localSol

I noticed this too, [... removed to prevent confusion] Hard flameout happened at 100%, [...] It's fun anyway!

Thanks, I have mk4 system but overlooked that feature.

Awesome first-kerbal-perspective view, and reverse thrust/wheel swiveling! What is the command pod called and what mod do the reverse thrusters come from or how does that work?

Thanks for letting me know what area the speeds would be in. I didn't know this and have never really tried this kind of flight. I'm curious to see your planes too. FAR users unite! Kind of! Stock users also unite!

Using FAR mod, no mechjeb. Both manned and then unmanned submissions in this slideshow (available in 720p): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TMyYDtIBqE Manned FAR Highest Speed Over Land: 1651 m/s Unmanned FAR Highest Speed Over Land : 1704 m/s Man, these craft seem so tough without deadly reentry installed! My first one became an awesome funny fireball. Is it getting warm in here, Jeb? The second unmanned thing which is nearly a missile was extremely delicate, took me about 20-30 attempts, the best setting in FAR was actually a lower wing leveler setting than I expected, something like k : 0.5. Yaw dampener high at 4 (don't know if it was needed) and used dynamic control adjustment - still super sensitive, but I guess it would make sense because of its shape and mass.

Hooray for v0.9.2! Good features and bugfixes, in the README.txt .

Thanks for the thread rawchicken. What's next, a giant crate of lasagna? (but really!) Edit : edveen, have you tried flying your last plane without the top wings but keeping the tailfins and delta-deluxes on top of the first wing surface?

Using the FAR mod, 1569.5 m/s, Mach 4.94 A slideshow available in 720p : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSjLibLIZck I forgot to include the flight log but I understand why that is needed and I like the idea. I haven't broken any records anyway. Deadly Reentry burned me up. It was fun! Going to try again..

It's a nice feeling to build something new and have it work. You can get that repeatedly in KSP by building weird things regularly.

Cool, I was hoping for something like that. Gave up for now due to the pizza causing big changes in center of lift in certain situations.

Congratulations on that and the pictures of atmospheric effects, it makes me want to try again. With TT's huge mk4 turbofan.

Alternative modded, 7:49. Delivered..and then it goes straight into the Blendtec total blender for the fastest digestion. Free KSPX HECS probe with every order! Cover eyes and face until other flying decouplers have rolled to a stop or exploded. Max speed ~184 m/s, this thing is extremely twitchy and manueverable but can yaw very well instead of roll and take off at very low speed.

Oh, these new posts are good news to me. I didnt realize there was difference between the terrain detail settings, and assumed they were all the same at close distance but not far, due to LOD.. - but it isnt that way, you say, so i've got to try high detail again. I was using default, never got game crashes but a rare suspension snapping, normal, but noticed it happened slightly more often at 2x time acceleration , and much more at 3x and 4x..yeah the physics inaccuracies. Except for the first trip toward the mountains I couldn't really use time compression and liked it that way.. 170, 180? At some point you get the 'is it a car, or is it a rolling projectile feeling.

Fun idea! I took about 4 hours! Video makes it looks easy, which it really wasn't! Four exclamation points! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of0zlOcTtRk

Here's a mass driver mod : http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/crashtest-inc-mass-driver/ Tracks would be fun, but what about digging a very deep hole (underground tube) in the polar caps and using the low friction ice in the tube as a good launching surface, possibly with a vacuum also? (partial variation of an idea by Andrew Nowicki) I think it was Scott Manley who had a video that explained some fun stuff about launch systems like this, the big technical limitations/challenges/resource-and-labor-intensity of using them in an atmosphere. But for low atmosphere environments, I like them! Or just some kind of expensive drag tester in thick atmosphere.. Oh here's the scott video : In my opinion it is one of scott's really great videos. If you want a short funny part , watch from 2:45 to 3:12, it still cracks me up.

