Corona688

Probably. Those struts, and two of those fins, are horrible workarounds for not having the right engine.

I remember reading an MSDS for chlorine trifluoride... It had an impressive series of images showing how it set fire to rubber safety gloves, frozen chicken, water, teflon tubing, sand, glass, metal, and a variety of safety equipment on contact. Written by Kerbals, it'd probably be 37 pages of "AAAAAAA" with the occasional image like that.

Sorry for the overexposure of the controls, this is a fly-by-night operation you see... It's REALLY HARD to lift off without breaking the tail engine, but possible, until I get the terrier unlocked. Flight ceiling is 7km, not 10km though, hopefully that doesn't make the terrier completely useless.

It had palm trees, very briefly, well before things like RCS existed. I never saw them except in screenshots, and I think I started around 0.8.5.

I'm tempted. But I also really want to beat this XD I bet I can do it. I'll note you later if I get desperate >.>

Thank you. I was expecting the old flameout behavior, where flameout was linked to pressure and velocity, causing horrible chain flameouts-spinouts.

The RNG spat one at me that's worth $60K on completion with 10K bonuses for each point. For that much I'll put up with it, especially since so little else is paying yet.

Unless they flame out perfectly simultaneously, they will kick the aircraft into a vicious spin. The same goes for disabling the engines one at a time. Maybe if I can get them running off the same fuel bottle, I can right click and disable the fuel.

So do I, I must compensate with lots of control surfaces. Take a look at your control surfaces, and where they are relative to the center of gravity. They are so close to the center of gravity, they have to work real hard to make it turn. That long neck, if it catches any drag, can and will outfight them easily. Pilot this craft with a velvet touch. Also, those diagonal fins, whichever way you turn them, will always press down on the back end of your plane, because turning them generates drag which tries to push them backwards. When your fins are sideways and flat, that drag doesn't matter, but when they're above your aircraft, that drag will force the end down / nose up. I also notice your wheels are far back from the center of gravity, which may make lift-off difficult. Imagine it as a lever, with the wheel as the fulcrum. Pushing 'up' presses down on the back end of your plane, right down on your wheels. Put the wheels a little further forward and it will help that push turn the nose of your airplane up. The SR-71 didn't have as much of a problem because its center of lift wasn't so wonky -- its neck generated lift! -- but for all of that, while SR-71 may have been the fastest craft in the world, it certainly wasn't the easiest to fly. About one in every three was lost to an accident. I know it'll break up your SR-71 look a little bit, but a set of canards in the front may give you the control authority you need to fly. As for the engines, check if the thrust limiter has been turned on by accident, that's happened to me a few times.

I am the OP. How can I shut down the junos without action groups, or do I need money to upgrade the spaceplane hangar to get the money I need to upgrade the VAB?

Your center of lift is far out of whack, it should be close to the center of gravity. We can't see your center of thrust, but I suspect it's too low, either that or you have drag-inducing elements on the underside of your plane.

We have decorative ladders all over the place in the KSP grounds, just there for the heck of it, and you can climb them. Why those useless ones and not these useful ones? Bug, I call it, or design problem. Their engine may have problems with the notion of a 1-rung ladder. Which ladder are they climbing when they're crossing three at once? My suggestion, either fix the rungs or convert them to some other widget so we can put our own rungs there.

The game has a lot of alarms already, albeit visual ones, including some you might not be aware of, like the vertical speed alarm. Observe the red light beside the vertical velocity indicator. They tried to add an "overheat" sound early in the game, but took it straight back out because it was pretty much on all the time XD It might be more useful now. How I envision it, a single warning "beep" when a part begins to heat up (i.e. when its thermometer bar would appear). Above 50%, a steady slow beep with pitch determined by temperature, above 80% a pulsing alarm. There'd only be one alarm, not one for each part, with the worst overheating overriding the others. Other useful auditory notifications might be the traditional airplane seatbelt "bing" when you've slowed down from re-entry to the point it's safe to deploy your parachute. You could install a radar as an "optional part" which would click slower and faster depending on how far you were from the ground.

That sounds fishy. Why are they there at all, in the exactly right place? He should file a bug.

DLC is a dirty word these days, but when the base game itself is enjoyable and playable without it, it can be a good thing.

Weather balloon.

I tried to warn HarvestR about this way back before career mode was implemented, how easy it would be to back people into corners by requiring mission successes to unlock parts, but giving them mission requirements they can't accomplish without more parts... At the time the discussion was just about unlocking better cockpit controls. Sometimes you can find creative solutions around the problem. Sometimes you can't.

Oh, I see -- for jet engines specifically. Thanks.

Be very careful controlling your space station. If you've docked anything, the engines on it will be available to use, even by accident.

As above, it's an exaggeration about the kind of mission that's frustrating me, every airborne mission I get is just a hair out of reach of my best air-breathing engines but the destination is difficult and costly to get to orbitally.

How exactly can you get to 19,000m with a Juno? Or do you mean with upgraded engines?

Specific impulse is thrust over flow rate. If you get less thrust with the same flow, that's a lower ISP.

Assuming it survives. A specialized craft that has to ditch half of itself before it can climb to 39,000ft is going to cost something, and lose a percentage in retrieval after parachute landing.

Did that change? When I was first playing with spaceplanes, I remember turning on a jet engine in vaccuum for the hell of it, and while it produced no thrust, it still gulped fuel.

I am certainly not saying it's better to use a pile of ganged Spark engines than, say, one T45. Just that the Spark is a lot lighter and more versatile than the Terrier. The Terrier is fantastic for one and only one thing -- long burns on medium-sized craft in vaccuum. I build smaller than that whenever I can get away with it, which makes the Terrier a pain to lug around. Especially as dead weight on an aircraft.