Spricigo

For future reference, the craft want to fly heavy parts first and drag parts last. If you are in doubt open your craft in VAB as it will be at the time of reentry and enable CoM (CoL may also help, but keep in mind that it don't consider all aerodynamic forces), you want to see it in the lower part of the vessel with most of the drag part above it. My personal solution for the placement of 1-2 Crew Cabins and 1 Command Pod: . I'm not a big fan of tourism mission but designed a few tourist bus as response to question in this forums. They are made to be functional and easy to handle career ships.

seems like a problem since in the mod thread the developer ofer only two download links: spacedock and curse . He even have a video explaining the process and mention than you can also get in on CKAN. Follow the instruction on the video, if you still can't get it to work maybe ask in the mod thread. And for your own good, don't click on download links that you are not sure is what you are looking for.

Fly by multiple planets are rarely done because the opportunity present itself, that requires a fortuitous alignment that don't happens that often. Most of the multiple flyby mission are done to take advantage of the gravity assists to save fuel. Those are not free of charge since every detour made from a direct trajectory takes it toll on mission time. I suggest you to just get the mod Kerbal Alarm Clock, set an alarm for your arrival at Eeloo and do something else in the meantime

OK, this subforum is more for "I tried to build this rocket and it's not working" or "my game is broken" kind of questions. Looks like you have this mostly sorted out (you mentioned an issue forcing you to use a different fuel type). Since your problems is more about finding info about the real life mission you are trying to reenact, I suggest to ask a moderator to move your thread to this subforum where there is more chance someone know how to find it. I sometimes have browsed this site for info, but never needed the level of detail you are looking for.

Stating some obvious : OP is from June 7, probably correct answer was provided June 7. Not so obvious : @Tobirocket last visit to the forums was in June 7. I suppose he got the answer (or figured out himself) and just parted way with the forums.

Welcome to the forums. May you elaborate on the situation and actual issues. Like which modes are using, and what are the aspects that you think are important for a faithful recreation. I'm guessing that will be a tricky question to offer help, that will involve mod specific knowledge and aesthetics considerations. But if we can help, so we'll do.

Good news from the thread where the idea comes from. And the mentioned mod devs thread.

For landing legs/gears? AFAIK those are always autostruted to heaviest part. But I'll be happy to be wrong.

Welcome. I guess it can be clarified a bit (proper statement of what is what in the formula for example), but as long no one complains I will just assume is well explained enough. (laziness pays out faster than work )

1b. Autostrut (heavier part or root part) may change in flight. The sudden change of the forces can result in Rapid Unplanned Disassemble. 2. The mod Editor Extensions have mass-struting features. But given the risk of excessive autostrut I prefer to let it alone. Given its a tweakable I suspect it's possible to set it to be on by default with a ModuleManeger patch. But, again because of risk of excessive autostrut....

Waiting anxiously for it. A revolution for mission reports. (and challenges, and craft sharing....)

Yay!

Sorry about the harshness, but at this time you need to accept that this challenge didn't worked out and let it rest. I know how it feels, the first challenge I attempted to host received the grand total of 0 entries, besides my efforts to keep it alive just didn't happened. But keep all the criticism/advice in consideration and try again when you are ready. Also keep in mind something you probably noticed by now: hosting a challenge is hard, up to eleven harder than attempting a challenge. You will need to put a lot of thought to avoid some traps and make the challenge interesting. My advice: 1.Take as much preparation as you need before creating the thread to avoid the need to later adjustments. You can make and fix a lot of mistakes before you create the thread and only will know, after the thread is up people will notice and that will give a bad impression. 2.Before you even open the thread for a challenge, attempt it yourself. People will want to know the challenge is possible, so you want to know it also. Also a good chance to find something you may have overlooked in the rules and fix it before starting the challenge. 3.Get the terms rigth. Avoid vague terms and if something is open to misinterpretation in your rules clarify it (e.g. for the purpose of this challenge a Base is ... ) 4.Modded challenge are less common for reason: there is a lot of different mods out there and each one you accept will make harder to make a ballanced challenge. If you want to allow mods consider which ones will be allowed and which ones will be banned, or consider to have stock and modded categories. 0. Browse the other challanges, look how other people handle this and, if you feel like, attempt some (even if you don't share your result, just to get a handg of how is to deal with the limitation set for someone else)

As far as I can tell the most common issue with planes lately. Affecting big and small planes. Novices and experienced players.

