Raptor9

The Guardian posted a story about Elon Musk's rocket hitting the ship, and referenced his love of Kerbal Space Program...and a video at the bottom of the page. No way! KSP is everywhere!! http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/16/elon-musk-falcon-9-rapid-unscheduled-disassembly

@ magico13 Does it count if we recover the stages ourselves? Just kidding.

Yep, sure is. @Patupi Like astropapi1 asked, it's Pacific Rim.

To be fair, "KerbalEssences" had a much smaller target to hit with the barge landing last month. I had the entire runway, although the objective was to land it immediately adjacent the spaceplane hanger after a 180 degree change in trajectory.

Along with many other members of the KSP community, I've been following the progress of SpaceX and their Falcon 9 reusable rocket. While currently attempting to land the first stage on a seaborne platform, SpaceX has stated that the eventual goal of the system will be for the first stage to fly back to the launch site. (This was filmed in KSP 0.25, so this design is quite outdated) Kerbal Space Center Commentator of the following launch broadcast is *Elon Kerman*. This video is my personal attempt of that goal in KSP. My intent wasn't to recreate the rocket and flight profile of the Falcon 9, but to design an analogous launcher within the KSP world that follows a similar concept. The entire craft (launcher and capsule) is 100% stock parts. I had to record this flight twice since I obviously could not fly both at the same time. I flew a very precise profile to achieve the same staging point in the trajectory, however my thumb was a little slower igniting the second stage in one of the videos, but it's only a split second difference. LEGAL CAVEAT: The official KSP logo is present in this video but this is not an official video by Squad. It helps create the authentic webcast feel of NASA and SpaceX broadcasted launches. Plugins: Trajectories (Atmospheric Predictions) by Kobymaru & Youens Visual effect mods: Environmental Visual Enhancements by Rbray89 CoolRockets by Sarbian & Dtobi Recorded using: Camera Tools by BahamutoD Hullcam VDS by Albert VDS ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ NEW LAUNCH SYSTEM AND CREW CAPSULE: I've tweaked the reusable booster and completely redesigned the upper stage along with a brand new crew capsule. These are modelled in concept after the Dragon V2 capsule and Falcon 9 rocket by SpaceX. There are some slight differences. Again, I wasn't trying to build a replica, but a KSP analogue with stock parts to accomplish the same mission concept. Best example of this is the fact the the Falcon 9 does it's boostback burn with three engines, but only lands with the center engine. I had to keep all three engines online while I landed the booster since one LV-T45 doesn't have the power to lift, let alone land, the booster stage. EV-1X 'Runabout' crew capsule on top of a reusable booster and reusable upper stage Booster return flight to KSC EV-1X orbital insertion EV-1X flight remainder

Not sure if anybody was following the latest launch of the Falcon 9, but when the booster stage tried to do the controlled powered landing on the drone ship, it landed hard. But there's hope... Latest Tweets from Elon Musk: 7hrs ago: "Ascent phase good. Dragon deployed to Space Station rendezvous orbit" 7hrs ago: "Rocket made it to drone spaceport ship, but landed hard. Close, but no cigar this time. Bodes well for the future tho." 7hrs ago: "Ship itself is fine. Some of the support equipment on the deck will need to be replaced..." 7hrs ago: "Didn't get good landing/impact video. Pitch dark and foggy. Will piece it together from telemetry and ... actual pieces." 8mins ago: "Grid fins worked extremely well from hypersonic velocity to subsonic, but ran out of hydraulic fluid right before landing." 6mins ago: "Upcoming flight already has 50% more hydraulic fluid, so should have plenty of margin for landing attempt next month." 6mins ago: "Am super proud of my crew for making huge strides towards reusability on this mission. You guys rock!" Sounds like they're getting it nailed down. Not to shabby to hit a target 300km downrange from the launchsite after slowing down from hypesonic speeds. Must not have landed too hard if some deck equipment is all that was damaged. Great job guys! EDIT: To watch the liftoff replay on the SpaceX site: http://www.spacex.com/webcast/

Judging from the photo, it's not stock. The main engines and vertical tail fin look like mods, as well as the wings and underside since they're all black. The main landing gear looks like it's from BahamutoD's Adjustable Landing Gear mod.

