Dark Lion

Nobody said I had to be actually playing the game for the most satisfying moments in KSP, right? -->When you share .craft and get constructive criticism that leads to legitimate improvements to and/or challenges your design process.

Have any of you seen my Duckie? Been really worried about her, since spotting this critter at the desert airfield. Not sure what it is, but it seemed peaceful enough. We let it go (about 6m/s after a 3min build-up. )

Krakken forbid they should kolonize Kerbin! LOL nice

Duckie! https://kerbalx.com/DarkLion/Duckie Be the Duckie! Fly the Duckie! Duckie the insurance clauses! *Ahem*

Wish granted! There are clouds of smoke, vapor and dust already in the game! (See my profile pic for a plasma cloud.) And those can be a strain on performance already... So just be happy this is as colorful as my reply can get.

Personally, I think BDArmory would take care of everything but the rail guns, but it's a big family of mods, BDA (and I've only used the original.) You might want to try several of them out and see what you find most fitting to the style in question. If it doesn't have to look exactly like in The Expanse, you'll probably be fine with the current BDAc: "PDCs" could be replicated with any pop-out turrets with half-spherical coverage or better turret traverse. Missiles and torpedoes might require a custom firing tube to suit the ship, but might not behave as well as you'd expect when fired in space. The railguns are beyond me; I've never seen or sought them out. I'd settle for some high-powered cannonry attached to the hull. Technically, it's still a kinetic impactor... it just wouldn't have comparable velocity to a rail gun. High-explosives might help equate to the damage done by a rail gun, however, only a much lesser penetrative force against targets. I finished season 3 of the show just moments ago and I'm inspired to build ships of similar style as well. Please do post some pics later of your work and @me. I'd love to see what you come up with!

That is mind-numbingly beautiful! *Begins sculpting Devils Tower out of mashed potatoes*

I'm interested to see if it's possible.

These criteria are hard to be fair about. Being completely biased myself, I dove straight in with building airplanes... and I feel my prowess in that field is beyond a great deal of other players who don't really bother with anything below the vacuum of space... yet those same folks who couldn't circumnav Kerbin could probably outshine me in some other field of engineering, such as it is. Like trying to place myself in this ranking, I should be at "Super Mad Lad" status because I've had a few successes in interplanetary SSTOs, yet I've never returned from Eve or a successful Jool-5. Because I haven't yet tried them doesn't mean one of those SSTOs couldn't accomplish it. Basically what I'm getting at: I'd score folks quite a bit differently. Not based on mission parameters nearly as much. Pardon me humor here: -What's a KSP? - Yeah, you asked it once, but you couldn't pass up the game when you finally checked it out. -Builder Bob - Please stop launching your crafts with kerbals in them!!! -Pensive Pauser - I'm too busy thinking about what to do next, but if you're patient, you'll see something that works. -OP is me - We've all got that friend that knows squat about efficiency. (Or you're just as guilty as I am LOL) But definitely pumping out those high-performance vessels. -Extra Extra - Is there a limit to one's stupidity? No... No, it's GENIIUUSS!!! Must go FASTER!!! -Extra-Efficient Entrepenuer - Just keep to your hushed expression and watch as the magic unfolds before your eyes into a thing you still can't understand after the feat is explained to you in dummy terms... There's only one place to go after that...: Infamy.

snoitcerid gnidnatsrednu rof dennab

Yeah, I dropped my KerbalX link for ya. Also worth mentioning that all the crafts on my KerbalX were built on a lower-quality laptop, so they're all low part counts (as I could possibly make them.) I did just get a much better system though, so I'm more inclined to work with you on weapon placement and/or testing, but I'm not inclined to upload those iterations to KerbalX. You're free to use whatever you find fitting and modify them to your preference.

Negative. Plastic insulated cup.

But cats are edgy!

*Knocks thread's title off edge of table; stares blankly @Triop *

I would like to see more half-sphere node caps like the 1.25m. A variant for each form-factor would be fantastic, because fairings aren't great for making a neat half sphere. Not sure, but I don't think fairings would they be as cost-effective or efficient as nose cones like these...

