Zwolff

No log is generated when double clicking the KSP.app. However, I just remembered that for a different KSP version I had a problem that it would not launch, but back then it didn't even launch a black screen as is does now. The fix for that problem was simply to copy KSP.app to a different location on disk, removing the KSP.app inside the KSP_osx folder, and just copy back the newly created one. I did that, and everything appears to be working correctly. Might be worth a try for OP @Fireheart318 as well. It probably isn't as interesting now, but I have a link to the log file that is created when everything works again, if something useful can be learned from it regarding why it happens. https://www.dropbox.com/s/eqonb20c6kcwl3t/KSP.log?dl=0

I think I have the same problem, and the same question, so I thought I could provide some clarification. I Have a late 2012 mac mini running macOS 10.13.3 (High Sierra). There were no problems like this using KSP version 1.3.1 and earlier, but when I updated to KSP version 1.4 the game did not launch when using the KSP.app. Just showed a black screen, but no loading bar or kerbal backgrounds. I found somewhere that if one control clicks on KSP.app and then chose "Show package contents" from the menu, and navigate to /Applications/KSP_osx/KSP.app/Contents/MacOS, and launch the game using the executable found there, the game would launch. This however is a rather annoying thing to do each time one wants to launch the game. Also in my case the some settings inside the game does not stick and revert to default each time, forcing me to set the right resolution and other things each time I play. What makes things worse, is that the settings panel looks as it should when first launching the game even though the settings are not. It is only possible to set things right after first loading a save and then exiting back to main menu and then entering settings, which at that point will show their true, but wrong values that I then have to change back to the way I want them. No idea if the two are related, but both issues showed up in for the first time in 1.4, and stayed in 1.4.1.

What would you say is the right RAPIER surface level TWR? My SSTOs tend to be around 0.60, but I haven't done any real experimenting. I just came up with something that works quite well, and try to get all my SSTOs around that number. How do you measure drag, and how it varies with changes in angle of attack?

I know this is not what you asked for, but I tend to build my SSTOs only using wings that hold liquid fuel, and power them in space with NERVAs. The wings wont be just dead weight, as they tend to hold the majority of the fuel, especially if you refuel in space. But of course I also carry along the RAPIERs, control surfaces, and intakes.

Really cool. I have done quite a few attempts to build a working electric plane, but never gotten anything of the ground. Really want to get an electric plane as a first stage for Eve return missions.

I like the idéa of this one, and it is better looking than the Dominion, but when I was one metre from touchdown on a perfect approach at the end of the runway, the ship exploded. I think I will stick to the smaller carrier for now.

If you ever update the Dominion, or when you do the bigger one, I have a suggestion. To make landing non VTOLs on it easier, it is good to align the carrier to a cardinal direction for a simpler approach. This was rather hard and slow to do on the Dominion, so I mounded a pair of the largest jet engines in the front activated by hotkeys as bow propellers to turn it on a dime, which I found really useful. I suppose it will also be able to do sharper turns at speed, but I have never tested that. I also don't know how big of a monster the next one will be, but somewhere of to the side to park aircraft while still leaving the runway clear would also be nice =).

Thanks a lot! Just tried it out as it is, and appears just fine without any ore tank balancing. I'm surprised my old mac mini actually could handle the carrier at all without turning KSP to a slide show. After about 6 tries I managed to land my JAS 39-Gripen fighter replica on the carrier. It is very tricky given the bounce in the landing gears, which often made me bounce of the bow of the carrier without loosing much speed. Only problem is now I have to get it to the back of the runway somehow to take of again. I suppose the deck crew have to get out and push it by hand.

This looks amazing. I have a few short take-off and landing fighter jets I would like to try some carrier landings with. Any chance you have a fully stock version stripped of BD-armory parts you could share?

I just ran into the same issue. It would be helpful if the engineering report told me the wheels are blocked, so I don't need to launch and revert each time to find out.

I have this passenger hydrofoil. It can carry 22 kerbals including crew, and tops out at around 80 m/s, making it usefull for transporting kerbals to and from the islands or rescue returning spacecraft overshooting the KSC.

