RichieD76

i think the main reason fir it not working is down the the rear part of the shuttle and the lack of mcjeb. Really ruined it for me to be honest. i may miss out 15 and run 14.4 for a little longer untill a fix can be made up

What would be really cool is that once configured for the CCS for example. Use a plug-in to make it mobile. Parking brake it. Then with a bespoke rig and cleaver stage set up have a zero thrust rocket with small particle effect start 15secs before the SSME\'s start (to replicate a water dousing system) then start the SSME\'s, move to full thrust then launch.

2.75 is spot on i think. Cargo like the ATV for example would be 1.75 which would be perfect for cargo, fuel and boosting large stations. With all the RCS, solar pannels, gear ect i think everything in kerbal will eventaully need to scale up. some 1mtr capsules with RCS, landing rockets, chutes ect are near imposiable to build in such small scale

Has anyone though about de constructing the external tank and using the fuel main feed lines as the fuel lines for the ssme\'s yet? I mean for them the external tank is fully operational? I know it\'s pretty low on the priorities. So far I think all of you have done a fantastic job. I did change a few peramiters on the current release so enable better gliding and must say its even better than silkos vanguard but without the weightless feeling. I know all you guys are working really hard but my question is...what\'s next? C7 dropped the bomb of air breaks...breakable rudder with incorporated drag chute? I.ve been using the hope drag chutes and attaching them one to each of the OMS pods for the min. Bay doors, landing gear and thats is. I just really wish I could help on this project but have no modding skill what so ever. I would love to modify the nose done to the SRB\'S with jordancox\'s permission to incorporate a very low thrust 5second horizontal ejection rocket that below 15k doubles as the SAS and return chute. Please don\'t think I\'m laying some kind of list down for you guys bad because I\'m not but Personaly if all of the above were to be implement along with docking & capability cargo swap out (maybe later in kerbals development) I would gladly pay for this mod.

If shes 18+...you need quagmire!

LOX/LH2 isn\'t such a bad substance when it\'s burned. It\'s the gas/oil/coal/nuke you need to use to get the energy to get the LOX/LH2 from water in the first place. And to keep in refrigerated. It\'s like cement..not so bad to use but causes its mass in Co2 when produced. Personally I hate how it\'s called 'private' space travel because none of them would have come close without government backing. There whole business models are based around NASA effectively giving them all there commercial contracts. I love spaceX, master, armadillo and more...but even they have to admit they got a big help.

http://www.spacevidcast.com/ check out the 'what if apollo never happened' podcast. This looks not far from what Masten Systems what to do with the the Centaur upper stage. Good work Nova

It\'s beautiful! And it works perfect!

I love the pack. I noticed the single trail from the main engines..not a biggie for me. I attached a radial parachute from another pack to the SRBs and they disapeared anyway not again not much point untill we can reused them. It would be nice to see ejection rockets from the SRBs but i think until a process of having lower thrust (like a burn out period) rarther than a 100% to 0% thrust as SRBs are now there is no need. Only thing i have a problem with is getting so close to landing then having it flip over on me. Either way keep up the great work.

cepheus, would it worth asking tiberion for a few config ideas. just seen his tiberdyne pack and (no disrespect to him) but its an ugly beast but my god its set up well. plus with all the plug-in landing gear and cargo doors. The ideal package would be the glide model you\'ve made for CSS coupled with all the tiberdyne plugins. If you are wanting to model a decoupler though may i recomend cutting the fuel lines from the ET and using that for the texture and set the config to allow fuel to pass through? either way i\'m really glad you kept this mod alive. if i had any graphic skills i would help you out.

At first glance I thought it were a storm troopers head!

I have a Kia pro_ceed 4...artic white. Only brought it in September. Brilliant car! Happy motoring.

Arianespace app for iPad is brilliant also for mobile devices

i\'m right there with you Cepheus. With the posability of fully automated lift off with seperable SRB\'s and external tank, along with RCS that can actually control the thing during reentry...this could be the best add-on there is. opening doors to catch satelites, recoverable SRB\'s, reentry heat (once implemented) Canadarm.. could be pretty epic

MEGA!!!! But to run any sort of physics based game in that world with comparable graphics your going to need a small super computer surly?

