Speeding Mullet

I did a quick search on the forum and also eugooglized and couldn't find anything similar. I'd be extremely surprised if this hasn't already been discussed, but this thread got me thinking about air brakes, and their current functionality compared to what they could be. Therefore this is a discussion about how to improve air brakes. Current air brake use is either deploy on/off, use as control surfaces, or tap/hold B to semi deploy. It's this ability to semi deploy that I would like to focus on, but perhaps others have wants for the air brakes that I hadn't thought about. Happy to update the OP with any good suggestions (at my discretion). I would like to propose that the air brakes are given some love in one of the following ways: 1) Two keys are assigned to the air brake in order to manually adjust the deflection angle. Once the desired deflection is reached the air brake holds at that angle until changed. The air brake also becomes tweak-able in VAB/SPH to be able to set max deflection angle. In all other regards the air brake functions exactly as it does now (i.e. brake button and tapping B still does the same thing). I think personally this is the best implementation, and improvement to this part. 2) The addition of a more traditional "flush with part" air-brake would be welcome. Interested to read peoples thoughts on this. It's probably been suggested and discussed but again I couldn't find it. Happy to shut this one down if it's already a matured discussion. SM

Firstly, I really like the petal concept, and a great video explanation. It's definitely something I would look at for a more controllable de-orbit. Air brakes are as has been mentioned the stock version of what you are using here. You can tap or tap and hold "B" to semi deploy the airbrakes, but unlike your design you cannot hold the air-brakes at a certain position so it's not a very elegant solution. I think it would be really nice to see air brakes slightly more tweak-able in the stock game. Perhaps engaging brakes fully deploys them to the set limits, but then 2 keys (+- for example or something else that is not already assigned) could be used for small adjustments to the % deployment. I wonder if that's something that has been regularly suggested in the forum? If not then I might create a little suggestion thread to see how it goes down.... SM

While building a fairing, status text will show its mass and cost, and tell whether the next section will close the fairing. The text will be green if the current section is valid, and orange if it can't be created. I think when closing a fairing the colour is a kind of light blue. the text is really very hard to see and would be good to see something different in terms of it's implementation. So basically: Right click on fairing base Select Build Fairing Drag fairing to first point and left click to lock it off (if it doesn't lock off it's for a reason - try a slightly different point and try again) Repeat until you have the shape you want To close the fairing bring the fairing inwards until the text changes to some kind of bluey green colour Hope that helps. If you are still stuck I think there's a few tutorials on youtube and almost certainly on this forum. I can't link to them right now as at work. Thanks SM

Ill re-enter the challenge when someone beats me, but I think I've set a large enough bench mark at this point Derp missed that - Yes he does! Edit: Me I'm counting is a monster! Does it generate loads of body lift stopping you from having to use so many wings, or is it just raw power? SM

I don't know. Need someone more authoritative on KSP than me to tell you that. Perhaps it's intended or just an oversight rather than an actual bug but it strikes me that if you can't control the capsule you shouldn't be able to adjust the parachute. SM

Inigma is maintaining the top 5 so if you are going for the leaderboard you will need to go bigger than the current 5th position: "Unfortunately 204 kerbals or 242 tons is the new bar for entry on this challenge where I can only maintain the top 5" If you just want to post a gigantic aircraft then I'm sure no one will mind, but chuck some more seats in there and go for broke haha! SM

I can't see the picture as I'm at work (on lunch), but judging by what you've written you are about there. As far as I am aware a circularly uniform altitude of 2 863.33 km and a speed of 1 009.81 m/s is what you're looking for a KEO. your never going to get it exactly there, so I say 2m/s ground speed is really accurate! don't forget unless your inclination is exactly on the equator the satellite will also librate as seen from Kerbin surface, which would also account for some ground speed I think. Have a look at my mission report for the satellite deployment. If you are able to get your apoapsis up to KEO height as you suggest, then assuming the periapsis is just out of the atmosphere you can use a single orbit to separate your satellite deployment by pretty much 180 degrees as I did. The satellites have easily enough fuel to circularise at KEO. Alternatively if you chucked your whole orbiter into KEO then simply release both sats at the same time, leave one where it is, then drop the other ones periapsis to just above the atmosphere for one orbit, then circularise at KEO and your should be close enough for government work. regarding how you precisely deploy them there's a couple of options. Spin or no spin. you want to go for the most advanced mission I'm presuming so spin it is. you want to set the staging so the sepatrons and the (bottom I think) decoupler are in the same group (obviously in 2 groups 1 for each satellite otherwise they will both deploy at once). Once you've done that it's simply a matter of staging and the satellite will come spinning out. It's a realllllly pleasing thing to watch, Inigma did a superb job with that. SM

