Volt

You, sir, are a supergenius. These mods have enhanced my kerbal aviation even further than before, in fact, larger and more varied-size swept wings were something I had been dying inside for until now. However, I can\'t seem to get the larger landing gear to work at all; they always - without fail - cause some sort of strange slewing or swerving behaviour on takeoff.

Has anyone reported the issue of DR parts not being persistent in position? I can\'t get hinges to stay in position when I switch to another craft then back.

Which part names in the KSP\Parts folder are these? It\'s hard to tell from the cfgs because Harv made them identical by accident. I also can\'t find the large stack decoupler at all.

The \'hold heading and alt\' feature seems like me to be a suicide simulator. When I used it on my aircraft it just dragged it into a progressively heavier dive. Edit: Same for the autoland. It just snap-controls the surfaces (all controls snapping from one end of the scale to the other, particularly roll) then dives. Hard.

I suppose this is a sign you\'re in for a very LONG flight, but... 587) When you accidentally decouple 4 full tanks with a full-throttle engine attached in a prograde vector during circ-burn. And the space station stays stuck.

543) When your aerobatic plane takes more skill to keep stable than to do aerobatics in.

I\'m glad to have finally had it confirmed that planes don\'t generate lift at 0 alpha. Possibly why my Delta Dart/Lightning replica suddenly became my fastest taking-off aircraft when I twisted the front part of the wing so the point was facing up one notch...

Yep, tested this out and it is absolutely perfect in terms of crude, basic speed-braking in midair. I can now do diving approaches a la C-130 on KSP! Thank you!

I was hoping you meant the Vickers Valiant. Darnit. =P

This looks too good. What a great thing to return to after a week in a muddy, cold campsite! Can\'t download just yet so I must ask: can you change the brake toggle from the \'B\' key?

I can\'t for the life of me get a chopper to hover, whether one designed by me or others. I hate how they currently behave in roll and also how the air over the wings leads to forward acceleration.

Dropping a Bigtrak from a plane is a lot of fun and makes you feel like a baller pilot. =P I stuck one slung under my plane, then came in really low so the wheels were just a little bit above the ground and dropped it at 90m/s. It actually worked. My only concern was that it would be deleted when taken on-rails because it was moving, but no, it just stopped.

Click the help button on the landing autopilot, and it explains it to you. It brings you in I think 200m above the target then slows to a stop and does a conventional vertical landing. It even calculates if you have enough thrust to do the maneuver.

Hmm, I think you have to click \'modify\' in your post, copy everything, replace it with -snip- or something to that effect, then post in the appropriate thread (the Carts thread, I\'d say).

He\'s new to the forums and I could see why he got confused. Regardless, he made something good. Try thinking positively and don\'t be hostile to new members.

Ah, so it wasn\'t an a321. I derped it up...

With a fleet of intercontinental bombers and transporters in development, I can\'t wait for the new spaceplane features. No rush, though... the process of slightly shifting wings back and forth to change the plane\'s flight characteristics is rather tedious but it\'ll take time..

camaroiowaguy, could you create a version of that that uses a stock capsule instead of a \'kerbabl\' capsule?

I only just noticed your engine-wing layout. Your aircraft is much heavier than it looks, because those jet fuel tanks with the wing-mounted engines are worth 2.4 Mass x2 for each wing. That\'s probably causing structural issues because you have 4.2 tonnes + the mass of the engines supported by the wing boards. Try using the much lighter structural fuselage.

The spaceplane industry is way ahead of you. That isn\'t decoupling from the bottom, that\'s a twin fuselage with the rocket decoupling from the middle. I believe this was first demonstrated either by Stratolaunch or SpaceShipOne.

If you turn off angular lock in the SPH (click the button next to symmetry) it allows you to attach things radially to the wings.

I don\'t think deploying from the bottom is practical at all because the diameter of the rockets vs. the height of the landing gear isn\'t quite how it is IRL. The fuselage of aircraft IRL is usually much bigger than the rocket itself. Take fighter-launched Anti-satellite missiles, for instance. If you deploy from the bottom, you also face the problem of the aircraft being uncontrollable. Most of the time it will pitch down into your now-accelerating rocket. I found with my HADS - High Altitude Deployment System, which was a huge carrier that launched a Vanguard shuttle into orbit (I later discovered Vanguard no longer flies straight in 0.15 D:< ) I mounted the rocket over the wings and it worked out okay. That was a heavy launcher, and my launch strategy was to not climb too steep until I got to around 10km, then accelerated as fast as I could and did what\'s called a zoom-climb - if you don\'t know what that is, you speed up as much as possible then trade your speed for altitude even after your engines flame out. I think my final deployment altitude was around 17km, and initially your rocket burn should be straight up as if you were doing a standard ascent, to get you out of the thicker atmosphere. I made two successful deployments like this before I got bored of the treacle-handling bug with small craft decoupled from larger ones.

Hmm, I have to do a 30-second+ video on anything for a Multimedia project. This camera will definitely be a useful tool!

I keep saying TMI instead of TLI IRL... /facepalm.

Is there a way to do this for things you want to be landed or splashed down at Kerbin, e.g. the Aircraft Carrier? (by the way, does that thing have an attach point?