Wanderfound

Like this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/101944-Kerboduna-Part-1 Basically: wide-track landing gear, tailstrike guards, a hint of VTOL to control the sink rate and retro-thrusters for grounded braking assistance. None of those things are necessary, but they all make it easier. Piloting-wise, it's just like landing at KSC: come in as low, slow and shallow as possible.

I can't directly compare as I never fly stock, but the stock drag model is particularly punishing on larger craft.

They're working out okay for FAR: We could definitely use some bigger jets/intakes/landing gear, though.

Likewise. Have another one: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1610271&viewfull=1#post1610271

Sorting out the rotation issue is simple, and in this case doesn't require that sort of extreme tactic (which does work, however). Just shift the rear gear forwards to just behind CoM, raise the gear on hardpoints for more tail clearance, and increase the max deflection on the elevators. Rotates with ease once you do that. But even with takeoff rotation sorted, it still won't fly, although it should. There's something buggy going on; it's acting as if most of the wing doesn't exist. It'd be worthwhile to run the FAR lift visualisation during takeoff to try and work out what's going on.

I didn't build or test fly that one, I just fiddled with the wings until the aero analyses came good. On test flying, though: yes, serious issue on takeoff. The issue isn't lack of lift, it's lack of pitch authority and insufficient tail clearance. It can easily get up to speed with plenty of runway to spare, and the analyses suggest that it should fly level with minimal AoA as soon as it hits Mach 0.45 or so, but takeoff rotation is a major problem at the moment. Working on a revised version now. - - - Updated - - - There is something severely weird going on with that craft; despite having plenty of wing and analyses that say it should fly easily, it has about as much lift as a brick. Behemoth: are there some clipped parts, altered configs or other weirdnesses in there? - - - Updated - - - In other matters, a new airframe: the Kerbodyne Sledge. Good cargo capacity, lively atmospheric performance, serious interplanetary range. Story at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Sledge/story Alternate format at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/slideshow/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Sledge Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/nfdwpz5g56aw6ch/Kerbodyne%20Sledge.craft?dl=0

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1636232&viewfull=1#post1636232

Work on the ascent profile; it should make orbit fairly easily if you maximise Turbojet speed and altitude before lighting the rockets.

HMS Campbeltown: Not that flashy a ship, but her final action was epic: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Nazaire_Raid

Okay: gave it a quick once over. The basics aren't bad, but deltas are notoriously tricky for pitch and yaw stability; having the CoM right up the back of the plane makes things difficult. It could use a bit more lift and span, so I extended the wings a touch, repositioned things a little and gave you more pitch authority: it was severely lacking in that. It's all good up to to 28km: But you will get a tiny bit of yaw instability after that: For that, either spend an hour fiddling with aero surfaces to eliminate it (moar tailfin and shifting CoM forwards is probably what's needed) or just fly through it. A bit of SAS torque or a Vernor each side of the nose would help with that. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ko36si0a2wsl7g/Deltatune.craft?dl=0

I'm getting repetition for cash, not science. As with others, I have thousands of science in the bank queued up behind the need to unlock tier 3 R&D. I can easily pop up a satellite or two for √10K/launch, and a spaceplane trip to Minmus can pull in half a million or so once you add up all the contracts done on the way, but I'm still having to grind for building upgrade cash. I've got about thirty satellites up there, and the orbital station / planetary base collection would also be piling up in a major way if I weren't doing them with spaceplanes. I've been running Fundraising Campaign and Patent Licencing strategies, but they don't draw much cash. We've still got ye olde strategy situation of overpowered Outsourced R&D and underpowered everything else, and the KSC upgrade costs could use some tuning as well.

Whoopsie. Thanks; will fix.

Well, testing to see if your boat thrusters can cope with a bit of splashing seems pretty sensible to me. (as for how to actually do it: 90% defuelled small SRB, parachute, jet on top, pop it just over the beach east of KSC. Shouldn't cost more than a thousand or so, most of which you'll get 90% recovery on)

Eh? The basic jet is the best possible stock thruster for a Kerbboat. Hefty thrust, fuel efficient, lack of high altitude supersonic ability irrelevant.

A lot of the early-tech options (prop planes, sounding rockets) can be achieved with a minimal part addition (props, low-tech cockpit, couple of small SRBs and nosecones, done). Ditto for helicopter bits (main rotors, small and large, borrow the aircraft prop for the tail rotor). The possibilities offered are large, the cost involved is small.

A Mk3 Inline Port + Service Compartment or Mk3 Inline Port + Four-Kerbal Passenger Bay part would be nice.

Finally got a big 'un flying right: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1636232&viewfull=1#post1636232

The fact that a large percentage of the KSP user base view FAR as essential suggests that the idea that "realism doesn't sell" is not entirely accurate. We're not seling to the same market as the other game companies here; the commercial strength of KSP rests in its appeal to non-traditional gamers. A large chunk of whom, apparently, do like relatively realistic aero. Personally, I'm hoping that all of this is just the beginning of Ferram's elaborate trolling campaign, at the end of which he reveals that Squad have indeed hired him to add FAR/NEAR as realism toggles to the stock game.

Kerbal Flight Data​.

Like this: Minimal drag, minimal mass. One turbojet, one intake, small wings, little fuel.

They've finally cracked it: the Mk3 heavy lifter that flies like a Mk1. The Kerbodyne Titan 8. Nothing this big should fly like that. Story at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Titan%208/story Alternate format at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/slideshow/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Titan%208 Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/dt60cvztnllkop5/Kerbodyne%20Titan%208.craft?dl=0

Yup, 1,500m/s is the practical maximum for jets in FAR. 1,750m/s or so is reachable if you build a specialist speedster and take a long time building speed. But 1,500m/s is plenty fast enough.

Fair enough; no aggro intended. This is the classic issue with stock; the tricks that you learn there are actively counterproductive when you go to a less unrealistic model. Things that should be intuitive need to be relearnt.

Change the cones to ramscoops, change the outer RAPIERs to LV-T45s. It'll be slower, but it should still work. Flick the rockets on for a second to give a little boost at takeoff. You probably don't have the inline docking port either; change that for a small tank or a nacelle.

Try this one: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1632210&viewfull=1#post1632210 . Make sure you install Kerbal Pilot Assistant first, and cut the kp/kd values of SAS to 1/3 of default. Climb to 5,000m before going supersonic if you don't want to blow up the airframe.