Spyritdragon

Well, yeah, it's pretty simple. You upload screen caps from your KSP online, then link to them here :-). And most people use imgur over here. We even have built-in support for imgur albums :-).

I don't stack intakes and i never have. Up to now i've never really considered it - haven't been busy with SSTO's much, and i've usually just flown one RAM and one radial per engine. For my 'ethic principles' though, as long as it is within reason, i don't mind putting multiple intakes per engine, as long as i don't have to clip them and they each have their legit physically-realistic spot.

How the heck did you get that back up in the air? O_o

Sorry my video isn't here yet. Im having a bit of trouble, but its getting along now, surprisingly.

If im wrong, seriously, please correct me, but: ttp://xkcd.com/1133/ Originally meant for humor, this picture can very well be used for my example. Its still a jice model of the rocket. The amount of space needed for the oxidizer is dramatically less than the amount for liquidfuel - you need twice as many liquidfuel molecules as you need oxidizer molecules, using standard fuels. You cant just take out the oxidiser and be able to take the same amount of units of liquidfuel - and in KSP, i dont think youd want to take oxidiser without liquidfuel - it literally has zero use without it. So i think that instead of going into complex workings, they just decided the parts were premade with one oxidiser tank and one li1uidfuel tank, and that they can hold only so much. It wouldnt make sense to adjust the parts specifically for evety launch, and once you put a bit of liquidfuek in your oxidiser tank it cant hold any oxidizer due to the volatility of resulting mixture.

Problem is mostly that KSP is surprisingly boring to lets-play if you know what youre doing. I have small fragments of voice here and there rather than an entertaining video, so i have to do a post-video recording of voiceover. Doing this would also solve the silly decision i made to record using Fraps' pushtotalk.

Video coming this weekend - biiit of trouble with the voiceover. I have little to no experience with video making at the moment.

I can safely say that your creations are my favorite thing on the entire KSP forums.

The demo continuum had a revolution in 18 PR - if hes from there, they must also be having some wormholey problems.

I eont really see why everyone thinks ue's screwed. Its a pretty to very small craft and still has 20 units of fuel left - ive actually done alot with 20 units of fuel. Why cant he make orbit, or at least fly past the Mun into HKO?

Not yet, still busy editing and stoofs. Will be out soon :-). Just wanted to let Leax start with his things already.

Updated persistance: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hsyyr0548aoairv/persistent.sfs This includes the shuttle and the undocked base module. Be mindful, the piece of debris that's left is the fuel depot thingy (i forgot the probe core) - i highly advise you do not remove this else i'll have to go bring it up again. Which i wouldn't mind too much but it would take a bit of time. I also took Cooly's rover for a little spin. And a Kerbin reentry. But i quicksave-reverted that so nothing happened.

Has nobody here ever flown the Aeris 4A? Its a very simple stock plane yet makes a reasonably smooth SSTO at only one RAM intake per engine.

Persistance: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hsyyr0548aoairv/persistent.sfs Video will be coming soon :-). Might be a little bit boring though :-/. I'm also happy to report that the rover is capable of achieving orbit xD. Edit: Hold that thought - persistance file isn't right yet, it still has two stages orbiting. Ill fix it soon.

Now with extra G-force? XD Btw, entry is in the works, persistance should be along before the end of Sunday, video might be Monday.

Mostly i try to keep the low orbits of celestial bodies, particularly Kerbin, the Mun and Minmus free of debris. I usually include a probe core and two small solar panels on my stages that push the craft to orbit so it can deorbit itself - these usually detach right after i attain a stable orbit. I won't fuzz very much about leaving some debris in orbit, although i do do my best not to. This is mostly concerning lower orbits though, the altitudes at which i might place space stations, park spacecraft and such. Usually anything under 250-300 KM up for Kerbin and anything under about 80 KM for the Mun. I also prefer to leave my synchronous orbits clear - usually i'll either put things in a sub-orbital trajectory or boost them to an even higher orbit where they wont be in my way. I don't take enough crafts to Jool, Duna, Eve, etc. to fuzz about debris there yet - mostly ill just do whatever to get to land and back to space there.

