inigma

I just figured out why KSP is so addicting. We make our own fun in our own little universe. And we don't pay $1000s to do it.

Here he is.

Today. Made subassembly STS Operations Module which is an all in one install of a mk 2 crew cabin, ISS style docking port, and a pair of modified xonight Hercules Mk-8 MMUs. You can find subassembly download in my STS Space Shuttle link in my sig.

I had so much fun making this: New STS Operations Module for all your orbital and station operations needs. A pair of modified Hercules Mk-8 MMU by xonight is included for your pleasure and work. Added to OP.

link? btw I've now added [sHOWCASE!] Manned Maneuvering Unit/ Jetpack / EVA pack YOU NAME IT- THREAD

Thank you! No, this is a stock craft intended for such. My solution to solid SRBs has to be a stock solution. I did test a rather novel idea I came up with: craft file editing the SRB fuel amounts... but doing so doesn't shift the mass with the larger fuselage assembly I made for it, even though the increased mass is accounted for. So until stock can extend SRBs via extra fuel stacks, this idea is on hold. In the meantime I am working on incorporating the SSI certified xonight Hercules MMU as part of the STS Operations Module subassembly I'm developing for the shuttle, seen in this picture in use at our space station. The attached ships are VTOL SSTOs SSI has published in our catalog.

BASEnutter confirms that the STS flies "very well with FAR". from: http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/2ue50i/sts107/ OP updated.

82 tons, it qualifies. Btw, you can obtain the STS Fuel Pod, a Heavy Plus cargo here: http://kerbalx.com/inigma/STS%20Fuel%20Pod Here is my entry: 42 tons, the STS Fuel Pod, a Heavy Plus cargo @ 300km orbit. Fuel is untouched. Shuttle made safe return to KSC runway using remaining onboard fuel too! This run even beat a later installed MechJeb attempt by a few dozen units of monoprop.

Today. Flawless Link to this awesome STS is in my sig below.

Here's the new booster sep images: - - - Updated - - - Version 2 of STS SpaceHab (STS-107)

Updated craft versions should be moved to the front of the line for New crafts. Do a check for new parts or part placement values to discourage bumping.

STS-3 is now published! Cleanup, balance tweaks, abort sequence, and major revision of booster sepratrons to be more realistic. Now rated to carry 42 tons to 300km orbit.

Might have too many wings. Does adding a few SAS modules help?

Lol. Thank you Naito. Your shuttle was my inspiration. I'm about to release STS-3 with some much needed flight tweaks and visual improvements. And thank Claw. If not for him developing InFlightShipSave, these wings would never have seen the light of day. Anyone is free to use them or copy them. No credit needed. I like how our shuttle upgrades are pushing the development of creative shuttle ideas. Im still amazed at your shuttle's balance. I tested mine for hours recently trying to remove even a single SAS unit to no avail. 30 SAS units is what the thing really needs to keep it noob friendly. I'll have to wait on reducing part count and new wings in 1.0.

Had to show this one off somewhere. This seems like the best place to do it. Link to the STS is in my sig below.

Any new showcases to add?

I updated the STS Fuel Module and renamed it the STS Fuel Pod (sounded better). I also removed the rogue Sr. port that attached to the forward bay which would go rogue on decoupling. It's not needed anyways for launch, but if you want to retrieve fuel pods for landing later, you will need to add a Sr. Port to the forward bay to complete the connection and secure the pod at both ends of the bay via Sr. Docking ports, for safe reentry and landing.

use mechjeb to find out your burn entry point. can mech jeb land it?

Great revision. Video soon?

speechlessly in awe... looks like a flying knife, or scissors, or a maple seed. I wonder if anyone has made a real thing like that and lived to tell about it.

Agree. Been frustrated with limits. Have had to get creative or compromise. Once saw a vid a guy offset 5 aircraft for formation flying on takeoff. Sweet. Sal, with that kind of plane, it'd be a bit difficult to shoot it down though. heh. I can already imagine a missile flying between the wing and fuselage and the MP player crying foul play.

I posted a list of items I intend to fix for the next version: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/108219-STS-2-Space-Shuttle-%28NASA-Replica-Easy-to-Load-Fly%29-%28Added-STS-107-SpaceHab-VIDEO!%29?p=1688879&viewfull=1#post1688879 If you run into any other issues with STS-2, or have any ideas for future STS releases, please respond so I can add it to the list of fixes/tweaks.

Great job on balance. Mine likes to dive into the flames like a moth if you see the vid. Could spell trouble when 1.0 comes out with reentry heating. Also I have to spam about 20 SAS modules in the external tank, where yours is minimal to nonexistent. I have a suggestion on aesthetics if you're interested. Rotate your parachutes to show their backside barely and embed them into your boosters for a more streamlined effect. Also feel free to recess your sepatrons for the same reason. I might copy your tri parachute design in STS-3 since the current tri parachute bulb just doesn't give the tri parachute look on deploy. I've not tested my STS with FAR yet either. I can't wait for aero to see what breaks/makes all these excellent shuttle designs. All in all I think your shuttle is in the number 1 spot for minimal SAS needs.

I think its a legitimate question to define what exactly the general consensus is on what is cheating vs what is clipping. At the very least I think that a vast majority of engineers would think clipping fuel tanks within fuel tanks is more or less cheating when they a doubled into each other with the sole purpose attempting to extend range and capability. All other forms of clipping are debateable and thus not consensus. The SSI standard for clipping is simple: No more than 1/2 fuel tank clipping within similar fuel type tanks without reducing fuel to avoid claims of cheating. All other part clipping is permissible and encouraged since its the only way to legitimately imitate technology miniaturization and achieve desired craft aesthetics. Any person or organization is welcome to adopt the SSI standard.

My thoughts: Clipping parts is the only way to legitimately play the technology miniaturization game And achieve aesthetics. Extreme fuel clipping tanks within tanks is cheating though. I aim for no more than 1/3 tank clipping and only if necessary.