Tex_NL

I just did a quick test: sadly there is still no functioning limiter for terminal velocity. My TWR 3 test rocket shot up like a bat out of hell making it nearly impossible to control. After reverting back to my old method of limiting the maximum acceleration it got to orbit under control and with ease.

Even with the additional NEAR module MJ struggles to keep control. And it has never been able to throttle back to terminal velocity. Personally I got pretty good results with a gravity turn at 1.4km and limiting the throttle to max acceleration of 20m/s2. But all of this could be already outdated, Sarbian updated the FAR/NEAR support yesterday. I haven't tested it yet. Let's hope for the best.

By now those mods would have been hopelessly outdated and wouldn't work anyway. If it still functions it is extremely unlikely YOU are the only person using a certain mod. Simply search or ask the forum.

First design the small plane you're planning to drop. Make sure it is capable of flying on it's own. Then build the carrier around it. If you do it the other way round there is no way to know for sure the dropped plane is aerodynamically stable. Plus the control stays with the small plane instead of the carrier. Also you want the small plane to be carried in front of the CoM of the carrier. Dropping the plane will cause the carrier to pitch up clearing the way for the dropped plane to fly off. If you hang the small plane behind the CoM the carrier will pitch down, potentially colliding with your payload.

You've already strutted the crap out of it so 'moar struts' is not an adequate answer. What you could do is shut down a few SAS units. It might turn a lot slower but in return the SAS units won't be fighting each other.

So you're saying the ISS is not actually in orbit? No one will dispute the ISS is well above the Karman line and in orbit. Still it experiences enough atmospheric drag to require frequents boosts to maintain altitude. The drag effect is significant enough to feather the solar panels on the dark side to conserve speed.

Sal_vager already told you where to find a working KSP 0.24. If you want a copy of MechJeb that works with KSP 0.24 you should ask for MechJeb. NOT for KSP 0.24! But why would you want to play KSP 0.24 in the first place? MechJeb and KSP 0.25 work great together. As long as you use KSP x86 of course as 64bit is pretty unstable.

Sandcastle was still there in 0.24. Rare, but it was there.

This does actually make a lot of sense. I'm pretty sure everybody has tried to balance a hammer on one finger at least once in their lives. Try balancing it with the head up (high CoM) and it is pretty easy. You only need some gentle corrections to keep it balanced. And even large movements are easily corrected. Now try it with the head down (low CoM) and the much lighter handle up. Suddenly it becomes much more difficult. It takes large and strong movements to keep it balanced.

All true. I slightly misread your edited post. In your un-edited version you said he needed his CoM lower than his CoL. I've tried to replicate Ashflare's design as best as I could to look what MechJeb would make of it under NEAR. MechJeb does make it to orbit the control surfaces are flapping all over the place the entire flight. It is not the most stable design. I played around with it a bit and got slightly better results by removing one of the three tanks in the upper stage and replacing the bottom stage LV-T45 with a slightly more powerful LV-T30. Since you have more than enough control surfaces you do not need the gimballing.

Sorry but this is not true. Just as planes you want you CoM IN FRONT of your CoL. Ashflare's CoM and CoL are exactly where they should be.

I wonder how many times this has been suggested yet. (You do know there is such a thing as 'Revert Flight', don't you?)

You're a wee bit late posting this. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/98748-SpaceShipTwo-Crash

Or they can't because they don't know (yet). Unless you have certainty it's often best not to say anything. Assumption is the mother of all F-ups.

I know of at least three options: 1: As described by Starman you can add additional crrew from the VAB/SPH. 2: Load the ship by clicking either the runway of launchpad from the space center screen. 3: Use a mod like Crew Manifest.

Pretty sure this is an electrical issue. In previous KSP versions you needed at least one item that could hold an electrical charge (probe core or battery) in order to control a vehicle from a seat. Even if you had numerous solar panels or RTG's.

IIRC WhiteKnight and SpaceShip have nearly identical layouts.

Did you destroy the launchpad by any chance? Check the space center screen. If it's a pile of rubble you'll need to rebuild it.

This will most definitely not be the end of space tourism. In '67 the Apollo crew capsule caught fire killing three. Also in '67 Soyuz 1 crashed due to parachute failure killing one. In '71 Soyuz 11 accidentally decompressed after un-docking killing three. '86 shuttle Challenger exploded during launch killing seven. '03 shuttle Colombia burned up during re-entry also killing seven. All progress will suffer occasional set backs. As sad as this is accidents WILL happen. But we can't let it deter humanity from moving on.

Live report on CNN RIGHT NOW!

For realism you might also consider EVE. EVE doesn't change or add any physics but the clouds make everything LOOK a lot more real.

Before clicking any of the two 'Land' buttons make sure you've killed time warp. 2x time warp is easy to overlook. And of course make sure you still have electricity. If your batteries are dry your craft is dead and even MJ won't be able to land it.

You're probably running out of memory. Try installing ActiveTextureManagement. It may not necessarily reduce the B9 memory footprint but it will free up space by reducing the load brought on by other mods. It might also be a good idea to remove the oldest of the two ModulemManager.dll's. You only need one and having two can lead to problems.

First movie that came to mind was Stripes, with Bill Muray. Boy was I wrong. Of course it was Sgt. Bilko with Steve Martin and Dan Aykroyd. http://www.anyclip.com/movies/sgt-bilko/presenting-the-hover-tank/

Apart from all control issues already mentioned hover tanks have another issue to deal with: A hover tank might be able to pass over current technology anti tank mines but the arms race never sleeps. If your tanks can outsmart conventional mines what's stopping him to develop more capable mines? Conventional hover craft could easily be taken out by mines responding to a sudden increase of air pressure. If you use an electromagnetic field to hover (pure sci-fi but theoretically not impossible) the EM fluctuation can be use as a trigger.