mythic_fci

4GB of RAM is nowhere near enough for KSP. Since your computer reserves 1GB for OS functions, you're left with only 3GB for KSP, which is a recipe for disaster as you'll quickly be hitting the RAM limit. With that aside, what's your CPU? KSP is more CPU-intensive than GPU-intensive due to the requirement for lots of physics-based calculations and the fact that the physics engine can only use 1 core, so you'll need a powerful CPU to run big ships well.

Second day of testing with my modified Dragon II rocket has turned up few good results. I've added some spoilers it the top of the first stage for added braking and control, and they seem to work - however, my engines burn up on reentry now. They just can't seem to withstand the heat, even with radiators. Any advice? In other news, I've tested the landing sequence without chutes, and it works great! Time to solve the engine problem...

Great craft! I'm planning to use this in my career save and modify this to meet the 'Phase II' Shuttle specifications - basically, I'll add delta wings to improve lift. I'll report back with results.

That isn't a challenge. Just stick some RCS thrusters on a ship and use them. IMO this thread is more suited to "Gameplay Questions and Tutorials".

I give up for today... The control switching's just too hard. You need to be able to switch at exactly the right time, something that KSP doesn't always allow you to do (*ahem* Can't switch in atmo *ahem*). I've tested launching it without relighting the 2nd stage for orbit, and it works - mainly because I don't have to juggle 2 spacecraft. Will try again tomorrow.

Hi there! I highly recommend you look at the Challenge Submission Guide before posting your challenge. This challenge doesn't really look like a 'challenge' - it's basically a contest of clipping some fuel and RCS tanks into a 2.5-3.75m adapter and slapping on some Vernors. Please rethink your challenge and edit it per the submisison guidelines. Also, the real Gemini spacecraft didn't use RCS as their primary means of propulsion. They used thrusters that were BASED off of the RCS ones but were different in quite a few ways. -FCI

@ihtoit Great entry and beautiful vehicle! You beat me to it The boostback fuel depends on your trajectory - if you have a steep upwards trajectory, you can easily kill your lateral velocity with some fuel to spare for corrections.

Actually, you could use a chute/engine combo. I'm testing that, and it seems to have good results so far. My latest test flight did a long boostback burn, OVERshot the KSC, then deployed chutes and coasted down for a 10m/s landing with rocket assist. You only need a small tank for that.

I'm testing a craft for this challenge right now. Do we need to land back at KSC, or are other locations acceptable? Anyway, I'll definitely be doing this regardless.

Thanks! Regarding landings - I'm still experimenting, but I've found that from a 100km orbit, deorbiting directly above the KSC to achieve a periapsis of 35-40km gets me bang on target 90% of the time. Once I finish experimenting with different orbits and altitudes, I'll post a guide. In the meantime, I'm also working on a few more pre-Christmas subassemblies (Hint: MPLM and a docking module)

Eh... You forgot to show pics of the landing. If you can show me that, you'll get the FD badge By the way, you can share Imgur albums by pressing the big 'I' button on the very right of the editing toolbar, and then pasting the 5-letter album code (at the end of your link - in your case, it's oVOnj ) into the space. Here's your album embed into my post: So close, yet so far... If you want, you can take this pilot badge for that flight... ...or you could try again for a Commander badge. Your choice! Good job! You hereby have achieved the honourable STS Commander Rank 1 badge. Collect your badge here:

Will do. I've done a few preliminary flights, and can tell you that she's a wonderful vehicle - nice touch with the RAPIERS as the OMS engines! I'd recommend changing the engines on the boosters to face inwards (towards the Orbiter) to some degree instead of outwards, for added stability. Also, maybe you could try using fuel lines to route the fuel onboard to drain bottom-up for added stability later in the launch phase.

Very nice! Congrats on the Spacecraft Friday feature from a fellow shuttle builder! I'll DL this and give it a spin to test its payload capacity.

Whoops... I think the link got removed accidentally or something while I was changing the link from the old v3 one to the v4 one. I can't fix it right now, but once I get home in a few hours, I'll put it back in the OP. EDIT: The link should be back now. Get it HERE!