Not sure I understand what you mean. There is only one root part per craft. The entire ship can only have one root part, not multiple. There are no other details beyond that. That gizmo just allows you to change the first part (root part) of the craft without disassembling the craft from that part first (non-invasive). No more, no less, unless a dev wants to comment further on it.

It allows you to change the root part of the craft file. Originally, early versions required this to be a command pod, and later certain parts allowed to be selected as the first part (root part). Changing the original part prior to 0.90 involved temporarily removing all parts on the original part, tossing that part away, getting a new one, and then reattaching the floating parts. Now, you can do this by selecting the root mode gizmo, left-click on the original part (first one you selected), and then click on the new part you want to be the root part. That's it!

I will agree that trying to find a survey spot on the Mun the other night while on EVA was difficult.

I have no idea what movie, I just think it's funny, ha ha; but I'm sure if you look at Bradley Cooper's filmography you'd jog your memory. Regarding the Laythe SSTO, I'm still progressing through the career mode, haven't even made it to Duna yet, let alone Jool's SOI. EDIT: I used hyperedit to briefly make sure it could fly in Laythe's atmosphere, which marks the only time I have ever seen Laythe in my own KSP, even though I've been playing since 0.13. It did occur to me that if I replaced the Mk2 cargo bays (which hold the VTOL engines) with just LFO tanks, it should be able to make it into Kerbin orbit (at the tradeoff of needing a runway ). Whether or not it can bring a 2.5m module with it as well, I'll find out this weekend. Curse my job! Nice Su-27 too, I'm a heavy DCS user as well, so I made this a while back: I call it the FA-7 Warhawk...inspired by the Su-27, but with the firepower of an A-10 (Even Jeb approves) EDIT: When/if you release that new part, I guess a redesign will be in order Cheers

Laythe, for nothing other than the beaches with the view, lol

I still prefer to lift heavy stuff from Kerbin via rockets, however I did design a VTOL SSTO for going to and from the surface of Laythe, and so far it's my only successful (ie functional) application of the Mk3 parts. On Kerbin, it can marginally lift off vertically with no payload and full fuel tanks, and comes up just shy of achieving a circular orbit. On Laythe however, with 80% of Kerbin's gravity, it works nicely in both hovering and reaching stable orbit. Not worried about reaching orbit at Laythe with a payload, all cargo will be going down to the surface, not back up. The SR-21 'Pegasus' The current version has an inverted cargo bay in the forward section to just drop things like a Science Lab to the surface directly. But when I saw Lack's Mk3 cargo ramp from his SXT mod, I threw it on there to try out cuz it looked really nice. A Mobile Science Lab won't fit through there though. Good for rovers I'm sure. With the exception of that part in this photo, everything else is stock. Early version prior to adding the ventral drop bay and the wingtip dihedral. For those that are curious, Lack's SXT link: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79542-25-SXT-Lack-s-Stock-Extension-SXT-19-07DEC14-KSC-v3 He has some cool stuff in there, like Kerbal trucks

EDIT: Current prototype designations referenced in this post are depreciated after 1.0 redesign of all craft files. Updated my OP with the re-optimized craft designs after the release of 0.90. Most of the existing designs weren't edited too much, but some were, to take advantage of more precise airfoil orientation and angles using the editor gizmos. The X-19 was redesignated as the HV-X, and a lightweight drone was inserted. Additionally, three more designs (not including the X-19 drone) were introduced. A modern X-17 with the remade Mk3 parts, and two advanced spaceplanes with VTOL capability using stock parts. Here's a publicity screenshot of the X-21 using Lack's Mk3 tail ramp from his STock eXtension mod. I threw it on there for this photo since Squad hasn't released any tail ramps for the Mk3 parts (yet?). A try to keep away from mods with these designs, and I'll probably use an X-21 with an inverted cargo bay to drop 2.5m modules to the surface since they won't fit through this anyway. But it still looks cool. SXT link

I just stumbled into these myself...very nice indeed.