Good, thanks for telling me about that, that sounds fun. Did you finish the course with that big nuclear spider-truck? I saw the omni wheel but assumed it would be speed limited or something, and I didnt know it didnt slide. Good for large or complicated mobile things though. Yeah I had fun with the sliding truck wheels and there are plenty of types to choose. Maybe a bunch of TT's 'dualley' wheels could be good for traction too. I like firespitter's electric prop a lot but putting lots of RTGs wasn't so easy for aerodynamics until the B9 pack's cargo holds with FAR (they can hold ..a cargo hold's worth!)

What are those, are you using regular damned robotics rotatrons somehow? The designs other guys made here with airfoils are really cool and encouraging, I want to try something like that outside of this particular challenge. The multiple wheels they had make me want tank tracks, tanks brake really really well because of the large contact patch..

Thank you ferram. to guys about nose up trouble : I haven't got a hang of rcs nose up myself, but maybe it is much harder when you're going too fast in too thick atmospheric density. What would be fun is integrated RCS thrusters in nose, command pod and or fuselage section (to keep drag and part count down) that can be adjusted in strength in exchange for mass after they have already been placed. Lando made a good part generator program, maybe it will be possible to do that sometime in the future with it :http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/25061-Part-generator-Version-2-X-release-open-beta)

ferram, did you see my message two pages back about the stall angle bug? Is that one that has been hard to pin down? Is that information useful to you? taverius, did you see my message a page back about the PID information? It's fine if you don't want to explain. It's pretty amazing what romfarer has managed to do with the lazors plugin. At any rate things are looking good for KSP mods this month. Looking forward to 0.20 and next FAR version, whatever that comes with.

Mention of PID was hard to find, I noticed that those letters aren't in the advanced controller menu any more, maybe that menu is the same as the Advanced controller options menu in the red laser menu. There is torque yaw, pitch, a single roll area and then translate up/down, left/right, fwd/back areas. I don't understand the abbreviations you used , maybe it is a quick way of telling me something about the other fields. Can you explain what this stuff does, and how it might work or interfere with FAR's flight assistance?. It did save my yaw and pitch torque changes between my flights. Edit : I just figured out what the Mach/AoA box does in the FAR CAS static aerodynamic analysis tab. Cool!

Really attractive craft!

Thanks! I haven't used that before specifically but I'll take a look now especially that, as I might have thought, just as I gave advice, I built a small low mass plane following my own rules but it is pretty much uncontrollable, so I'll try lazor system on it. I've got Tac fuel balancer too and forgot I had it. I like your Ramjets, which are good for supersonic flight and roasting kerbal pizzas.

41:28 -5 -5 -5 = 26:28 (Available in 720p) http://youtu.be/YPevfZe0_Yg Using Firespitter's propellers, TT's wheels, F.A.R. (probably doesn't do much since I have no airfoils or control surfaces) It may not seem entirely obvious from the pictures, but there is no way this thing can get airborne unless it is in the usual way a car does - crashing a lot due to flips and broken suspension. I've never really done much rovering in KSP, I must have crashed 100 times (really) due to the springiness of my kerbspension, but it was a lot of fun and took me a lot of the last two days to do. I took roughly the blue arrow route, or the magenta track, and then met up with the red track in saiko's picture. It was the first time I used TT's multiwheels and the sliding was fun. I used no powered wheels for extra fun, two steering in front and trailers in the back. I found that 'hey once my front propellers gets blown up, it's easier to control the thrust!' so I just continued with the half prop rover. I think drag limited me to 137 m/s anyway, and the new 103 m/s max speed using one rear propeller was usually uncontrollable anyway. Seems accurate enough too since 30m/s is 67 mph/108kph , and 100m/s is 223mph/358kph! I used ASAS about 65% of the time, because with this setup any turning over 30 m/s was like skating on ice (fun). And maximum speed was only reasonably safe near the 'final straightaway' semi flat plains at 102 m/s - about 3/6 crash-reload-quicksave. I made about 5 quicksaves through the whole course by stopping the rover..not easy to do with no "anti flip" brakes either! (about 5 crashes this way by flipping on seemingly smooth terrain..seemingly..). Silver Cup! Silver is antibacterial! ...Hooray! My first trip to the beach was in the air at 100 m/s, and then in the dirt at 0. There is a blind cliff. Hold f9! Bill realizes that 'the wheels are not symmetrical' . I made it in the VAB though it might not have helped in the SPH due to small connection peculiarities. It didn't actually help stability that much since , again about the tractionless rolling, except when you go sideways..Then you get plasma all over. Most jumps at this speed are reasonably okay to not explode, so I took a scenic picture. My pilot frowns, is it the white knuckles? Hard to tell from the picture, it was a blind nearly vertical cliff.. had to slow to 20 m/s for later success..this is my third attempt where I became a delightful mangled heap of something like jetsam. This is too dangerous for manned pods. Final straightaway of about 80km, at 101 m/s it was about as crazy as a Baja trophy truck driver's pleasant dreams. (wheels often off the ground, just look at the pilot, that was pretty much my expression too) I just realized all of my pilots don't look too happy about the danger. Next time I think I'll use unmanned pods! Fun trip!

