Mars-Bound Hokie

@katateochi I would like to make a suggestion for KerbalX - a Cargo Slot Capacity Line. For two years, we have had cargo capacities in not only specialized parts such as the SEQ-24, but the passenger and command modules as well. We already have a crew capacity line on KerbalX, so why not one for how many cargo slots the craft has in total? For everybody else reading this, what do you think?

If my ITV was low on fuel when approaching Kerbin, aerobraking would seem like the logical option. However, I then run the risk of blowing something up in the atmosphere while aerobraking to lower my apoapsis. Worst-case scenario, I make a pit stop at Duna and send an ore transport to refuel the ship before going to Kerbin. I'm already in the process of removing the ISRU and science equipment from a P-5 Olympian while adding a SEQ-24 to it. Simple job, and I should be able to fly to Mun or Minmus orbit if the mission requires it. The modified SSTO may not carry enough spare fuel to give to the ship, but that's what mass ore transports and space stations are for. As of now, the single-use ITPs still carry 7 - and no extra cargo modules. That's why I turned to the ITV in the first place; to increase passenger and storage capacity in a streamlined spacecraft network.

@SkyFall2489 First of all, how do you know about the interplanetary travel pods that carry seven people? Did you come across one of my old reports/fanworks or something, because I can't find anybody else referencing such craft. Second of all, I built an ITV whose sole mission is interplanetary transport of kerbals and cargo and sent it into LKO as a test run (won't spoil anything with pictures and specific performance specs yet). After I established a stable orbit, I noticed that I had a seven-man pod on standby for years (both in-game and IRL) and decided to check the craft file for it. Turns out, I have some competition for the new ITV buried deep in my save file - even with the clipped fuel tanks removed. ITV Comparison Old Pod New Ship Crew Capacity 7 19 Cargo Slots 21 43 Re-entry Capable Yes No Without giving away specific information, I can tell you that the old pod (left) has at least several hundred m/s more dV than the new ship (right). Although the new ship has a lower dV capacity than the old one, it's still quite impressive. At the very least, it should make it to Laythe in one shot and make a refueling stop over one of the other moons before flying back to Kerbin. When comparing it to the old pod, I think it's a decent trade-off; sacrificing some dV for a higher passenger and cargo capacity. With the new transport network in place (albeit not officially streamlined yet), and since I have Breaking Ground, having a higher passenger and cargo capacity is necessary if I want to save time and money on separate spacecraft. It may not be able to return to Kerbin's surface, but that means it can be used again after the next passenger shuttle reaches it and loads it, hence saving hundreds of thousands of funds on launch costs PER MISSION.

With all the stations, ore transports, and landers I deployed over the years, that idea does sound fun. I won't have to drag all my ISRU and rapiers all the way to Laythe and back, though it is necessary if complete independence during the mission is the goal. I can send a shuttle spaceplane to the interplanetary transport vessel (let's call it the ITV to keep it simple) in LKO or Minmus, send the ITV to its destination/s, have it dock with the necessary space stations/refueling ports while sending landers (or in Laythe's case a docking-capable spaceplane), and have it return to Kerbin when everything's done. When I return, an empty shuttle can fly up to the ITV and collect everybody to return to the surface. And if I don't want to have so many stops and docking trips along the way, especially if my tourism contract involves landing. However, speaking from experience, there is a flaw in an orbitally-assembled interplanetary transport ship. The docking ports will wobble during the burns, increasing the chances of structural failures - hence increasing the chances of mission failure. Unless you know an easy trick to dock multiple large ports to the same part at once, I'm afraid the ITV would have to be launched in one stage fully assembled before it can be used. Furthermore, to minimize refueling trips, it would need as high a delta-V capacity as possible while carrying an optimal amount of occupants and cargo. Although I don't have a good design for an ITV as of yet, I cannot guarantee now that it can reach its target destination without having to make a refueling stop first. If you know of any good ships to reference that match this criteria, that would be very nice. So I can have full mission independence and not have to worry about so many moving parts in the middle. While I already have so many space stations and other craft on standby, it would be so much simpler if the craft was standalone. Fewer moving parts means fewer chances of failure (and the consequences of the ITV itself failing are more or less the same if a completely independent SSTO fails), so why invite them? The "moving parts" I am referring to are: Kerbin-to-orbit shuttles Space stations Including orbital refueling ports. Landers Laythe SSTOs Not that I'm going to completely reject your idea, @SkyFall2489. In fact, you've just given me an idea for the Neptune X. If you know of any ships that can do what you described, I can use them for inspiration for my own design. Thank you very much.

