Laughing Man

One more reason to look forward to 1.1! I've got a wee design to share too - the Fluffy-class Corvette. It's very loosely based on the British Flower-class Corvette and is armed with a 4.5" gun, a Bofors and a couple twin 50 cal mgs. Here she is steaming about by the KSC:-

Just out of curiosity, what was your fps for the frigate plus carrier? I'm enjoying the mod so far but the high part counts are proving to be troublesome.

Switched to legacy targeting, recovered everything then started over. Works fine now. Must be a radar issue I'm guessing?

Howdy folks, got a bit of an issue here that I hope you lot might be able to help with. I've made a simple CIWS unit for ground defence, mainly just for testing, and cannot for the life of me get it to work properly. It has power, ammo, tracking, enemy is in range, has AI comp, has weapon manger, is on the correct team....refuses to fire no matter what. Tried swtiching from radar to legacy tracking, made no difference. The only other mods I have running are KER, HyperEdit and Fantom Works. Tried in stock too and it has the same issue. Here's a vid to demonstrate. I switched to the goalkeeper manually if you're wondering why it's tracking then stopping:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqVv2fAq3yM I realise I didn't slave the turret, however slaving has no effect at all as far as I can tell. If I lock from the Radar can with the turret slaved then switch to the turret, it won't be locked on. I also tried without radar linking to no avail.

Bugger me, look like the budget's taking another hit! Thanks for the quick reponse!

Just a quick one here:- did something change with the tracking station in career mode? I've upgraded it to level 2 and still can't use manoeuvre nodes, is this intended? I seriously hope it isn't. Only mods installed are KER, BDarmoury and Hyperedit.

Is it just me or do struts add ridiculous amounts of drag? I had a plane design that could pass Mach 1 on dry thrust, but upon adding struts it took a huge hit in performance. The craft files are below for reference. I tried changing the strut placement so that they weren't inside the hollow fuselage, but it made no difference. Is there any way of adding struts without inducing crippling drag? Is there a (stock) alternative to using struts for reinforcement? Any help very much appreciated. Craft files for proof:- [url]http://pastebin.com/hzQhYVYD[/url][B] (Struts)[/B] [url]http://pastebin.com/NPr0KnLz[/url] [B](No struts)[/B]

Looked at those but they didn't help. I must be flying it wrong somehow. Thanks for the replies. [COLOR="silver"][SIZE=1]- - - Updated - - -[/SIZE][/COLOR] Figured it out. I made one wee change which I didn't consider and that was adding struts to reinforce the plane. Removing them had a huge impact on performance. Worth noting as well that they were all within a structural fuselage. So onto the next question:- is there any way of adding struts without inducing massive drag? Craft files for proof:- [url]http://pastebin.com/hzQhYVYD[/url][B] (Struts)[/B] [url]http://pastebin.com/NPr0KnLz[/url] [B](No struts)[/B] EDIT2: Think I'll make a new topic for this.

Has anyone managed to figure out this engine yet? I've had a plane that can supercruise (up to 500m/s) at 4.5km at level flight then flown the same plane the next day at the same altitude and it won't break Mach 1 on dry thrust. I even lowered the plane's mass, burned all the way up to 12km, came down in a dive and it won't break Mach 1 on dry thrust. I know I'm not misremembering because I took screenshots of the plane accelerating past Mach 1 on dry thrust. Is there an altitude where this engine operates best? So confused as to how a lighter plane has such a performance hit.

Howdy folks, thought I'd share a wing design that's been eluding me for a while now. Chances are someone's cracked this already, but if not hope this helps. Basically it's an emulation of the Sukhoi wing (SU-27) made up of a swept wing type A, type B and a couple of flipped wing strakes. The nice thing about this is you can add rails to the outside to put fancy weapons on. [imgur]Unbvj[/imgur]

This thing is fantastic, thanks for uploading!

You could always just haul them to LKO and use a small stage to boost the rest to Minmus, it would still be cheaper than using a rocket.

Carthago!

Hey, I was going to send this in a pm, but your inbox is full. :/

Apologies, the mainsail is part of the first stage, I'll update the craft file.

