EpicSpaceTroll139

@Van Disaster I've found that mk3 fuselages on their side act as a durable deck, flotation device, and fuel containing combo. Anyways, your carrier looks pretty cool! Also: I hate to be a bother but @Veeltch could you please update the leaderboard?

Sort of actually. A while back when playing on a DMP server it turned out someone had lined the little buggers up across the island runway. I didn't notice this and came in for a landing with a large cargo plane which had 6 Goliath's hanging just above the ground. I didn't see the kerbals until I was right on top of them. *WHAM!* One of my Goliath turbofans slammed into one of them, and it got blown up. Not just the Kerbal, but the engine too.L uckily I had engine out capability, but it made me think about really how much more often things like that should have have happened to me, considering all the junk there often was hanging around near my planes.

Yah I wasn't thinking it would be much of a problem for things firmly attached to the craft, but rather for rovers or other objects close in front of the intake.

Derp I didn't even notice Hazardish had already posted. Just saw the leaderboard and saw he wasn't on there and was like "What???".

@hazard-ish I believe this is yours to win with your 3.61 ton craft

Ah well I wouldn't know how the devs would work it if they did implement it but I imagine the damage thing would work kind of like solar panels do today, in that they can deal with parts of the same ship clipping through them perfectly well, but when something else hits them they get damaged.

@VeeltchHow would it affect part clipping? Do people often put stuff inside their intakes? Edit also I would assume this effect would be throttled along with engine power. I figure to make it more fun and less of a nuisance in ksp, at idle you'd have to almost already be in the intake for it to do anything.

I'll just put this here https://kerbalx.com/EpicSpaceTroll139/Heli-MKll-18-8 If you play in KSP 1.2 you can ignore the lines about increasing the angular velocity limit Also made an electric plane pretty quickly. I have some better ones saved somewhere and could make a better one than this, but was too lazy. http://imgur.com/a/Hr3AV

I've been thinking that jet engines in game seem a bit too docile for the air hungry things that they are. You can (in game) have them roaring full blast with an object directly in front of them and nothing will happen. Meanwhile you can easily find a video from the USS Theodore Roosevelt on which an A-6 intruder sucked in a man working on deck. Luckily for him his helmet and his own blockage of the airflow into the engine saved him among other things. Many other incidents can be found in which things ranging in size from bolts to baggage cars were pulled into engine intakes. Imho the intake side of engines should be just as dangerous as the exhaust. Perhaps even things sucked into the inlet should be able to damage the engine. What do you guys think?

@Vanamonde iirc it had something to do with the changes to SAS made to fix WR SSS (Wobbly Space Station Syndrome) but other than that I don't know.

Yesterday in KSP 1.2 pre career mode, I decided to take on my own miniature mission: put a flag on K2. Now at the time I didn't have any engines powerful enough to land VTOL style on it, so I landed Jeb in a bush plane in the flatish plateau a bit south, southeast of the mountain. Jeb climbed the first ridge and was heading north with one more climb before the big one,a and then he tripped. Sadly he will not be going to space anymore (in this save).

I've got 1.2pre. No Steam here.

I'll find my screenies and specifics as soon as I finish dinner. My point wasn't that this new SAS mode would fix it, but rather that not all slow drifts are due to motion relative to the planet; that the SAS does (sometimes) have problems keeping craft straight. Edit: Turns out I can't find a craft that the drift problem right now, but that's because whenever I encounter this I fiddle with the craft until I can get it to stop. IIRC the last one I had that did the slow roll turned out to have its vertical stabilizer on slightly crooked. I find it understandable that this would make the plane want to roll. What I don't get is why the SAS let it roll even though just a touch of trim was enough to fix it when I flew manually.

Actually, it in fact can lose bearing over time for reasons unrelated to moving around the planet. In a bit I'll get some screenie for you of a plane I have that I can hold straight on my own. When SAS handles it however, it waggles its tail up and down and slowly goes into a nosedive. This particular case is more of an instance of it constantly overcorrecting, but I've had other planes that would slowly change direction without waggling (like another one that would slowly roll).

I feel like a way to fix this would be some kind of function to "paint" sides of a part with thermal tiles and have that affect a sort of heating cube (similar to the drag cubes used for the aero now, except changing the multiplier by which the part is heated). They would of course have a mass penalty. That way we don't have to add a whole bunch of parts, but still get the nice heatshield tiles.

Made a stupid decision in career mode: try to climb K2 on foot. http://imgur.com/a/hBvf2

Exactly how fast would you want them to open? They seem to move pretty fast to me, considering that there are no obvious motors/jacks that make them do so. Also: I see you haven't tried going to Eeloo

Actually I wasn't having problems with the heat blowing me up. My plane just didn't want to keep going that fast for whatever reason... I'll investigate it. I think it might have something to do with the heat making the engines produce less thrust or something...

I don't know if it's still possible, but while back there was a mod (might not have ever been finished for all I remember) which some guy made which allowed the creation of craters when you crashed stuff. I might see if I can find it in the morning, but it's 12:35 at night where I am, so I should probably go to sleep now

I've got to reverse engineer this... This sounds amazingly practical as a propulsion system (considering it for what it is).

I think there at least once was a mod that gave mk1 docking ports airlock functionality. I don't know if it still exists or what it was/is called... I'll take a quick look around Edit: Or rather, I would, if the search function didn't keep giving me errors *goes on rant about how the old forum site didn't throw these fits and that if it ain't broke don't fix it*

I know business jets usually have a door like that, I just figured it would look odd to have several evenly spaced doors on a tiny biz jet. 1 would look more normal, possibly 2, but 3 would be a lot for just 3 fuselage links... idk that's all imho. I think it would be awesome to have a part with an airlock or door like that though. (maybe the part itself could be an airlock, with its outer door like the clamshell so it could be multi-purpose, working for both biz jets and spacecraft

You don't need mods to reach 1700m/s with jet power. RAPIERs in air-breathing mode can do this. It's hard to design a plane with low enough drag and high enough temperature to do this, but it is possible. So far I haven't made one that can sustain it though.

I always thought that the reason it doesn't have a hatch on the side or roof was because it was primarily intended for planes, and it would just kind of look weird to have a whole bunch of hatches on the top of/on the side a small plane that uses a few of these. (I know there are multiple doors on airliners, but 1 door for every 2 passengers seems a bit much). It is kind of limiting though... would be cool to have a toggle to add a hatch for a small weight penalty or something like that

I'm out of likes today apparently but that is pretty awesome. Once I get some decent antennas I am definitely using this technique. Anyways, this actually happened last night, but I started working on a B-52 replica. And then I realized: