sgt_flyer

- well, KSP multiplayer would be a Sandbox multiplayer - so the player themselves will make their own gameplay with the game's elements think Minecraft multiplayer here they made different ways to play the game in multiplayer - direct confrontations, sport games, shared constructions - all of that with vanilla minecraft:)

Regarding the isv venture star, it's pulled, not pushed It pulls for acceleration, flips and pulls for deceleration That's a recurring concept for long range space travel, because it's way more lightweight than a pusher configuration (thus, by saving on structural weight, you save on fuel, and you can use smaller engines for a given payload)

I beg to differ stock KSP can involve direct confrontation (see macey dean's youtube series ) Plus, you can have people making simultaneous missions too (ex: for building a space station)

I merely made a statement to tell how we could have a time warp in multiplayer ksp, without it affecting the other players

If time acceleration's a problem, why not : remove standard time warp, and add a 'warp drive' part which 'enables' the same warping, but with the following limitations : 1st : the warp drive sucks electricity 2nd : can't warp / Auto drop out of warp if another ship is in physics range (<2.5km) (because warp drives interfere with each other) 3rd : only your ship is accelerated (and placed 'on rails') - this will change how transfers are done of course. as the other orbits won't be warped like before. And 4th : because it's kerbals we are talking about, their warpdrives do not accelerate your ship : instead they slow down everything else

the main problem will be the smoke plume with that much engines, to generate a smoke plume on top of 1100 parts will make the thing slow down even more your computer

when you are in target mode, near your target, burn retrograde (it's actually the Target's retrograde marker) - until your relative velocity is around 0 m/s. then, use your RCS thrusters to slightly accellerate toward your round pink marker (not very fast) - during this time, use your RCS thrusters to make translations (left / right / up / down) to try to center your green prograde marker on your pink round marker. (this will kill all lateral velocity relative to your target) - try to slow down as you approach - less than 2m/s under 50m - less than 1 m/s under 10m. then you can stop, and translate / rotate around your target to dock. (although, you can also take control of the target, and make it's docking port to face your ship - it'll help for beginning to not have to circle around your target )

well, you can use the one inside my Angara thread - the kliper there should have enough Delta-V to make a free return trajectory - although it would be really hard to land it on mün ^^ if you wish to have a bit more delta V with the Angara rocket, use an angara A5 configuration for the URM's (the non capped URM at the center, and 4 capped urm's around it), and add the modified soyouz block I atop of it (the tall one - which is almost the same as the Onega lite upper stage) that should be around 300 / 330 parts in this configuration (without the Kliper Angara's A3 scaffolding), and the modified block I should be able to approach you from the mün i'm using a lot my angara's lately, it's so damn useful due to the variety of ways i can configure it - yup tested it out, using the Angara in A5 configuration, the modified block I can bring the Kliper in a free return trajectory, - without needing to use the Kliper's fuel before Mün circularization (although it's really tight ) by if you manage it, you'll have plenty of fuel left after mün circularization to go back to kerbin - so it can service your stations in orbit around the mün ok, i added the Kliper A5 'münshot' configuration to the Angara thread here Have fun

i'm currently testing out a new reloadable weapon platform with my 'drill' SRB's as weapons - although this kind of weapon platform could only be mounted on Dreadnoughts i think how it works : there's a M-Beam which slightly clips through each SRB, so when i decouple them 1 by one, (through a custom key), the M-Beam pushes the SRB towards the center of the system, where there's a docking port which will suck in the SRB (i put a docking port and a decoupler under the SRB's) once the newly chambered SRB has stopped wobbling after coupling, i can fire it from the center of the weapon - so i'm able to fire only 1 SRB at a time the staging is made to fire the SRB's in the same order as the custom key's. once the SRB has been fired, i simply undock the remaining 'cartridge', which flys off from the front of the weapon. (although i'll try other systems, in order for nothing to stay in ) - i can then use a new custom key to chamber the next SRB - for the moment, the system has only been tested with gravity hack turned on

the russians should really go for their angara launcher to replace ASAP their old protons

i'll let you discover the similarities between this IRL launch and KSP ones (it was a proton M which was launched today from baïkonour to put into orbit 3 glonass satellites )

well, it seems that russians play to KSP too : this one was launched today...