FROM THE OFFICE OF WERNHER VON KERMAN Regarding the Anubis I / Neptune VI and Neptune VII missions, there isn't much to announce other than they are set to return home to Kerbin. We have made some great progress exploring Laythe, from the orbital reconnaissance missions to the interactions with the natives there. In the process, we have also established strong network coverage around that moon and set up a couple of space stations there (granted, one of them had its construction halted after the fourth module). Though we have gained a lot from our Neptune missions, we at the Kerbal Space Center believe that we aren't done yet. Most of Mission Control is not fond of climate activists - and given their recent activity defacing museums, I can see why - but you cannot deny that some of the more competent members may be on to something. More specifically, they want us to reduce our emissions on Laythe by using electric vehicles for our surface reconnaissance. Fortunately, Kerbal Motion LLC and WinterOwl Aircraft Emporium were more than willing to sell us parts to make an electric drone. As a true test of its capabilities, we set it to circumnavigate Kerbin without stopping. While Mortimer Kerman was negotiating the pricing for the parts, Gus Kerman let slip that he had recently sent a few of our engineers to design an electric aerial drone for Eve exploration before sending Kerbals. Since Eve's atmosphere is not suitable for air intakes, it would make sense to want a sustainable propulsion source and rocket fuel for powerful rocket engines (on account of Eve's increased gravity) would not last long on one tank. Therefore, once this prototype's capabilities are proven on Kerbin, these drones will be sent to Eve as well as Laythe. Previous test runs had proven that this prototype could not hit 175 meters per second, which was the velocity of Kerbin's rotation about its polar axis. So, to maximize time exposed to the sun, it went retrograde (west) early sunrise. I must say that we were very impressed with the aircraft's stability, even when our pilot (who will remain anonymous) left to pick up his teenage daughter after she was dumped in the middle of a date. Normally, leaving during a test run would be acceptable so long as the pilot-in-command (PIC) either activated the autopilot and ensured it was flying smoothly or found someone to fill in for him in his absence. However, neither of which happened in this case. As soon as we realized that nobody was flying the plane (either man or autopilot), we rushed to the control room and were surprised to find that it was still flying. While the project manager was scolding the original PIC for risking a lot of money with his blatant breach in protocol, the substitute PIC kept her hands off the controls and talked with her coworkers - while ensuring the plane didn't crash, of course. Almost one-and-a-half days later, the drone returned to the KSC after a nonstop flight across the equator. The drone was slower than we had hoped, but at least it was stable and had passed the off-runway landing tests. Besides, to save electricity, it was optimal to only fly when there's daylight in your takeoff and landing spots - even if that means having to fly in intervals. Now that we have proven that this prototype can fly reliably on electric power alone, we just need to send this to Laythe and we can explore the moon whenever we want without having to wait for kerbalnauts to arrive or ISRU converters to finish refueling. It may be slower than the supersonic remote-controlled planes, plus it may have a shorter range due to being so far away from the sun, but we'll reduce the rate that we're using the moon's ore so that future settlements can utilize it. Speaking of future settlements, we have designed a multi-launch surface base for Laythe. Although we already have two single-launch bases on the surface, we decided that we needed a warehouse to store all our cargo there - mostly our deployable science station equipment made by Probodobodyne Incorporated. Below is a photograph of the four individual modules all docked together, with the center piece with the relay on top arriving first. DISCLAIMER: more lights and parachutes were added after this photo was taken. That way, it would be easier to find for kerbalnauts - especially those who are lost. In order, these pieces will arrive: (Center piece) Primary entrance, communications array, and primary storage area (Right) The mobile science lab (Left) Additional storage modules and seats (Behind) More seats with a small docking port at the end May be used later to dock with rovers that would carry cargo. The next time the Laythe transfer window opens, we'll send the drone prototype there. Some in Mission Control are contemplating sending the first piece of the Laythe Warehouse as well, while others want to send a new ring station designed specifically to hold a lot of cargo (and have many docking ports open for future expansion). Its latest design had passed the simulated test run, so real-life results seem promising so far. The arguments for "yes" are: The cost of launching this station, although quite expensive, may be less than the total cost of launching all four Laythe Warehouse modules. Both in terms of time and money. This station can hold nearly three times as many people as the completed Laythe Warehouse. Any docking-capable spacecraft that takes in cargo on the station can send it anywhere on the moon. Once launched, we won't have to worry about continuing construction in future launches. While there are plenty of docking ports open in anticipation of expansion, we currently have no such plans. They may appear later on, but right now the station is fully ready for action as-is after deployment. The arguments for "no" are: Launching this station would cost more than a third of what we have in our budget. This station holds less cargo than a completed Laythe Warehouse. On the other hand, some argue that only the first and second modules are important. While it may save overall costs and ensure that only essential elements are used for the base, shutting down construction before the third launch would bring the cargo capacity to less than that of this station's. If anyone in surface operations want equipment, they'll have to take time, fuel, and great risk to fly to Laythe orbit in a docking-capable spaceplane (most likely the P-5 Olympian) with somewhat limited cargo space and send it back down to the staging area. We already have two stations orbiting Laythe (granted, one of them is getting close to being declared defunct), so what purpose would a third one serve besides keeping scientific instruments that can only be used on the surface in orbit? We in Mission Control have 370 days to make a decision, but we welcome outside input for what we should send. In the meantime, we are attempting to redo a solo mission to Laythe after our first attempt was aborted seven years ago. Engineer Agaford Kerman is currently in orbit of Minmus overseeing a P-5 Olympian fuel for Dres orbit, awaiting a Laythe speeder to arrive at the moon's sphere of influence. Once that arrives and rendezvous with her, she will board the smaller plane and refuel it in preparation for the Neptune VIII mission. If anyone wishes to enter their input or ask any questions about our ever-expanding presence on Laythe, please do not hesitate to reply. It was such a long wait, but now things are warming up again. Wernher Von Kerman Y66D147 1H00M

