Wjolcz

I always liked the small rocket fuel tanks texturing, but never understood the need for the dark rings (I guess they are some sort of structural support). They don't look like something very aerodynamic. Especially when they poke out with some of the nose cones on: What are they influenced by? In my opinion they could be slightly more standarized. The texturing of the small ones is OK, but I wouldn't mind if they got slightly redone to look more "smooth" and the size 2 and 3 tanks got some love (texture-wise) too.

It's perfectly normal. I always send interplanetary probes first. Once they visit the bodies that I want to send Kerbals to, it's time for crewed mission. And I always do crewed Mun and Minmus missions in one sitting. Launch the game, send crew to Mun/Minmus, do science/contracts/screw around for no reason, go back, turn the game off. E: It sure is better than doing one mission at a time (launch a Jool probe, tranfer, wait until it get's the SOI encounter, circularize, do another mission). KAC is what makes the gameplay actually active and full of opportunities while other missions are en route to their destinations.

Just wanted to have it separated. It's easier to read the OP than something stretched within few posts that you need to scroll through the whole thread to get the idea, though I guess you're right. If everyone posted a slight variation of someone's idea we would get flooded with threads really fast.

But... But this idea is already in this thread!

I'm no spacecraft design expert, but it might be because of the stereoscopic field of vision thingy. Two side-by-side pilots could judge the distance better than two in tandem configuration.

My thread got merged with this one:

I agree with this.

I like the idea. The Utility tab really is cluttered and so is Aerodynamics. Would be nice if the Fuel tab would also got split into two categories (Monoprop, Rocket Fuel). If I'm not mistaken you can also customize the tabs yourself in the current stock version.

This is some neat stuff! I especially like the aerospike, VTOL engines and nose parts. Would rep, but gave away too much for the last 24h.

Here's an SSTO from my career save: -Crew of 6 -Cargo bay for small payloads -RAPIER-less, Aerospike-less -Designed to fit a mid-career save IIRC the cost of the craft is about 40,000 credits, or less (don't remember how much exactly) and the cost of a single flight is only about 2,000 credits. More details: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/131272-The-Roadrunner-SSTO

So to sum this up: Not worth messing with dihedral on conventional SSTOs like this one:

This is strange... The dV requirements should change only for bodies with atmospheres in 1.0.

So after a bit of testing I noticed that angling the wings of my aircraft up reduces the turn radius and adds some lift (which is very helpful when landing). So with this logic I thought: "Wouldn't that also stabilize an SSTO during reentry?" Let's replace the air with water for a moment here. It seems logical that if something is angled and we push the stream against it the fluid/air/whatever will "slip" off it instead of splashing in all directions, thus reducing the friction. So if we try and pull the nose up it will be easier to expose the belly of the aircraft, and not dive nose-first and horribly die in flames. Are my logic, assumptions and observations correct? E: We're talking stock aero here. E2: Can dihedral affect the top speed?

I don't mean to necropost, but this doesn't work for me? It says the name is invalid and to make sure if the path of the file is correct. I'm on Win 8.1. EDIT: OK NEVERMIND! Forgot to inlcude space before the path and "-popupwindow". Works fine now.

I'd like to see a Mk2 piece similar to F-35's lift fan.

I really hope SQUAD doesn't look at this thread and think it's a good idea.

I remember being frustrated, but then I installed KER.

I once replied to "Is MechJeb cheating" thread. Still feels bad.

Give me examples of so called "potentialS". And a different colour.

@KerikBalm: It's ugly so doesn't count. Jokes aside. I'm not sure why I said SSTOs can't carry big loads, saying at the same that it's posssible (Rune's 'Longsword'). I mean, not in real life at least (Do we even have any SSTOs IRL?). Anyway, I don't treat SSTOs as reliable payload shuttles. Rather using them to transfer crew and small sats to LKO. It's always easier to strap a bunch of boosters to my interplanetary transfer stage than trying to fit it in Mk3 cargo bay, even though it's not cheap.

AKA "Let's have a whole bunch of 1.875m parts just to support a new 2-man pod" Just what Alshain said. 1.25m pod with crew of two would work better, though I still want a 2.5m Dragon-esque command pod with crew of 4.

Still doesn't make much sense. Edit: there were no moholes on the old Moho IIRC.

I like the idea. Some sort of limiting the number of nuclear parts and negotiating your way to permit the launch of more doesn't sound bad!

As much as I would love to have more fuel tweakables I hate the idea of parts being procedural. And I know that it would allow for less parts per vessel, but it wouldn't be the same game anymore. Call me crazy, but I actually really enjoy the LEGO rockets and toy solar system for ants.

;___;