well, my kliper's technically a lander but only works on atmospheric planets, and is a one way glided trip down (parachutes are overrated ) it was made to do precision landings on kerbin / rotate crews of up to 6 kerbals at a time) (the pod you can see on this first image is the system which houses the fuel and engines for orbital manoeuvers - jetsionned after deorbiting) overshoot the runway at 15000m before this pic : no big deal could turn around and make a glided landing on the runway i landed this one on each of the solid atmospheric planets (the 'onega' launchers second stages actually have enough delta-v to send it up to laythe - if you jetisson the second stage during the transfer burn and finish with the kliper's orbital module) for more infos on the kliper, see my sig (there's also 1 kliper in the angara thread, this one can only do LKO operations )

Several points for Spaceplanes : If your wings are fixed below your craft, slightly trun them upwards (a very wide open V when you see it from the rear) - if if your wings are fixed above your craft, reverse the V shape. - this should improve stability. You can also slightly increase the angle of attack of your wings / or only turn your control surfaces in order for your airplane to naturally place it's heading slightly above the prograde marker when inflight. Last but not least, fuel tanks draining : as the fuel tanks drain, it will move your center of mass. Ideally, fuel flow should be set up in order to Tmake use of this CoM movement : at takeoff and climb, your center of lift should be slightly behind your center of mass, and in the reverse, when landing (after draining your fuel) the center of lift slightly ahead of your center of mass. The center of drag should be kept behind your center of mass at all time. Also, for your turning problem, try to create an angle of attack (by having the rear gear slightly shorter than your front gear) so the plane will have a tendancy to take off on it's own. Having the rear gear closer behind the center of mass also helps at liftoff - you just need to be careful of tailstrikes

hmm - a few points :first, lower your control surfaces - place them on your central booster. - you can also remove the ASAS on the outer boosters - 1 ASAS is enough per craft, more ASAS's won't cumulate their effects then, try to add 3 struts between each fuel tank (vertically connecting them) also, disable gimballing on the outer mainsails before liftoff should reduce wobbling. regarding the fuel flow, the fuel lines are not connected correctly - disable symmetry before adding them, or place your booster only using a x2 symmetry. basically, the fuel lines in an asparagus on your rocket should be disposed like this : 1 fuel line from each of the two first boosters to fall go to the second set of booster, then, 1 fuel line per booster of the second set goes to the central tank. (two boosters to two boosters to central stage). here's a modified version of your rocket (moved control surfaces, removed the boosters ASAS, strutting remade, and fuel lines fixed ) don't forget to disable gimballing on your outer mainsails before liftoff - i also added separatrons on your boosters, to prevent them from destroying your core stage on separation note : with the fuel lines fixed, the first pair of liquid boosters runs out of fuel only a few seconds after the solid rocket boosters. http://www./download/2zlguwkbbdspgag/Wildcat_Lander_%2B_Launcher.craft

yup - non asparagus boosters primary utility should be to increase your TWR at liftoff to an acceptable point - until your main stage have lost enough weight by burning their fuel to have a sufficient TWR by itself.

also, don't make sharp turns with this kind of rockets make smooth curves to avoid tumbling (don't go too far away from your prograde marker while turning, - the marker will start to follow your heading, so you can continue your smooth turn

the trick is, at this stage of the campaign, you can only use a LVT 30 one problem with aerodynamically unstable crafts, would be to be more gentle while turning (do not wander too far away from your prograde marker, or your rocket will tumble - typically, high chances of tumbling would be when you go over 20 / 25° away from your prograde marker. - i'd say, just to be safe, while turning, don't move farther than 10° away from your prograde marker - and then let it follow your heading. - don't go directly to a 45° heading, make a nice smooth curve instead (i was testing with a floating beacon carried by LVT30 with winglets at the bottom of the LVT30's FLT800 - the beacon was around 4 tons, with quite a lot of parts , including 4 parachutes and a drogue) an analogy would be to try to make a sharp 90° turn at high speed with your car - you have all the chance in the world of losing control of it - but if you have a nice long curve to make this 90° turn, you can make this turn with your car easily at high speed

