JTpopcorn

Ummm actually nope... Irl I don't think any supermanuverable jets use reaction wheels. Therefore I would say Aqua's plane is definitely supermanuverable as its the performance not the parts that make the difference. If you have a compatible gpu, nvidia shadowplay works nice. My vids are recorded with it (not promoting myself in any way )

This might need to go to support/staff, because you seem to have found a bug...

Laie got it, FMRS puts ships in hold, and remebes their velocities, so you can fly the satellite to orbit, then go "back in time" and land the launch stage/ carrier plane.

Does it generate during time warp only? also try right clicking on a solar panel to see what it says, a screenshot of that might be useful... Otherwise, if it isnt game breaking just ignore it.

Without any mods you could just clip a cube strut and use symmetry to mount engines.

Pretty sure those need values, my approxamitly geosync satellite has the following- ORBIT { SMA = 15240608734.904 ECC = 0.109160551969558 INC = 2.87223661217377 LPE = 2.1172891567035 LAN = 261.773338496634 MNA = 6.22770564976797 EPH = 2043585.75608398 REF = 0 } I assume INC is inclanation or the slant of the orbit, and no idea about SMA, it isn't altitiude, at least not from kerbin.

-JT I'll let those numbers speak for themselves.

I've got something interesting coming. Can you say orbital strike...

Try unlocking plus limiting the front gear steering to overcome it.

I would assume at this point he may wait until version 1.1 to update the series, especially if 1.1 is looming closer.

I'm using a modified scope that definitly works at 150km. I think I may be limited to DOE's 750km load distance, but I might try to extend it. It seems that at maybe 750km the entire ground unloads to a lower res version, causing the buildings to be unviewable from geosync.

I think, ksp is still limited to a certain amount of memory, meaning if you have more than a certain amount, ksp can't even use it.

Alright complicated question here First, what is the unload distance of the KSC? Not the physics distance, but the unload distance, in which it would be impossible to actually view the KSC (between 150km and 2686.33km) from testing. Second, would there be a way to change this (increase the distance) to something as high as geosync? Thanks all, JT

I would have to assume in this situation that you are getting heat bleeding back into the single NERV, and while this may be problamatic, extending the other rads should quickly solve the problem. Maybe it is emitting enough heat to the surrounding area that that one Nerv takes in more... Similiar to pointing a rocket at a craft... I don't know just speculating.

Canards are used a lot in ksp for looks balancing of lift manuvering Because canards are in a spot to add agility to a craft, IRL planes that have them tend to have fly by wire etc. For instance the Dassault Rafale

Click on the dropdown menu where your acount name is (top right) Click on account settings Signature type whatever make sure Show Signature is on Press Save -JT Oh, the hyperlink is works by clicking on the little chain looking thing, which appears to the left of the big quotation marks in the little menu above the text box.

They are upside down by 180 degrees

Technically, it should connect to any part with an open node, which should include Mk3 bays. Dont forget to use the slider to adjust the height of the ramp so it just hits the ground. Also, If you have clearance problems, you could mount wheels off of a singular I-beam undernearth the cargo, instead of on the outside of it.

I would look for a chart of all of the different possible stock science experiments. What you will find is that some experiments operate differently, and require different altitudes and locations to gain new science. I think this will be the best way for you to get all of the science! -JT

I suggest going to the BD armory forums to check on that, ksp might run slow but it should still work. If you PM me your basic specs I should be able to tell if you are likely to have game breaking bugs like that.

Chutes, your planes are small so they probably can glide to far less than 100m/s, but chutes are the best way to go from flying fast to stopped. I have hit over 200m/s landings after deploying chutes on touch down.(Not recomended, but possible) For your Kerbal's sake I would land along the runway on the grass, stop, then roll up onto the runway for full cost return. -JT

You also might be able to cut down on drag by reducing your main wing size. Maybe a tiny bit more speed from airbreathers but you wont get that much more out of it. If space TWR is good enough ditch the duel rapiers for a single rapier with a wiplash inline (cliped partly into the rapier) Then you cant spin out do to engine out, and you can leave the whiplash on after the rapier switches modes. If you use the short mk2 to mk1 adapter, you will save .2 mass from the engine swap + gain low atmo performance. Worse case just make the plane longer by adding more fuel. -JT

Yup. 1.05 did some funky things to aero, such as causing upper atmo to be very thin, and lower atmo to be more dense. This causes a "wall" in which while still at orbital speeds crafts hit low atmo and overheat, or are unable to slow quick enough to open chutes. If possible, I would suggest geting rapiers to supersonic at low pitch, then going up relativly steeply to skip the dense atmo, and level off close to the top of low atmo.(on the density bar) You shouldn't have to much trouble with heat if you get high enough in the atmosphere, but at a certain point heating will go through the roof, and you will need to get above that altitude as quickly as possible. A steeper climb should cause heat to be less of an issue but will hurt efficiency. -JT

I read an article somewhere that said: 1) Within visual range dogfighting isn't going anywhere, this debate has been around since the F-14 in Vietnam War, and within visual range situations still occur, do to better countermeasures. 2) While thrust vectoring is fun, the speeds in which it can have an effect over just control surfaces are slow relativly, and at high speeds it is not needed/does not help. Don't forget planes and people unlike kerbals have g limits. -JT

[quote name='Spearka']Sorry, I've just been trying to be as constructive as possible with my advice yet Emu keeps PM-ing me over and over and I'm just getting tired of it. That and the thread is becoming little but more Emu craft being announced and I'd like some more diversity[/QUOTE] I can't say anything about the PM's, but I literally just read through a good bit of this thread, and in the past month, many people have posted more craft than Emu. And I am not responding to constructive critisism, I responding to stuff like [quote name='Spearka']TBH it's not even anti-fighter. I'm sure that a Thalia could tank infinite amounts of those missiles. I mean, if you don't believe me see Ep. 23 with the Trishulas missiles, they had similar structure and couldn't even get through a Longswords weak armour[/QUOTE] and [quote name='Spearka']emu stahp[/QUOTE] and [quote name='Spearka'] Emu, we need to talk about your making of too many ships[/QUOTE] Constructive critisim involves informing a person on what they did wrong, so they can fix it, not just stating something is bad/wrong. I also found the bottom two quotes rude, as they basically discourage a player from playing the game and submitting craft.(The entire point of this thread) I do not understand how you see this as only Emu announcing craft, because put up far less craft than others in this thread. Also, it just isn't your place to tell him to stop. He never reached a spam level of posting, so he shouldn't be treated as if he had. -JT I'm going to get HatBat to resolve this issue so the thread can move on to making spaceships.:D