Wanderfound

That is a very Kerbal solution.

I'd actually be curious to know if the Migration flies in stock air at all, actually. Soupmosphere drag is particularly punishing on the bigger planes.

Still a few days until the close of polls, but my current thoughts on who I might be voting for: Skathi: does what it's designed to do, and does it very well. Decent aesthetics, although I'd be the first to admit that SP+ makes that a lot easier to achieve. Could probably have avoided test flight confusion (and potentially disastrous mistakes by customers) simply by mounting the cargo bay probe with its controls facing in the same direction as the rest of the plane. A bit competent rather than extraordinary; it's an effective middleweight cargo/crew transport workhorse, but it doesn't really surprise with unexpected performance in either speed or lifting capacity. SP-10: well built and fun to fly, with very good aerodynamic balance. Demonstrates that you don't need mods or even RAPIERs to make a highly effective spaceplane. A good inspiration for career players trying to build spaceplanes early in the tech tree. Suffers a bit from lack of practical usefulness and questionable aesthetics. Robin​: a lot of fun to fly. Not quite as aerodynamically polished as SP-10, but given that it was designed for stock aero the fact that it flies as well as it does in FAR is astonishing. A tiny bit of control surface tuning and it would be a top-notch sportsplane. Best of the stockers in aesthetics, but also limited in practical usefulness. Laythe Wing: questionable aesthetics, but a lot of that is down to personal taste. Extremely stable and easy to fly, and has good practical application in a wide variety of contexts. Kerbin-gravity VTOL capability a substantial bonus; it'd make a great remote-area explorer. Lacking a bit in speed and aerobatic slickness, but that's the price you pay for stability and ease of use. - It's a real shame that I haven't been able to fly either of the reverse-wing designs; they both look awesome. Can't really bring myself to vote for something that unconventional without at least seeing someone else's test flight, though.

...until your still-lit SRBs hit the capsule.

If you're bothered by part counts, TAC/FB will let you dump fuel with no extra parts, BTW.

Seconded on the tweakable option. "You have selected the landing gear part: would you like light, medium or heavy? Now, adjust this slider to set height". Aesthetic options on top of that would be nice, but the tweakable thing alone would cover 99% of the functional issues.

Feel like posting a time? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90354-Spaceplane-speed-challenge-shortest-elapsed-time-from-runway-to-orbit

Eh? You don't have to use all the detailed analytic stuff. My designs are done by eyeball and flight testing, and I don't have any problem producing high-performance things that easily go to space and beyond. Whatever works for you be cool, though. KSP: Strength Through Diversity.

Hmmn... * With the size, it's as much about height as bulk. It's not just "big gear for big planes, small gear for small planes"; we need short gear and tall gear in the same styles, so that you can angle the nose up a bit or make clearance for an oversized engine without resorting to pylons or mounting the rear gear halfway up the side of the fuselage. * Landing gear lights that actually draw electrical power. * Landing gear that is able to be coloured by Kerbpaint. * Landing gear that withdraws entirely into the fuselage (or at least looks as if it does). * A no-wheel landing strut for WWII style taildraggers. * An arrestor hook? Doing a carrier-style landing on a short runway could be fun. * An Me-262 Komet style disposable launch sled could be entertaining as well. * Powered gear for taxiing. * Something that eased the "wing flex ruins the steering geometry of wing-mounted gear" would be nice. It shouldn't go away entirely (wings do flex in real life, after all), but KSP's current super-flexi wings make it excessive. This is just spur of the moment brainstorming. Definitely want the different-height stuff, though.

Also handy for de-orbiting unwanted engines off space stations and the like.

