Wanderfound

The cargo bay can fit a Munlander (or scanning gear and several probes). As for the towbar, here's an old design with a similar concept: It already has a couple thousand ÃŽâ€V unrefuelled in orbit, double that if you fill its integral tanks. And fuel efficiency doesn't matter when you can hook half a dozen Rockomax 64s on the back (which you can get to orbit cheaply by lifting empty and filling with a spaceplane tanker). Plus a laboratory, mining rig and maybe another cargo bay. But you need a rear mounted Snr docking port if you're going to do it without terminal wobbles. The spaceplane tug is also able to detach the train and visit Laythe or Duna (add some more Vernors and RCS retrothrusters if you're doing that, though). Sure, the wings are dead weight in vacuum and the RAPIERs aren't as efficient as nukes. But the wings are wet wings (so not entirely dead weight) and the waste mass is a tiny fraction of the mass of the whole train. And with the sort of loads that this is intended to haul, nuke burns are painfully slow.

Actually, that's one bit they got right: bay doors. Although there's an argument for making them flat-bottomed, having doors is definitely better than the doorless original landing gear. I wouldn't mind a style update of those to similar quality as the new ones.

A small but very useful MkIII for FAR: Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/287cxnw8vh57qep/Kerbodyne%20Astrotug.craft?dl=0

OTOH, those bulges are very useful for FAR area ruling. Leaving out the large nosegear was a rather questionable decision by Squad, though. Hopefully they'll hotfix it, along with the animations.

Something a bit different: Kerbodyne Astrotug. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/287cxnw8vh57qep/Kerbodyne%20Astrotug.craft?dl=0

One ship to rule them all: Kerbodyne Astrotug. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/287cxnw8vh57qep/Kerbodyne%20Astrotug.craft?dl=0

BTW: spruiking here because it's the relevant audience. If you've built something slick, try the air race (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/120751-Kerbodyne-Air-Race-Series-Redux-Race-1). But if you build for pure straight-line speed, you're going to have an interesting time in the turns. It's a sustained 10G pull through those passes...

What do the stability numbers look like? Slick is one thing, slick plus stable/controllable is a bit more of a job.

...or integrating all of the features of Enhanced Navball, except for the only ones that I actually care about (i.e. resize/relocate). The rendezvous burn length thingie must be very obscure; I'm not even sure what it is that you're referring to.

All good Kerbals recycle: Kerbodyne Fencer. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/0vc2oqudv78eget/Kerbodyne%20Fencer.craft?dl=0

A few points: * Not finding science grindy at all. I was in orbit by my third launch, and pulled over 1,000 science from an early-game low-cost Minmus mission. Sending one-way roboprobes to other planets is also very doable in the early game. * It's good that contracts are now about money and rep instead of science; more exploration, less satellite grinding. * I like the flyby/rendezvous/dock contracts. Gives more of a historical step-by-step feel to the progression, and is an elegant way of introducing new players to the concepts. * Tech tree is improved, but still needs work. If it's a technology that was used by the Babylonians (e.g. ladders), it should be in the starting node. * The new aero is a huge improvement, but I still jumped ship to FAR as soon as possible. Yay for area ruling; much fiddling fun. * The tier one runway is now usable; this is good. * Action group restrictions are still stupid and annoying. * Maximum altitude for low-tech aircraft: Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/9vptzzhq8knsoaj/Kerbodyne%20Hiflyer.craft?dl=0

Trying out some new airframes... 4.52m2/0.71m2​. Slick enough to casually zap through the transsonic zone while climbing; no point in compromising stability in pursuit of further streamlining. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/obf30cql2tb6z44/Kerbodyne%20Thudmeister.craft?dl=0

Kerbodyne Thudmeister. RAPIERs not included. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/obf30cql2tb6z44/Kerbodyne%20Thudmeister.craft?dl=0

99% of what's here is designed for FAR. A lot of them will probably fly in stock (because stock is so forgiving that almost anything will fly), but no guarantees. Likewise for the old ships even with FAR installed; NuFAR is different enough from oldFAR that many ships will have radically altered drag profiles. I did do a few designed-for-stock ships while I was waiting for NuFAR to arrive. See http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1888219&viewfull=1#post1888219 and http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1897125&viewfull=1#post1897125 and http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1910666&viewfull=1#post1910666

Which moves the contest to who can manage the best cross-section/wave-drag ratio... Best I've managed so far: 5.12931m2 cross section, 0.802051m2 wave drag, roughly a 6.4:1 ratio: Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/r2e9iw79kwnaamk/Kerbodyne%20Queequeg.craft?dl=0

FAR no longer includes an engine nerf, so RAPIERs and turbos have more punch than they used to. But it's compensated for by the reduction in altitude available to jets: you can get off the runway with much less engine, but you need to carry a lot more oxidiser. And, as in stock, the RAPIERs have a substantial flat spot in their powerband around the transsonic region. Get 'em up to speed and they accelerate very rapidly, but if your streamlining isn't good enough you'll never get up to speed in the first place. It's different, but not "wrong". And the power boost means that you no longer need to strap on a dozen engines just to get a Mk3 off the ground; four turbojets will do just fine for 747-sized monsters.

...unless you have the FAR mod installed, in which case clipping functions exactly as you first intended. Voxel-based aero for the win.

A friendly reminder that the Kerbodyne Air Race is still open, and as usual the FAR side of the leaderboard is a bit thin. Put those new design skills to the test... http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/120751-Kerbodyne-Air-Race-Series-Redux-Race-1

Quite a bit of speed in the basic jet...

A demonstration of how little engine is actually required: Kerbodyne Gull NF. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/uzsjjsxjgnzs254/Kerbodyne%20Gull%20NF.craft?dl=0

They're useful but high-tech; you won't have them in your career game yet. Bit of LF, bit of intake, good heatsink properties. They're the bits just in front of the engines on this one:

It's hard up against the part count as is, although you could probably afford to lose the girders and change the fins to three per set.

Nicely done.

Kerbal Attachment System: it allows you to place struts on EVA. Whatever you do, you're going to need some way of creating a rigid attachment between the salvaged part and whatever you're using to bring it down. Just loose in a cargo bay won't do; the second you engage time warp, it'll float straight out through the walls (because craft "on rails" in timewarp don't have collision effects).

I think that's the first time I've seen anyone manage wave drag area higher than the total cross-section area; I didn't realise that was even possible... It's apparently doable to crack Mach 2 on basic jets alone, but it requires a lot of aerodynamic polish to achieve. However, as you've discovered, with enough rocket thrust you can punch through by brute force. Bad Mw is usually caused by too much lift up front and not enough at the back. Either shift some wing rearwards, shrink the canards, expand the stabilators or pull the CoM forwards. Given that it isn't intended to go to space, vacuum isp isn't of huge importance. So, I'd probably replace the LV-909s with Thuds; more thrust, more gimbal, and the radial attachment of them would let you slim the ship down to a single-fuselage layout. Something vaguely similar to this one: As well as substantially reducing your overall cross section (and saving a fair bit of part count), the Thuds are very useful for fine-tuning wave drag. Shifting them forwards/back/in/out by tiny amounts can have a huge impact.