probably asking too much.

11 screens in total, actually. No problem filling them up, though; one camera on the nose, one camera in the cargo bay, one camera pointing up from the docking port, one camera pointing down at the ground, primary flight display, landing assistant, navigation display, resources display, autopilot interface, target interface etc. etc. And that's even without mapsat screens... I'm hanging out for Fine Print RPM integration; contracts and waypoints on screens, tasty. And something with resizable fonts. Ooh, I just had a nifty idea: RPM screens displaying biomonitor readouts from your Kerbals. Watch their pulse rates and blood pressure spike whenever you get them scared...

Robin is one of the few stock planes that also works pretty well in FAR; see http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86202-Better-SSTO-Spaceplane-Challenge-%280-23-5-0-24%29-Fin%21?p=1368710&viewfull=1#post1368710 OP updated. Do remember that the contest still has nearly two months to go.

O-Doc does have form as a quality stock-aero designer. Take Robin​ for a spin, you'll like it.

Sorted, cheers.

Think there's any chance of getting the mods to tweak the forum to automagically whack a spoiler tag in front of any post above a certain size threshold?

Another vote here; the stock contracts window is a UI nightmare. However, the one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet here, and that none of the mods have sorted so far: LARGER FONTS! The defaults are undersized to the point of complete illegibility for me unless I get up and stick my face right into my screen. Not good when you need to check them mid-flight.

Nope, no restrictions. As described in the first post, enter whatever you want in whichever category you want. And you can enter one craft in multiple categories if you want to. The only limitation is no more than one entry per category (and a request that you don't spam the thread with excessive unspoilered images). But you will be facing test flights and a popular vote; if you enter something that doesn't fit the category or just isn't very good, expect the voters to tell you so and to place their votes accordingly. It's up to the electorate to decide what "best heavy cargo spaceplane" means, and it's up to them whether part-clipping or mod parts or whatever is a reason not to vote for something. However, it's probably a safe assumption that if there are two equally good ships, but one of them needs half a dozen engines clipped into each other just to get off the ground, then the other one is more likely to get the votes. Clip enough wings/intakes/tanks/engines and anyone can build something that'll do Mach 10 all the way to Moho; doing it within more realistic limitations requires a bit more skill. Just post your best, and see how you go. As well as a fun contest, it's also a good opportunity to pick up design tips from each other, and there's nothing to stop you from refining and updating your entry over the next few weeks. Nothing is final until the voting starts. Hopefully, by the end of it we'll all be better designers than we were at the start.

Considered the possibility, but wasn't sure. Worth posting for the lurkers, anyway.