SnakyLeVrai

Yeah I use the bigger one too. The difference between the 2 is usually small enough that it's not over-expensive. I have reusable launchers as well, around 70-80% of the launcher's price is recovered as far as I am concerned (I lose the fuel and the fairing).

Thanks @XLjedi The VAB is a good building tool. As much as I appreciate the SPH for particular payloads, like vehicles or other things that have a horizontal plane as reference, the VAB does a great job for "cylindrical" shaped designs. I find rockets pretty efficient for catapulting stuff to orbit quickly (under 4 minutes I'm good and done) and easily. Building space planes takes too long for me, I find them impractical, mostly due to the fact that the cargo bays are very, very narrow and the time to orbit is like forever. It sucks because I like the concept. Some of my medium class launchers don't appear on this illustration. Alongside the Creamy Goodness series, I have the Moka series & Chestnut Cake series, which have the same cargo capacities but come in 3.75m parts. They are so much more expensive that I don't use them, even if they are, too, recoverable. See, with an average 75% recovery value, when you still lose 25% of the launcher's cost, it might as well be 25% of a cheap rocket than 25% of a very expensive one... That's why I made the Creamy Goodness I, II & IIIR-S3 version, for "size 3", with a 3.75m adapter with adequate fairing. I can lift bigger payloads for a fraction of the cost of an immense launcher. And it's recoverable.

I have standardized all my launchers in subassemblies too, I tend to like the classical look of it so, no weird looking launchers with unaerodynamic payload for me... They are all equipped with chutes and / or spare fuel for recuperation (I use Stage Recovery), even the 2nd stages in the rare situations I use them - most of my launchers have one main core with boosters all around. I can lower the launch costs dramatically this way: I usually recover 75 to 80% of the launcher's cost. TWR is around 1.4 at takeoff, including payload of course. I keep lowering the thrust until Max Q is passed, so TWR stays around 1.4, and then I let it go up naturally as fuel is burned. I put thrust to the max usually above 30km when air is thinner. For my medium-class launchers (the "Creamy Goodness" family), I've simply made an adapter to fit a 3.75m size fairing for the bulkier payloads. They take care of most of my launches, and I do a lot of them. This, plus a strategy based on ferrying tourists to the Mün, Minmus, just outside Kerbin's SOI, rescuing Kerbals and using the tourists cruises to train them to up 3 stars... That's my main income, this way I can finance just about everything I need. They paid for the mining equipment I put on Minmus and the Mün, the orbital fuel depots, the space tankers, ... Even when I go over the top for the base building contracts, I'm still making money In short, base building anywhere in the Kerbol system is not so expensive anymore... (yeah I know, the names... well, Kerbals like 2 things in life: rockets, and food... it seemed only fair that rockets get the name of food... I need to rename the Minus family though - how about Peach Pie?)

Hi, Good choice reproducing the Apollo missions, it's always good fun and you learn great things about what they did to make it work! Here is my take on the Apollo missions, all stock except for the cameras. I've tried to stick to the real thing, the electrical systems are the same (no solar panels ). There are a few mistakes, like I forgot to add RCS to the lander... You can check the blueprints I've put in the video, maybe you'll find some inpiration, especially for the CM / lunar module separation.

Cool pics and videos Here is a couple of pictures my parents took in Wyoming, I wasn't there unfortunately. They processed the pictures, centered them and sent them to me, then I whooped up a video with the whole sequence. You can even see some lunar surface details, like the main seas! (I've highlighted them for easier identification). Hardware used: Fisheye Samyang 8 mm for the general image with landscape ; Nikkor 300 mm lens for the detailed images of the eclipse ; Lotsa elbow grease.

Thank you Yeah I like making those but for the moment being I will keep making progress with my career game, I've got some exploration to do and customers to satisfy

Thanks!