Kirk was just walking on the streets of Woomerang when suddenly, high above the city, a cargo plane carrying explosive substances was starting to crash. One of the crewmembers' kPhone 5c slipped out through the hole and fell to the ground. It landed on Kirk's head, forcing him to the ground where he snapped his neck on the curb. Jenny Kerman will die after snorting hot tea through her nose.

Inspired by many Community Space Station challenges (such as this one by @Jeb-head-mug kerman from two years ago), I decided to give it a try myself. Only THIS TIME, the challenge is to assemble a station... OVER LAYTHE. The objective is simple: build one large space station over Laythe using one save file (link below). Feel free to add as many different modules as you want. Game save HERE The rules are as follows: PURE STOCK No DLCs No Mods If you have to use MJ, use MechJeb2 Embedded as well so that the program is automatically embedded in the control modules and you won't have to use the modded part. You must use KSP version 1.12.4 No cheats One module per mission Leave a docking port open for others to use Post pictures and/or video When you're all done, post a link to the new game save in your post so that the person after you can use it (just like in previous community challenges). To prevent confusion due to two (or more) kerbalnauts posting different, non-sequential game save files, please "claim" the save file so that everyone knows you're flying with it before posting the new one. HOWEVER, once you claim it, you have a maximum of 24 hours to respond with the new station save file (and pictures of what to expect, of course). I highly suggest you test your delivery rocket in a separate Sandbox mode save before deploying it in this one e.g. Johnny sends his battery to Laythe in "Johnny's Test Sandbox" and, once confirming its success, claims the "Kerbalnational Laythe Station" save file and sends the battery module to the already-assembled station. He then posts the new save file and pictures within 24 hours of claiming. If you have any questions about the rules or if the link's not working, let me know at once. All you have to do is download the game file and put in your game's saves folder. When you start "Kerbalnational Laythe Station," design your module and send it to Laythe. After that, upload the new save file to whatever file sharing service you're using (mega, Google Drive, etc) so that the next person can use it with the expanded station. I have already built the first module, and boy was it a doozy to make. All worth the time and effort in the end, though, and I have several docking ports ready - including a big one. Here are the orbital characteristics of the final product, which I know you all will need when you rendezvous with the station. But before I show you my pictures, here are the action groups I set up. Keep all this in mind for when you make your modules. Gigantor panels DO NOT DEPLOY until you ditch the delivery rocket. Ladders Start research Stop research Collect all science for lab 1x6 panels Handy for the trip there. Science Kerbnet (from the probe core) - EMPTY - Communotron 88-88 (100G direct antenna) ABSOLUTELY DEPLOY before leaving Kerbin. And now, our feature presentation. Have fun, everybody. The finished product in orbit of Laythe. I decided to do a different ring station design from my tried-and-true Jool ring station for the challenge. The assembled product in the VAB 9,228 m/s delta-V 71 crew capacity Four or five of the cargo slots already come filled (EVA kits, repair kits, jetpack fuel), but you'll be amazed at the cargo capacity. I have plans to post this craft file separately when the challenge dies out or from popular demand (whichever comes first), so you can transport several collections of Breaking Ground DLC science gear for future Laythe missions. At the very least, it can serve as an orbital storage facility. The station blasting off. To save dV while maintaining structural integrity (preventing wobbling-related damage), I set the angle-of-attack limit in the ascent guidance to 60 