GKSP

Before that post, I was going to ask how you get funds without contracts. Thanks.

Just don't do what I did: just about land your rover and have it ready to jettison from the crane/tug and accidentally press shift thinking that will let you scroll to move the camera up. TL;DR Don't get sloppy and think you're in the VAB.

I must say that his videos are a great way of introducing you the game, but then I started looking at others to get more cool creative ideas for my game.

I was also thinking if the crew was subjected to g-forces while 'idle,' they would have a higher risk of G-LOC.

There could be some sort of 'toggle idle' option that enables it, then when you toggle it off, the crew will strap themselves into their seats, maybe for a burn or atmospheric entry.

I've played a little Rocket League and think this would be a fun little addition. Then have an option to make the ball look like Kerbol(sun).

Level 2- 4 range. I have a mod ideology that I stick to, love Scott manley, gone to extra-kerbin bodies, think of Kerbin moons as a walk in the park, and planning my first true Jool mission in a science game with a mid level tech tree. Thinks physics honors should be way harder.

Looking at that, I am so much reminded of KSP. The wings are in the middle of the intakes. Sure it wasn't designed in KSP?

I try to do that technique too. It's simple yet effective. Last time I flew one, I stopped paying attention for a moment and thought it was a normal rocket. In my defense, it had the same appearance on the map view. The biggest issue is just finding the right engines to get you off the ground. I've had that issue when trying to build a science mode spaceplane for Laythe exploration without the supersonic flight researched. My lesson learned was that Jool is a huge leap from Minmus exploration in a science game without going to any other planets first.

Going to use a spoiler to quote XLjedi's huge post here. Nuclear was always an option I had for making my spaceplanes, and my early prototypes did use it. Being able to get so much delta v out of it and almost keep a very similar look, I was surprised. First I probably have to teach myself how to fly spaceplanes better. When I can, I'm going to test fly these things, I already put them in their SPH folder.

Have you compared my mk 1 design to the second? How much did my edits actually effect the delta v?

@Foxter I downloaded your version, but probably won't get around much to testing that due to some school things right now. Is that an edited version of the original or my second?

@Foxter I updated the plane using your tips. The KerbalX link is below: https://kerbalx.com/Brendo/Shadowhawk-2

Thanks for your comments. Not too much of a spaceplane engineer myself right now, so the advice is useful. I'm working on the edits right now. I do have a few comments on your suggestions: 1: Going to implement. 2: Taking chutes out. Add them if you want to not risk what I wrote in the Spoiler. It is old and from before I had the (highly recommended) VNG parachute mod. 3: Don't know why, but I prefer to steer clear of nuclear for 'safety' reasons. Will implement as I can keep the Manual as an original stock copy. 4: Done. I think. Got rid of the two extra intakes radial on the mk1-2 adaptor. Mk 2 will be removed anyway. 5: I'll try to get that in as best I can. Sometimes I can ignore the clippyness but its hard. 6: Done; it was made before Autostrut. 7: Done, but having 2 per side 'cause I like to separate pitch and roll control surfaces. 8: Will replace those with smaller ones to more or less keep the plane flying straight. 9: That would help.

Don't have too much to contribute to this thread. Let's see... I have a rather short model rocket flight log book. I've also assisted in making a low-thrust sugar-stump remover engine. The nerd me also memorized a few numbers of KSP part stats so I could busy myself for ~1.5 hours doing rocket science on a planning sheet for a statewide test. A few proctors glanced back at me after collecting my rough Delta-V calculations done without a calculator during a reading test...

Sure thing. Ill put it up soon https://kerbalx.com/Brendo/Shadowhawk-Manual

Thanks for the info both of you guys. Next opportunity I can, I will try to check these out for myself. Gonna play it safe though and use a copy of my KSP files.

Hi again. This time I have a question pertaining to the stock physics range. Much of the time, I use BDArmory and use ground-based vessels. Can I edit the load range of the ground to allow any landed vessel not to 'fall' if loaded using a mod such as Physics Range Extender? I just don't want my ground systems to be limited by the 10 km limit. Can I also manually input the vessel load range to the game instead of using PRE? Thanks for anything.

Hey all. A long time ago I made this spaceplane and got it into orbit and back. I'm not one for testing planes so I want to see if anyone else would test it out. Tips for an optimal trajectory for takeoff would be appreciated. Also, feel free to edit it and send it back(but keep it stock, save MJ, and don't go too far off of what it is.) Remember to check the action groups too. Thanks. Link: https://kerbalx.com/Brendo/Shadowhawk Sorry, but the imgur album with my pictures for some reason shows up as someone else's starcraft game so I don't have any here.

Sorry. I misworded what I said. The vessel had little connection to the relay, but the relay had full connection. I mentioned this to point out how on the first pass, one relay was red, the other green; the second pass had two red relays.

I tried to put both antennas in almost the same orbit, so none of them are inside the atmosphere. On another pass, I had little connection to both relays but full connection to KSC. I'll just overlook this problem as my relays are outdated anyway. Actually I might not want to overlook this; I plan to utilize a science station orbiting the Mun and that has a spotty signal. Depending on how long the science processing from the Mun landing I'm doing soon will take, I'll just launch some new relays. This will be using two eccentric polar orbiting sats, like in a guide I've seen, but my extra ground stations aren't working(and I've made sure its enabled) so I'm also going to include three circular equatorial sats. Think this'll work?

I've been using CommNet for a while, and love it. I have just managed to find myself in a particular situation I want answers to in my science game. In it, I'm still waiting for transfer windows thanks to kerbal alarm clock, so I'm sticking to Kerbin system-based operations. My rather primitive and outdated relay system contains two relay sats, exactly the same including layout, with four of the antennas directly superior to the Communitron 16, except they're pointing opposite directions. This is obviously because they're supposed to be on opposite sides of Kerbin(And yes I do have newer antennas.) Anayway, I did not align the orbits perfectly so they shifted very close to each other, so any vessel can hit up both at once. In Map view, I noticed one of my ships had a very strong(green) connection to probe A but a weak(red) connection to probe B. They have since moved on but I still want to know: Is the weak connection because the antennas were pointing away from the target? Does signal strength relate to the angle of an antenna relative to the connection direction? Thanks in advance. --GKSP

Sadly, most things are.

Another interesting read by KSK.

Just looked at this thread. I'm gonna need to try out these planes. Nice ace combat music in your video.