I presume that if you were rescuing a tourist your command pod had a probe so you could control it without a pilot aboard in order to re-enter etc? If so then the probe would give you the control needed to be able to alter the parachute dynamics. Edit: If you are talking about a dumb re-entry - i.e. you set the command pod on it's re-entry course with the parachute activated and then stage it so it is re-entering without probe core or pilot attached, then I don't know. SM

Ah so the Carbon dioxide is pulled out of the atmosphere of a planet (e.g. Mars) and compressed directly to liquid form for storage and later release for propulsion? Given Carbon dioxide has higher density as a solid (97.4 lb/cu. ft.) vs liquid (68.74 lb/cu. ft) and on Mars the two conditions you find Carbon Dioxide in are gas and solid form then wouldn't you be better going for solid compressed dry ice pellets/bricks as fuel and using the high powered lasers to sublimate the Carbon Dioxide, providing thrust? "High Power" lasers also sound way more complex in this instance than just heating the dry ice with a simple element? It strikes me that to obtain liquid Carbon dioxide storage in space would require pressure and temperature heated vessels, where as solid would require only a vessel. Also it would be a much easier process removing Carbon Dioxide to dry ice as it would not require heating and pressurized storage, so the machinery and storage would be lighter and less complex / dangerous, which is important in space. Also on release of the liquid Co2 into a long tube in a vacuum it would just turn into dry ice blocking the tube wouldn't it? The liquid Co2 in the tank would also reach a point where it was not pressurized or at the correct temperature and would also turn straight into dry ice. As I said I'm not a scientist and I have also assumed a couple of things here (for example you are talking about producing fuelon Mars and not say Venus). This is also just based off my amateur views and I am not a qualified or learned scientist so I'm very, very happy to be corrected here (that's good science-ing ) but I just cannot see how the idea would work without being overly complex and not very efficient. SM

Then unload them for a group photo SM

Sounds like your coming in pointing to much to prograde, or lowering your periapsis too much. You need to face the belly of the shuttle quite a decent amount to prograde from the top of the atmosphere all the way down until the flames stop to take advantage of high atmospheric gliding and speed reduction. if the aerodynamic forces are pulling your nose to prograde, then you either need more torque or RCS or a better wing design, or adjust your re-entry path. Alternatively just face the belly totally to prograde, chuck a load of torque in there and aerobrake so hard your nose doesn't have time to heat up before you've lost the speed . @batman78781 - chuck me the craft file if you like - happy to have a play around and give you some constructive feedback! SM

That's why if I was asking a] whether it was possible, and b] whether any organisation or scientific study that you know of had had a serious look into it so I can read about it further. If you are very scientific but no-one has looked into it, are you able to flesh out how it works a little more? All I've got is shoot, suck, and propel at the moment. SM

You can certainly do that. I've played around quite a bit with putting pretty tightly arranged constellations into fairing arrangements before, so possibly this may serve as inspiration. Consider the following probes: There's six of them, each of them is multi-staged, and also uses fairings (ignore the fact that used procedural fairings here as with the new fairings this is now possible). How to compact this into a nice looking array and keep it within the confines of the stages width? Like this: Space plane or rocket, your best bet is to make use of sub-assemblies and root parts as others in the thread have suggested. SM

No problems at all It's full stock so it qualifies for entries in to the other sub challenges in this challenge thread. I say go for it! Also sounds like from reading your mission report you are experiencing some issues with de-orbits, possibly stability? Got a few hints and tips to share if you feel like it (or feel free to check out the link to my thread in my sig). Also from an aesthetic point of view I could provide a couple of pointers. I prefer the nose on your main tank to mine though, and I also forgot about that large flap when designing my body flap. May have to revisit my Buran based on those photos, I hope you don't mind! Hmm, I hadn't considered that as a possibility!! I would say it's an absolutely legitimate method of getting around and in no way at all cheating. Now....who's going to be the first person to get an Inigma Industries 42t payload to another planets soi using a stock shuttle!? That would be something to behold. Actually I hope you don't mind, but request @inigma's presence: Has anyone managed this with a stock shuttle as far as you are aware? On a side note batman78781: You could probably do away with some of those engines on your shuttle and get better range on orbit, and possibly better stability on de-orbit if that's an issue for you? SM

I feel honored, thanks! Will look out for future "I needs". I'm rather enjoying the wingsuit one at the moment as you can tell SM