Will you allow the use of NRAP to let people crank up the weight without having to inflate bulk and part count? I can probably get a fuselage plus a couple of AV-R8's down intact with more than their own weight, but trying to beef up the mass to the limit with stock parts would require strapping on several times its own size worth of SRB-KD25k's or something. There aren't really any high-density small stock parts. It's not a realism-breaker; even at its 100t maximum (unlikely to succeed), NRAP is no more dense than a lump of solid metal ballast. The tweakability of it would also allow people to really push the limits of their builds, which is always good for dramatic screenshots. Just don't let 'em get away with using it as landing gear; NRAPs are indestructible. I'd suggest making the horizontal speed bonus competitive, BTW; instead of giving it to everyone who exceeds a set landing speed, have a couple of bonus point awards for 1st/2nd/3rd fastest etc. That'd solve the problem of being unsure of where to set the thresholds. Anyone having fun with this is welcome to have a shot at the powered piloting equivalent, BTW: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/91511-Spaceplane-Speed-Challenge-2-Fastest-time-from-orbit-to-runway

I've only just realised that the SP+ triangular structurals make better swept wings than the fugly stock parts: Can't believe it took me this long.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/81390-0-23-5-Part-Angle-Display-View-and-set-accurate-angles-for-parts-in-editor

KSP is the worst game ever because it lets people play even if they're physically unable to handle joystick controls.

This might be just the ticket to stop things from poking through the walls of SP+ cargo bays... Any chance of a version custom-shaped to fit neatly in the bottom of one?

That guideline actually goes away once you get big enough, BTW. The Wedgetail has a pair of turbos on the centre line, but it has so much inertia that thrust asymmetry only matters if its happening out on the flanks.

Cargo bay, mount it inside. SP+ or one of the half-dozen other mod options.

Would you like a fun little aerobatic sportsplane that also works as a practical science explorer? Are you suffering from a strange delusion that the Kerbodyne SSTO Division are unable to produce spaceplanes that aren't a rear-delta design? Come have a spin in the new Kerbodyne de Minimus. We promise you won't be disappointed. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/47n0beaxbrxmoa6/Kerbodyne%20de%20Minimus.craft?dl=0 Requires Spaceplane Plus and FAR/NEAR. Optional paintjob provided by Kerbpaint.

Not disagreeing with any of your points except for: by the time you get to throttle down level, you should already be starting to shut engines off entirely if you've got more than one. The only one I use the throttle down trick on is the final engine. One engine working well beats two engines choking. If it's a big 'un, toggle in pairs; most of my hefty cargo stuff is set up so I can choose from 7/5/3/1 engines at the flick of a button.

Dammit, every time I get my laptop working properly people start telling me about must-have mods. Knew it was too good to last.

* Rammed a solar-panels-facing-the-wrong-way spaceplane into correct alignment with a passing satellite. * Many versions of using SAS/RCS to roll a toppled lander over a cliff and get it upright again. * Solved a "can't undock bug" issue with a carefully aimed impact probe. * Creative spaceplane landing techniques: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/91644-Spaceplane-Speed-Challenge-III-Ice-Skating-on-Minmus?p=1381719&viewfull=1#post1381719

It appears that planes with FAR-enabled control surface tuning won't load without FAR or NEAR installed. Due to this, I've been having to make two versions of my designs; one with tuned surfaces for the FAR/NEAR flyers, one without for the stock purists. This is a bit of a nuisance. Is it possible to set things up so that altered maxauthority/flap/spoiler settings are just ignored when loaded into stock air?

All of my rep to anyone who can hack together a solution to allow Kerbpainting of the small gear bays, BTW. Those things are seriously messing with the aesthetics of my raceplanes.

Alternately: use the right click tweakables to disable electricity supply on either your battery or your cockpit/pod/probe core. You now have an emergency reserve supply; keep it turned off unless you need it, and get the solar panels deployed ASAP if you do.

What Diomedea said; TAC Fuel Balancer has the answers you seek, and it's a minimal-impact utility mod that should have no negative effect on your game. However, in addition: 60 FL-T800's is insanely excessive for just about anywhere. Where are you going, and how much junk are you planning on taking with you?