RoboRay

No kerbal left behind! Except Bill. Screw Bill.

I worked on this mini-shuttle: It mostly works, but still needs some improvement.

Does this still work in 0.90? (I'm away from my KSP machine or I'd test it myself.)

2.5 meter jet engine and air intakes?

Why not update to the current version of KSP? That makes finding working mods much easier.

Trying to land on Duna, and the decoupler below my lander engine was glitched and wouldn't disconnect from the (nearly empty) transfer stage. So, I did a low pass by Ike and smashed it against a mountaintop at orbital velocity, getting rid of the now useless transfer stage and exposing my descent stage engine nozzle. (Ok, it took several save/reload attempts to get the altitude just right so that only the desired stuff was destroyed. But it worked!) Duna landing was successful!

With the stock Mk3 parts about to be replaced with larger versions, I could still see old Mk3 parts like TouhouTorpedo's Mk3 cargo bay being adapted to the updated Mk2 platform, as the stock Mk2 cargo bays are so small inside, especially vertically. Adapting the old Mk3 cargo bays to the new Mk2 parts would allow some much better options for hauling one-man landers and such. Sort of like the Dreamlifter... Call them Mk2+, Mk2-B, whatever... Is anyone considering anything like this?

With the stock Mk3 parts are being replaced with larger versions, I could still see TT's Mk3 parts being adapted to the updated Mk2 platform as "Mk2B" or "Oversized Mk2" parts. The cargo bays, in particular, as the stock Mk2 cargo bays are so narrow. Adapting the old Mk3 cargo bays to the new Mk2 parts would allow some much better options for one-man landers and such. I kind of like the bulged aesthetics of the Dreamlifter: Any chances of that?

It's nothing new at all. Everyone used Enhanced NavBall all along, right?

Sure... a 1.25m cylinder, so long as you don't want anything attached to the outside of it. Once you start tacking on landing legs, solar panels, batteries, lights, docking ports, etc. it rapidly becomes almost impossible to fit a 1.25m payload into that tiny bay. The Mk3-sized cargo bay can accommodate a reasonable 1.25m-based vehicle built around its desired mission profile instead of just the severe compromises required to fit it into the Mk2 bay. The Mk2 bay isn't useless... far from it. It's just a Mk3 cargo bay is dramatically more useful than a Mk2 cargo bay.

No customizable minimalist window options, unfortunately, and lacking a few really nice bits of information that MJ provides. At least, the last time I checked... and it's been a while...

That's... unfortunate... but it does explain why the probe I just tried to launch with an all-SRB launch vehicle shot off the pad at I don't even know how many Gs and shredded itself in FAR, even though MJ said my TWR was dialed back to 1.2:1. I guess MJ doesn't know that KWR SRBs follow different rules than the stock ones. Which means I'll need to stick to the stock SRBs when I need to tweak the thrust.

But you were fine for all those months that 64-bit KSP worked only on Linux, so long as Windows didn't get it.

There's no "might" about it... it's a known issue. The reason for laterally angled landing gear causing uncommanded yaw during the takeoff roll is that the runway is not "flat" to the pull of gravity. All of the raised ground surfaces of KSC are on a perfectly parallel plane, while the rest of the ground is a sphere. Gravity pulls you toward the center of the sphere, not straight down through the plane of the runway. This is also why planes roll forward on the runway if you don't set the brakes... gravity is pulling them "downhill" toward the middle of the runway. As to the yaw, since the plane is technically on a slight gravitational slope, dropping off to the right because the center of KSC is south of the runway, the right-side wheel has a tiny bit more weight resting on it. So, the planes tend to to turn. This "slope" also exacerbates any flexing in your craft due to its weight... parts will preferentially shift to the right, creating even more of an imbalance.

If you peruse the various mod threads, you'll find people that have difficulty with "copy this folder to that location" in every... single... one... of them. It's so sadly common that "improper installation" is always among the first issues suggested when people have "unique" problems that don't seem to affect other people, for any mod.

Because there's no drama quite like "I'm quitting a videogame!" drama.

If you really want to fly Duna, may I suggest lighter-than-air? I haven't used it lately, but I think the Hooligan Labs Airship parts are still being developed.

I did say "most" of the mountains. You're definitely not clearing all of the terrain, though... you do have to stay clear of the highlands.

From a pure "lift" standpoint, I've found that the atmosphere of Duna behaves similar to the atmosphere of Kerbin 10km higher. So, if you can fly above 10km on Kerbin, you may be able to just barely get off the ground down in the low-lying basins of Duna. If you can fly to 15km on Kerbin, you can clear most of the mountains on Duna.

MechJeb has a modular design. You can install it, then disable any modules you're not interested in (I usually "kill" a few that I will never use myself).

Not to mention that, if someone really does want to use his mods, they can just type the mod name into Google. Officially-authorized distributions or not, they are out there. Just don't link to them here.

It's way faster than a Piper Cub's top speed, really. A Piper Cub's stall speed would be about 16 m/s.

It looks like the front gear is tilted at an angle, leaning forward. That can cause problems. Or is that the problem? They're straight when you start, but tilt when the load shifts as you try to get the nose up?

If you rotate your strut endpoints sideways, you can make them flat to the surface so that they don't protrude much. It's possible to put lots of struts on a plane and have them not disrupt its beauty. Especially if you get really good at tucking them away inside seams or gaps. I strutted this one to heck and back trying to solve a problem and even then I don't think it's that bad...

No, it's not, but it does help. I have a good enough understanding of aerodynamics from a pilot's perspective (ground school was good for something, I guess ) that I can build decent planes without having to fully understand aerodynamics from an engineer's perspective.