Maybe you get more luck asking on the threads of the mods how they do it. (both the data and the calculation they do) And try to reproduce it with kRPC. Alternatively you may also look at kRPC thread (also KoS) if someone did something similar. I say that because for the 'regular player' that's too much hassle to care. A rough estimate is enough for our needs(or we can use a mod) Edit: well, at least that is what I thought that before @OhioBob reply. And everything that you may use to steer a plane can also be used to steer a rocket. The rocket only lack the aerodynamic characteristics (like lot of wings) to make it effective.

The math behind it is the Kepler's Laws, more specifically the 3rd one: Since the target orbit is circular , its orbital velocity is constant. If you are at the desired altitude, an angle ϕ apart from the required position, you want to complete one orbit while the target complete one orbit plus or minus ϕ, so you desired orbital period is: (for angle in radians, substitute 2π for 360º if you are using degrees ) In the end , we don't even need to know the orbital period, as we get the formulas together it get canceled out and we end with: Edit: this tool may help, it's meant to help deploying a number of satellites equally spaced in a circular orbit but the math is exactly the same.

D'Oh! BTW 3 hints about craft sharing: 1. KerbalX and spacecraft exchange 2. pure stock craft are accessible to more people. 3. Images and flight instructions

I like the course guidance feature of Kramax and I'd love to have in as a standalone mod. No autopilots in my must have category but info is always welcomed. Actually it uses Pilot Assistant, not Mechjeb. Pilot Assistant is more geared towards atmospheric flight and planes.

That is where I'd put my money (or else, not put my money unless as a offer to the Kraken) . If at least we could change autostrut to grandparent...

Thanks for the entry, @swjr-swis It not only perform well, it also looks very nice. I really enjoyed the cabins in radial stacks around the big fuel tanks. The formula is correct, those are really intended to be bonuses. But consider a few things: 1 . Recovery will probably make much more difference that a meager 6% bonus. 2. You may look at the bonus not as a reward for doing something , but as an aid for people in trouble to make the craft recoverable. 3.There is cases where letting a spacecraft in orbit makes sense and returning it to the surface is the weird thing. 4. If you are wondering about the rules, maybe you are considering to participate. If a bit of weirdness helped to catch your interest, I suppose that is a good thing.

Next in the News:Jebediah Kerman accused of Piloting Under Influence . Witness to be heard about "good stuff" inside command pod.

<toss a coin> Sight! It rolled behind my desk, you will need to do it apollo stile and use one of each kind. OK seriously : Lander can will make landing on the Mun slighter easy. Command pod will make reentry slighter easy. Choose one and deal with the consequences.

Maybe that is the easy way. The other one that I know is setting up a 'rendezvous' with the target position in the required orbit. That a bit difficult since is not possible to target a imaginary vessel but you can calculate things considering that the required orbital period is known (and unfortunately is also long).

Well, technically...100% recovery can be obtained in both runaway (KSC and old airfield) and both launchpads (KSC and KSC2). AFAIK the helipads on top of VAB and Mission Control don't offer 100% recovery, (IMHO unfortunately)

That's true if you land on the runway. The further away you are from KSC, the greater is the recovery penalty. You can see the exact recovery value in the window that pops up after you recovered the vessel. Simply subtract that from the overall cost in the VAB/SPH and you have an exact and unarguable number. ^THis On the top of the mission summary , parts tab, you will see something like this: And on the bottom you will see a message like that: And I'm happy that you applied it to this challenge. Now I just need a rectified score to place your craft where it belongs in the leaderboard. As you may or may not had noticed, your entry was placed on the top of the leaderboard, waiting for the score. And I guess there was people wondering how to remove it from there (even with a score a few points worse), please don't make their job easier and less fun.