Wanderfound

Speaking of satellites, you don't need a Mk2... Guess what you can fit into a service bay?

Re: removing the intake data because asymmetric flameouts "are a thing of the past". I just had an asymmetric flameout... (pure stock KSP, no mods)

Guess what I downloaded in between my post and your post?

Squad killed her; the heatshield aerodynamics bug strikes again. Bare capsule + heatshield, moderate reentry (500km x 20km), capsule flips sideways and explodes at 25,000m. I'm sticking to playing Windward ​until the release of NuFAR or the 1.0.1 bugfix update.

Not to forget the non-SSTO spaceplane option... http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Sabotage/story

OTOH, top-draggy is bad, for much the same reason.

I'm still hanging out for "rescue Kerbal from an impact trajectory" contracts. Put some pressure on for the launch and rendezvous to work first time.

I'm not actually sure how closely tied the white effects in-game are to the speed. Do a test run and check when they occur? Preferably at varying altitudes?

That was my point: take that same basic single-engine conventional Mk1 design (or something of similar airframe, exact parts don't matter), replace the RAPIER with a turbo, and it'll take you to the edge of space or circumnavigate Kerbin. Your science gear can go in the service bay, and if you must have a Science Jr it can be stashed behind the cockpit. Just be sure to get it over 20,000m before you break 1,000m/s if you don't want your Kerbals to cook. See the captions on the Imgur album for details on how to get spaceplanes up and down successfully in the new aero.

That is massive overkill for an atmospheric survey contract. Something like this will easily go to orbit: Ditch the oxidiser and swap the RAPIER for a turbojet and it'll handle anything you need in the way of atmo survey contracts. Something as simple as swapping the basic jets for another pair of turbos should make your existing plane work. But really, you've got more than twice as much wing as you need.

I thoroughly approve of this challenge.

A Perikeet would have to be a New Zealand parrot, surely.

You left unaddressed the most important question: Perikee, Perikerb or Perikay?

Guess what you can fit into a service bay?

If it works as promised, I think we should build an aircraft out of chocolate and send it to Ferram.

No; what you're seeing are Mach effects (the white clouds) and shock heating (red flames). Both of them are a function of atmospheric density (and therefore altitude) as well as speed. The exact boundary between supersonic and hypersonic is a bit subjective, but it's generally thought to be around the Mach 5 mark. At low altitude, you can BBQ your plane long before you ever get near hypersonic. Transonic refers to the speeds immediately around Mach 1. Exactly how fast Mach 1 is is also a function of atmospheric density, but for Kerbin (and Earth) around 350m/s does as a rough approximation.

As before, if you want your aero to be realistic-ish, you need FAR. In particular see http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-0-90-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-14-7-4-2-15?p=1870281&viewfull=1#post1870281 for what's planned in the new version. NuStock Aero is no longer dreadful, but it's still nowhere near an accurate simulation.

Give it some time; I'll be very surprised if I can't still get a nuke/RAPIER hybrid into orbit with 3,000m/s in the tanks. Small wings, big tanks, just enough jet to crack 1,000m/s at 25,000m and just enough rocket to reach orbit.

It does seem that the visual flame effects actually mean something now; if you see red, pull up immediately if you want your Kerbals to live.

My soundtrack's been heavily reliant on José González lately:

Other minor niggles: * Medium landing gear wheels don't animate when moving; they're quite noticeably static. There's also no option to unlock the steering. * Adjustable brake torque on landing gear is a good idea, but it seems that the default torque is extremely low. * RAPIER glow effects persist when the engine is throttled off. * Unshielded solar panels are now non retractable. While this was presumably done to nerf them relative to the shielded panels, it seems like just making them high-drag and vulnerable to wind and heat would do the job. Unshielded solar in a cargo bay used to be a standard design feature. * There are no control surfaces designed to match the new small swept wings. * There is no way to tell in advance if a part is going to catastrophically overheat, and which one will blow first. No temperature readouts anywhere. Why not a high temperature warning indicator at least? (edit: there's an option in the debug menus to include temperature in the right-click popup. Still not easily viewable in flight, though).

Check the captions on the Imgur album; I describe the profile for that ship there. In general, though: after take off, settle into a climb of sufficient steepness that, although you continue accelerating, will not take you above Mach 3 (roughly 900m/s) until you're over 20,000m. Gradually flatten off your climb as you go; you want to build as much speed as possible, but you need to stay above the speed/altitude BBQ curve. Once you're over 20,000m, you can pile on the speed as you slowly climb to about 25,000m, at which point your jets will start losing thrust and your speed will begin to drop. Kick in the rockets immediately; you'll lose too much speed if you try to maximise jet altitude. Keep it pointed close to prograde during the rocket burn; upper-altitude drag is minimal in stock, so a long coast to apoapsis isn't a problem. For reentry, it's once again about that speed/altitude BBQ curve. You have to wash off the speed before you drop below the altitude at which that speed is survivable. You don't need airbrakes; just come down with a 45° AoA and a few S-turns and you'll be fine.

* NuStock spaceplanes reenter without difficulty so long as you use AoA and S-turns to wash off most of your speed at high altitude. No airbrakes required. * Heating is not a problem during ascent so long as you gain sufficient altitude (25,000m+) before cracking Mach 4. * Unshielded solar panels are no longer retractable. * Default brake torque on landing gear is very very low. * Stock aero planes can casually pull 15+G manouevres, but will lose a lot of speed in doing so. * Stock aero planes lose speed very rapidly with engines off; if you run out of fuel, you're unlikely to be able to glide home.

Stock SSTOs are still trivially simple. The first thing I threw together in NuStock:

Seems like increased drag and vulnerability to heat/wind on unshielded panels would've been a better way to do it.