capi3101

That's troublesome; is anybody else having problems with the Auk? I'll take another look at the .craft file today to make sure there aren't any parts that aren't supposed to be there; IIRC it's stock.

The Mainsail without a Mainsail? Let's try this... You could build a booster stronger than a Mainsail if you use eight radial LV-T30s instead of six; to do that you can either A) turn on part-clipping with ALT-F12 (select "Allow part clipping in editors" and then shut it off with ALT-F12 again), or put one set of girders sticking straight out from the tank and turning another set of girders down on them, and attach the LV-T30s to that second set. I find clipping easier (and it saves you mass). I haven't done much to figure out whether the extra thrust actually helps you or not (on account of the weight of the extra equipment); just tossing it out there as a suggestion. Lately I've been going to the Mun and Minmus with basic Geschosskopf Science Pack ships; been sending them up DSTO (where the second stage is the lander). I don't have Mainsails, so I use the method above. Later on you can use four LV-T30s and a Skipper if you'd like; there's parts and mass savings there but lower Isp.

Shush.... I was using it as merely as an example of what was needed for the submission guidelines.

I was thinking about how I could make a circularizing challenge work, and couldn't come up with a method that would be 100% fair. Couldn't come up with anything that would cover the bases, so I figured I'd just post this here and be done with it...

...and by someone I meant cyberklad, of course. Though those ones Kasuha linked to look like they'd be a lot of fun to try out...

Neither are orbits - both are escape trajectories. You have to fire retrograde at the apsis to establish an orbit.

Made a bunch of science runs to Minmus yesterday and one to the Mün. Last launch, got a Kerbin orbit of 80,346m x 80,327m, eccentricity of .000014. Nineteen meters difference; a personal best. Somebody should make a challenge out of that...

Neat looking ship. Are you still tweaking it?

Rats. Somebody will have this challenge broken before I get a chance to play again. Probably before I get a chance to post...

Intake-wise, Try 6-7, or possibly eight per engine. Ideally you want to delay the switchover of your RAPIERS as long as you can (less oxidizer needed that way). One per engine ain't gonna cut it; I've had designs like that flame out on me on the stinkin' runway... Speaking of RAPIERS, are you just experimenting with them, or do you have a specific purpose in mind with that particular engine? I'd give you the standard "Turbojets have lower mass and higher Isp" argument for Turbojet/Rocket vs. RAPIER, but I imagine you've heard it before. In any case, looking at your screenie, I think you're putting too much mass on the back wheels when you go to lift your nose. Try reinforcing the wheels first, then adding more wheels if that doesn't work. Something you may consider (and I've done before) is actually having three sets of landing wheels - nose gear, a rear set close to the center of mass, and a tail set that responds to an action group command (this is the set that supports the tail of the plane when it's stopped). On take off, when you get close to takeoff speed, use the action group to raise the tail set. You should be going fast enough at that point that, if all is well, the rear end of the plane will stay off the ground. You then just have to pitch up; the plane pivots on the middle set (the ones close to the center of mass), and you're off to the races.

Hmmm....general principles I would apply stock are: One Turbojet per 9 tonnes payload (everything but the wings, engines, and intakes) One pair of Swept Wings per six tonnes of plane Two Mk1 Fuselages per Engine One Ram Intake per tonne of plane. Now, I know you're using FAR and I'll admit I don't use FAR and am not familiar with the parts. But, you should be able to compare the FAR parts to the stock ones and see how well your plane is measuring up. It sounds pretty massive in any event. Could easily be a case where the solution turns out to be MOAR STRUTS, but try comparing your plane to these principles first and see how well it's measuring up.

SlayerMcGee, nicely done. Your craft file says 25 parts; you're missing 3 Cubic Octagonal Struts and 2 OX-4Ls from your parts list you provided in your entry for an additional 36 points, so your actual score is 152 points. One thing...your entry is provisional at the moment; to make your entry official, I need... I'll update the leaderboard.

Okay...fair amount of stuff there. Let's begin with: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/62368-0-23-Tutorial-Mission-Planning-and-Ship-Design-for-SCIENCE! Dangle four FL-T400s on the corners and put 48-7S engines on the bottom; that should get you to the Mün, down, up and back if you're careful piloting. Tack on a set of FL-T100s if you want a little extra gas. The quad 48-7S should still be capable of getting you down and up again. Then for the booster - To build yourself - http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/62368-0-23-Tutorial-Mission-Planning-and-Ship-Design-for-SCIENCE! That's a few versions' old but the basic principles still stand. To replicate the thrust of a Mainsail without having Mainsails, try a Skipper with four LV-T30s dangling off the sides of the tank attached by Modular Girder Segments (which are Starting Tech). Alternatively, you could use a centerline LV-T45 with six radially attached LV-T30s - that option gives you the best Isp but requires the highest amount of parts and is the heaviest option.

