Azimech

@MiffedStarfish tried those aircraft carrier planes yet? They're perfect for carriers because of their size, mass and STOL/VTOL capabilities. To give you an idea, my carrier is 75m. and my planes are able to land and T/O within that space. https://kerbalx.com/Azimech/craft Search for "carrier".

Haven't seen you in ages, nice to see you're still here!

Thanks mate! And yes i'm still busy with your reply :-) Wish we could grab a brew or something.

Read the story in the album :-) Can be modified to be a heavy attack helicopter: Stock ZSU-23-4: Gigantic transport helicopter. Two ZSU-23-4's fit in there. If you need a BIG target, you might like this. Or use it to mine the seafloor :-) A somewhat smaller, generic platform or base. A stock dock. 183 parts, 284m.

I've searched a lot and the only thing I could come up with is the 1x1 square steel panel, a number of them stacked together and rotated until it -somewhat- gives the impression of being round. Plus: strong connection and impact rating. Con: the mass. If mass isn't a problem and neither size, the MK1 crew cabin has excellent specs. I often use it for turbine shafts.

Ah, yes the contra-rotating engine development hell. Tricky stuff, I'm testing it right now using 10 juno's per engine. It has enough horsepower but even the slightest thrust imbalance makes it indeed uncontrollable and at the moment I can't get rid of that thrust imbalance, or something crashes into something (last time, heatshield into fairing base). I also see the heat shields wobbling around. With engine pods you're talking about fairings around the engines? If you could do without those, the fairing bases are very weak. But I think that my bearing just isn't developed enough for such an application, there's too much vibration resulting in power loss. It's either the antenna/solar panel, Sputnik probe core or the big wheeled MK3 cargo bay solution. The last one is the most heavy but almost indestructible. Try the engines from this one, you can remove as much Juno's as you like to reduce part count and fuel consumption/intake air requirement. But I would build a working tilting VTOL first before reducing the amount of blowers. Also the rotors are gigantic, you'd need to remove 2 blade segments per rotor but you'd also need an engine speed readout because engine speed would go up dramatically. If you don't have one already, I use V.O.I.D. https://kerbalx.com/Azimech/77I-Azi24-Cronus

Just a reminder that the challenge is still open.

New sport: deep sea driving. With stock cars.

Bugs? Yeah, sure. I call this "deep sea driving". The other car is a 2CV, in my country nicknamed "Duck". Which is odd because ducks float.

Request: who has driving experience with a real VW Beetle and would like to test my car? I want to know if I've given it a realistic handling. Stock parts, no mods needed.

Where can I order this magnificent cloning machine? ... Imagine an army of Jebs ... doing line dancing.

Server should decide the limits. And as I've said before, some styles of mp don't need time acceleration. Fighter combat or racing for example. And it wouldn't surprise me if those would become the most popular.

Amazing stuff!

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to have your opinion. I see tons of cool things users can do and it would extend the life of this game with decades. People are still playing Doom and Descent, almost 25 years after they hit the market.

Two cars. One for Kerbin, the other for somewhere out there. Stock parts. Citroën 2CV, 1948 - 1990. The famous car that helped rebuild the French economy. Citroën 2CV - deux chevaux-vapeur - literally two steam horses, the CV was a way of defining road tax based on engine power. Design started before the war with various prototypes completed. The car had to be light, economical and easy to produce. One special requirement set by the President of Michelin was that a farmer should be able to drive across a freshly ploughed field with a basket full of eggs, without breaking a single one. Between 1948 and 1990 9 million cars of all variants were produced at various factories. Most were produced in Europa (including Slovenia) but multiple factories produced them in South America. The cars became famous for their fantastic smooth ride and infamous for their incredible rolling tendency. Contrary to popular belief the cars also had very impressive roadholding, being understeered at default but able to corner at high speeds without losing most of its grip. The chief designer, André Lefèbvre, was a suspensions specialist for racing cars. The level of technology was high for 1948. The car used front wheel drive while rear wheel drive was still the norm for 95% of the production cars that year. It was powered by an aircooled two-cylinder flat (boxer) engine with only 375cc, which grew over the years to eventually 602cc. The chassis was a rolling one, meaning the entire bodywork could be removed with less than 20 bolts, leaving the engine, gearbox, brakes, fuel tank, exhaust and suspension/wheels mounted on the chassis. You can literally bolt a chair on the chassis and drive away. A fantastic feature was the canvas roof that could be rolled back, on every version. Also the rear bench could be unlocked, removed and carried out by one person in seconds. Great for picnics! My car has most of the design principles of the original. It’s based on a chassis though simplified. Like the original, the entire bodywork can be removed and replaced with something else. A single cubic strut just above the jet engine is what keeps the complete body in place, together with four struts in the rear. See the album for a few pictures. Propulsion: it has the jet engine in front and only the front electric motors are enabled. Having driven a real 2CV I know the handling and as such I’ve tuned the friction, spring and damper settings to as close as real as possible. The jet engine is set at 30% power, if you want to have some fun, just set it to full. A boost flap is present. And I’ve left the canvas roof open. A car with solar panels all around and you give it a jet engine … very logical, Azimech! Yeah … you know me … don’t like electric cars in KSP - way too slow. Until piston engines are a thing, I’ll use jets in every car I build or get my hands on. The wheels stick through the fenders at high speed! Lousy! Don’t blame me, we need smaller stock wheels. . Aaaand ... the other one. the 2CV Space. Features: 3 reaction wheels, 3 fuel tanks, 2 xenon tanks, 2 fuel cells, 1 ion engine, 1 science container, complete science package, lots of vernors you can configure (standard: roll, brake, accelerate). You can find them on KerbalX.