degrees. Throughout the course of the ascent, whenever the craft seemed to fly in a stable manner, I decreased the limit in 10-degree increments until finally reaching 20 degrees. I don't know what setting it at 20 degrees from the start will do, but I'm guessing that you need to reach certain speeds before getting a low AoA so that the station doesn't wobble so easily. The nuclear rockets making their burn to Jool. As a dV-saving measure, two of the rockets had their tanks drain first. Once that was over, they were basically dead weight and could be ditched. Once I reached Jool's SOI, I set a "fine tune approach to target" maneuver so I can go directly to Laythe (as opposed to setting up a parking orbit around Jool before making a Hohmann transfer to Laythe). This is the craft approaching the planet. Setting up my orbit with plenty of dV to spare. Poor Sherbart, cast away to spend his life alone in that large station. But a pilot was necessary in the event that the CommNet signal was lost. You can send him friends in subsequent missions. While the space station is enjoying its time in stable orbit, the remote-controlled delivery rocket is making a suborbital trajectory for self-destruction on Laythe. It had fulfilled its purpose, and it was nothing but space junk at this point. "SEE YOU ALL ON LAYTHE!" (Sherbart Kerman)

I see a lot of future entries where this is used - or at least used as a starting point for further research.

Well, that worked. And in the process of getting my new version back online, I took the time to install the latest versions of my mods.

It's pretty self-explanatory. Longer version: whenever I try to add the TVR adapters to my craft in either the SPH or VAB, they disappear - but the price still increases as if the adapter was there. To make matters worse, I also can't launch anything until the disappearing part is truly removed - and apparently the only way to do that is Ctrl-Z. How do I fix this? Another part that vanishes during the assembly and causes problems is the FL-T400 fuel tank. I'm sure that there are other parts that are affected by this as well.

Wow, 1947 seems to be the year of aviation milestones. What's next?

At least it should get @katateochi's attention.

Is it just me, or is anyone getting this message now?

The title is pretty self-explanatory. On the anniversary of a milestone of aviation and spaceflight history, post about it here. It can't just be events you think are significant; the name of the game is "This Day In..." The event in question has to share the same month and day as the current date. e.g. if it took place on December 17, 1903, you'll just have to wait until December 17, (whatever year it is now) to post about it. Replies discussing events already posted DON'T have date limits; just the events themselves. In other words, you're free to talk about any events mentioned on here as far long or as late as you wish. Links to sources are highly encouraged. Even if you first learned about it from the Air Force Museum calendar, we would all benefit from some corroboration. It can be as significant as a first test flight or a shuttle crash to something not-so-well known - such as the Army Air Corps delivering mail for the first time or the first successful V2 rocket launch. The choice of event is yours, but the "Anniversary Posting" rule still stands. Have fun, and I can't wait to read what you all come up with. I'll start us off. October 14th, 1947 - U.S. Air Force Captain Charles "Chuck" Yeager becomes the first man to break the sound barrier using the X-1 rocket plane. Source: https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/breaking-sound-barrier-75th

This has got to be the laziest entry on here: the Apollo 15 Command Module. Using Vesselmover, I relocated this three-piece capsule to the admin building. If you look at the picture of the command module on display, you'll find that this screenshot and the photograph don't look that much different. Only 244 to go - and yes, that includes the two duplicates I mentioned earlier. I'm eager to see some (slight) design variety.

