Darren9

The music is , outstanding track The looks of that buggy fall apart with all stock though, there aren't any stock wheels that are the correct size to match that body. I'll have a go at something similar though.

Would you consider adding a "Modified" class. I've only ever had one "almost" stock car, and even that had double sized wheels and a rotatron for front axle articulation. It was a very capable off-roader though. If I made it again I'd want to use the RollKage wheels and probably P-Wing for the body shape it would allow. Edit - Uses an Infernal Robotics Suspensatron and rover wheel with "rescaleFactor=2".

Yep, It's on SpacePort, I think the forum thread went dead a very long time ago. You'll need to update the SAS/torque to reaction wheels if you use them.

It's Skeppies mini-pack, most of the 1.25m parts in a handy 62.5cm size, they have around 1/8th the volume/mass. I did list it as a mod I used in an earlier post.

Yes, it can in theory load an extra 5T of fuel on the winch in docked mode and just about take off vertically. I think I'll be able to fly it to mun under it's own power and jettison the extra tank before descent. For the moment though I've got a mission to KSC2, I loaded up a 1.2T (25% payload) buggy and six Kerbals, and managed to make 2000m/s at 32Km on the way over.

I changed to a slightly more compact design, this is the one I want to enter. It launches at 4.5T and can accommodate a 2m wide payload. So far I've loaded a MK2 pod (with 3 parachute for 4.6T/100% payload) and six Kerbals, dropped them off at the Dirt Runway (made 400m/s on the way), and returned to the VAB roof. Uses P-Wing, FireSpitter, B9, KAS and Skeppies mini-pack. It should complete all the challenges with just the addition of two half size nuclear rockets for orbit/mun but I'll update progress as it happens

Thanks, it was the BATVTOL's cool wings that made me start experimenting and that little 5T ship ended up at 140 parts I can't wait to see your stunt vid, I destroyed a couple of craft trying to get that flip at a low speed/altitude.

I have a new design that should make the Pogo award this time, has a central winch for cargo and seven permanent seats in a crew compartment. So far I've only completed the Harrier and Moller Distinctions during a test flight that turned into a fast lap, and of course flew upside down as I just watched someone else do it. I'll update the rest as I get around to doing them.

^ I couldn't say I've fully appraised that mod, I initially only installed it to get more electric at a lower mass specifically for this challenge. I did lift off at KSP, go to orbit and onto Mun landing with just 3T of RCS fuel, 8 folding electric props and 4 small plasma's on a 1.25m anti-matter reactor. It would of been for the closely related VTOL challenge, if I'd finished it and if a plasma drive was considered equal to ion. It takes an amount of time to complete all the challenges though and I've already completed them all with various craft.

^ The blades don't touch anything as they spin (at any angle on the rotatron) - I always stick to that rule, the surface attach rules on the rotors base though would require additional spacers not to have slight clipping of the rotor base into the rotatron. I could of added some virtually weightless parts (62.5cm circular battery for instance) but then be left with joint strength issues and visible gaps opening up between parts at full throttle and closing again at idle. It depends what I'm building and what parts, the rotors for example can't be mounted upside down and have thrust reversed but every other propeller/blade in Firespitter can. I did some bad clipping to have an "under/over" twin rotor (one above and one below a narrow wing that rotated on a rotatron, instead of a rotor stuck to a wing and another rotor stuck on top of the first rotor). I haven't got around to trying the thermal jet yet, I needed the high core temp of anti-matter reactors to get useable thrust from the plasma thrusters but I was able to get a VTOL to orbit and Mun - it did have wings to help though.

^ Yes Northstar, the blades tilt with Infernal Robotics, you just need the Rotatrons, you could try deleting all other parts from the pack (I also didn't update to the latest version, it's had issues with the toolbar from reading the thread). And, unfortunately my "Kerbvinci Nuclear Electric Turbo Jet Copter" was the catalyst for some rule changes that made "Da-Vinci" pretty much totally out of range for a nuclear powered device. I have a tilting 8 blade design that can achieve around 220m/s (has a small amount of lift cleverly disguised as structural supports) so it's fast enough for a lap of Kerbin but getting to 400m/s at an altitude where the blades function at all is impossible even with FAR. How much thrust can you get from a thermal jet on air? I haven't tried that yet, I could realistically add up to 40T more of reactors and jets as an allowable base design modification.

Hmm, I'm not quite sure what you're saying, so the payload has be a single object? Because that isn't made clear in the OP. I would of designed a totally different craft, if the payload has to be a single mass it has to be attached directly below the CoM and I put my engine there instead so I could use just one for efficiency. It can carry 60% of it's mass to dirt runway or KSC2 and turn around and carry it back again without refueling but not as a single one piece payload, only two halves or other equal fractions. I could attach 40% to one side and a discard-able 40% counterbalance to the other, I'm not sure why anyone would though, they'd just send a different vehicle because that design can't manage single payloads. And yes, I've already lifted things on a KAS rope - It often ends badly

When a Kerbal sits on a command seat he weighs 0.09T and the seat weighs 0.05T, delivering 6 Kerbals and 6 command seats (they were attached after launch from SPH and removed safely upon landing) also delivers 0.84T mass (it's not like a pod where 0 or 3 or 6 internal Kerbals don't effect the pods mass - when they enter/spawn in a pod/internal their mass magically vanishes and the craft doesn't get any heavier, on a command seat they have mass still and each effects weight/balance and increases drag, ect., becoming a payload), that mass was added to the craft on the runway and removed safely at the destination (KAS allows a Kerbal to carry a command seat and attach/detach it from the craft). I thought I'd demonstrated carrying 0.84T mass (payload) as well as six Kerbals, I can fly the same missions again without the Kerbals/command seats if necessary and just attach 0.84T of other parts instead but to me it appears to be the same thing.

