Wahgineer

Aren't VASMIRs actually stronger than ion engines?

2046: the probe is scrapped, since the Kerbals kinda forgot they had warp drives. The kerbals go there, find nothing of interest, and return. They also use a warp capable ship to stop at eeloo, plant a flag, get some samples, and return home. 2047: A kerbal scientist by the name of Emmet Kerman turns a car into a time machine.

Building a NASA style shuttle is only hard for stock purists. For those of us who use mods like Ditobi's shuttle engine mod, B9, and P-wing, shuttles get much easier and much more practical.

I meant by KSP standards. Since a we don't have to worry about part damage, knocking the tank slightly on separation isn't a problem. Also, since the shuttle is on the side, it doesn't have to worry about the stack rising up and hitting it. It can then use the OMS to boost away and glide down to safety.

2050: Kerbin fractures into nations again, and they resume fighting. The Aliens do not return to assist, since Jeb's ship is destroyed. The Mun is re-molten, again expected to re solidify in 100 years time. The Kerbals eventually exhaust their resources, and society collpases. 3050: Kerbal society rebuilds, having forgotten most of their achievements, and begin to rebuild their space program.

I meant clean service record as in no loss of life, nor jeopardy to the mission. (AS-203 was a test mission, so it actually contributed in that there was a flaw that needed to be fixed before it became a problem. It was also stated as a successful mission.)

1. It doesn't bring along useless jet engines. (SSTOs do) 2. It actually can carry an appreciable amount of kerbals/cargo. (SSTOs can't) 3. It isn't 90% dead weight once in orbit. (SSTO's are) 4. Debris isn't really a problem. 5. You shouldn't put anything near docking ports dedicated to space craft anyways.

2038.5: It turns out that Alcubierre drives can be re-purposed into weapons. One such weapon is created, and the GMVC is threatened with annihilation if they don't comply. The GMVC doesn't comply, and seconds later, a massive beam brighter then Kerbol strikes the surface of the Mun, melting its surface and blowing off its atmosphere. It is calculated that the Mun's surface will re-solidify in 100 years time. The whole thing about 2040 was nothing but a political prediction by a naive politician. Ignore it.

So, this entire proposal is a super massive, super complicated form of the Rockoon?

Why no bigger shuttle? It seems that a big brother is just what the KSO needs: something visually different to but basically the same as the KSO, but scaled up. The one advantage that every other shuttle mod has over yours is one and the same: a larger size for more practical applications. And yes, while the Kerbals may have designed this shuttle according to their needs, wouldn't they also want to build a bigger one to handle more heavy duty jobs? If you want an idea of a really good shuttle mod (that, truth be told, is possibly the most practical of all), look at Tiberion's Shuttle Booster System, which includes parts to build an entire family of shuttles, ranging from a Buran equipped with jet engines to a NASA Ares style launcher. Also, given the results with the KSO, I'm pretty sure that its big brother would look and perform equally as well.

every vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages: Rockets: simple, yet expensive (when money is implemented) Shuttles: more complicated than rockets, but more reusable (therefore cheaper to an extent) and use similar ascent patterns. SSTO space planes: While the most reusable, they are the most expensive, hardest to design, have the smallest payload capacity, and require a totally different kind of ascent path. Also, in ksp at least, the shuttle design is the safest: Since the shuttle is on the side, the boosters have a harder time of hitting it if they break off, and the shuttle's engines (if "wired" correctly) can shut off the instant it breaks free of the tank. The shuttle can then glide to back down to land.

I saw this movie, and have to say it is one of the best movies I've ever seen. To say I like Lego is an understatement, considering my basement looks like a Lego city got nuked into oblivion.

2034: the interstellar vessel HarvestR is completed. The warp drive powers up in kerbin orbit, and then: with a light brighter than Kerbol, the drive destabilizes and explodes, destroying everything with in a 30km radius. Future Note: warp drives don't like being deep in gravity wells.

The Saturn V never had any problems at all. Apollo 1 was a malfunction in the capsule, it also used a saturn IB. Apollo 13 was a problem in the CSM, and skylab was a problem with the fairings on separation. The Saturn V/Saturn family is probably (emphasis on probably) one of the only rockets/rocket families to have a flawless service record over its lifetime.

Maybe for the far flung future (Phase V/Phase I A), a larger KSO shuttle, basically does all off the jobs the KSO does, but bigger. Looks similar to but is different from the KSO we have now.

Year 2029: The kerbals refit a KSO shuttle with ion engines to go to laythe. Also, the old Alcubierre drive plans are found, and ship construction begins.

Warp drive: Uses a bubble of exotic matter to warp space-time so that it can exceed the speed of light. Wormhole: a black hole lined with exotic matter that shortens the distance between to distant points, effectively allowing a ship to travel at super luminal speeds. I don't see a difference. From what I know, wormholes don't occur naturally. They are created by lining the interior of a black hole with colossal amounts of exotic matter. But in order for it to work, the black hole needs to have a stable connection with a white hole. Afterwards, you can only go from one place to another. Warp drives use a far smaller amount of Exotic matter to create a bubble around itself. While it takes significantly longer than a wormhole, it has the benefit of not being limited to only one destination. Since it needs to warp space around it, it can not function deep within a gravity well. The drive also has power limitations, range limitations, and speed limitations, while being possible to build with near future tech. These are all balancing factors that make a warp drive much more plausible as an endgame form of interstellar travel.

1014: The Duna orbit change incident was found to be a combination of a hoax and mechanical problems with a telescope. Construction is completed, and the ship begins its two year voyage to Duna.

Year 1012: the begging of an initiative for a Duna mission is started. The plan is to use stages from their Mun rockets as well as some older space station tech to cobble together a Duna vessel. Construction begins in earnest, since the next window is in 2 years.

1004,0000002: Jeb manages to use a booster still attached to the station to save it. Old Files on the Alcubierre drive are found and promptly put into storage. The Kerbals get tired of using capsules, and start to think of using more reusable craft: so begins the research, development, and use of the Kerbal Orbital Shuttle. It is an outstanding success.

Well, when/if we get interstellar travel, we won't use wormholes. Why? To get a wormhole, you need a form of exotic matter that can be better put to use in a warp drive. You then take this material and line the inside of a black hole with it to create a wormhole. And since it is impossible for anything to get that close, it is safe to say that worm holes are impossible. Also, as it has been said before, black holes would only exist in the center of the galaxy, which would make using them as forms on interstellar travel useless.

There could always be some sort of 'accident', with multiple failures of communication, propulsion, and life support as the moon acts like a sling shot, sending the craft off into deep space, never to return. How how much better life would be without having to listen to the people most undeserving of their success.

China= srb (fireworks, fire arrows) U.S.= liquid rocket engine Also, to contribute to the German speaking nonsense: Nien spruken da doich.

Also, one has to realize that china is (attempting) to become a space power (and kind of already did). when they send their first man to the moon (if they do), the U.S. will experience and uproar from the public. Then, we'll see a second space race, this time it's the U.S. versus China, and the goal is Mars. Also, considering NASA already has the schematics, it will only need to build it's mars hardware. China, which has no formal plan, will be forced to throw together some shoddy equipment or rip off of the U.S. (which won't work, because they don't have an SLS equivalent to lift the stuff).

ComradeGoat: My test was a comparison of RAIPERs and other engine types ON THE SAME CRAFT, and the other engines won every test. Because you used a plane designed to use the other engines. Which skews the results, because the other set-ups will always win since they're being used on a plane designed to use them.