Scarecrow88

Other than a few notes I've never heard the music. From the first few bars I heard on first loading the game on the intro screen, I had the feeling it would grate after a while, so muted it whilst doing the initial settings, and I've never unmuted it.

432 m/s it is then.

The space program has seen the development of vehicles to go longer, faster and higher, but they are looking now to develop a vehicle that will allow them to get in and out of some of the tight spots here on Kerbin. To that end they want to design a STOL (Short Take Off and Landing) craft. As the design process is still in it's infancy, the first step will be to design a power train capable of both accelerating and stopping quickly. This is where you come in. You are tasked to design a test bed that will be tested on the runway. You have to reach as high a speed as possible, but still be able to stop before you go off the end of the runway. Rules Stock only please. We have a budget to keep to and can't afford any of those fancy non-stock engines etc. The vehicle must remain on the ground at all times. The vehicle must stop before going off the end of the runway. The vehicle must still be in one piece when it has stopped. Screen shot of F3 mission log required to verify results. Here's my starter attempt to give you all something to beat. Leaderboard Rhomphaia 651 m/s dodrian 637 m/s Virindi 288 m/s Scarecrow 262 m/s

I hadn't realised, but thanks for pointing it out. My aim was to provide a challenge that people would find interesting and would enjoy doing and, from the feedback I have received, it would appear I have managed that.

Very nice. I like it.

Rather than not caring where on Kerbal the attempt is made, why not make it like a drag strip and see who can achieve the highest speed by the time they reach the end of the runway. Having said that, there have already been speed challenges such as this, why not add a twist. See who can reach the highest speed before hitting the brakes and stopping before they go off the end of the runway. Obviously that challenge would need two screenshots - one of the speed achieved and another showing the vehicle stationary and still on the runway.

Congrats on an amazing time, which takes you to the top of the leaderboard, and I'm glad you enjoyed the challenge.

There is on main base on Minmus, which has four sites very close by. The flag at the main Minmus base will tell you which of the sites you need to visit to continue the mission.

I agree. If it gets to the point where you need to do several orbits around an atmospheric planet simply to slow down enough to even contemplate making a landing is the point where I will stop playing KSP. I play this game for fun, and going round in ever decreasing circles to slow down, rather than being able to get on with the landing, is not my idea of fun. And how frustrating will it be for new players? This game already has a fairly steep learning curve for anyone who doesn't have more than a passing grasp of orbital physics, and I am sure having their craft destroyed on re-entry from their first hard won orbit would be pretty off putting. For those that want such effects and difficulties, mods are already out there to provide them, but I don't think it advisable to burden everyone with that level of difficulty as the default option.

Because it's a game and not a scale simulation.

For a stable VTOL, the centre of thrust of your vertical engines needs to be totally in line with your centre of mass. i.e. if your CoT is behind your CoM then the craft will drift forward on takeoff. The further out of line they are, the faster the rate of drift. As for number of engines, as long as your thrust to weight ratio is greater than 1, you will lift off. The more above 1 your TWR is, the quicker you will go up.

I've pretty much given up going anywhere that requires a craft that uses the new legs. I've been spending a lot of time in the SPH lately.

Listen to UmbralRaptor. Since 0.22 it's no longer necessary to fanny about fitting any sort of silver tank between a mainsail and a jumbo tank, as they no longer overheat to the point of exploding as they used to previously.

As a real pilot I can tell you that the effect of rolling the craft to 45 degrees and effectively seeing the horizon roll to 45 degrees in the opposite direction is somewhat negated by automatically tilting your head and the brain's interpretation of what you are actually seeing. As an evolutionary ground dweller, we are used to seeing the horizon level (mountainous terrain notwithstanding). I find the 'spinning ground' effect of the current camera chase view somewhat nauseating, which is why I don't use it.

I think I know what the OP means, and I agree with him. He is referring to a camera that stays behind the piloted vehicle, as the current chase cam does, but stays in it's original orientation i.e. the background scenery doesn't spin round whilst the vehicle appears to be static in the centre of the screen. I personally find the current incarnation of chase camera difficult to use because whilst the vehicle you are looking at, particularly aircraft, always appears to be the right way up, it could in fact be flying upside down. If my aircraft is upside down, I want it to appear upside down in my view of it. I would like a chase camera that maintains the same sort of view that you get when using free view, but actually follows the vehicle.

If you are going to cheat in career mode and make science easy, you might just as well forget about career mode and play sandbox mode.

I think you are trying to be too analytical. Put the thing on the runway, hit the go button and fly the thing. If it handles like a bucket of rusty nails, then maybe have a look at making a few tweaks, but until you know what it handles like in it's current form, you may be stressing over nothing.

If you want to shoot something, there are plenty of shooting games out there. I find KSP refreshing because it's about construction not destruction (save the odd crash!)

I don't understand the rules. You say only two stages allowed, but that each stage can only consist of 1 part. As a minimum I imagine a stage will need two parts - fuel and an engine. Or am I just being a bit thick?

A simple design following in the spirit of the stock craft, but with none of the problems. Just don't over-rotate on take off if you want to keep the tail intact. Trinity.craft

Glad you enjoyed it and have added you to the leaderboard. Good score!

There should be a flag next to Bob's ship with instructions for your next destination. However, the idea was that Jeb should be there to hitch a ride from him. Never mind. Just EVA Bob out of his craft to read the flag plaque.

I'm sure you will work it out but it sounds like you are struggling a bit.

I'm glad you enjoyed it streff. If you want me to post your time on the Leaderboard, I will need the required screenshots, unless you intend to have another go to try and improve your time.

You do realise that with your scoring system, the longer you take, the higher your score will be? Maybe you should amend it so that you start with 1000 points, and you deduct 1 point for each second it takes you. That way a longer time will result in a lower score.