Human Person

Ohh, new Idea: Why not catch their command pod with the claw? This should be faster than spacewalking them over (especially for more than 1 kerbal)

Hi all. I'm planning a mission to Eve. Why does the ascent vehicle has to achieve orbit, when we could try to rescue them from Sub-orbit with a powerful orbiter? First things first, let's start on Kerbin and see what it takes to do a suborbital rescue: - Have a powerful rescue craft in Orbit of Kerbin - Launch a manned craft on a suborbital trajectory - Use the Orbiter to rendezvous with the craft, EVA the crew (better start with a crew of 1) over to the orbiter and get back to a stable orbit. The lower your apoapsis and the steeper the suborbital arc, the better. This is 100% safe, no risk at all, now sign this waver. Have fun and share your experiences with this task. 1st entry @FungusForge He actually went through the atmosphere, on an escape trajectory in order to get to his kerbal.

My entry. I think this will be easily beaten 1st the Delta Heavy Payload: 31.867 t 2nd the asparagus rocket (same rocket, bigger payload) Payload 34.196 t Having an empty fuel Tank on your payload to drain leftovers from your core stage is legitimate. So, It seems like asparagus staging isn't all that beneficial. Prove me wrong!

If you don't, your boosters and core will burn out simultaneously, so you basically have a single stage. My Delta Heavy would have had only 3000 m/s if i wouldn't have saved some fuel on the core.

Carry a payload to LKO, you may only use 3 Skipper engines on your first stage. Max payload wins. you wouldn't believe how hard it is to balance this out between TWR and DeltaV. You may have an empty fuel tank on your payload to drain leftovers from your last stage before detaching it. You may not use fuel from your payload to get into orbit. (Imagine the fuel crossfeed between payload and last stage works only in one direction, only into the payload) There are 2 (3) Categories: -Asparagus -Non asparagus (-Delta IV Heavy Style: Non-asparagus and modular, wich means the boosters and core-stage are identical and you have to throttle down the core engine during ascend to save fuel.) This main goal of this challenge is to determine how beneficial asparagus staging actually is. For this reason, please try to participate in both categories asparagus and non-asparagus. pictures would be great, but simple stats are ok as well: -Launch mass -Payload mass (must be seperated from the core-stage) -Booster configuration Leaderboard: Non asparagus 1. @Martian Emigrant: 32.79 t, modular core/booster and upper stage. I hope I got this right from the pictures, but it looks like he simply build a single first stage with 3 Skippers that burned out simultaneously. 2. Me: 31.867 t, modular core/booster, no upper stage, throttle control on the core 3. @MarvinKitFox: 27.1 t, throttle control on the core, no pictures Asparagus: 1. Me: 34.196 t, modular core/booster, no upper stage 2. @MarvinKitFox: 31.1 t 3. @Martian Emigrant: 30.36t, modular core/booster and upper stage. Extremely low TWR after booster sep lead to a shallow launch profile with presumably lots of drag losses.

What texture pack(s) is he using, especially for the parts?

Sodium bromate? NaBrO (It's bad because it's actually NaBrO3)

Most recently I started using MechJeb and It feels like cheating.

90 degrees to prograde? That's the same as radial out. Are you sure?

It happened to Scott Manly and it happened to me a lot: The mk1 and mk2 cockpits burn up during reentry. Nothing seems to help. Maybe you can help by analyzing Scotts accident. It happened at 7:20

this doesn't help you keep your altitude

Remove the plane's range, or make range categories like 100 km, 1000km, 10000km

There's a little circle left of the IVA-screens that toggles internal view.

