rpayne88

Here's an idea. Take a fuel tank of any size, place a few parachutes and a docking port or RAS refueling port (if you use it,) and build a rocket underneath it. Yes, a rocket. Next, launch it on a sub-orbital trajectory to some point roughly half way between KSC and your Kerbal. Next, build a plane that can reach that point on a one way trip. Repeat this process until you have enough "gas stations" to get your plane to your Kerbal and back to one of them. Then simply fly from KSC to the first station, refuel, and repeat.

Or you could just hyper edit to the pad at KSC2. I don't know the coords or elevation of it, though.

Can you blame him? I'd be trying to do the same thing. If there was a snowball's chance in hell that I could get back after such a disaster, I'd be trying it.

Looking at your signature, did you just come up with it or did you copy it from the internet. Ad astra per aspera means to the stars through adversity. The only reason I know this is because I'm in the Civil Air Patrol (Google it for more info) and that's my squadron's motto. I don't think we made it our own, but we may have, but I don't give a damn who uses it and what for. Just interested. I'm just as clueless as to how to activate stage lock, though.

Also, make sure your center of gravity stays ahead of your center of thrust

More struts, more SAS at the bottom of the rocket, and RCS. If your getting collisions while jettisoning stages, I suggest sepratrons or ullage motors pointed away from your rocket.

So radially attach some structural fuselages to the sides of the main tank. They are fairly light and strong and don't carry any fuel. Just don't forget struts and fuel lines.

If you want it simple, go straight up. If you want the most efficient ascent, enter LKO at 70Km. Every second your rocket is vertical, it is paying a "gravity tax" of 9.8m/s^2. What this means is that a rocket that will be oriented vertically may only be accelerating at 0.2m/s while the same rocket oriented horizontaly would be accelerating at 10m/s (though, not to such an extreme.)

Then Squad would go out of business, assuming KSP is their only game. If previous versions became free, an individual's patience would be rewarded by a free game. I wouldn't mind waiting until .25 came out to get .21 if I didn't already have the game, but Squad knows this. They know people are willing to be patient to save money. Since Squad is a business, no profit equals bankruptcy equals end of KSP's development.

Maybe its the fact I'm new to interplanetary travel or the fact that I spliced my persistant and this one, but I' can't get anywhere near the objects. I can manage to set it as the target, but then something weird happens. My closest intercept, no matter which way I burn, will do something like to following: 17,800Km, 16,000Km, 15,000Km, 18,000Km,...16,000Km, 18,000Km. The closest intercept difference is oscillating between two definite values. So, is it me or am I having a technical problem?

Are you talking about the pipes or the pump. If its the pump, the whole system could be pressurized prior to launch and left at the pad. Since it pressurizes the fuel system for an entire core, if it fails, the launch would be aborted (not different than a complete fuel system failure for an actual rocket. This would still allow engines to be shut down in the event of an individual engine failure. Granted, it would not be possible to restart the entire system, but then again, most first stage engines burn at full power until burnout (the only difference over SRBs is they can be shut down.) In the event of too many engine failures for any rocket, the launch would be aborted, or at least an attempt to salvage it with upper stage engines would be made.

Is there any way I can splice this persistant with my persistant? I have remote tech comm sats in orbit and do not want to set up a comm network while and impacter is hurtling towards the planet.

Couldn't a sypion (sp?) be used to replace the pumps, only requiring one to pressurize the entire system?

How do I post error reports to the support thread?

Not only that, we deploy our chutes at launch.

I'm just saying that I don't know of any U.S. aircraft that use this system. I don't tend to keep up on other countries aircraft. I only know of the Tornado from a documentary I saw.

You mean one like this: http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1118794M.jpgWh I think that system is only used on the Panevia Tornado. I know for a fact it is not used on any U.S. aircraft.

226. We spend ten years orbiting the sun after our first missed encounter to encounter the planet again 227. Kerbals have not the slightest inkling of economics because there is no money 228. KSP doesn't waste several thousand dollars from that nonexistent economy to send a pair of spiders into space (NASA actually launched two intentionally aboard Skylab for some reason.) 229. Our planes can be destroyed by the Kracken 230. When our planes or rockets are destroyed, there is no ejection handle 231. No memorizing boldface (emergency procedures) or Ops limits (Operational Limitations) 232. A Kerbal being pulled down by his craft into the ocean at 140+m/s manages to survive 233. The majority of flights end when Op Limits are discovered/ reached 234. KSC personal never need to worry about wildlife entering the VAB (another problem NASA has had to deal with on occasion.) 235. Need more electricity, add nuclear reactors. Need more control, add more RCS and SAS. Need more power, strap as many mainsails and SRBs to a rocket that is possible. 236. Kerbals survive reentry with only thier suit. 237. We're in the habit of putting massive ships into orbit because "It looks cool." I'll stop there and leave room for others.

Why don't you make some engine heat shields. They don't have to be operational, I only need the model. I'd like to see something that folds down to fully encapsulate the engine during reentry for when reentry heating is added so I can protect my ships. (I know Deadly reentry already has heat shields that do this, but the look horrible before they're deployed and they create so much drag they flip over.

Sorry, I assume they are working on a patch.

I don't think there is a limit on the number of legacy parts. I've gotten 488 to load just fine with the exception of Damned Robotics. That being said, I've been trying to build a space plane using B9 parts. I can get it off the ground just fine, but for some reason, the ship will explode and the cockpit will be launched onto a solar escape trajectory at ludicrous velocities. It'll go from 1500m to interstellar space in a fraction of a second. Any one else had this problem or is it another mod causing this problem?

Just try to be patient. The devs are working on patches to these problems. If they aren't, and if this is legal, I can pull .19 out of the recycle bin on my computer and send it to you.

I posted this on another thread, but I think the Kracken is back. I've had an experimental SSTO shot from 1500m off the deck into intersteller space in less than half a second and accelerate from 180m/s to a few dozen c. Edit: The ship was shot off without a model but the crew were still alive in the pod with IVA.

So how are you judging the aesthetics. Is there a way to quantify it or is it solely subjective. Also, if it is possible to get a multiplier of 0 for the aesthetics, doesn't that make aesthetics mandatory. I mean, any number multiplied by 0 equals 0.