bsalis

That sounds right. They are 1m tall with suite. In fact the whole game was re-scaled around 1m tall Kerbals in .16. Since when EVA was being done, they found out that the physics didn't handle objects so well if they are under a meter. "Insect physics" i think Harv called it. So everything was made larger, such that the 1m parts are actually wider than 1m.

Well i'm a software dev too, and the problem isn't one of converting the file. That can be done, and Harv said they considered that. They chose not to, and I would say it is for several reasons. Some that I can think of are... a) It would set a precedent that new alpha versions will always be backward compatible, which will not always be possible Anything Squad provides, it would be responsible for. So people will hold them accountable for conversion issues which have nothing to do with the actual conversion c) Conversion does not mean everything will be fine and dandy in .21. Expect the new Mun heightmaps to return (so landed crafts will be underground again). Any craft without a power supply will not have pod torque, since that requires power now. d) The community will have a converter made soon after release anyhow. Probably several, within days.

Release day is going to be epic. Gonna get me some popcorn and enjoy the show. The whining is gonna be louder than triple turbojets screaming through 24km at 1600 m/s.

Say hello to docking ports --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pushing_on_a_string For strutted rockets launching from Kerbin, pushing is much more practical and fine. However when docking crafts in orbit for transit, pulling is more stable. Just turn the gimbals off - you should not need them anyhow. For me i started to make things modular with docking ports on top and bottom. This tug works brilliantly... As you can see, the land tanker also has port top and bottom, so I can stack crafts into a train. If need I can stack two of those tugs to make a double if i needed the oompf.

From my experience, planes with stable pitch often have.... * The CoM near the center of the craft * The CoL and CoD behind the CoM * Long craft length * Ample control surfaces * Control surfaces further from the CoM * Control surfaces at the rear and front * Forward control surfaces should not be further from the CoM than the rear So basically if you build something like a Lockheed U-2, but with the addition of canards at the front (but not too far), it should work great.

More is still more. Larger rockets have more chemical energy (fuel) to convert into kinetic energy (velocity). Kinetic energy is a function of mass and velocity... However if you build big and don't get more delta-V, then what you have done is get more mass moving. So that is more.. but probably not more of what you want.

Kerbal Space Program The space program for the rest of us Kerbal Space Program It goes up to eleven Kerbal Space Program Kiss your girlfriend goodbye

I too have heavily invested in Laythe. Sad day.

Landing something on top of it is #1 on my .21 to do list.

I dispose of them Russian Style.

It looks like you are building a small SSTO, and since I didn't have any to show, I decided to build one just for you in order to demonstrate good design. From looking at your pics, I think your craft have too much engine mass, too much jet fuel, and are unbalanced. Even if you managed to get them to orbit, I am certain that your joy will be short lived upon re-entry. Below is the skeleton of the Sprite SSTO Spaceplane I made. Note how the mass of the cockpit & ASAS at the front balance the engine mass at the back. Also see how the fuel mass is also generally balanced around the CoM (remember jet tanks have less fuel) - this is so the CoM does not move much. For an SSTO this size, one jet and two 909s are enough - any more engine mass will reduce the delta-V you can get to orbit. The jet fuel tanks are also all you need for one engine - any more will be a waste. I did a sneaky job and fitted 4 air intakes, with 2 between the tanks and 909s. However I did do a K-prize run initially with only 2 intakes. Worked fine but was a bit of a dog. So here it is with wings and all the trimmings, in orbit. 44 parts in total. Craft file here (paste the text into Sprite.craft file if needed).

Well, it's good to see people who do enjoy exploring with rovers, and others like me that find it a bit boring. I'm not alone here, and I think I will pass on the audio-books and trim-auto-roving. Perhaps in campaign there will be missions to collect samples from deposits that are spread out, and cannot be easily seen from a distance. So you will need to walk or rover... then yeah, rover beats walking.

... and well, I have found out that it is boring. Mainly because it is so slow. Sure you can easily visit any particular point, but... so slow. Not sure it's worth it. Am I missing something here? I see many people deploying rovers. Do they drive for 5 mins then abandon it?

Um yes, since .16 Clicky pic to play...

Good artists steal Find an epic narrative and re-imagine it in an interactive game form. Studying some basic stuff up front helps too.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dramatic_structure Then get help by crowdsourcing some content perhaps.

Built a ramp to get a fuel tanker onto the runway. This was before it had tapered edges. There were a couple of issues. After this incident, Kerbal engineers decided to invest in a measuring tape.

Jackass - Kerbal episode

Not sure about unpowered, but I have heard people mention that the landing gear has mass extended but not retracted. So I checked and... no mass. Does not matter if extended or not.

Perhaps you could post some pictures. Since i'm not seeing anything major wrong with how you are flying. Other than not closing air-intakes once you're done with the jets, but that should not prevent orbit in a decent craft.

With some knowledge and enough fiddling with maneuver nodes you can do things quite cheaply. Last evening I returned an spaceplane from (low) Moho orbit. Did it in one main burn with some minor adjustments later. Only cost about 2800 m/s, since i didn't do a plane change and aerocaptured into Kerbin.

Even if you change the building to be the proper type in the file, you still get odd symmetry. Not sure what can be done about that. I just deal with it, as is. The alternative is to achieve what you want in the same building. For example you can build a mirror symmetry rocket around whatever you have in the SPH, and just rotate it upright and slap some launch clamps on it.

I now claim Laythe for myself.

Looking at the upcoming changes, I do not see a persistence wipe. However, the reaction wheel and ASAS work that C7 is working on looks like you will need electricity rotate your craft in .21 That, and possibly ASAS unit will be dead weight, or maybe serve a different purpose. So, if you have any craft without a power supply, you may only be able to rotate them with RCS. If no RCS then......