Well generally i'm hoping the rovers wont use all too much fuel - the depot doesn't hold very much fuel - three FT-L200's to be exact. If you need a large supply of fuel you'll have to pump directly from the shuttle. Thing is, the shuttle lands on LT-2 landing legs, putting it a bit high off the ground. As it was designed the shuttle didn't have a lateral docking port but i'll add one anyway. The depot has two lateral ports, a jr. one and a normal one, mounted on LT-1 landing struts. You should be able to dock to the shuttle via the depot while its still attached to the shuttle if the rover is smaller, and to the lateral port i'll add afterwards. I don't know how high the rover's ports will be off the ground, so i dont know how to fit the ports to the shuttle. Ill add some RCS-thrusters and a probe to the depot so you can sorta hang it off of the side of the rover if you have problems docking. Ill bring a Kerbal or two along to staff up the station. Maybe bring Jebediah over from the Kerbin stations to Minmus. And ill hop the commander back on board of his station too if you want :-). Remember the shuttle can be remotely operated to safely attempt rescue of daring commander-guineapigs from stations accidentally placed in a not-very-orbital course.

In general this might be a nice idea, but they are very very expensive delta-V wise to get to Duna or Laythe - they weigh very much, so taking them to space is usually something mqny people avoid. But purely from a takeoff point of view it could work, yeah :-).

As said before, the game chooses a single axis to be symmetrical about. If your part tries to use symmetry differently it does weird thing, like placing it symmetrical around a part your try to surfattach it to - those mechanics are weird though and i try to avoid them as much as possible. I.e. try to avoid using summerty when youre nkt placing symmetrically around your central axis anymore. Right now it looks like your axis isnt vertical like you want it to. Try rebuilding and making sure you start off with the stayoutnik,this should fix your problems.8

'Cause we got a daily kerbal now ;-).

Im at uni so i do use maths everyday, but its still for my studies. What i can say is that playing KSP has given me a whole, very much new outlook on space, partially through the math involved. Although i tend to guesstimate my loads and look up the angles for my transfer windows, the maths involved make this totally different. Many principles in orbital mechanics are unknown to normal people or counterintuitive; the idea that you can end up farther from your target half an hour later by burning straight towards it thanbif you hadnt done the burn ; the idea that accelerating will always still return you to tbe exact same point you made the acceleration in your orbit; The fact that you cant just go to Mars anytime you want, and youll have to burn all kinds of weird eayst get there, but generally not in the direction of Mars itself.. The entire game changes your outlook on orbits. Theres much more to orbits than flying in an ellips arojnd a planet, but you wont know it unless youre actually getting invokved with them.

Have you managed to identify what component allows you to run your multi-thousand part crazy crafts? Ideally you'll want to get something similar or better to that part so you can continue doing your KSP as you always have.

Chitty chitty bang bang - main theme. Every launch feels like this. "Ohmg its going up yay tatarata smooth *booster disconnects while burning* ohmg chaos stuffs flying everywhere." Theres this moment in the middle of the song, which goes with a guy trying to take a picture in the movie, which is always me at launch. Its like buildup buildup build... crash. Buildup buildup buildup builld crash. Buildup buildup buildup buildup buildup Space yay!"

I've come up with a reasonably solid design for my shuttle - it's not particularly fancy, but depending on part count im hoping to actually have 3 seperate utility-style parts in. With these i am hoping to act as a functional supply chain between the station and Minmus, allowing for transport and some storage of resources as well as Kerbals, so future additions can go bumming around having fun without having to worry about petty things like fuel. One parts is a lander-style shuttle, with a dockable/undockable surface module slung under it. This surface module can stand on the ground as is, or be mounted on landing legs. Its not powered though, so you cant move it around on your own. It holds some fuel, some xenon, some monopropellant and some electriccharge, and can be docked to using standard docking ports - i might add an adapter to a junior port if needed. This way rovers and surface bases can use all aformentioned resources to increase traction, fun, or whatever . The shuttle itself also carries its supply of fuel, monopropellant and electriccharge, which can be accessed via the docking port on the bottom side once the service module has been placed somewhere. Assuming i have enough TWR, the lander is fully operational with or without this module under it. Finally, if i have enough parts left in my allocation, ill add a simple nuclear-powered shuttle between Kerbins supply depot and the orbital Minmus station. Im just hoping right now i have enough thrust to get off of Minmus - the entire thing is powered by just two NERVA's.

Seelorf Kerman. Big adventures, but science, big fun ^-^. Bob is awesome too. And well, Jeb is Jeb ;-).