^ I think the legs sink because you have too much mass on them, I had it happen to me earlier - may need some bigger ones. You could also land next to the weight, pay out a load of winch and walk over and attach it, personally I don't think I'd even try 40T on a rope actually no, I am going to try 40T on a rope.

I managed to get airborne with 4 plasma drives as well using RCS to power them, I'm guessing they're in the same class as an argon ion drive. Has anyone else tried the Throttle-Controlled-Avionics plugin? I've got asymmetric front/rear engines with robotic swiveling on two axis and no reaction wheel and it's holding it dead flat, it's a shame it can't deal with the slow throttle of the jet engines.

The first test flight of an experimental two-axis engine vectoring system, a skilled pilot could attain the Bedstead award with this prototype

I really like the look of some of the bigger ships in this thread, I started with something smaller though. It launches at 1.34T, can carry six passengers or 60% of its mass more than half way around Kerbin, complete a continuous lap at 36,000m/2000+m/s and with an additional small atomic rocket (allowable small design change?) can attain orbit and complete Munar operations - could be the Pogo Award. Uses Skeppies mini-pack and B9 (and KAS). The center engine mount can rotate a full 360*, it shouldn't be pointed at the pilot or front wings though For the two mass/Kerbal challenges to KSC2 and the dirt runway, since six Kerbals in six command seats adds 0.8T to the craft (the Kerbals must carry the seats to the craft and attach them, and also remove them after the flight), I counted the same mission as achieving both (delivering 0.8T/60% of mass and six Kerbals safely). They can easily be flown again with just the equivalent mass if necessary. I tried to launch from KSC to orbit and to Mun and got there and landed but only had enough fuel to safely fly 20Km from the first landing, from Mun orbit it can complete the challenge, and it's only 2T to move there.

It has around 650 thrusts at ground level with all the engines pointed forward and weighs not much over 10T, it could probably get airborne with just 4 of the small control surfaces I'm just trying to avoid a behemoth that lumbers around, the jets only become effective after the propellers have run out (above 10,000m) and it takes an amount of lift to keep them up there, they waste fuel below 3-4,000 where the props are more efficient. I already have a nuclear electric that can complete every challenge but it has to do the lap at 10,000m - 230m/s and the trip to KSC2 at 100m/s, and rotatrons don't like even 2x warp so it's nine or ten hours of holding a constant course/altitude above unchanging bland terrain which I'll never complete.The Osprey achieves efficiency with a high lift "full aircraft" forward fight mode, it's just the blades hitting the ground that stops a horizontal takeoff, I can achieve that effect swapping the VTOLS for large rotors and put the jets below the rotors so no forward thrust can be made at takeoff without the blades clipping the ground, only when it's up can the rotors be rotated for forward jet power - has the same mass/lift/performance as the last one, it would just be deliberate side-stepping though. Without lift to get above 20,000m and exploit the turbo-jets fully (I'm cruising at 28,000m 1600m/s at half throttle) it's just limited to a massive fuel load moving very slowly and more and more rotors to lift the massive fuel load plus 40T payload. I do understand that cruising at high altitude with a turbo-jet isn't a helicopter but for me embarking on a flight that I know will take 5-6 hours with no option to save mid-flight and do a bit more tomorrow is unrealistic

Is it OK to use the VTOL engines, they stay pointing upwards. With them I have a design that can attain the Da-Vinci award, I just need to practice landing it a bit more before I go back to KSC2

The problem with propellers is they can only go about 300m/s, and that's on a ridiculously light and efficient design, they're down to single figure thrust at above 10,000m. I'm not sure that's enough to do a lap in 6 hours? I still might try though but it looks like a 3-4 hour flight to do KSC2 and 5 or 6 for the lap - that's a lot of flying.

For the task of powering an electric propeller any nuclear reactor would be OP, for mega-watt plasma-ion interplanetary things they're reasonable It probably shouldn't go on the scoreboard but if I attempt another with similar performance and no nuclear it's probably going to end up more a plane with a lot more lift surface and rotors stuck on for VTOL to get the necessary efficiency. I started it before the rule adjustments and I'd say that was the only thing that had a chance. Just having to keep one central design with the ability to swap out components does open up new possibilities.

The Kerb-Vinci Experimental Nuclear-Electric Turbo Jet Copter. Has two medium fission reactors from Near Future Propulsion powering 8 electric rotors and a couple of B9 jets and can raise/lower the wheels to dock onto payloads. I've been on the VAB roof, delivered a 42T payload with 2 Kerbals to the dirt runway, delivered a 10.5T payload with 6 Kerbals to KSC2 and attained 20,000m at 730m/s level flight. It should do a lap of Kerbin in under six hours with an additional fuel payload but I've not tried yet. Unfortunately those particular reactors (the only ones I have in .23) appear to be virtually infinite

With this little tilting blade design I've been on the VAB, at 774Km/h in level flight, 11582m forward flight altitude and delivered 2 Kerbals to the dirt runway. Oh, and the blades never clip anything The Jet Ranger distinction Precision award The Eggington award The Church award I'm considering a nuclear-electric multi-prop heavy lifter - would that be considered as an infinite fuel?

I have an approximation of the Ca-60, the Kerboni-Kerbiplano, engines are way too powerful and the props too big but it can cruise at around 80mph and take off and land on water.

The S.P.A.M. (Suspicious Propeller Array Machine), not at all practical nor efficient but can attain 295m/s and return to the runway. (near-future, skeppies-mini, P-Wing/fairing)