Lack, here's my first spaceplane with your Mk3 cargo ramp: Doesn't quite have enough rocket fuel to get beyond suborbital around Kerbin, but it works nicely around Laythe which is what I designed it for...it takes off and lands vertically so it can support surface ops on any Laythe island that has a spot level enough to land on. Thanks again Lack

Lack, I stopped in to see what you've been up to lately, and apparently you've been busy. That Mk3 tail ramp...those cockpits, those parts....(drool) I tried hitting the rep button repeatedly, but it only worked once. Well done!

There's some good points here. I would say though that the first iteration of a lot of features in past updates were lacking as well, but as they were refined, balanced, and added to they became much better. My personal example was when the science and tech tree mechanic was added to make the career mode, I thought it was tedious and I hated it. But several updates later when they added the contract system and the admin strategies, I started playing career mode and enjoying it more than sandbox. I would guess that the next update or two a lot of the content that was added in 0.90 will be refined and balanced just as previous aspects of KSP were in 0.23, 0.24 and 0.25. Regarding Fine Print specifically, I support the implementation. When I get tired of aerial surveys, I can switch to satellites, when I get tired of that, I can focus on parts testing, etc etc. Much less repetition indeed. I also like how you have to figure out how to meet the requirements of a orbital station or base while trying to remain in budget so you're not losing money, or at least not so much to negate the science or rep gain.

This isn't entirely accurate. Some probe cores simply provide unmanned control, while other more advanced probes provide additional functions like automatic attitude pointing towards different vectors, a target, or a maneuver node. A more experienced pilot will be able to outperform some probe cores. Depending on where you are in your tech tree, or how much money you have, you may not have the science points nor the funds to unlock and purchase the more advanced probe cores. In this case, experienced pilots ARE necessary.

With all those jets on the bottom, reminds me of the alien aerial drones from Battle: Los Angeles.

Nertea, you really can't see it from the photo, but the Mk2 fuselage tanks do pinch the upper inside cargo space slightly. Wouldn't be a problem with low-profile rovers, but full 2.5M parts might clip/collide with the Mk2 parts in that configuration. It's up to you of course if you want to make the dorsal wing root, but I wanted to make sure you were aware.

"ALL JUMPERS ABOARD"

I'm not trying to speak for Squad, Nertea, or any other modders out there, but this Mark IV is a mod. Saying that stock parts should fall in line with the naming convention of a mod is kinda...off (for lack of a better word). The next comment is sarcasm from one mildly OCD person to another : You annotated Mk IV as "Mk Iv"...shouldn't roman numerals be "IV"? While we're quibbling here... EDIT: Nertea might have named this mod MkIV instead of Mk4 to distinguish it from another Mk4 mod made by TouhouTorpedo a while back that was an extension of the legacy Mk3 body shape. TT's Mk4 has since been depreciated, however.

The stock parts are already numbered Mk1 and Mk2. Or do you mean specifically "Mk I" and "Mk II" instead of "Mk1" and "Mk2"? I believe they were primarily intended to be wing pods above or below (like a B-1B bomber) like you said, not "in wing". Although if you enable part clipping in the debug menu (Alt-F12) you should be able to rig it somehow to be in wing. If you check out page 13 of this thread, you can see a picture that Nertea posted from "Thunderbirds" that was an influence in pod design.

Well, I finally did it. Got a Mk1-2 Command Pod off of the Eve surface, with a little bit of monopropellant left for rendezvous (final stage used four mono engines for one last oomph). Before you all start sending me virtual high-fives, I will admit that a few weeks ago I installed Stock Drag Fix, so that shaved off the last 250 delta-V I needed to complete my gravity burn. Now I just need to finish the design with a few small things like a battery, a few OX-STAT panels, a ladder, etc. Nothing that should cause a significant penalty. A little summary of what it does, and I apologize if I'm going over stuff that readers may already know. The stock aerodynamics model uses the total mass of the spacecraft to guess-timate a drag cross-section of the ship. The kicker here is that if you have, for example, a spaceplane take off fully-fueled from the KSC runway, it will gradually have a reduction in it's drag coefficient as fuel is burned off. Since fuel (and other resources of the like) adds to total mass, fuel causes drag. The Stock Drag Fix removes internal resource mass from the drag calculation. Is this a cheat? I'll let you all decide. Until reading the forum post for that fix, I had no idea that a full fuel tank had more drag than an empty one, and that seems absurd to me.