CrisK

That is a well known UK actress (Beale and I both live in the UK). The GIF is from her promotion of a charity. Mainly I wanted to show that I was freaking out over the great N-1 engine model and thanking Beale.

Okay, the easiest way to guarantee a fix would be to: 1. Delete the Squad and NASAmission directories from your GameData directory. 2. Delete the Squad and NASAmission directories from your GameData/ActiveTextureManagement/textureCache directory. 3. Highlight all of the folders in the GameData directory. Temporarily move them to your desktop. 4. Reinstall KSP so that you have a fresh GameData directory. 5. Move the files on your desktop back into the GameData directory. If you've done this right then you should NOT see any warnings or messages from Finder. If Finder asks you to Replace, Copy, or Duplicate then you have duplicate files somewhere. Copy each one of the plugins into the GameData directory until you find the culprit. If you want to be extra safe: 6. Delete the ActiveTextureManagement folder in your GameData folder. 7. Download and install the the latest x86-Basic-Release from ATM's GitHub page. Also, if you really want to improve performance on your iMac try running KSP in windowed mode at a lower resolution. You'll be able to use higher graphical settings and it'll use less overall memory.

We loaf your work, Beale! Don't let the N-1 bring you down. Although, come to think of it, bringing things down is what the real N-1 did. Pictures that show the interior really convey what a goofy design this rocket had.

I took a look at your patch. Disabling ATM for SXT is really the simplest and best solution. i.e. your config file should work. A couple of extra instructions for Mac users: 1. Only use the x86 versions of ATM. 2. Place Lack's patch file in Library/Application Support/Steam/SteamApps/common/Kerbal Space Program/GameData/ActiveTextureManagement/ActiveTextureManagerConfigs You can find that directory (folder) by ctrl+clicking the KSP icon or shortcut, then scrolling to options, then show in finder. 3. Move the following directory to the trash while KSP is closed: Library/Application Support/Steam/SteamApps/common/Kerbal Space Program/GameData/ActiveTextureManagement/textureCache/SXT

No. I'm on a Mac as well and SXT has absolutely no compatibility issues. That being said, I can help you troubleshoot the SXT+ATM behavior. Are you using the Steam version of KSP? Lack, for future reference the Mac client uses OpenGL so this is unnecessary. I'm on OS X Yosemite 10.10 and both ATM aggressive and ATM basic seem to work without problems with SXT. Would it help if I made an ATM config file for SXT and wrote up instructions for SXT users on where to place the file within ATM's configs folder? stali79, Are you also on a Mac?

I still think that the white + gold looks better.

I like solid white the best so far, but if that's out then I vote for the almighty Beale loaf N-1.

Thank you for your work, Lack. I will try out the new IVAs. My favorite part of your revisions and additions is still the revised N-1. I think that is your finest work.

Unfortunately I agree with dimovski. This is the first Beale/Tantares model that I don't like. I imagine that the N-1 is a really hard rocket to model. Lack's recent N-1 redesign has made his version my favorite in the Kerbal universe. Beale, Could you make this N-1 white or black like the historical versions? I think that grey just does not look good with the N-1 design.

That's what she said.

Lack, I like the outer appearance of the new cockpits. However, the limited visibility inside the cockpits makes it very hard to fly any of them in IVA. The instruments, gauges, etc. in all but one of the cockpits come up to the chin or eyes. As a result, the windows are only useful for viewing what is above the pilot. They're terrible for landings. The one exception is the cockpit with full windows in the front. This would be amazing, but the front seat is placed so far forward that the pilot has an extremely limited view. It's almost as if the Kerbal has tunnel vision. If the front chair were moved back behind the windows then the field of vision would grow tremendously.

Lack, is that a new cockpit?

Not as much horizontal speed as Wanderfound, I grant, but the altitude and upward momentum are still pretty respectable I think And now I must redesign every spaceplane I ever made that has more than 2 rapiers :/ Eddie, I don't want to come across as constantly negative or critical, but this is not a good flight. The reason why I (and Wander, and Hodo) maintain a horizontal profile for so long (aka: we target the horizon or slightly above it) is so that we build up a great deal of speed, AND while doing so we raise our periapsis to 200,000 or less. Once your speed is sufficient and your periapsis is around 200,000 then you can gain altitude, but only gradually. As you burn at a 10-15% angle you raise both your apoapsis AND your periapsis so that by the time you're over 80,000 your periapsis is over 75,000. You've achieved orbit without having to stop, aim sideways, and waste fuel on an orbital burn. In your case you may still be able to get to orbit, but it won't be an efficient path. Sorry for the negativity, and good work on getting up past the 40k barrier! Edit: The revised ship looks far better. That plane should be able to take you interplanetary.

