SaSquatch

Also remember that the KSO has nosewheel steering that you can enable and get much greater amount of steering freedom. Not recommended at high speeds. I fly with FAR and DE, I actually undershoot KSC with a burn on the farside and just skip in the upper atmosphere for longer. It works perfectly for me but your experience may be different... especially if your cargo was giving you drag.

The mission numbers were also linked to fiscal years and a fear of the number 13... but besides the point.

That was a problem with the real shuttle program. The math becomes dependent on the turnaround costs and maintenance vs the regularity of flights. Both aren't issues in Kerbal. **edit** plus nobody has balanced or can balance the cost figures since Currency hasn't been implemented in KSP yet... nor does anyone outside of squad know what this system may actually function like. So the cost numbers are completely arbitrary.

OMS and RCS use the same fuel. Nose RCS dump is actually not before reentry. If it was, there would be no way to control the spacecrafts nose since the control surfaces wouldn't work in that part of reentry. This dump is performed to reduce the weight in the nose AFTER there's enough atmo that RCS isn't needed anymore.... So the flight surfaces can actually lift the nose. It's not to avoid fire.... well, not primarily.

Agreed. Inspiration, Technology, and Practical Applications.

The SmartParts Pack fuel valve is what's used in the video. I've never had a tumble though but sit on the runway with a full tank and you pop a wheelie. I honestly only dumped fuel to ensure that the video was obviously unpowered.

Nicely put. I'm reminded of a Jefferson quote , "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." I'm not suggesting this in the political sense but rather... if we remain silent in a topic that we care about, we are accepting the outcome provided by those we complain about. I know my house Rep (Montana only has 1) is a freshman congressman who is too busy running for the open senate seat and is not likely to have any say on the matter let alone pull... Daines if anyone was wondering. But I'm with Langkard and will probably type out some emails to Daines as well as the guys running for his Seat and see what the replys are. Personally I'm for the Mission, if for no other reason then to keep something akin to focus with NASA or just money in the coffers. It's always easier to sell a cut then a budget increase. Lets maybe avoid the slow bleeding death of faster, better, cheaper and see what waits for us just over the horizon.

I think regardless of anyones specific opinions or political affiliations, we can all agree there are political realities and political conveniences that are exploited by both parties. And nobody here lacks an interest in space exploration. So the common ground is the reality of further exploration of the cosmos and how we might go about doing it. Still waiting on pins and needles for Juno and New Horizons personally. First images of Pluto (of decent resolution) will not be a small thing. Bigger then Space LEGOs anyways

TAC Life Support lets you do supply missions. Final Frontier mod tracks mission time for each Kerbal so crew transfers have more meaning (my Jeb has over 1500 days of space flight... 800 day mission on a MunBase Science Lab). Interstellar Mod lets you take up a Science Lab that creates science daily but requires power and resources of it's own. My station has been setup as a science station but I've been refitting it for Anti-matter storage, along with the Phase 2 modules. The last Interstellar tech tree entry requires 10k science and that lab is only doing .148/day in kerbin orbit. And of course... Keep building that station.

It does have the trademark elements of a political fight. Opposition President proposes budget and (relatively) ambition goal, draws Congressional Representatives to pick a fight in the name of fiscal crisis all while cloaked in obscurity when the public cares more about justin bieber(don't care if that's how it's spelled) then they do science or space exploration. Reminds me of the many Anti-Video games/pro-family fights. Politicians taking on "easy" fights to shore up their demographics (How many times did the House vote to repeal the ACA?). Let's not confuse the politics of convenience with policy, or competence. It's an election year and the campaign ads are already flooding in on all media. I'm in a State with an open senate seat... yea, lots of money and mud is being thrown around here already (I have never hated Youtube ads more). It is a crisis for NASA however. They were hit by sequestration, just like most agencies. This is a Republican fight with a Democratic President about essentially restoring pre-2012 budget levels to NASA. And everyone on that committee is up for reelection. Let us hope that public inspiration is restored from this apathy of discovery and exploration that has infected public consciousness and science education. Reminds me, I need to catch last weeks episode of Cosmos.