Haha ok, this thread is going to double as a brilliant knowledge center for flying locations! It's really addictive so I reckon it will be a very popular contract. Here's one for Eve. I had a good look around, there's bonus in that you can glide at super low speed and maintain quite a decent altitude, and with a slippery craft you can still pick up speed fast, but the place is awfully flat overall. This is the best I can do for Eve I think! Got me thinking about this video again now, and how incredible (it all is) the bit at 2:41 is: SM

I don't know if your still looking, but I'm still enjoying finding places! Here's another really good one. There's lines down both sides of the mountain with crags, near vertical faces, and long swooping plains. I'm rather enjoying this aspect of the game and my wing-suit design seems to work really well. I think if I can stage the engine and fuel tank I'd get an even better glide profile so I might try that. It's great fun learning tricks like barrel roll, and back flip off the vertical faces into steep dives, even flying up hill for a while when you collect enough speed is possible. Let me know if you want me to stop. Might have a look at Eve later today if you are still looking? SM

No problems at all, happy to help. Not sure why you had to go back to space center and back in, maybe someone else can clear that one up but at least you are on your way again! Good luck! SM

I've heard of a carbon negative rocket engine in development, powered by a mixture of carbon dioxide and aluminum, and also just stumbled across this which "could potentially use waste heat to take advantage of the Leidenfrost effect by exploiting the low boiling point of frozen carbon dioxide to spin a turbine to create electricity" but not an engine that uses a laser to propel carbon dioxide. Is it something you can point me towards that is theoretically possible or in development? I can't help create a mod as I'm not a modder, but I'm interested in reading stuff like this. If it doesn't exist or isn't a realistically practical or possible method of propulsion, then you may find that you need to revise your request to garner interest. I could be wrong though - there was a "banana for scale" mod from memory. SM

@nightingale seems to be a contract configuration expert, and I know @inigma has also been doing some contract work. Check this thread out Best luck! SM

I can! (finally....) So first I forgot to rename your persistent file to "persistent" and couldn't get the save to work. As a point of interest someone like....erm....I don't know, summon @Claw (who can put me back in my box again ) viewing this I discovered that if you have an invalid save file the game warns you with an option to "delete" or "not now". If you select "not now" it simply opens a grey screen and won't let you do anything until you force quit. Might be worth making the "not now" option revert to main menu, or display the games with a big red X through the ones you can't play or something. Second I hyper-edited a Kerbal up to your ship to test a theory as I couldn't get the antennas to open. I thought it might be this but no. Then I hyper-edited a capsule to the same point as the last one and it appeared inside the other one and didn't end well. Finally I noticed that you had not fulfilled the mission brief "Have 4000 units of liquid fuel in your station". You had over 4000 units of fuel easily overall, but the mission required Liquid fuel (of which you had 3600) so I Hyper-edited an extra tank up there with the required liquid fuel outstanding and rendezvoused/docked with the station, and hey presto the contract completed! Also Claw - The antenna requirement only completed when the liquid fuel requirement completed despite the antenna already being present. Might be worth Squad changing that in a future update so if something is present it definitely turns to complete so players can work the problems easier. SM

There's no need, it is included in stock: 1) In sandbox mode simply go to the "engines" tab in the VAB or SPH to find it 2) In career mode progress until you unlock "Ion Propulsion" in the technology tree. It's one of the last things that you are able to unlock in the tech tree. Here's a picture of where you can find it in the tech tree. You are looking for the IX-6315 "Dawn" Electric Propulsion System: I hope that helps! If you still can't find it let me know. Thanks SM

With this in mind it might be a good idea to have a few points based objectives to allow for some sort of measuring of the challenge or ranking system. Doesn't have to be anything detailed, just maybe a few things based on weight, number of kerbals, you know - the traditional stuff! SM

That's a decent amount of on orbit shenanigability! Be interesting to see what you come up with for a stock shuttle, keep us posted! Unless I'm missing something with your screenies your orbit is not within the challenge parameters for the STS payload mission. It looks like 800,275 and 799,428 which would be 847 meters. The mission requires 100m or under difference. SM

Hey there nice cargo plane, I'm also trying to develop one to hold my Buran for transport! Re: stuff falling out of the seemingly virtual cargo bay once the crafts join forces, the only way I have heard to get around this is a couple of well placed docking ports. See this thread for more information. As a side note: if you are converting that beast for air drops and experiencing explody things when you try and drop the payload, then I found this little solution which works brilliantly, and doesn't affect the looks of the plane apart from little nodules on the outside of the hull. I haven't tested to see if it would help with your specific problem, but it may be worth a quick try... Check it out: EDIT: I tested and the wheels will not prevent something falling through the cargo bay. Docking ports it is! SM