M5000

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it would matter in relation to that aspect. The circular orbit accuracy factor refers to the fact that finding an angle on an ellipse is harder than just a perfect circle, and that the math they did was based on circles. If you're at that singular point in orbit and it's the same phase angle as you're supposed to be at, it shouldn't matter as long as you burn at basically the same point every time.

As I love the idea of non-RCS control systems, I don't think the benefit gained would be all that great. The individual ion engines combined with the way you have to mount them, Xenon tanks, and solar/RTG power systems to power them would be probably very close to the mass of the RCS's small near-massless thrusters, and the single-part tanks. Also, part count. But it's an interesting concept.

It's not a "can we build a rocket this good" thing, it's a "The demo only includes Kerbin and the Mun" thing.

Just do the same thing you do with spaceplane building.. Turn on the center of mass marker and make sure it's in between your two sets of the inside wheels.

Dat horribly unnecessarily high part count

Here's a few that have always kinda gotten me going. Sorry if there's too many lol: 4one - Surrealism (The official song of M5000 looking at completed work) Rush - Ghost of a Chance (The official song of M5000 doing docking) Jon Bon Jovi - It's My Life (The official song of launching things from the SPH) Deadmau5 - October (The official song of doing non-atmospheric landings) SkyMarshall Arts - Millennium (The official song of finishing an injection burn) Moby - Anthem (Generally inspirational sounding song)Else, I just start playing one of the myriad chiptune playlists on Youtube.

Yes. Pretty much only this. If you're planning on staying low, say, making an atmospheric fighter or something, go with the standard jets. Anything that you're intending to spend extended time above 10Km, use the Turbo Jets. EDIT: Or, the standard jets are pretty good for VTOL engines too, since you generally aren't landing at 15Km.

inb4 Temstar shows people how to properly build lifters.

I like the sound of that mod.. Though it seriously needs to be vanilla... Like why do we have to run the engines all at the same throttle? VTOL would be so much easier that way.

I could, but I used a different model to base it off of, I have a small model that sits on your desk or on a stand and it had a much more elongated tailfin than the ones shown in the pictures (the real pictures). I wonder if it was some later or earlier variant..

Where did you get those beautiful fuel tanks and engine?

I think that an ion plane may be the best solution to get out of Eve... You just need a HUGE wing...

I see, and yes, LFO stands for "Liquid Fuel/Oxidizer" by the way. I just can't get over how well made your little control system is. It's just so novel...

Gave me goosebumps and inspired me to design a grand-tour probe. Beginning construction soon...

Today, I existed REALLY hard: HEY LOOK GUYS I CAN SSTO TOO. In other notes, jets are absolutely horrid orbital engines, making fine, precise adjustments is not a thing. Should I take it to the Mun?

Also also, if you're not opposed to mods, the Firespitter pack has, essentially, canned air. Intake air, that you may be able to use to make jets work on places like Eve and Duna. I would love to see someone attempt this. EDIT: Like this SSTO I designed in 2 minutes and got to orbit in like 3: It's over in the "Show off your awesome KSP pictures!" thread ATM.

I'm going to get to work building a few of my own, I like this challenge and I don't feel like going to space today. EDIT: Ahem.. Ahem ahem... Two of my favorite planes of all time... Also, these are both all stock. The Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II "Warthog". A gun that had an airplane built around it, is actually a GAU-8 Avenger with wings. This gun can carry a heavy armament (not mine, but the real one. I don't believe in KSP weaponry) and can quite literally blow up tanks. It is low, slow, but really powerful. This KSP model is very hard to fly, as the position of the engines causes a strange center of thrust which makes the craft want to nose dive, even with avionics. Again, many nasty clipping tricks were used, but nothing seems to be structurally compromised. This plane takes off quite well and readily. And what would a replication of a gun be without the gun itself? Embedded into the nose of this faithful replica are several small probe fuel tanks and a radial engine that emits fire to simulate a gun firing, it can be toggled with action group 1. The engine also serves a dual-purpose of creating a retro-thrust when activated that actually slows the plane down, just like the real thing. The Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. A plane I have no idea why I like. It's old, outdated, and not all that remarkable in any one way, nor does it even look memorable. But for some reason, I adore the F-104. My KSP version can easily fly stably at 20Km and reached about 1.1Km/s when I was flying it. Able to get re-entry flames. That fast. Single engine, as per the original, flies like an absolute dream but takes off like an elephant. Requires the bump at the end of the runway and a steady hand not to knock the engine off the back when taking off. Still, I think it turned out amazingly. The MkII cockpit is hidden somewhere inside of that black fake window, and the entire plane just uses a bunch of nasty clipping tricks in general to look how it does. Still, it flies well and seems not to have any issues. Hmm.. I may do more of these, this was actually really fun. .craft files anyone?

Would we, by chance, be allowed to use the KSPX ion engines/tanks? The engines provide slightly more thrust at the cost of a massive amount of electricity more, it seems.

OP, what exactly are you building there? That is an awful lot of RCS ports and (what looks like) your own custom LFO-powered control system. Nice! But what is it?

Dat beautiful payload/rocket combo. Dat window style.

I really REALLY hope they don't change this bug, at least still make it sometimes possible to have identical Kerbals. I just love the thought that they come into some kind of quantum conundrum when they meet and their existence cancels each other out.. It's just so...Right...

It seems that the Arcturus-I rover has encountered yet another distant cousin located on Duna itself! By the way, that rover in my pic is a horrible design and should never be replicated.. God why did I even send that thing up?

^^^^^^This this this.

The ant is, admittedly, okay for a small landing engine for a one-time use probe, rover, or lander, but for anything that stays in orbit, or you need to have operational for a long time, the ion engine is the only way. That little rover you have is nice, but after it loses its fuel and hopping ability, what next? Ion engines can actually provide sufficient thrust for landing engines if the craft is light enough, which it is entirely possible, assuming you're on a small, non-atmospheric moon. (Mun, Minmus, Gilly, Bop, Pol, Eeloo possibly, You get the idea..)

1: There should be a submit an addon link somewhere in your profile, IIRC. 2: Certainly not, as long as if you claim a 100% stock craft that it has 100% stock parts. One part out of whack and it won't be loaded. You can certainly submit other modded craft, but it's good etiquette to let others know what mods the craft uses. 3: It takes a while after you actually upload for it to show up. But yeah no, nothing really, just try to make sure your stuff is complete, which I need to review my addons at some point.