*Maniacal laughter* No, seriously... You don't wanna be in the way when my creativity goes off. Part count cap for submitted designs? Is there some storyline to entice us with, Ace Combat-ish? (I won't judge if it's worse than an AC storyline, but a political war is not a private war is not a skirmish between opposed factions. Each would have very different tools.) I'm pretty exclusive with my BDA creations, but I welcome you to take a gander at my available KerbalX crafts. https://kerbalx.com/DarkLion/craft I see a trend of incoming planes already, so I insist you have a look at my personal favorite ground-pounders, the "Boose" series and modify them to your apparently more malevolent preference. They were not intended for battle, but will be easily retrofit. Remove science, add bludgeon, done. If you're looking into staging some orbital/interplanetary action, I'd encourage the mounting of torpedoes and killer cannonry upon my "Crazy Eight," and maybe "LeoComm" could pose as a functional military/spy satellite (and legitimate, over-powered relay.) There's a perfect little spot on back of the LeoComm relays for a tracking/targeting system and dV to get it just about anywhere. You might enjoy modifying the planes there for your purposes, but TBH, they too, were not designed for combat. Should you use any of them, I'd love to see what you change to improve their versatility. Most have only one job that they do very well. There's a few strange ones in there too... but you might use them for something anyway. "Bo" is fun (just try it and see.) The Kustom Krazer is incomplete, but lookin great. I have no idea what sort of series we're talkin about. For all I know, you'll make use of the "Slappy Surfer." Maybe you could give us a teaser vid or mission statement or cause or something to define the nature of the conflict?

Only if shooting with a polarized macro lens. Was that last question really a stupid question? *Wanders off again, mumbling about not knowing the exact local atmospheric density and flux of the adhesion zone.*

3/10 How about that stupid space program...?

You're the best, Mum. My words will fall short of true nature of the feels this gave me. Respect.

People with crappy internet really hate waiting for clean downloads when they panic and erase the whole installation because it's not PERFECTLY CLEAR whether or not something is actually wrong... Just to find out the cat won't go away. @sarbian If you won't give us an option to turn off the cat, how about a discrete warning message to go with it? Something short and sweet like "Happy Hipster Cat Day," or "April Fools!" or when things are really broken: "All ur modz R belong to us." It's not THAT big a compromise and everybody's a happy hippy, right? P.S. I have no hope for change, honestly. [snip] Hopefully this stretch made sense to one of you. @Jestersage you are not alone. And, for the record: This thread made me hate the cat.

Well just be sure to land on Mun's surface where it's facing Kerbin!

Nice.

Depending on which probe core you choose, you might slightly amplify the signal or enable multi-hop relaying. No, the direction your antennae are facing does not matter, as you could deploy them inside a cargo bay and they would still work. Also of note: the distance between your relays is greater than the distance to the nearest ground station... If you intend to use this network to stay in contact with other worldly exploration, I highly recommend beefing up the entire relay system. Either use more of the same, or redesign them with greater ranges in mind than you need. You'll want to go farther out later on, right? No harm in preparing for that now and save yourself a few launches.

I'm eyeing details from the preview pic and feeling a bit burned. I've been sick lately, so pardon my lack of attention previously, but now that those details do have my attention... I want to wail about those short-comings of having 2 engine bells with the exact same control authority as a single-engine design. What? Why is this a good idea? I understand it's a marvel of engineering and all that, but this is rocket science we're talking about here! (Please see @sh1pman's shared pic on page 2.) Now, I'm not one of those KSP'ers that have to have it all as realistic as possible, but I really feel like this engine could be a lot more useful if it were made similar to the "Twin Boar," or others that have multiple engines which gimbal independently of one another when exercising rotational control authority. One could imagine the feasibility of navigating the cosmos (or landing, of course) without the need of other reaction control systems. But to put it even more simply: why, in the name of the Kraken, would you use a single-engine hydraulic gimbal on a multi-engine system? That's really messing with my head right now. @SQUAD @RoverDude https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150008246.pdf There's a .pdf loaded with relevant RL-10 info. I hope the team will consider it at least. There's even gimbal joint and hydraulic hinge placement diagrams. You already gave the whole engine mount a gimbal, so you really only need one more actuator to induce rotational control authority. Bill found a use for it. Y'all like flight sims, right?