Deddly

OK, I suppose the vast sea in the background was a little vague. Here's the rest of the adventure: Takeoff Eye candy Refuelling "The rocket that got me there" That don't look like Kerbin I feel quite small Nice and toasty Definitely not Mun Ooh, pretty Oops, that's just a little too hot Abort! Help? Next contestant! There he is Landed safely Rescued the guy - only been here for a few years Most definitely not Kerbin, no. Ed

I hereby claim the highest and only water speed on Laythe. This seaplane is obviously not built for speed on water, and it's only running at 1/3 throttle, but since it's the only entry so far, that puts me on top of the leaderboard! -- Deddly Design

I'm flattered. I'm happy to let you try out the Waterbourne prototype. There are some guidelines: DO Enjoy sailing your new Waterbourne jet-powered high-speed hydrofoil DON'T Enjoy sailing your new Waterbourne jet-powered high-speed hydrofoil into solid objects DO get up to speed at 2/3 throttle before going full-speed DON'T put the throttle to full when you are at a standstill DO consider life insurance from our friends at F5 Insurance DON'T count on them paying up DO let the the manufacturer know your impressions of the craft DON'T be too harsh, or the manufacturer may sulk DO remember that this is a precision-engineered high-performance watercraft DON'T try to adjust the position of the bow hydrofoil. DO take that last one seriously DON'T expect to live to tell the tale if you don't DO keep your speed at 60 m/s or below when on land DON'T be afraid to jump off the end of the runway at that speed If you agree to the above terms and conditions, please order your very own Waterbourne by following the link below today! https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20576590/Waterbourne.craft /Ed

Whilst not acheiving the speeds of the SRB-powered watercraft, I would nevertheless like to submit a practical high-speed craft for everyday use: The Waterbourne: For the speed freaks, Mk II: /Ed

Fascinating. Is it related in any way to elevation?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that debatable? No recorded fatalities is not the same as no fatalities.

Could you not forego the extra upper girders by angling the refuelling girders up slightly? You'd need a corresponding angle down on the docking port too, of course. That saves you three parts. -- Ed