Absolutely. I suppose so, but good luck going anywhere with their weak thrust.

And now, for my next trick, I shall replicate the North American F-82 Twin Mustang. And cue the Blazing Angels flashbacks. The North American P-82/F-82 Twin Mustang on display in the SPH. It had a "P" designation in its early days, then the Air Force began assigning "F" in front of fighter aircraft. Due to the large difference in landing gear height, the craft was tilted with its nose(s) pitched up in the SPH. Its root part is the probe core on the left fuselage (from the pilots' perspective). To increase power capacity and lower the nose length difference, the right fuselage has a battery between its cockpit and motor. Night flight around the KSP. I decided to revert to launch and wait until late-morning to do the off-road landing test. Flying around with both its ladders deployed. At least Jeb didn't jump off this time. At a couple points during the test runs, this prototype was performing at (if not better than) its real-life counterpart's absolute top speed. "Who says men can’t be pinup models?" (Jeb) Turned around and flew toward the mountains. To save fuel while maintaining altitude and velocity, I had to reduce throttle to less than 1/3 (forgot exactly where). After clearing the mountain range west of the KSC, I landed in some bumpy terrain. Good thing I had the reverse thrust action group handy (although I didn't know if the real-life version had it). WORD OF ADVICE: Pay attention to the takeoff and landing instructions on the craft page, and you'll be fine. Come on, kerbalnauts. I can't do all 245 remaining craft all by myself (243 if you ignore the second Superfortress and Twin Mustang). If we all work together, we can cover the entire museum's collection in no time.

This: I know it was finished years ago, but there's a good first step to aim for.

Thank you very much, @swjr-swis. I took your advise and updated the gas-powered P-38 version, tested it, and posted it on KerbalX.

After some playing around with the Breaking Ground DLC, I finally managed to make a replica of the Lockheed P-38 Lightning. The (gas-powered version of the) aircraft in the SPH. More on that story later. I didn't have any US Army Air Corps flags loaded in my game, so I stuck with the US flag. It took me a long time to not only get a motor-blade combo that worked, but a balanced CoM and CoL placement. The regular propeller blades were weak, so I went with the duct fan blades (especially since they never failed). Jeb flying up north in the aircraft in an attempt to climb over the mountain range. The aircraft's performance stats were pathetic, but they were adequate to maneuver through the mountains to the north. Nice cockpit shot. After a successful landing, Jeb stepped outside for an "Old-timer's selfie." A camera on a tripod with a timer. Apparently, he didn't set the timer correctly and it took a shot of him going up the ladder. "I was going for a pinup pose on the nose." For a while, I thought the off-road takeoff test would fail since it took me the full runway's length to get off the ground. Good thing this worked. All Jeb said was "WILDCARD, BI(censored)! YEEEEEEHAAAAWWW!" before bailing out of the aircraft. Upon recovery, the probe core indicated nothing was wrong with the craft before Jeb bailed - causing it to crash without a controller. Jeb was unharmed, but the same couldn't be said for the P-38. It's "manner of death" was marked as "Pilot Stupidity." The "Electric Boogaloo" Origin Story So, there you have it. My replica/s for the Lockheed P-38 Lightning. Now that you know about the two variants, which one of those two would you rather take into battle? Feel free to answer in your replies below. Personally, I'd go for the electric version due to superior performance alone. If the mission is taking place during the day, then I have unlimited range.

