Tex_NL

Just searched eBay for second hand artificial horizons and got almost 200 results ranging a few dozen dollars for several thousand. No idea if those parts still work. Or how to make them work. But they are not that had to find.

Sure. A ship without the need for a land/launch system can be lighter and carry more. Of course it will be more efficient than a ship that does need it. But that's not the point. Actually BUILDING the tether is insane. With the resources required you can fly hundreds of missions to the moon and back. Possibly thousands. And as it has been said before: By the time we do have the tech to build a tether and make it more economical than regular launches it will already obsolete.

And WHY is it feasible with current technology? Because it is already easy to lift off due to the low gravity. Yes, it is probably possible to build a space tether on the moon but you don't have to. Building and maintaining one is still way more expansive than a conventional launch.

Try it with the half size girders with mirror symmetry.

Please. Not again. This has been discussed here multiple times already and the result have always been the same: it's a pipe dream. It requires technology and materials far beyond what we have. And by the time we finally do have the resources required to actually build and maintain one it has outgrown it's usefulness. By that time there will most likely be far easier ways to achieve orbit.

If you want to do this in KSP I would suggest you try B9 Aerospace. I am pretty sure it that plane can be recreated with it. However, with the effort required to recreate it you could have simply build an SSTO spaceplane capable of launching the same payload

That's pretty much what the OP is asking for. And as I said there is already a mod that can do this. I just can't remember the name. That's not what the OP is asking for. He obviously wants to actually LAND them.

There is already a mod out there somewhere that does exactly this. Can't remember the name but I know it exists.

I use Google. Yahoo USED to be a proper search engine. In the mid '90's. Ask always tries to install that damned toolbar. Never heard of Bing or Duck before today.

I did not "Search Entire Posts". Instead I did "Search Titles Only" If you're searching for a specific mod it's best only to search the titles. Doing so will ignore all the discussions about that mod leaving you with a MUCH shorter and more comprehensive list. Your search mentioned EVERY topic that ever mentioned either the word 'aviation' or 'lights'. And since those are both very common words I am not surprised you got so many 'results'.

The game will always fill the first pod be default. Unless you tell the game not to. Before you launch click the crew icon, remove the crew. Then launch.

Don't you mean 'haven't searched'? A simple title search on the forum for 'Aviation Lights' gave just one result: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/16925-0-25-Aviation-Lights-v3-6-%2803MAY14%29

Absolutely brilliant!

Unless I suddenly developed a split personally, no.

This thread USED to be about Star Wars but gradually it became about Star Trek, Stargate and politics. I would like to ask those still convinced there will be no technological progress in the 30 years between 6 and 7 on what they are basing that assumption. All you've seen is a few X-wings and a ship that looks like the Falcon. Nothing else. There are plenty of 50 year old cars and plane in use today. They are still used either out of necessity or nostalgia. And exactly the same is true in the Star Wars universe. The Z-95 Headhunter is the direct precursor of the classic X-Wing. It was developed during the Clone Wars but still in use, side by side to the X-Wing, during the Galactic Civil War. So unless you've got more reference material this entire discussion is totally useless. It's like looking at a glass of water and concluding that since it contains no life the entire earth is devoid of life. Your sample size simple is too small.

I've got 5m parts in KW Rocketry but I rarely use them. I don't think they should be in the stock game. At least not yet. There are way more important issues SQUAD should concentrate on besides adding more parts.

Some possibly will. Others probably don't. Best way to find out is to make a separate install of KSP without NEAR and find out.

Why not simple create a shrapnel cloud in a retrograde orbit at the proper altitude. Unless you have some kind of scifi shielding it would be nearly impossible to avoid being hit by thousands of shrapnel pieces travelling at a relative velocity of over 50.000 kph.

May I congratulate you with your first, and hopefully last, necro-post on this forum? Next time, please check the date of the post your replying to. This thread has been dead for about 18 months.

First of all, sorry for replying in English I can read and speak German just fine but my German writing sucks. I have seen this problem in the past several times. Try going to the Space Center and then return to your rover to reload it. That might solve it. If all else fails you could consider using KAS fuel lines. But you will need a Kerbal to make the connection on EVA.

I was not aware of that limit. On the other hand, his plane is pretty simple. I can't imagine the file being extremely long.

You could, if you really have no other options, paste the file directly to the forum. Simply open the .craft file with your text editor of choice and copy/paste the text here. But PLEASE put the text between [noparse] [/noparse] tags to avoid an insanely long post.

In a taildragger design the tail wheel is not the fulcrum. It is supposed to sit as far back as possible. When speeding down the runway the tail wheel is lifting off first. Then after pushing the tail back to the ground the main gear lifts.

CoM/CoL placement is near perfect. CoL just behind CoM. To make it fly a bit better I'd suggest you make the wings bigger, move them forward and give the plane some tailplanes.

You should not look at StarWars as science fiction but rather as fantasy set in the future instead of the dark ages.