You might be able to adjust those designs. A while ago in a ferram thread, somebody mentioned to keep the center of lift behind the center of mass (going away from the command pod). For me this works nearly every time in keeping this from happening to me. But if you put the center of lift too far behind the center of mass, the plane will be difficult to pitch up (pull up) at all. Planes that have the center of lift nearly on the center of mass , just a barely visible bit behind it are very easy to pitch. Keeping in mind that the center of mass can move in flight as you burn up fuel, and that could cause instability later while you're going kerbal at mach 7. The total mass changes this too and also the shape of the plane and thrust to weight ratio, which you can get by using Flight Engineer or Mechjeb's in-editor window. If there is a way to fly a plane with the center of lift in front of the center of mass in FAR, I haven't really tried with that, planes tend to go crazy on takeoff in that case. What would be really useful is a display in editor to see where the center of mass moves to at all points between full and empty of any tanks you'd choose. That's probably something only the KSP dev guys can do though I guess. Because sometimes it is too hard to take apart planes to see the change if a fuel tank is gone and then put it all back together.

@ferram4 : Here's the stall angle bug : I rebuilt the SRB rocket, using 4 mirrored av-r8 winglets, launched it, they ripped off, the launch went fine , I selected 'end flight' at about 77,000 meters, went back to the VAB, and now the stall angle says 859.4366! When I first built this craft before launching the first time, the stall angle did not have that bug. I built it this way : OKTO 2 core, nose cone, rt-10 SRB, four av-r8's. So that bug is reproducible for me, I rebuilt the craft 3 times from scratch in a row and got the same thing. I'll include the okto2 cfg I modded below. Unfortunately I have been launching stuff including many SRB simple rockets and other debris for about 50 minutes but haven't been able to get the game to lag to 1fps. Some other background : I suspect FAR had something to do with the 1fps bug, but whether it was because of a more KSP program problem, I don't know. I say so because I only had the setting on 25 max debris for a few weeks, and no problems with slowdown, until I started launching those SRBs - they had various fins put on all four sides mirrored (all FAR parts), and I ended the flights each time instead of going back to the space center. I was using far flight assistance each time, and launched maybe 10 different kinds and didnt notice the problem until I tried using the same simple rocket with 3 normal canards, not placed with the tri-symmetry setting, but two on the side mirrored and one on the back (dorsal?) side as a vertical stabilizer. That is when the game started at 1 fps on launch pad and didnt stop after I waited up to a minute, no matter what other craft I loaded, though all the ones I loaded may have had FAR capability on them, I'm not sure. What's interesting about this canard-SRB craft compared to ones with winglets is that the canards don't disintegrate (vertical launch, no maneuvering just like all the others), it has much lower max Q during ascent (~90 thousand), and around 106,000 meters, the wing leveler starts the roll the rocket back and forth slowly. But when I turn off wing leveler and then back on after 20 seconds, wing leveler stops doing that. All other assistance options besides AoA limiter were on and with default settings. Sometimes I press 'update CoL' out of anxiety while changing nothing else. The okto2 cfg : http://pastebin.com/RyKnxq8y The output_log.txt(couldnt get the lag bug to come back though) : http://pastebin.com/RAFqJqWL