Hi all! After several long, long hours of flying, editing, blueprint preparation and mixing, here is my take on Apollo Kapollo 16. Funnily enough, it took me Kapollo 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 to fine tune the 16th... I've tried to keep true to the actual spaceships as much as I could (well... I did not put any RCS on the LEM... my mistake ). Now I can finally come back to my career game Enjoy Snaky

All aboard the Space Train! Today’s Space Train stops at Eleanor Kerman’s. Starting off as a seamstress, Eleanor is now manager of the Airbags and Balloons branch at K-Tex Company. She recounts how she got involved with the space program: “I have been sewing teddy bears for eleven years. One day, an engineer asked me if I could build an airtight suit for a special kind of activities.” The airtight suit was designed to protect dumpster-diving enthusiasts from getting covered in trash while landing, since experience taught them to choose full dumpsters rather than empty ones to break their fall. “This is how we realized bloated bags of expired snacks made great shock absorbers”, she says. Months later, after a string of unexplainable failures at landing on the Mün, the Space Center launched yet another competition to build parachutes that could work in hard vacuum. K-Tex proposed their radical yet innovative solution of Inflatable Litter Container (or ILC), that surrounds the ship with airbags to cushion landing, effectively tackling both problems of taking care of trash during long duration spaceflight and not missing the dumpster while landing. However, protestation from the Planetary Protection Agency threatened the project, stating Kerbals couldn’t resist popping inflated balloons, resulting in polluting outer worlds. Fortunately, while observing a stallholder decorating a merry-go-round with balloons at the fair, Eleanor realized they could inflate the bags with just any gas. This is how she was put in charge of the brand new Airbags and Balloons branch at K-Tex. “Everyone can participate in the Space Program” says Eleanor, “sure you can train as a Kerbonaut, spend years studying engineering and science, but you can also contribute as a seamstress, a painter, an environment protection specialist or a dumpster-diver! Everyone matters, just step forth and join the hype!”

Hahaha congrats

And here is an improvement with the perfect delivery system... and a mission profile! The best way to attract Kerbals and Kerbalinas to the Space Program! (also to send food the stranded ones, but don't say that, it may impede recruitment). Current mods used: KSP: 1.2.2 (Win64) - Unity: 5.4.0p4 - OS: Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (6.1.7601) 64bit Toolbar - 1.7.13 Kerbal Engineer Redux - 1.1.2.8 Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - 3.3.1 HyperEdit - 1.5.3 KronalVesselViewer - 0.0.6 KSP-AVC Plugin - 1.1.6.2 PlanetShine - 0.2.5.2 Precise Node - 1.2.4 RCS Build Aid - 0.9.1 ShipManifest - 5.1.3.2 Trajectories - 1.6.5 TweakScale - 2.3.4 Enjoy your meal!

I hope so that was fun to make at least

Here's what I've cooked up so far. Looks like I've found something to do with the Stayputnik

Could be a corrupt persistent save file. Back your career folder up somewhere (your career should be there : Kerbal Space Program\saves\AUG 16) and try this: delete persistent.sfs (it's the corrupt file) duplicate the most recent quicksave #xxx.sfs and rename it persistent.sfs try loading your game (you may need to restart the game) if you load a craft in the tracking station and hit F9, you MAY be able to restore your progress (the one you have lost when deleting the corrupt persistent.sfs file). if it doesn't work, try with an older quicksave #yyy.sfs file... You'll obviously loose some progress but you'll play again.

Have you tried a gravity assist with Gilly? When you get out of the SOI of an inclined moon, you can use it to throw yourself in polar orbit of the main planet for quite cheap. Takes a little planning. Never tried it with such a small rock though... Minmus is great for that. Just remember real life comets can have their orbits turned from prograde to retrograde if they are eccentric enough and pass real close to Jupiter. The same applies here

lol yeah that looks bad I try to run a clean space program with 100% reusable launchers, it saves a lot of funds (boosters, main stage, 2nd stage and / or propulsion stages that tug stuff around Mun and Minmus are all reusable). I can reduce the launch costs by 65% to 70% sometimes!

Those are great investments. In a single 600k funds contract (ore return from Minmus), I could launch 2 mining outposts on Mun and Minmus, then a space station with fuel storage and Kerbal space and a tiny 4 seats lander, around both the moons, and now the tourist contracts only cost me the fuel to get them around Kerbin, because my launchers are reusable... I just pack the ship with every stranded Kerbal I find on the way and train / recruit them basically for free. Some of those stations were also required by contracts, and the Kerbin one also paid for an extension... So I have basically had my whole tourist / mining operation paid for, and now it's ready to make money...