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/93853799899003701/B3C78AC91246A3B90E85640B22F8E748B6CC8C6E/ http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/93853799899035779/DB83355D0774DE1AA6FA5B32374B5CBC964D3A0A/ http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/93853799899038122/C07AA7A16CFF1F03ACC4095ABACAF0A118FC483E/ Meet Planie Mc Planeface Mark 2! It's an 48 passenger aircraft that looks like a stubby jumbo. I removed the droptanks, removed fuel and put 4 more Wings on. Now it's stable! It's cruising speed is 185 m/s at 9500m, 230m/s at 7000m. It manages to hold that speed and height without any control input (but with SAS). Top speed (only achieved on a dive) was 364 m/s. It can land on water without damage, but it can't take off from water. Min takeoff- and landing speed is 60 m/s. It's Max Distance is pretty high. Im sure it could circumnavigate kerbin but my longest flight was just about 800 km (it still had 3/4 of the fuel it started with and I tried some stunts on that flight) 364+(800(could do much better)/10)+(48*5)*1+(2/2)) + 110 = 1239

I'll redo this and try to get more than 300 Points this time! I honestly are that bad with planes.

Well, I tried. Category: Heavy (48 Passengers) Scoring: 120+(2/10)+(4*5)*1+(2/2))-20 = 121,2 That's a positive score, not too bad considering that my plane barely flew at all. The challenge isn't that old so do I have a chance to get on the leaderboard? I thought no one would care for the heavy category too much.

@tater @sal_vager Expansion? *facepalm* I've clearly been living under a rock, I didn't know there's an expansion coming. Edit: Forget everything I said. That's exactly what I want.

@sal_vager @tater I really like the game how it is, I just fear to loose interest as soon as I've done everything. What's wrong with progression? Small changes here and there to improve the overall experience: more goals, better graphics and so on. Of corse, from a modders point of view, he doesn't want the game to be updated because he might have to work on his mod. stock game first! The more mods become redundant, the better. That's my opinion.

but it isn't. and it has a remarkable price tag already. I'm not complaining, I just expect further progress in the future.

To fit in the 0.65 meter boxes they come in! Why is Gilly so small?

That's a good idea. This would make boarding and unboarding much easier. It's those little details about the game that shouldn't be neglected. I'm sure there's a mod for this (is there?), but nobody wants to have hundreds of mods fixing little things like that.

I actually had to check my spelling a couple of times on that. It's also because volcanism is spelled Vulkanismus in german. The o bothers me a lot. That would be nice. How about a small planet even closer to Kerbol than Moho, with a thick atmosphere and lava instead of oceans. It would be so hot there most of the parts overheat if not actively cooled.

Only small bodies are cooled down enough to have no volcanism anymore. Big terrestrial bodies are "still hot" meaning they haven't cooled down yet. Radioactive decay is also a source of internal heating, not only tidal forces.

I wanted to bring this topic up again (old thread here) because I believe the game would immensely benefit from it. For further discussion, also consider cryovolcanism volcanism. I'd like you to answer the following questions. Feel free to submit further questions If you feel like they contribute to the discussion. 1. Where would you put volcanoes and what properties should they have? I'd put at least one big volcano on Duna, representing Olympus Mons. This one doesn't necessarily need to be active (still it would be a nice feature to have smoke trails and maybe lava flows at the top), but it should be extremely massive and extremely high. Actually, it should have such a great height that it makes it hard to land on it because you can't hope for Dunas already thin atmosphere so slow you down sufficiently at that altitude. 2. Could this be implemented easily? Yes and no. Yes, because (if it isn't active) it would just change Dunas topography- and biome-map. No, because it would change a big part of Duna entirely and people who have ground-stations there might be upset. 3. What does it add to the game (except for itself of course)? It would be necessary to be considered when aerobraking at Duna (so your aerobrake doesn't turn out as a high-g lithobreak ) and this would be a completely new and unique feature. Also, you have to consider that the atmosphere would hardly be helpful when landing there. So all in all, it would add a destination for medium to experienced players without making the game harder for beginners. I'm curious about your ideas! I'm not sure if this topic belongs here, maybe It's rather a general discussion?

I only use the NERV when I really need the delta-v, compromising in TWR and doing multiple passes to burn at periapsis. Yes, an efficient NERV-Spaceship has to have crappy TWR. To keep it playable, I usually try not to get it below 0.2 (wich is pretty low). If you wanted to squeeze decent TWR out of NERVs, your dry mass increases a lot and you could as well use POODLES or TERRIERS, wich are a lot cheaper, to get the same delta-v.