Thanks to a bunch of hippies from Green Springs and their goons at the so-called Environmental Security Agency (or, as we like to call it, the Economical Screw-up Agency), we now have to limit our Kerbin circumnavigation challenges to have ZERO overall emissions. In other words, whenever we circumnavigate the planet, we have to do it in an electric vehicle. Fortunately, thanks to our folks at Kerbal Motion LLC, we now have the means to do so. It may be slow, but it is possible. In other words, the challenge is to go one full equator's length of Kerbin WITHOUT any gas-powered engines - which means ABSOLUTELY NO: Jet engines Rockets Gas-powered turboshaft engines (like the R121 or the R7000) Electric motors are okay. Here are some other rules for this challenge. Leaderboard placement will be awarded based on TOTAL MISSION TIME ELAPSED (As you may have already guessed) vehicle must be all-electric. Which means are solar panels and/or RTGs are highly recommended. Having liquid fuel and/or oxidizer is okay ONLY for weight and balancing purposes. This can come in real handy if you need to move your CoM forward or backward. Fuel cells are not permitted, since we're trying to conserve gas thanks to those pot-smoking bureaucrats at the ESA. Even if I did allow fuel cells, they won't be enough to push your vehicle through the whole length of the trip. Stock and/or DLC parts only. Autopilot/navigation/gauge mods okay. Generally, no mods outside of DLCs that come with additional parts EXCEPTION: mods that come with balloon or dirigible-related parts are permitted, but those craft go in a separate division. If you want to allow a specific mod that conforms to the other rules, let me know and I'll take a look at it before deciding if it shall be allowed. Your vehicle must come back IN ONE PIECE. Not that you should need an extra fuel tank for an all-electric vehicle. Surface vehicles are okay, but they'll get placed in a separate division. Mostly because you'll take longer to go around the planet. On the bright side, if you have to stop to recharge, you can pause and take a break IRL. Just keep in mind that any and all recharge breaks in which the MET clock is running count for your finishing time. Crew capacity is optional. Divisions are as follows: Trekker Division - vehicles that can't fly, but travels on land and/or water to complete the journey. Earhart Division - aircraft like planes, helicopters, and gyroplanes. You'll get an Earhart Division: First Class medal if you successfully fly Kerbin's equator WITHOUT STOPPING. Heisenberg Division - balloons, blimps, zeppelins, et cetera. I don't know much about the balloon/airship mods, but the reason they're a separate division is because they can stay airborne without needing to land or stop. This may provide an unfair advantage over the aircraft, since they'll have to come down and recharge for God-knows-how-long before taking off again. Sun Soaker Division - any craft that can successfully cruise at 175 m/s. More details later. Multiple entries per person allowed, but only the best-performing one for each division will be accepted. Pictures and/or video required for entry to be valid. Be sure to include: Your craft in action. Start/finish times. (Optional) the craft in the hangar. If you're having trouble getting your rotors to work, please consult this thread below. @Echo__3 and @18Watt really helped me out when I started to use the Breaking Ground DLC. Sure, I originally asked about a motor that's prohibited on this challenge. Nevertheless, the same principles still apply - and I got the electric-rotor plane to work successfully. As promised, here's an explanation as to why the Sun Soaker Division has a speed requirement: And last but not least, here's my entry. Can't wait to see what you all come up with. LEADERBOARD - (ONGOING) MARCH 7, 2023 TREKKER DIVISION (empty) EARHART DIVISION @18Watt - 3 hours, 14 minutes (FIRST CLASS) @Mars-Bound Hokie (ME) - 5 hours, 11 minutes, 30 seconds (FIRST CLASS) This was a last-minute entry. Better time than my last entry, but not fast enough to overtake the current leader @OJT - 17 hours, 13 minutes HEISENBERG DIVISION @Snigel - 5 hours, 3 minutes I know that he damaged the Thunderbolt's lower battery pod during the landing, but the "Come back in one piece" rule was mainly intended to prevent jettisoning and mid-air explosions. Had he kept the landing a little softer - or if landing gear wasn't too much of a problem for the craft's performance - he could have landed the craft intact. SUN SOAKER DIVISION (Could be me, but I don't really care since I was doing a speed test before sending the E-40 to Laythe) (Please let me know if I missed anything)

My Poseidon Mk. IV is a 20-man (16 passengers + 4 crew) refueling-capable pure stock SSTO that has an emergency ejection system for the occupants. Once the "ABORT" button is hit, the cabin and cockpit will separate from the rest of the plane and freefall to the ground. Be sure to activate the parachutes before you get too close to the ground, or everyone's dead. Hopefully, it's only used on Kerbin. It also has a probe core in the front so it can do both manned and unmanned flights. It's also there to store scientific data from the voyage. During a test run, the cabin was ejected at 17.5 km altitude above Kerbin's surface. Parachutes activated, and the cabin is safely on the ground. Now I know I can recover the occupants if a safe landing on Kerbin is not possible. If I'm on Laythe, however, then I might have a problem since I'll have to extract everyone from a stranded cabin and put them in a rescue craft back home. This photo was taken before the Poseidon got some modifications (heat-resistant nose and tailfin), but the ejection system still works. To see the Poseidon Mk. IV in action, check out the Neptune Mission Files (starting with the Neptune IV). You'll see it is capable of flying to Laythe and back. Here's how I think I should be scored, but I'll leave it to you: Save passenger compartment - 2 points Save crew - 3 points Or does the "crew" in this case consist of passengers AND kerbalnauts that work in the spacecraft? If so, then I'd get 3 instead of 5. I don't know exactly how scoring is done here. At least break down how points are awarded when you score contestants, please. Unmanned piloting - 1 point Does this only count before or after the ejection system is deployed? Either way, as seen in the second screenshot here, the craft can deploy its own abort system without needing a crew inside. Manned piloting - 2 points Cargo space - 1 point It holds the scientific instruments, the drills, ore tank, and the ISRU converter. SSTO - 8 points TOTAL: 17 points Do you agree with this assessment, or not? Either way, I think I should get at least 11 thanks to the craft being an SSTO and the ejection system saving EVERYONE on board ALONE. Is that true?