i tried to have a look, but it has mods in it

yup, but the mainsail needs a huge sustainer stage - which is ultra heavy

mmh, i'd say drop the mainsail much sooner it's so inefficient and it drinks your fuel like mad (my Saturn V's first stage x5 mainsails burns around 4 tons of propellant per second... ) also, what is your payload weight ? (to compare to the total weight - i'd say for non asparagus designs, a good payload / total mass ratio would be around 10% - max 12% for high efficiency designs - asparagus being more in the 14%/16% range.

to Bannon : it will be really hard to assemble correctly in orbit - you will need the exact docking angle each time (else, imagine where it could send you with misaligned engines )

Bannon is right about ammunition tech : Here is : the new Stock 'Drill' Warhead : if it's not deflected by hitting the armor at too much an angle, it should be able to do massive damage, even when launched at short range. (tested two kind of propellers for it : a guided propeller, (propelled by a LVT45, it was the payload of a surface to space two stage space interception missile) the second version was an unguided rocket, where the warhead was propelled by the standard SRB. here's some results (a single impact against a Spiritwolf Vanguard class Battlecruiser hull): liquid fueled guided missile : total mass before final burn : 4.83 tons Impact speed : around 120m/s, final acceleration was made less than 500m from the vanguard from a 15m/s approach. impact was on the large flat top section of the cruiser. SRB propelled warhead (launched from a bomber) (around 4.5 tons before firing the SRB) launch distance : around 400 / 500m with an approach speed between 20 and 25m (impacted near the front of the battlecruiser) : the warhead is only 6 parts - 1 NCS adapter, 1 small parachute, and 4 structural pylons.

i'm finishing my work on my Havok Bomber - it carries 1 'Drill' Warhead, this time, propelled by an unguided SRB. most of my tests launches against a Vanguard class battlecruiser were done from around 600m, at an approach speed of around 20 / 25 m/s. some were effective, other less - hitting armor at a too open angle has a chance of deflecting the rocket it seems, but direct impact can make the rocket go through the battlecruiser, as if it's armor was no more effective than paper... i once seen a simple 'hole' from the top of the cruiser - the rocket only destroyed two plate of armor : the one on the top, and the one opposite of it, at the bottom - and destroyed the main fuel tank and a part of the SRB missiles of the vanguard between the two plates... of course, you need to be sure of your aiming, cause you have only 1 shot - although during my tests, there was still some substantial effects, even when fired under 200m, but with an approach speed of more than 60m/s (Dive bombing anyone ? ) as you will be able to see on the images, the 'Drill' name for the warhead seems to be spot on first, the Havok bomber : front view, bomb bay closed rear view : (note : there's a missing plate on this one, the release version of the craft will have the two plates at the rear, to encase the engines) front view, bomb bay opened, with the Drill warhead and it's SRB propeller in view. now a show of the results of the 'drill' rocket (tested on a vanguard battlecruiser) : yes, the hull is mostly intact - but that's another story for the insides this time, the impact hit on the front of the battlecruiser ... i let you appreciate the damage the SRB + the warhead weight around 4.5 tons when it's fired. on this image, it was fired with an approach speed of around 20 - 25m/s, at a range between 400m and 500m. considering technical data on the warhead : the warhead is made of : 1 NCS adapter, a x4 symmetry of structural pylons (radially attached to the top flat surface of the NCS, and angled to what you see on the pics) and a small parachute (just to 'hide' the NCS adapter flat top ) the warhead can then be fitted on any propeller you want. (i tested both - the unguided version here, and a liquid fuelled guided rocket i posted some time before)

some pics of my stock skylab second one is with my apollo CSM docked to it of course, the whole was brought atop a saturn V first and second stage (here, jetisonning the saturn's fairing prior to skylab's decoupling) in it, the apollo telescope mount is autonomous, so i can detach it to move it to the side after separation