This has proven to be remarkably useful of late for gathering science. Basically Geschosskopf's strategy involves hauling multiple experiments (in particular the ones that really pay out well). He goes over design of a science package that gets returned to Kerbin every time. As far as a "unlock this technology first" schema - I go with getting all the techs on Tier 3 first (and everything preceeding it). I.e.: Starting Tech Basic Rocketry General Rocketry Stability Survivability General Construction Science Tech Flight Control Advanced Rocketry (Get all of these, even though arguably you don't really "need" Flight Control or Advanced Rocketry, simply because these are usually prerequisites for everything else and they're relatively cheap). Then go for: Electrics Fuel Systems Advanced Electrics Advanced Exploration Electronics Advanced Science Technology (this will unlock all the Science parts except for the thermometer, which you can pick up with Space Exploration - pick that one up at your discretion) Then go for: Heavy Rocketry Advanced Construction Heavier Rocketery Specialized Control Nuclear Propulsion (basically, once you've got all the instruments, make a beeline for nuclear rockets) From there, its whatever you'd like to do.

I've had one for a while: Finding a good screenie of it, now there's a challenge...You can see I've got three separate craft docked off of Kristall, Spektr's sticking out in the foreground and that thing off to the left with the anemic looking antenna dish is supposed to be Priroda. Would I earn any brownie points if I mentioned I had another station just like this one in orbit of Mün as well?

Escaped Kerbol and did two runs to Minmus for science.

Hallelujah, I finally have an entry: Craft file My entry counts 493 points: 6 Advanced Canards (x8) 3 Z-100 Battery Packs (x4) 2 FL-T800 Fuel Tanks (x4) 4x Mk1 Fuselage (x5) 1x LV-N Atomic Rocket Motor (x7) 1x Stayputnik (x4) 3x AV-R8 Winglet (x4) 16x Ram Air Intake (x7) 1x Inline Reaction Wheel (x4) 6x Small Control Surfaces (x5) 3x Small Gear Bay (x5) 3x OX-STAT Solar Panels (x5) 12x Struts (x4) 14x Cubic Octagonal Struts (x8) 6x Swept Wings (x5) 2x Modular Girder Segment (x1) 2x TurboFan Engine (x7) Not exactly an impressive entry, but an entry nonetheless.

I was simply asking for instructions on how you should go about making the burn, and y'all have answered that question succinctly. I can happily report success this evening: I did go ahead and do one periapsis kick first; it was one of those deals where I'd have been burning straight down into Kerbin if I had tried to do it all in one thwack. Basically just set up the maneuver node at 120 degrees ejection angle like y'all told me to do; PreciseNode helped with that. Thanks for y'all's help.

If you're looking for a land base on which to refuel ships around Jool, I'd suggest Vall. It doesn't have Laythe's atmosphere, Tylo's gravity or the weird eccentric orbits of Pol and Bop. Flat it is not, but it's liable to be the best you're going to get.

What kind of Mun lander have you built? A screenshot or a craft file would be helpful in diagnosing potential problems. Getting it right is one of those things that takes practice. I will say that the shorter and wider your stack is, the less likely it is to tip over when you crash. Try this: put an FL-T200 under your command pod. Put three more radially around the center tank (set it so that there's no tank directly below the hatch to the command pod). Connect the outer tanks to the inner tanks with fuel lines. You'll have as much fuel there as an FL-T800, but without nearly as much height involved. Good for early landers. Stock, you need to go IVA while you're landing and look for your radar altimeter gauge. When it starts to twitch, you're 2500 meters above the deck and can plan accordingly. What you want to do when you're ready to land is burn retrograde until your surface velocity is near zero; the retrograde marker should start pointing at least very close to straight up (all blue on the nav ball). Stop your burn and start falling. Watch your radar altimeter; when it starts twitching, start slowing down. Right above the surface you don't want to be going much faster than 5-10 m/s vertically (use the gauge right beside the altimeter for this purpose) but if you're higher up you can afford to go a little faster than that (indeed, you want to be going down a little faster so you don't waste too much fuel). Make sure your gear is deployed. Your radar altimeter will really start to dial down fast once you're less than 1000 meters to the deck; use that to gauge when to really slow down and estimate the elevation of the deck. If you have landing lights, turn them on and use your shadow to gauge the final deck. That's really all I can suggest. And Scott Manley rules, of course.

Well....I've got one nuke and I'm pretty sure I'm too high to exploit Oberth effect to the maximum capability. I'm hesitant to lower my orbit at this point, though I might if I can do it cheaply.

Yeah, unfortunately...I would consider that a violation of Rule #1. Basically, there's got to be the same number of parts when you launch as there are when you've gotten on an escape trajectory. So that's out. Only exception I'm allowing is rule 1A (launch clamps).

I was aware that you can't actually escape. But there does come a point where the game hits the numerical limits of the programming language, your SOI says SUN and your situation becomes ESCAPING. That's what I'm hoping to acheive here. About where did you put your Kerbolar periapsis in that screenie, Kasuha? Wasn't my screenie... Alright, I may give this a shot. I'd been doing my burn at sunrise; probably why I was having problems with it.

Alright...I hate to admit this, but I've started a challenge whose goal is to send a craft on a Kerbolar escape trajectory, and I have no earthly idea how to do this my own self. Here's my sitrep at this point - I have a craft in a 125k Kerbin orbit (I overshot a bit), KER says I have 4,917 m/s of delta-V available and my current TWR is .453. It is Year 1, Day 5, 04:12:17 in my save game. I can go at any time. So how does one achieve a Kerbol escape trajectory? (For clarification: I'm talking about escaping from "The Sun").

Alright, that works. I'll get your entry officialized and updated posthaste.