You know what happened when I did that? My drone wasn't nearly as nose-heavy and it started to actually stay straight and level. Actually, it's still a bit nose-heavy when gliding. Nothing a little throttle won't fix, though. I didn't adjust the wing structure because I wanted to test ONE ADJUSTMENT AT A TIME. And since the engine modification alone worked out great so far, I decided to keep the wings as they are. If I need to modify the airframe for Eve operation/transport, I will. It was dark when I took off. With 18,015 units of electric charge ready, I think I was okay. Once I got the drone to a safe altitude (I did 5 km) and kept it level, I just left it alone. It may have descended approx. 1000 m before rising back up on its own, but otherwise not bad. That's why I took it so high. Its cruising velocity averaged at 120 m/s. Mid-flight, I realized that I was wasting electricity by cruising full throttle. I reduced speed to 1/2 to 1/3 throttle, and the airspeed stayed the same while the plane still maintained a (somewhat) level flight without my help. Note-to-self: when you get your flight path set, reduce throttle. Those bottom lights are more powerful than I thought. They really came in handy when landing on a hilly grassland peninsula and my drone was nearing 5,000 units left. After minutes of some bouncing touch-and-gos (unintended), I brought the plane to a complete stop. It took me almost 1.25 days for the plane to be recharged to maximum capacity. It probably would have gone a lot faster if I remembered to extend the tailfin panels. In my defense, I was too chicken to press the button since the last time I hit it was when I meant to turn on Kerbnet mid-flight and the panels flew off. After that, I took off up the east hill and started flying towards the sunrise. Check the surface info tab and you'll see the general area where I had to make a pitstop. If I took off early in the morning instead of the middle of the night, I would have made it a lot farther. For the next few hours, I'll be flying without risk of a battery drainage. Since it was getting boring watching a plane fly with pretty much no problems over the ocean, I decided to entertain myself with some math. Specifically, how fast I would have to go at minimum to keep up with the sun if I was to maximize my solar charge time. Below are the velocities that the planets revolve around their respective axes in m/s. In addition, since the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'll have to fly RETROGRADE (west) to stay with the sun. KERBIN: There is no way I can reach that velocity with that drone, so I'll have to time my takeoff to have as much sun time as possible. More specifically, I'll need to take off shortly before sunrise so that I can get a head start on the sun and have plenty of charge left over by the time the solar panels start charging. Then again, why would I need to use that drone? If I need to collect data on Kerbin, I have a whole collection of jets that can do the job for way less than a sixth of the time and half the money. EVE: If I can match that velocity at a safe altitude without losing control (due to going too slow) on Eve, then I can practically keep my drone airborne FOREVER. @18Watt, although I'll be paying attention to Matt's video on how to pack and move my current drone prototype, I'll keep your designs in mind in case bringing it to Eve is not possible. Thank you. FYI, the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt is actually a single-engine fighter. Are you actually referring to the P-38 Lightning (not to be confused for the F-82 Twin Mustang)? My drone's stats are not as impressive as the P-38's, but at least I got a general structural design going for when I make that replica.