I've had this happen on a couple of different ships. It's a KSP bug. Seems like there might be a fix you can manage but it's rather complicated... and then I stopped reading it. I dock my KSOs to a "docking collar" that has ports on both sides, so I just had to do a reentry with that thing sticking out the top (it's a pretty small thing that I use but still). But I lost one ship to it because I couldn't be bothered.

It's not the size of the cargo bay that counts... it's how you use it.

A Flare during landing is performed right before touchdown. The aircraft pulls back (nose up) to slow the decent rate. This way, the pilot controls how hard they come down on the landing gear while putting the nose at the right angle to avoid ripping the tail of the plane off. . It's basically just pulling up before you hit the runway so you touchdown softly. Analogous to slowing a Lander to under 5m/s before you hit the ground while making sure you touchdown flat to the slope of the hill you're coming down on. Except an aircraft, you want the nose up a little to contact the rear wheels but not too high and hit the rear of the aircraft on the ground. This is why a boresite or waterline indicator would be nice on the hud (one can wish). If you have the ADI open and in IVA, there's a static icon that looks like wings with a dot in the center (it's also the center icon on the NavBall). This icon displays what angle your nose is pointing independent of the velocity vector. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_flare

It's a known bug.

That's weird. Are you using the experimental FAR? I changed that bit from winglet to part and tried another landing and was still able to manage it. Landing speed around 100m/s and that same twitch instability above 150m/s when flying low. It's either something causing drag that you haven't noticed, some config or setting somewhere, or just the way you're bringing it in. I'm using FAR 12.5.2 with KSO v2.05(that video) and v2.06/7. Maybe PM me a description of your decent? So we don't stray this thread off topic too much.

What's the Fix? (PM me or something if this is too off topic) I just ran a keyboard only landing with a "mostly" empty cargo hold (I had some stuff in there... like a KAS winch). A couple of tips maybe.... KSO gets twitchy when you're above 150m/s or so during Final (maybe just my cargo drag). Keeping airspeed lower near 100-120m/s during final makes it much more stable. Also the Velocity Vector on the Hud in IVA is really handy for lining up with the runway.

Is your cargo hold absolutely empty? The cargo hold doesn't prevent drag from cargo and it can stack up pretty fast and have dramatic effects on the reentry profile. Most loads I bring back I try to have in a stack in the bay, with a nosecone or other cap even. Otherwise I'll end up in the water far far away from KSP.

I didn't touch anything from launch.

Quicksave with F5 and reload with F9 to mess around with different deorbit burns. Are you aiming short of KSC or long? You can safely deploy the airbrake around 500 m/s (actually at 1000m/s but the g-load gets higher) In the video, I'm just west of KSC at 450-500 m/s with a good amount of altitude as well. I enter into a descending turn holding around 200-250m/s while loosing altitude and lining up with the runway. (I could of just hit the airbrake and used a steep dive... but oh well) Also the ScanSat Map in the cockpit will give a good estimated flightpath and landing location. Great for navigating.

Don't forget about the Island Airfield if you don't have enough energy to get back to KSC. A shorter and more hazardous runway but is arguably better then the water. Are you typically overshooting KSC?

I also might suggest what kind of cargo ayana has in the bay. Might be causing too much drag. Haven't had the overshoot problem. Where are you aiming during your deorbit burn? With FAR, I aim short of KCS. I ended up doing a descending circle but I could of just dove with the airbrake a little earlier and came in sooner then with the descending circle.

I don't remember the Default actiongroup bindings but I have flaps next to the airbrake on my setup (3 & 4). I usually lower the flaps before final approach. Touchdown usually with both Airbrake and Flaps deployed (unless I was low on airspeed to begin with but usually not the case).

I thought landing with FAR was easier... but it has been awhile since I landed without a joystick. Where have you been crashing? Final Approach?

I guess I'm just not sure what cargo you're trying to lift.

What is your cargo setup like? I'm curious if i'm just not recreating the load you're intending.