lammatt

O.... nvm... i forgot you cant time warp when it's ~500m or else it breaks.

anyone experiencing this too? (it's not a big deal, just have to soft land with engine... but hey, why no fully deploy)

yes i exited instead if am excited

lol.... so true

i am in GMT+8 and it's 20:34 now.

SQUAD is in europe i think. so in this case, their time should be within GMT+/- 3

i think... enabling part clipping and stack millions of control surfaces INSIDE a fuel tank can make it looks like a lifting body craft.

no. just no.

depends on the wheels? as if there are other sets of wheels for planes in the game. and why would you land a plane on uneven ground anyways? i dont think planes are made for landing on rough terrain as per my knowledge.

another thing to add, it may be easier to land coming from the East. this is because there's mountain on the west side of KSC, this forces you to make your descend a little steeper and hence a little harder if your plane isnt very agile. coming from the east would be easier because the east side of KSC is the ocean, and you can afford a clear view on the approach. ---- this shouldnt be a big deal, but if you are not very familiar with landing planes in flying sim games... it may be helpful. (if you are ok at landing planes on carriers in ace combat/hawx KSP wouldnt be too hard, the hardest part is actually touch down ON the runway instead of next to it, which isnt that hard anyways, if you have enough approaching distance to mess around during your descend)

1. wrong, as long as the plane lands at low vertical speed, it's fine. you can have >100m/s horizontal speed when touching down and the wheels wont break.

fuel tanks and engines! fuel tanks are the heaviest things in a plane. you can manipulate the center of mass just by shifting the position of the tanks. usually, you dont want the CoM being too in front tho' because this is make your take off very hard. (to avoid tail strike) also, if you want to have the center of mass more in front, you can use lighter engines. (aero spike is 1.5t at 175kN, while the 215kN engine is 1.25t) also, monopropellent tanks are pretty heavy too, you can use them to play with the CoM position.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/24581-WEB-APP-Ribbon-Generator-1-1-0 here

a quick tip is: 2 turbojets + 1rocket engine (the one with 215kN thrust) on 1 long 1.25m fuel+oxidizer tank+ the mk1fuselage with fuel at the middle and 2x 1.25 fuel+oxidizer on the side with fuel duct to the middle stack; with ~2ram intake +4 radial intakes, you will be able to fly up to ~mach4 to5 at~20km altitude and the jets can live till ~25km ---- otherwise, you want to squeeze as much jet thrust as you can in a reasonably weight, if you manage to get to mach 5 @25km before the jet dies and you have >1.5km/s of vacuum rocket dv to spend, you are very likely getting to space unless something goes wrong.

dont know if Starglider's a troll what's the point of building planes if you are detaching the wheel when you got airbourne. How can you fking land withour wheels? what? parachute? then why would i build a plane at the first place, i'd just vertically take off with rocket.

media test gets the beta >> a couple months >> release

for planes, the lighter the better - you have way too much RCS fuel - and parachute is kind of meaningless for a plane this small - 4 intakes for 1 turbojet are too many

O... if it tips on the runway, it's that the wheel and the plane body are not relatively stationary enough (aka, the plane is not rigid enough) to fix this, add more struts.

appreciate your input... but my question was how can i guesstimate the threshold it's easy to do trial-and-error, but to make an educated guess is harder but can save a lot of tedious trials. and i am actually looking for the how-to-guess instead of the trials. i think i can handle some very basic symbols and math calculations (my math training ended when i was in year2 in university, and my physics training ended in year3, but i know absolutely nothing about fluid dynamics more difficult than GCE-ALevel or AP level and i was a chemistry graduate and i teach science in highschool) i would appreciate the knowledge on the thought process how to guess the switching threshold (if it happens to be understandable within my scope)

thrust doesnt line up with the center of mass, you will be spinning like no tomorrow.

let's say... i have 2km/s of vacuum rocket dv and i can afford a 2.0 TWR; and i want to achieve a 80kmX80km orbit. how can i guesstimate the min. speed & altitude i've to acquire when i switch to rocket and to make thing simpler, let's say the jets and rocket cant operate at the same time, they work in an either-or fashion.

PhenomII 955 4gb DDR3 1333 4850 7200RPM X2 @ RAID0

F12 for steam screen cap F1 for the KSP client screen cap client captures as .png, while steam captures as jpg and png is way larger than jpg so,... it's your choice

you have 1700m/s of rocket dv... i am pretty sure you can basically switch to rocket at any speed >1000m/s wrt the surface. (since a 75kmX75km orbit is ~2300m/s and a surface speed of 1km/s is ~1200m/s orbital speed)

skycrane is the easiest way to build, but harder to fly while sideway attachmant requires some weight balance,but landing is easy it's up to you