I managed to figure out that I had to time warp some to get different contracts. But the only thing I got, except for the usual stock contracts for stations around Laythe and so on, was one from SSI Aerospace. However, that one was for planting a flag on the Mun, and not a mission to give planes a purpose. Does it make a difference that I have played quite a bit on this save, and have everything on the tech tree?

This looks really nice. Do you have to start a new career save for this to work, or is it possible to get the Join SSI mission to appear in an already started career save.

First off of the KSC assembly lines in the new year is the heavy cargo aircraft Anastasia, designed primarily to carry hardware to and from the island airbase of the cost. The Anastasia is capable of carrying heavy cargo in its cargo hold, or if it is to large to fit inside, mounted on top of the aircraft. It comes with a rear access ramp for loading and unloading cargo and a forward boarding hatch for the pilot and engineering crew to board the aircraft. Anastasia can be flown remotely through a probe core, but a crew is preferred, especially an engineer to fix wheels that might break when loading or unloading cargo. I did some experiments using a simple fuel lorry to test cargo loading. It is possible to take of and fly around with the lorry as a separate craft inside the cargo hold with its parking breaks on. But eventually it slides backwards somewhat and shifts the centre of mass, which causes the aircraft to pitch up, stall, and explode from things coming apart in the cargo hold. I also tried to mount a claw in the front end of the cargo hold and attaching the lorry to that, but as soon as the crafts merges, the wheels stop colliding with the deck and it hangs out through the belly. Does anyone have a good stock solution to this, or do I need KAS or something similar like that to place struts in the field. In addition to cargo transport to and from the island airfield, Anastasia will also be of great use for further development of the Duran Duran shuttle program. If flown to high altitude, gliding and landing exercises can be performed without the need to waste an external tank and solid rocker boosters and to perform an abort during the ascent just to test flight characteristics of the orbiter during approach and landing. Get the craft file here. A few additional images can be found in the album below.

I would suggest that the most important thing to improve would be the hatch EVA menus themselves. When clicking on any hatch, one should get a list of all kerbals in the spaceship, and not only in the part whose hatch is clicked, just like the crew selection screens in the HAB/SPH showing the same information. That way you could get any kerbal from any hatch, and make sure you get the three star engineer that you wanted to EVA, regardless of witch capsule the engineer was sitting in. This would solve most of my problems, but I would of course welcome a surface mounted zero kerbal capsule with just a hatch, if the above mechanic is implemented, so you could EVA any kerbal from it.

I would imagine the new 2 kerbal crew module being even better as it has access points in both ends. If you use your trick above with one of those, but stick one end inside the fairing and the other end outside, you don't even need the crew transfer to get a kerbal inside. Just enter through the outside door, and EVA through the inside one.

I haven't done much experimentation, but it appears to be working as one would expect. At speeds between 0 and around 10 m/s, it floats as a boat. From then on raises as the speed increase to around 15 m/s, where it is fully above water, and stays that way until you reach about 95 m/s where I accidentally got it airborne once. Not sure it is possible to do this any more however, as I removed a pair of engines without any apparent loss in performance. As it is impossible to get it airborne going slower than 90 m/s it is treated differently from air, but maybe Squad is using the same mechanics only having different valued for drag and density and so on.

I wanted to celebrate the new water mechanics by making a hydrofoil, to be used for crew rescue for my retuning craft that overshoot KSC. Even though I recover the vessels where they land, I think it is fun to send missions to get the crew back to the space centre grounds before recovering them, if they land nearby within reason. The Aegea is inspired by the Flying dolphin passenger hyrdofoils that go between Athens and the Greek islands nearby. It comes with a carriage to get it from the runway to the water. At around 15 m/s it will rise out of the water on its own and is quite stable without SAS, but at higher speeds the ride gets less bumpy with SAS engaged. The top speed is somewhere just above 90 m/s. Warning: At speeds higher than 90 m/s there is a non-zero probability of the Aegea becoming an actual airplane. Get the craftfile here.

