rdem

but if i use the two engines towards opposite directions: one with less and one with more r (distance from com) it should detect 0 g. but it still detects some acceleration.

spinning a craft also requires force. so if it turns the craft, not all of it is used to accelerate it. so it should have less linear acceleration.

that is not what i asked. i already tested it with the red engines that create only angular acc. accelerometer didn't detect any a in this process. so i came to the conclusion that a.m. doesn't count angular acceleration. when only blue engine generates thrust it also turns the craft unlike the yellow one. but this time a.m. detects acceleration. so it must have caused also a linear acceleration.

I made a craft and send it to space to test the relation between angular and linear acceleration. Here's the picture. (SAS was off and gravity was hacked) It has an accelerometer at the center of mass (at least very close to it). First of all I wanted to test if it detects angular acceleration. So I fired the two engines marked red in picture at same time. So it has only angular acceleration. The accelerometer was detecting zero g in this process. Then I only fired the engine towards the center of mass (yellow). Accelerometer counted it as 0.240g. Then I only fired the engine marked with blue. That engine must create both angular acceleration and linear acceleration in the direction of thrust. It happened as I tought and in this process accelerometer counted it as 0.240g same as with the yellow engine. [Note: if craft turns too fast the value on accelerometer will start to decrease. that is because when it turns too fast, force is constantly changing direction and kinda disables itself over the time. The accelerometer can’t be trusted in this situation.] So in my opinion, if the accelerometer detects only linear acceleration and not the angular, it should have detected smaller g than 0.240 because not all of the force is used to cause linear acc. some of it used to turn the craft. I also tried with huge masses added near center of mass (symmetrically) but result was same. Prove me wrong or KSP’s physics engine or accelerometer.

with new "lv-t15"s i can send light boosters with tiny probes without starting to burn in atmo at about 15 km

i was curious about the stage seperators on russian rockets which are looking like they're not very aerodynamic efficient. they are probably used because they are lighter. and the additional drag is not that much. pics of some russian rockets: https://www.google.com/search?q=soyuz&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjd_daGiYjPAhWEtRQKHRqYAj0Q_AUICSgC&biw=1920&bih=955#tbm=isch&q=soyuz+rocket https://www.google.com/search?q=n1+rocket&biw=1920&bih=955&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwit0beYiojPAhWDWBQKHcveBaQQ_AUIBygC

i was trying to design a reusable launcher that can carry probe into a sub-orbital trajectory and then re-enter atmosphere, use chutes etc. but this happened (i tried it for few times but same thing happens) notice that decoupler is towards heat shield

after crushing my Stearwing A300 i noticed some parts were flying. at first i thought they were wings. flying wings were common in ksp, but now a filled mk3 to mk2 fuel tank was going upwards with a constant velocity. it reached a high altitude without losing any speed.

it's very light even if it carries 4 kerbals. also safer (usually, at least one of them survives the crash) control from docking port http://kerbalx.com/rdem/cheapPod

Mk2 sp parts have heat resistant cover on their front and sides. Not at their bottom. Does that means it should enter the atmosphere straight down? Or, is it just for flying with high speeds in atmosphere? Maybe it's not even a heat resistant cover.

In ksp after designing a craft you can launch it directly and it costs you as the sum of the each part's price. Building the craft is free. When it comes to recovering it you get back the craft as funds. So you can design new crafts for every specific mission. But in reality, seperating parts and rebuilding them for every different mission is inefficient. So they make multi-purpouse spacecrafts and re-use them. (such as space shuttle). I think you shouldn't be able to design and launch it directly. After designing it you must produce it before launching. And then you have one of that craft. If you recover that craft after using, it should come you as the craft. (not funds) Rebuilding a new craft form that should cost extra money. If you damage the craft, you should be able to repair it.

I'm not saying it's easy but with many intakes and turbojet engines you can even reach a speed about 2200 meters Per second at very high altitude and you don't need much d/v to reach a stable orbit. Is that possible?

With adding many intakes to your spacecraft you can make it able to reach almost orbital speed at about 35 km high while using very low amount fuel compared to rockets. If this can happen in reality why they are stil using rockets to put small payloads or astronauts into orbit.

pic: http://imgur.com/a/mf220 download: http://kerbalx.com/rdem/the%20agile

it's very efficient and cheap to send light probes into orbit. it uses monopropellant in space. (after taking the screenshot i added some rcs control trusters) http://kerbalx.com/rdem/Efficient%20Small%20Cargo%20SSTO

i dont know exactly but the same mass of two mk2 passenger cabins.

i made an ssto without using oxidizer. it uses monopropellant to circularize orbit. http://imgur.com/a/EvSZh#0 transporter: http://kerbalx.com/rdem/rdem-SSTO-transport cargo: http://kerbalx.com/rdem/rdem-SSTO-cargo action group 1 is for turbo jet engine, ag 2 is for monopropellant engines

i have the 32bit version of the game. not 64

i recently bought a new pc and i cant run the game.(sorry for my bad english) when i launch the game there isn't any problem. but when i try to go to vehicle assembly building etc, game crashes .and when i go to mission control building game doesn't crash but the kerbal at the top left isn't visible.(there is no problem with the animations on the main menu) the output_log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/j6j1mm8xg6s3g6q/output_log.txt?dl=0