Seein' ya comment on antennae for the thrust vector. Y'all mothers need Collide-o-Scope!

I look at a couple of things. Because with my big designs the turbine shaft is allowed to flex in its housing, collisions may occur with other parts during high speed or aerobatics. Fairing bases and heat shields can't take a lot. Heat tolerance is secondary for me. Sure, no problem. Wait for it ... Little joke there. That "thing" is the first coaxial turboshaft in existence, made almost 2.5 years ago. I'm glad I've never released that one, it's fugly. There are either two solutions. The one is complex, have one shaft rotate in another, the other is just offset hacking. I prefer the first but I know the limitations (size, mass, drag, part count). Here you can find both: https://kerbalx.com/Azimech/77I-Azi29-Janus-v10 https://kerbalx.com/Azimech/77-Industries---CTR3-10 Keep in mind the CTR3 doesn't run, it was built in 1.0.4. Here's a video with a later variant: Now I know you'd like a compact, offset hack style coaxial. I haven't really built one yet but when I do, I'll make it public. It will probably be with a 2.5m heat shield instead of 1.25, the smaller ones are just way too inefficient.

While almost all of my designs were having 8 short I-beams as turbine blades, I recently started to look at alternatives. I think I've found a decent one: The MK2 drone cores have a reasonable impact rating of 20 m/s. While it is true the I-beams have a rating of 80, the fact they expand from the shaft at high speeds is the most common source for engine damage in my designs. And they snap off easily when they hit something. The MK2 cores can't expand because their CoM is in line with the rest of the shaft. Not only that, they can withstand a higher temperature and have more heat capacity. Plus they provide a tiny amount or roll torque, just enough to validate the fact the construction is 220kg heavier (1 RTG is needed). Another bonus is the control I'll have over the rotor blade pitch. I might starting to use a few Panthers as well, with the MK2 cores it's easier to use the afterburner without overheating the engine.

The cause is your craft is trying to spin faster than the 51rad/s limit, faster than that and physics go gaga. It's a limitation in either Unity or KSP, we don't know. The solution is to use more lift.

This is the 77I-Azi20 Selene, stock turboshaft helicopter. It's powered by an Asura II engine, 50 blowers, 8 turbine blades. Only modification from standard is I added a probe core and RTG to the turbine shaft for controlling rotor RPM at high altitude. As you can see I was out of fuel while climbing after roughly 45 minutes. The last test was using the fuel cheat. After a nap it was hovering at the final altitude. Interesting to note is the engine started to run a little hot, something it doesn't do below 3500m or during forward flight.

Allright, did a testflight, Ill put up the pics in a few minutes.

Interesting :-) 1: It is true some boost flaps can be positioned differently. It doesn't change the fact the module that handles the actuation of control surfaces is a bit rigid in its implementation. When using my autopilot, the rudder still won't respond no matter what control input I give, except deploy. FAR does this better AFAIK. 4: Well ... maybe some other parts can be used than thermo's. The problem is that right now we have no way of knowing what could happen ... unless you know something I don't. 5: Good point ... what about the CTRL and SHIFT beneath the ENTER key?

So ... did some testing. I don't like fully electric helicopters but the use of just two reaction wheels, a probe core and RTG does reduce fuel consumption so ... think I'll upgrade all of them with this.

Aye, just a giant floating one and zero should be enough!