Hey all, I've just learned that reading contracts thoroughly can make things easier the hard way. All I had to do was mine 1200 Ore on Minmus and land it back on Kerbin. By land, they mean land, not splashdown... So, as my contract did not register, I put together a (particularly) ugly seaplane and dragged the precious payload back to KSC. Today I've sailed 45km through Kerbin's ocean at 20m/s just to bring back a juicy amount of funds... and that was worth it, because it paid for permanent mining outposts on both Mun and Minmus, both associated with orbital fuel depots, equipped with lightweight landers for wealthy tourists. Those investments will pay very soon...

No idea how to do that, I don't have a mac. There must be a way to sort the files by size, most probably. If it does not help, try with a bisection : Cut half the files away from the folder and paste them somewhere safe. Launch the game and click VAB. If it fails again, the wrong file is in the remaining half. Congratulations, you've saved 100 useless clicks Go back to step 1 and do it again with the half of the half, and so on. If it stopped failing, the wrong file is in the half you've just cut out. So you'll have to go back to step 1 with only this set of suspect files When you've isolated the bad file, destroy it, then put all the other files you've cut into the VAB folder (or SPH) and you're done! You'll save time with this search method, if sorting the files by size doesn't help...

As @Spartwo said: there could be a corrupted craft in your folder. Check for a 0Kb file in your craft folder, should be located there: Kerbal Space Program\saves\<name of your career>\Ships\VAB or Kerbal Space Program\saves\<name of your career>\Ships\SPH It happened to me, I just removed the corrupted file and it worked fine again. If it doesn't do it, you'll have to test each file...

I have this too with large space stations that have many pieces. I've limited this effect by using cargo bays to stuff much of the parts inside. The structural parts are now Mk3 size and include cargo bays, it means less parts to wobble together and enter resonance... The whole station has less parts (due to better skills after hundreds of KSP hours) and is less prone to auto-rotation. I don't remember this but: aren't cargo bays including "invisible struts" now in 1.1.2? (like airstreams)

Doesn't it depend on whether you get your assist from inside or outside Kerbin ? (inside being between Kerbol and Kerbin) If you get your assist while being "higher than Kerbin" in respect with Kerbol, you should accelerate. Better yet, having your assist with Kerbin rather than with the Mun should have a stronger effect, as Kerbin's gravitational attraction is stronger, as long as you get it from very close (like between 75-100km). Found this (look at Kerbin gravity assist 1 year after launch) :

Yeah, on 1st design, it's a bit tall indeed. As stated above, batteries and solar panels will make your life better 2nd design will be more stable on the ground, that's true If it's short on dV for beginner level, then add more fuel TWR is aplenty on this design, so you just need to add more fuel. Also, be careful for reentry, as you have a very long reentry vessel due to Science Jr and Mk1 Cargo Bay. Do this: Make sure the command pod is the root part (it helps for step 3) Display the Center of Mass (CoM) in the VAB Detach the bottom part of the lander (click on the decoupler to detach the whole base and put it away for a moment) Look at the position of the CoM : it needs to be located at least in the lower 1/3rd of the reentry vessel. If it's higher, there's a risk of flipping & burning during reentry. --> Tweak the monopropellant, parts placement, ablator and stuff to make the CoM as low as possible. When it's all adjusted correctly, you can put the base back in place.

I splashed down the 1st one at a near stall, that was the best way. Also I made a plane with high wings (for increased stability), high aspect ratio and straight configuration (for lift), as if I bred a Cessna and a U2. That makes a LOT of lift, with a low stall speed. Perfect for landing slowly. I equipped it with flaps ; for pitch I only use the horizontal stabilizers... All in all, it looked a lot like a DeHavilland Twin Otter. Just take off from the grass, not the T1 runway.

I use them yes, I also make bigger ones, like this LES for a 90 tons spaceship: And I've also made a bottom-approach, putting the LES below the payload, I think it looks better. More streamlined, no need to separate it when reaching orbit...