Yep I didn't want to bother with IR (though I'm interested), and I needed a way to berth the thing to my station. I also added a backup parachute in case I screw up landings.

Beautiful! I've replaced the capsule-based CRV on my station with a modified version of the one above. Works like a charm!

KTS-4 has been released! This is by far the biggest update ever done to this vehicle, for four big reasons. First of all, the entire wing system has been replaced. Inspired by Speeding Mullet's Buran replica, new wings have been added which increase the shuttle's handling twofold and decrease its stall speed to ~40m/s, making it far easier to land. Secondly, every single SAS module in the ET has been removed. Yes. Removed. This reduces the cost by 60,000 funds, making this shuttle actually usable in career mode (for me, at least). The shuttle's launch handling has been retained, however, so you don't need to worry about decreased control. Thirdly, the ET has been redesigned. It now has a smoother, more aerodynamic shape as well as a better fuel transfer system that looks smoother and weighs less. Finally, the RTGs used in the first 3 versions have been replaced with actual fuel cell modules! These are designed to last for 6-7 days when in orbit, but can last longer if the cargo bay lights are turned off, maneuvering is minimized and if the shuttle is docked to a space station with solar panels. These changes reduce the Shuttle's weight to 508.9t and its part count to 241 parts, along with reducing its cost to 309,387 funds! Minor changes include retuning of the RCS and OMS for better balance, mainly because of the new wing and fuel cells, which change the CoM somewhat. Download KTS-4 'Atlantis' Here! In other news, I've made 3 extra subassemblies as Christmas presents to you all! STS-1 DFI Package The first payload launched by the Shuttle ever, the is mainly a cosmetic package but also has a probe core, batteries and a few scientific instruments. Inertial Upper Stage This subassembly has 3,881m/s of delta-v without a payload and can take probes to geostationary orbit or to other planets. TDRS Satellite This communications probe is designed to be lifted to GSO on an Inertial Upper Stage. It has solar panels, RCS and (obviously) a communications antenna. Have fun!

Whoops... Well, now we're in this together. I looked at your post date instead of the OP post date. Reported for locking. (Brainfart FTW)

Very nice replica! As @Mods_o_joy said, it does look a bit more like a Shenzhou than a Soyuz, but that's forgivable due to KSP's notorious lack of parts that fit the bill (if you want, you could rebuild the orbital module using wing parts and intakes to look more spherical). One suggestion - try rotating the decoupler between the orbital module and the Soyuz 180 degrees, so that the decoupler stays with the discarded orbital module instead of following the Soyuz down to Kerbin.

Just a suggestion - why not put the first SCF into a spoiler? It doesn't exactly make sense and might confuse newer visitors into thinking that that is the current SCF.

That's no excuse. You should pay attention to dates. Thread reported for locking.

Awesome job! You have qualified for STS Commander Rank 1. Here's your badge: Can't wait to see you do more with that shuttle!

I was simply confirming your entry's validity, nothing more. I didn't and don't suspect you of cheating at all - I hold all entries up to the same standards, which are the ones in the main post. All entries go through the same checks. Also, in case you decided to actually hyperedit it up to orbit, I would be able to tell by cross-checking the orbit in the picture with the orbit shown in the video you posted. I can't stop you from feeling humiliated and deciding never to wear an STS badge, but I can assure you that I do not suspect you of cheating and do not mean to 'humiliate' you in any way. Other challenges and their maintainers do exactly the same thing. Challenge accepted! You could actually make a mini-station with your shuttle... Wish you luck!

Okay. Could you please post a picture of the fuel pod in orbit with the resource panel open, just for confirmation? Thanks!

Oops... Sorry! I must've missed your submissions under all the other ones. Quite a unique idea, using ion engines - hopefully this won't be too limiting on range. As per the rules, you hereby receive the STS Commander Rank 4 badge! Congratulations, and I hope you can prove your shuttle even more with the other challenges.