@Echo__3 Like I said earlier, I only made that plane for show. Apart from maybe posting on KerbalX, I have no further uses for the B.B. After watching Matt Lowne's video on a science plane to Eve (see video), I decided to give it a try myself with some modifications of my own. More specifically, my version is: Completely unmanned Right now, Eve's surface is a one-way trip. I'd rather not send anybody there until I've established that two-way travel is possible. No goo or materials Which is related to the first major difference in my design. More energy storage When it came to making the twin engines, I found that if I make one good forward-facing prop engine in the back as usual and then added the engine+blade combo symmetrically in the front (as Matt did here), the engines work out great. Trying to change the direction and blade orientation of the two engines individually didn't work. After confirming that my design works on Kerbin (despite being nose-heavy), I teleported it to Eve's surface and waited for a signal. Here are the screenshots of my Eve test run. Almost looks like I'm going faster on Eve than I am on Kerbin. Not bad. Still have to constantly pitch up to keep it level, not to mention it just loves to keep rolling And the roll hold is completely useless if not treasonous. Took a total nosedive when the signal broke, signaling the craft's doom. I promise you that my career save will have better coverage once this drone is finalized. My first Eve drone prototype in the SPH The front tanks are empty while the rear one is full. I fear that, if I fill up the front tanks, the craft will get even more nose-heavy. Well, if it's that risky, then I probably won't be using aerial drones on Duna often if at all. I already have the Dirtblood and a quite popular mobile base, so I'm pretty much all set in exploring Duna. Thanks to you, though, I would have general guidelines for making a VTOL drone when it comes to exploring the canyons. @18Watt I checked the Wikipedia pages for both planes, and they're not exactly impressive stats. At least they'd be good places to start when making larger and/or more practical aircraft. Holy crap, you're right. At the time I posted on here, I had no idea that the VC-118 was the military counterpart for the DC-6. All I knew was that the VC-118 was the second Air Force One. Now I know what to go for when making that replica. If you scroll up on this post, you'll find that I did make a twin-engine drone. I didn't use the small electric rotors since I was unsure on how much thrust I'll need due to Eve's increased gravity (and Matt's recommendation, but I think it was mainly because his model weighed more). Maybe I could still fly just fine with the small rotors like you said. Also, like I said earlier, when I tried making counter-rotating individual rotors, the plane couldn't take off. I just followed Matt's instructions, and they seemed to work out fine for me during testing. Thank God for Alt+F12 and Sandbox Mode for test runs, both on Kerbin and Eve. I'll just need to teleport some more relays.

@Echo__3 Thank you so much for helping me with my problem, and especially for sending me a link with a modified version to work with. Test run with your version Once I took it to the SPH, I opened the fuel tank PAWs so I can see how the weight was distributed. After that, I opened the engine and propeller PAWs and checked the main throttle action group. Apparently, the RPM limit may have been an inhibitor in my performance. I do have some questions regarding the motor size and output setting: What made you decide 10%? Is that standard for all your propeller motors? What are the absolute minimum and maximum motor size percentages I should heed if I expect the aircraft to fly? Depending on the size of the aircraft (e.g. electric open-cockpit plane vs B-36 bomber), I'll have to adjust as necessary. I then took your engine and blade adjustments under advisement and returned to my original B.B. craft file. Below you will find how I adjusted the Lf+Ox setup, the engine, and the blades. To be honest, I don't remember why I used 20% in the motor size and output instead of 10. I think it was because the aircraft was bigger and heavier than yours. Either way, this design worked out great for me. My B.B. prototype with the new prop engine successfully flying over the KSC Perfect landing. I'll need to get my MJ autopilot to work on keeping it level without sending it into an endless spiral first, but otherwise I'm impressed with the results. Thank you so much for your help. @18Watt Okay. Would the BG props and engines be fine for, let's say, a DC-3 - or something of medium-large size like a VC-118? I haven't even put kerbals on Eve yet, so crew recovery missions will be a while. However, I should be able to send a drone in the meantime to collect science. Since Eve has no usable atmosphere for the air intakes, I'll have to use the electric motors - which is another bonus, since I should use solar panels and RTGs to charge it. I'll just need to test the drone on Kerbin first. After that, it's a matter of sending the drone to Eve's surface without blowing up. A couple of questions: For an unmanned science drone on Eve, should I go with the ducted fan blades or the regular propeller blades? I plan to carry: Thermometer Atmospheric GCMS (Maybe) a scanning arm Seismic accelerometer Gravioli detector Barometer Surface scanning module Would this work on Duna too? Again, thank you all so much for your help. Can't wait to fly old-school.