Majorjim!

At the time of posting I wasn't sure about posting the craft file. When its on Spaceport I will open a thread in the SCE. MJ

Why is this not stickied anymore?

Yup, this is stock.

Err, yeah I will upload it shortly. MJ

*NOW ON SPACEPORT* Hi all, A very talented friend of mine, Capt Snuggler has created this work of art to refuel his new SSTO, "Stingray". It is a fully functional refueling truck which can detach from the Fuel tank payload. Seats two, carries one orange tank and a rear docking port for fuel transfer. This thing even twists at the attachment point of the fuel load. Meaning you have to drive it like the real thing! Here she is: Separated from fuel load: Thirsty girl! MJ

No landing..?

I'm going nuts trying to work out what you did with that new lander. I'm sure you used seats. So no internal view? I cant wait to see it up close.

Hi John FX, I havent downloaded you rocket yet so this is just going buy the pics. IMHO the lander is a bit of a mess. Those tiles are all over the place. Try to get some symmetry and equal lines between parts. no gaps preferably. On the stock lifter, i'm sure you don't need that many tiles for fairings. Try using less just around the lander. Blend the other stages around it. Other than that, well done on getting fueling right for each stage. I have only ever done this by accident.. Do more work on the lander. Focus on that. It will come together. MJ p.s Did mechjeb make that Mun landing?

Hi all, I thought I would share this little aesthetic tip with you guys, if you dont already know it. When you attach say, the MK1 command pod to a small fuel tank you get this: Not very pretty.. By adding a round 8 toroidal fuel tank to the underside of the command pod, thusly: Making sure its sitting in the higher position on the Command pod. Now add the fuel tank and presto! it fits nice and flush with the pod. MJ

Second that! I have been wondering about landing legs for a while. Tired of the stock ones, but still want to stay stock. This is a brilliant piece of lateral thinking! MJ

See first post for pics!

Hi all, I recently decided to put together a Duna science mission which would losely follow a proposed NASA mission. so, here goes. The plan was to send am unmanned ascent vehicle to Duna with rovers, two com sats and science stuff to make fuel for the crews ascent stage on the surface. Here is the unmanned ascent and science package. Found a promising flat area at the inlet of a shallow valley The rover tug getting to work setting up the science equipment With the tugs job done, the duna base awaits its first crew. For the main ship I wanted to keep things simple to maximize my chances of success. This is my first attempt anyway so I knew something would go wrong at some point. Here is DUNA 1. My assembled ship ready to fly to Duna. I sent up the front section first with that one grey tank the hitchiker container and other docking ports. then the two hab modules then the engines last. The first section was like a snake on the way up so I flew it by hand which got me sweating! Duna insertion burn, more than half my fuel. Which was lucky as a bug seemed to drain a large part of my engine fuel when I docked with the main body of it.. In orbit around Duna, releasing on of the two satellites. Now here's the problem.. I was originally planning to have six Kerbals on the surface and return in groups with an ascent stage. Buuuuut due my general forgetfulness and the fact that I completed the mission over a week or so I forgot to test the two Hab modules properly.. It began to dawn on me as I arrived at Duna and was thinking about sending down the modules that they didn't have enough parachutes or RCS for de-orbit and slowing a decent under chutes. I decided to try docking them and sending them down together to detach when under chutes. thusly And here they come down together. The problem was that they hit to hard and always bounced smashing off solar arrays and causing me to have an embolism. I didnt get a pic of the crashed one, I was too mad to remember! So a quick reload later and I decided to send just Jeb and Bob down in the one Hab module with enough RCS to slow its decent. I transfered the other crew members into the main ship Hab module and broke the sad news that there would be no Duna surface visit for them. so, the single surface Hab module arced across the Dunan surface and I couldn't believe it when it touched down unharmed and ready to get to work. Just over 8km from the Duna 1 base. Here's Jeb and Bob making their way to the Duna 1 base Jeb seems to like the Tug rover Final inspection of the atmosphere test rocket A safe distance, so Bob says. Jeb asked if he could hold it.. Arial view of DUNA 1 science base This was a hell of a lot of fun. Especially moving those machines around with the tug. We need more little jos to do like that in KSP. anyway, I hope you found this interesting. night all. MJ

Very nice indeed. And yeah with stock parts any CSM will look like Mulbins as those are the best parts. Nice work on that Skylab.

Yeah it is a bit. This is still very much a work in progress and will no doubt change. I will keep it as a one Kerbal mission to keep the size down. I would like to have a different CSM for a Duna mission too.

Well it didn't need a third stage as two is plenty. As you can (sort of) see my second stage is the Saturn's third. The Saturn Vs third stage had one engine. This is more of a Saturn v alike than a recreation. Mulbin made the perfect stock version that I don't think can be bettered. So I took a different route as I know a lot of people had problems running Mulbins craft.

Shes a little more forgiving.

I think it would ruin the overall look of the CSM and lander as it would force me to use other larger parts to keep the aesthetic. I was using the Command Pod Mk1 for the lander too but I had real problems designing around it.

nice.

I quite agree. Three would be better. My intention was to make it as small as possible to keep part count and weight down. And making room for three pushes the size up massively.

Hi all, I present my "Single Kerbal Apollo recreation". Do you like maximizing mission risk? Or do you just flat out hate the company of others? Then this ship is for you! Take a single hermit Kerbal to the Mun in style! I have completely redesigned the rocket and after many, many versions I have finally settled on this. I decided against fairings as I tried and tried to get decent looking fairings with the square tiles but they always looked 'wrong'. So I have I have used a frame work of struts to keep aesthetic and provide a great supporting skeleton the the rocket. It is a three stage rocket with the third stage finishing the initial climb and then a circularizing burn. Then you flip the CSM and dock with the lander. The CSM has enough fuel for Mun transfer, capture, escape and Kerbin capture and a circularizing burn. PICS!! On the launch pad Liftoff! Second stage just before ignition Third stage basting the brave Kerbal to KO Docking with the lander and discarding third stage engines Burning for the Mun! I may change the CSM motor, its efficent but a bit weedy.. Over the Munar surface Lander release, tested up to 20,000M Munar orbit Plenty of fuel in the decent module for those 'less than optimal' burns 'popping the cork' CSM hookup Release of the escape pod into Kerbin atmosphere Coming home, CSM still visible in the background There she is. I was amazed at how well this came together. It will be up on Spaceport tomorrow. Thanks all for looking! MJ

I uploaded the wrong craft to spaceport. The one that 70? people downloaded so far is incapable of return missions.. I will upload a return version soon. MJ

Hi all, I'm a HUGE fan of KSP landers. It was my attempts at copying Mulbins Munbug from pictures alone that showed new ways of using the stock parts. I'm totally hooked now! Here are a few of my landers. First landing on the VAB roof in the mini lotus A prototype, err.. stealth? no. umm. something lander, looks like batmans lander or something. 'nother batman shot

Check first post please. Thanks all. MJ

Thanks all.

Lovely landers guys and gals?