Fixed the links there, thanks for point that out! The rockest take off fine and I run stock-only, no mods, no scripts, no editing of anything. Control authority is fine, it flies smoothly so long as it is pitched to 45 by around 12-15km. @Red - that was my thought as well. I'll probably convert this to use SRBs instead, but my mainsail will run out of fuel much quicker if I don't add droptanks. I don't want this thing to get any taller than it has to. Thanks for the replies!

Okay so this one has really got me buggered. I've got a design that's intended for Direct Ascent landing on Minmus (I cba doing a lander/CM combo). It gets into orbit just fine but doesn't quite have the delta-v needed to allow the lander to make it back. I figured that instead of 2 oversized boosters I'd asparagus the lot. Same number of engines, same mass, same fuel. The design without asparagus is more efficient, even using the same ascent profile. When flying the non-asparagus version, the second stage (Skipper) has almost enough fuel for orbital insertion by itself with another 200 delta-v needed from the minmus insertion stage (Poodle). Naturally I wanted the Skipper to be able to do orbital insertion + match Minmus' inclination before ditching so I could use the Poodle to perform Minmus insertion + braking, hence why I converted to asparagus staging to give the first stage a little more oomph. The asparagus staging causes the whole thing to be less efficent however. With the asparagus version of this rocket, the Poodle runs out of fuel at 1600-1700 delta-v as oppossed to 2000-2100. ...?! I'm figuring maybe the 8 asparagus boosters have more drag than the 2 oversized boosters or the thrust loss as each asparagus is being ditched is too great. Idk. Really need a pro to fly these two rockets for me and let me know what's going on. I will name my next cat/dog after whoever can help! Craft files:- http://pastebin.com/13FT8xRT - Zenith 03 rocket (no asparagus) http://pastebin.com/6S48dcxQ - Zenith 03 Block 2 (asparagus) EDIT - just realised this is the wrong section, sorry mods

Thanks for that! All I did was take the solid boosters off and that was it. Flies fine. Had to add a little more fuel to the lander and command mod but otherwise worked fine. The only really annoying thing is I don't have access to larger landing legs yet.

Thanks for the replies everyone! I hadn't even considered it was overpowered, or checked the G meter for that matter. At least my budget will take less of a hit this time round!

Howdy Kerbalers! I've been playing around with 1.0 a bit and loving it so far. I'm having serious issues with one rocket however. I cannot control this thing properly, it bounces around, leans every which way, essentially behaves like a very fragile machine. I've strutted it to ..... I've reduced the gimballing on the mainsail. I've added control surfaces, take control surfaces away, turned SAS on and off, done countless things. This rocket just will not behave. I can just about get it into orbit if I'm lucky, but only after a shockingly inefficient ascent profile. It is simply uncontrollable no matter what kind of ascent profile I use. I hit f12 to see what was going on, but nothing obvious has jumped out. I've spent 2 whole days on this thing and cannot get it to work. I suspect it might be overbuilt, but I've reduced it as far as I dare. I need an expert to fly it and tell me what's wrong. Craft file - http://pastebin.com/9agNw9ch Please help! EDIT: It's a little different from the picture, has moar struts for one thing and the top structural thingies aren't there any more (as I suspected they were inducing heavy drag).

Cool, thanks for the response rocketeers!

Hi there, been a while since I've played KSP, loving the 0.9 update so far (or whatever version it is atm idk). The skillset for Kerbonauts is a welcome addition - I was wondering if I took 2 scientists with me on a mission would the science benefits stack? ie. would I get a 200% bonus on science from having 2 scientists onboard? Also, is it worth it to cluster lv-t30s any more or are their better engine solutions out there?

EDIT: Also this one -

That's a beaut of a plane, nli, loving the tandem cockpits and tails!

Those are absolutely beautiful Rune, you always make such lovely looking planes! I'm slowly working my way up the chain, making better looking and heavier SSTOs. These are a couple of shuttles I made to ferry Kerbonauts up to my station, both can make it to 150km orbit and safely land with some careful piloting, all without refuel although they are a little airhoggy. Unfortunately, the second one has one major design flaw - the hatch is obstructed by the wing.