Have you used this pack? There is NO control whatsoever ever. I\'ve tuned to wings to have little lift as per the orbiter but quite high drag (which ripped them off so messed around with strength ect) And giving the body high lift and low mass. Quite fitting with the real shuttle in that it\'s a lifting body. Before this it would either nose dive or flip over and striking a ballance was hard. The wings are really only there to pull the shuttle out of its last 5000ft drop as you say. And give it the 1500mile cross range the DOD required of it. I did systems and aeronautics systems integrations as part of my degree that used the shuttle as its case study. Check an apple based store for the lectures we had headed by prof Jeff Hoffman they were interesting and i got to meet some old school engineers. Anyway engineering is my thing not coding but would love to see someone give it ago remaking this pack, ideally rocket2guns. Not tried x-planes in 6 months or more & not sure if I had the shuttle as i think its an addon for the ipad version i have. I do have f-sim on iPad which is really good though.

In all fairness though it would be nice to have a update to this pack. I\'ve played around with the part settings and have it gliding quite nice now. But you have to have the largest RCS trusters you got on the rear of the shuttle. All my work\'s in vain though as this could pretty much be rebuilt perfect to scale now....Opening payload bay doors that could capture space junk. Fore and aft RCS. a rear tail airbrake with drag chute. Heck with automated launch this thing would be epic. Would be brilliant if a plug in could be developed for assent, on -orbit, and decent profile caracteristics. Stronger RCS on decent and fuel dump ect...

and if i remeber correctly it was first developed for writing underwater with waterproof ink but was taylored for space with a pressurised ink cartridge. good call on the graphite note. never would have thought of that

OJ did it!

Well unlike the crazy expensive addons for COD that only add more levels of the same nature...battlefield had announced today 3...yes 3 DLC packs. One that will effectively give players close quarter combat like COD games with lots of new weapons One they will see the largest ever multiplayer map created for a FPS along with many new vehicles And a third that there keeping details VERY quiet about. Chances are it will be some ultimate pack that combines a lot of the previous games levels and weapons OR it maybe a cross in with the new medal of honour game which used the same frostbite engine. Watch this space....RIP COD MW3......zombies??? Hahahhahahaahah

Michael Jackson isnt dead at all.....He\'s living on Hitlers secret moonbase with Elvis and JFK. The US goverment used their apparent deaths as finacial stimulation in the retail market with people buying collectors stamps, mugs and t-shirts

Right...time to end this argument.... Battlefield WIN!

You sure they MW3 videos? they look like MW2....or black opps....Hell they all look the god damn same when they get CHURNED up every year and rob people of £45/$60 for the very same game with different sprites and rubbish visuals.... Great vid find Damion...LOVE battlefield...Check out Battlefield play4free and battlefield Heros.

This was only a week ago over the UK. Was viewed across a 230 mile (nearly the entire stretch on the UK mainland, north to south) so it was either very big or at a very low angle of attack to be seen for such a long stretch before burning up entirely

GroundHOG has a very good point. The electronics in the F22 are over 15yrs old now i guess. Hydralics, aerodynamics & material science\'s have come along way in 15yrs. I think what people are comparing to much is its 'headline' figures....top speed, max weapons payload, thrust ect.... News Flash....top speed isnt worth anything if you cant deploy weapons over a certain speed. Nor will it allow you to pull massive G\'s because the squidgy bit in the cockpit cant take it! The F35 to me will be a better aircraft because it operates at a much better operating window where combat operations are possible. Look at the Harrier to instance. It\'s achieved more enemy kills that the F22 and Eurofighter combined. Yes its alot older but personaly i think its probably even better than the F35 in that it can take off from a very short aircraft carrier FULLY LOADED then return verticaly. Unlike the F35 that will need a longer runway of take off verticaly half equiped. Yes i get the aresting hook configuration...but if that was the case why spend so much on a VTOL to land it like a F15. Anyway...i think the US can see the F35 being LONG over scedual seeing as they brought the last of the 72 UK harrier\'s