Shaun

I've been to Florida for two weeks, so I was so excited to hear about the release of V.1.0. Upon beginning the new version, I noticed the jet engines have been completely overhauled in the way they work and no longer work at altitudes in excess of 30km. I've managed to make a few SSTOs that can get into LKO, but anything bigger I struggle with; e.i fitting a cargo bay with a 2T payload. I get into suborbital, but never have enough dV to get into orbit and hence leave orbit afterwards. I think I must be making mistakes in the ascent as I seem to be wasting so much fuel: What is the proper way to ascend? What are the best engines to use? (I figured RAPIERs as they're only 0.2T heavier than turbojets, but they have a hard time getting above 340m/s sometimes). How much dV should I have after my jet engines cut out? Would additional intakes keep my thrust up any longer? Thanks.

Haha Top Gear memories

Yes I got specialised construction. I tried reloading the game twice. I realised the name was changed with a '0' at the front of the title, looking around and spotted SETI was the reason for this change. I duplicated the stock fuel line, renamed it to fuelline2 and it worked from there.

Loving this so far! Career is always better when it takes you so many attempts to succeed! However I'm having VAB problems; the fuel line is missing even though I researched it.

:/ hmm. Perhaps it's gonna be a case of looking into some of Overfloater's crafts.

True, but the Mk-2 cargobay is too small in terms of height, and the Mk-3 is too big and heavy. Making a bay is easy but the door is the issue.

I'm trying to develop a line of cargo spaceplanes. Starting from smaller payloads, I'm trying to create a 2.5m cargo bay (to house 1.25m parts with stuff on the sides). Due to the size of the craft I'm aiming for, I need the cargo bay door mechanism to be compact, and preferably a one I can assign action groups to And doesn't use fuel or RCS to open. What's the best method to do this? So far I've tried landing legs but I'm not sure I'm doing it correctly because the door hardly opens.

Would have added more options if poll allowed more than 10 options.

So I'm going to make a company to show off my builds. My main focus is on Spaceplanes and SSTOs. I'll also do requests to a certain point. My crafts will be 100% stock; both in parts and aerodynamics, however should part counts get rediculous I'm sure there's no harm in using UbioZur welding... cos it's just a merge of stock parts right? I no cheat I won't be doing replicas but I may base my craft on other crafts. Anyway, I want to know what fellow Kerbonauts actually want, so I've made a poll, and it's most likely I'll start building whatever is being voted for before the poll ends

How does FAR react with UbioZur welding? For example welding parts of wings to make one big wing? Or multiple fuselage parts into one?

I've decided the best thing to do is learn how to use FAR and AJE to an extent where I can create models as efficently as possible with good flight statistics. I've hit lucky with my second attempt; I've made a small jet capable of sustaining level flight with 0 trim, and flaps tuned so the aircraft pulls up itself and lifts off the ground

That image... How did you get the fuselage like that? Is it a procedural mod? Having one fuselage with a couple of parts would probably solve the drag issues I'll try out AJE too.

338mph at 10,000ft (3050m).

My craft has a load of cubic struts but I thought they had no mass or drag in the game... Physics significance = 1?

I'm supposed to be able to reach more than double that with the E.28; 466mph @10,000FT/3050M - - - Updated - - - #British problems; adults use imperial; kids use metric and us stuck in the middle have to use both.

So I'm creating a new line of replicas, this time using FAR aerodynamics, Tweakscale and Procedural Wings, so the vast majority of parts are stock and still have a stock look... Because aircraft in KSP are so much heavier than their real counterparts, I just match the TWRs rather than thrust. This however causes problems as the aircraft are far too slow. I realise that even if I triple the TWR, the aircraft are still too slow. For example, the real Gloster E.28 has a TWR ratio of 0.21. In KSP my Gloster has a TWR of 0.65 but for some reason can't get above 95m/s (185kts) at 10,000ft (3050m), and at sea level I can only get a pesky 85m/s max, even though my wings sustain enough lift so that the angle of attack is 0.0* at this speed and altitude. Is FAR still 'far' off from real physics? Or is the problem from something else? I only have 2 radial intakes btw.

Holy mother of Kod...

It just happens sometimes. I think kerbonauts are a little shy lol. It's a nice craft and we'll designed but when practicality comes into the equation; why would we need 50 kerbals in low Kerbin orbit? This craft would probably be more popular if those crew fuselage were cargo bays or perhaps extra fuel tanks. Then maybe adding a few nuclear engines. It's basically everyone's goal to make a Laythe SSTO as they are difficult to construct, however doing so may get you a bit of praise and some downloads

The amount of engines in KSP offers good combinations of thrusts to suit your ships needs, however I feel some gaps should be filled with a few new engines. Currently thrust limiter is available but does not change weight or isp. I've came up with a few; 1. 100kN 1.25m engine. Fits between LV909 and LV-T range. 0.75T 310-380 isp 2. 50 or 100kN SRB. 200-220 isp Burn time: ~ 20-25s 3. 1000-1200kN 2.5m engine to fit between Skipper and Mainsail 4.5T 320-365 isp 4. 800-1000kN Upper stage 3.5m engine 4T 310-390 isp Just an idea

I might take a break from replicas for now but I can still take requests I think I may right a few stories etc soon though

Did you know you can use imgur and /imgur in square brackets with the last five characters on the album link to see the album on the forums like so; By the way, that's a nice looking craft

Thanks all

The Avro Vulcan is the most famous and practical of the 3 British V-bombers developed during the 50s. It's loud. Very Loud. Good for testing car alarms. So Loud. It breaks Cameras. Sorry for my inactivity lately... lots of preparations as my Long Distance Relationship finally comes to a close this Christmas. Anyway, without further ado... Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you a fully stock Avro Vulcan, complete with a bomb bay DOWNLOAD HERE! And please REP if you like

As crew Pods allow for Crew Reports, perhaps Probes could also transmit some sort of science, like a radio signal transmitted from the probe to Kerbin, back and forth. For instance around Kerbin it could say "The signal is received instantaneously." and at Eeloo it could say "The signal delay short but noticeable; our scientists can count to 5." Other science parts could include a Gieger counter, camera (perhaps doing the same job as Eva reports), various EMS telescopes and cameras etc

Problem with the tech tree is the player's limited choice to choose what to unlock when. Perhaps the part improvements is a bit far but if players could unlock parts when they want, I bet most rocket builders would buy the small cubic struts pretty damn early. The advantage of choice creates diversity in order of unlocking; some players will opt for big, power rockets with dozens of boosters to get 15 kerbals into space, while others would opt for sending small unmanned missions into deep space.