For what it's worth, I just flew the Dolphin to orbit with the latest version of FAR installed. I took the quickest, least efficient path available: angle 20% up and hold. It made it to orbit with fuel to spare and my speed was 2241m/s. It would have been significantly faster had I taken a proper 5-15% shallow flight path. This is a very, very easy SSTO to fly (nice work Wander!) so there's something strange going on if you run out of thrust.

eddiew, You're barely going fast enough there. You need to angle downwards at 25-30km and build up more speed. Ideally you would be going twice as fast before you reach 40km. If you're moving that slow then you will have a very hard time.

I am a fan of both. Nice work, Wander! eddiew, I suspect that your trouble getting to orbit is 70% flying and 30% design. I think that I could get all of the planes that you designed to orbit. However, they're not optimal. The reason that Wander uses minimal wings on SSTOs is that larger wings actually work against you for spaceplanes. They're dead weight from 30km on up. They'll also serve to pull your nose down and keep you in the atmosphere when you try to break out. Just by looking at your crafts, here is how I would expect them to fly with inexperienced piloting: they should reach 400-500m/s at around 24km and then the nose will pull down. If you attempt to pull the nose up, the nose will probably drift to the side. The plane might even flip. Here is how I would pilot your Boomerang plane: fly it up to 20km then level off. Maintain altitude until your combined speed is 1200m/s or higher. Angle upwards by 5-10%. As soon as the thrust of your Rapiers drops to 50%, switch their mode from airbreathing to rockets. Angle upwards to 20% or so. Leave them on for about 10-15 seconds. That should get your apoapsis to 45km-50km. Cut your engines. Keep your nose pointing at 5-10% and do not let it dip down. If you do, it's not a huge problem. You'll lose height and speed, but you can make up for it with a sort burn. Once you're over the 40km mark, turn on the lv-n and angle upwards to 20%. Your momentum will mean that you will add very little vertical height, but you don't need to. At this point, as long as your time to apoapsis is staying the same or increasing you are fine. Actually, increasing your horizontal momentum is very important at this point because you're exploiting the Oberth effect and increasing your orbit. When your apoapsis is in the 80-90km range, tilt your nose down and burn horizontally. You should slip easily into orbit. If you have trouble at this point, toggle the rapiers back on to give yourself extra height and then try burning horizontally again with the lv-n.

YES! Yes, yes, yes. Beale is a Kerbal rock star.

Lack, thank you for this! The more conservative black and white color scheme makes this N-1 look amazing. Great work!

Hmm. Yes, FAR now sets a hard thrust limit of 50% on all engines that use intake air. It also individually weakens each jet engine and the Rapier. Confusingly, FAR uses a third set of values if AJE is installed. The "supernerfed" state that you're describing is the turbojet's default thrust state at low altitude if FAR is installed. I run out of vertical and horizontal thrust when trying to do maneuvers. Here's the thing: if I increase the size of the wings to a realistic size then I CAN dive at 100m/s or more (given an altitude above 1000) and be absolutely fine. I'm tempted to slap some wings on a Kerbodyn body and record an example.

AHA! It happened to someone else! I posted a screenshot of this a few pages back. My cone actually started floating mid-flight.

Are you using the latest version of FAR? I tried to replicate some of the stunts that you pulled and I was unable to generate enough thrust. Wanderfound, please allow me to offer some slight constructive criticism. On planes that are meant to be acrobatic like the trainer and the Dragonfly X, the wings that you're using are too small for acrobatics and wild maneuvers. The designs are essentially lifting body planes; the wings offer little or no lift and function as mild roll stabilisers. For an acrobatic/highly maneuverable plane you need more lift to compensate for high speed turns, dives, etc. If I add a relatively small trapezoidal wing with forward-facing and rear-facing control surfaces then the trainer can pull out of dives where the vertical speed is -65 or so. With the current wings, the limit is around 20. This is because the wings do not provide lift on their own due to their small size and limited horizontal speed; the lift of the craft is generated entirely by the vtol engine. With larger wings (delta, trapezoidal, whatever) the maneuverability increases tremendously. This is meant to be a positive constructive criticism. I'm not trying to take anything away from your excellent designs. On an unrelated topic, there was a Soviet spaceplane called the MiG-105 that used staging similarly to yours. It had three stages if my memory serves me right, and the top stage was the actual Spiral spaceplane.

WhiteKnuckle, that was amazing. I can pull of the acrobatics, but that landing at the ending made me sweat a bit. Jesus.

Forgive me, Beale.

This looks really good, Beale. It is a large departure from Tantares' original style. Is this going to be your style going forward, or is this just a single American piece in the Tantares pack?