selfish_meme

I think you are right, neither way makes up for the wrong cockpit shape

You have just taken the mechanised bird crown

Pretty good, gives me a good impression, everything except that cockpit, can you add another passenger section to the top and clip it into the one behind to make the top hump come further forward? From the pictures I'm looking at, thatand the strange angle on the wings is the only thing I would look at

We are not usually as harsh, it is much more supportive here, check the other threads and look at what other people do.

Told you it was going to be

I think people thought it could use some work, there was no need to be harsh or disparaging, what is a 'clipfest' anyway, without clipping we would not have anything half as cool.

Facing opposite directions, airbrake closed one set it engaged, airbrake open the other set.

Two sets turning different directions on your airbrakes

I know there is one guy who consistently trolls Colombia

Most of these rating systems could use a can't rate without a post, to disabuse the casual troll

I spammed the Facebook feed for you, I think you might make Video Wednesday

I just figured out, you could make a pivoting wing craft? Or a deforming craft flight and landing, maybe a giant bird?

These are probably ruled out for aesthetics sake, besides Runes suggestion on ascent path (with Rapiers always get fast down low and then hold it on the edge of exploding till you hit space). Shock cone intakes are less draggy than ram air intakes, they also work well on the back of rapiers clipped in a bit, open nodes on the back of rapiers are draggy. A pointier nose (a shock cone works best) would also reduce drag. This would allow you to accelerate quicker, reach a higher speed and requires less dV to orbit. As Rune said also you have too many engines, two would probably do, which probably means you don't need to run off the end of the runway and can climb quite steeply to mach 1, but it also means you are wasting fuel.

Well if I can get mine to orbit dragging a nuke then there is plenty of room for more performance.

And you can use it with the 64bit Linux without it crashing, well you can do everything in 64bit Linux without it crashing

Isn't it Kronal Vessel Viewer?Edit: should remember to go to last page before replying Are the wing panels just for looks, I know Colombia had one that was just one giant fairing.

Actually mine can reach either pole in half an hour, in fact it's faster than whiplashes because of the rapiers, though that has nothing to do with it's VTOL ability. I have a version that can do a tourist run to LKO, any land spot on the planet, or drop a small satellite so it is practical in a way. It would probably have slightly better performance with whiplashes (I have tried both but only the wheasleys fit in the bays without clipping, so they do provide some utility, about as much as KSP can be said to provide any utility).

I beg to differ http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/132424-Project-X-VTOL-SSTO-Spaceplane

Really? I found the opposite, they take a long time to spool up though. Are you watching the kn readout in KER?

For forward thrust keep the Turboramjets, but for VTOL lift use the basic jets.

My guess is it's all the wing panels creating drag that is oriented towards the side with the most panels, which in your case is the bottom. The draggiest parts want to go last, so it rolls over.

The Basic Jets have better low speed and low altitude thrust than the turboramjets, don't be fooled by the max specs, they only happen for the turbo ramjets at higher altitudes and speed. I tested them both in my ProjectX VTOL SSTO.

Real plume

You guys are doing such cool stuff I am so jealous, especially after the mosquito was swatted by the heat bug. Anyway I have been hanging out with this lady, and we decided to get serious, it was a beautiful ceremony. The Kerbes all 124, rotating ring, launchable parts of her.

Yeah he was using old beta craft that had high part counts