Well, I tend to agree, but my computer have a different opinion as the ships get larger. Nice one. I like the cockpit design. The cargo bays are a bit more tricky to do when doing a stealth bomber-style flying wing as the smooth lines are easier to do with the wings slightly clipped into the fuselage, which is why I left out a cargo bay all together for the Pterion. It is the Alternate resource panel mod. Get it here.

There is one now. Get the craft file here. It might still have a Mechjeb controller on, but from what I understand it KSP just removes it if you dont have the mod installed. If not then tell me, and I will remove it and upload a new craft file. Action groups 1: Toggle rapiers on/off 2: Toggle rapiers jet/rocket 3: Toggle NERV on/off 4: Bay doors 5: Solar panels and radiators Next project will be to make a scale up version to fit ISRU gear onboard, to make a truly long range SSTO.

The fuel in the LF+O tanks are used up by the rapiers in closed cycle mode for the boost phase out of the atmosphere. Everything else is in the wings.

I just finished of three different missions with my most capable SSTO ever built post 1.0. As it seems to be in fashion to share SSTOs in the Spacecraft Exhange lately, I thought I'd join in. Some other well designed SSTOs on this forum inspired me to improve my own designs. It is possible to get slightly over 2400m/s ∆v left when in a 73km orbit around Kerbin, but most times I reach somewhere around 2300-2350m/s. This is enough to get you to quite a lot of places, and if you have a system of refueling stations you might even get back to Kerbin again. The craft, which is piloted remotely using a probe core, can carry 4 non pilot trained kerbals and has a service bay that can be closed during atmospheric flight, containing radiators, solar panels, batteries, a monopropellant tank and a docking port. Update: Get the craft file here. The first mission was to Minmus. With plenty of fuel to spare, it is no problem to fly to Minmus and back, even if you don't do a perfect ascent from Kerbin. The Pterion lacks any landing struts for vertical landings, but it worked well to balance on the wing tips and then gently falling down to the landing gear. The only thing to watch out for is the aerobreaking on the return trip. The large wings and RCS modules overheat easily, so I had to break several times before going in for landing. The second mission was to Duna. Actually it was to Laythe, but I got an accidental gravity assist from the Mun and was flung into a solar orbit, so I decided to go to Duna instead. I ended up with around 700 m/s left on the surface of Duna, so I could not get back to orbit, but if I would plan a mission to Duna directly it would probably be possible to do it more efficient leaving more fuel for the ascent. As the Pterion has a lot of lift, it is possible to do a quite gentle gliding landing on Duna touching down at around 70 m/s, but the place I landed on was quite hilly so quite a few loads and saves were required. The third mission was a retry to go to Laythe. It went well as far as I actually got there with the crew compartments, engine and some fuel intact, but most of the space plane overheated during aerobreaking over Laythe. The solar panels were destroyed, so the craft now orbits powerless in orbit around Laythe. Good thing I sent it there uncrewed, so I don't need to send any rescue mission. When entering the Jool system, I did do a breaking gravity assist on Tylo and two more on Laythe before aerobreaking, but I did not have the patients to try more things to slow down enough to survive intact. I would think it could be done with some fancy flying and gravity assists, but for now only the craziest of kerbals would consider this a Laythe-capable SSTO. A gallery with some extra pictures can be found below.

Very fun to fly, and good looking too. I enjoy craft with slim margins on ∆v for the intended mission. Not sure how I never thought about such a small thing myself, but I found your way of controlling the ladders through landing gear control to be especially ingenious.

The telescopes should orbit Kerbol, and they detect asteroids close to themselves near the orbit of the planet outside the telescopes orbit. Before I did the Eve ones, I placed a sentinel just outside Eves orbit to monitor Kerbin (Just like the real Sentinel just outside Venus) and one just outside Kerbin to monitor Duna. Both works fine, so I am not sure what is different about Eve.

Anyone know the tolerances for placing a Sentinel telescope and having it monitor asteroids? Are there any limits on inclination, apoapsis and periapsis in relation to the planet whose orbit I want to find asteroids near? I have now placed 2 telescopes in to different orbits, but both get the message "misaligned with Eve" when I activate them. One is just inside Eves orbit, and the other one is close to Mohos orbit.