Amoun

I actually know exactly what you're talking about.....and thought it was just me with the issue. I want to say that I notice it far less than before, but I do know what you mean. I always assumed that it was drag of the parts (I may be imagining but it feels like the parts have a lot more drag than they should?) so if I built a long plane, it was if there was a rope attached to the nose of the place/space-plane pulling it to the side. But I for one can not wait for the mod to get updated I built "the" perfect SSTA with KAS/crane in the hull that would dock an exploration rover...*just* a week or so before the update. Legit refresh CKAN and forum daily waiting for an update.

*Just* discovered this mod a week ago or so and started working on a rover (loooove the design btw and the bendy parts is like sexy gravy) as 1.4 hit

Ah got it. I actually decreased the gimbal very low in order to make it work. But I seem to have this issue while in VAC. Thank you for a quick reply though WIll experiment further; really liking the engines

Actually came here trying to figure out an issue I am having with ARI-73 engines. These are actually my favorite however anytime I 'd use them they make the ship wobble. CoT is dead on with CoM and it is the same thing in anything I build. It starts to swing almost like a pendulum and across multiple re-installs. Was wondering if I am missing something or if it is a known issue?

It's a balancing act really. I am practicing and trying to perfect my shuttle as well. In the beginning I gave up trying to figure out the angles and made it almost a rocket-like vehicle with the shuttle sandwiched in the middle. It was good enough to dock, made it to my SS and then back down to the complex. Now I am playing around with the real-life like shuttle design and was able to get away with using two engines (one on shuttle and another on the tank and have the fuel drain evenly to make sure that the spin does not happen. Anyway, this sounds a lot like Center of Mass issue. While you are in the atmosphere and when you launch your weight shifts while the trust doesn't and in the atmosphere your wings (or control surfaces rather) can kinda compensate for that shift but when you are in the atmosphere it does not do you any good. (Imagine trying to balance a broom upright on your palm, same idea). This is why the shuttle and the people who design them sometimes have two sets of engines. Main ones to help get to orbit and then a smaller set for vacuum flight. Definitely test the shuttle in flight before slapping it onto a launch vehicle....especially the reentry, that's when things can get interesting (at least for me).

I am not sure if I don't understand or that is more complicated than it should be. That just sounds like a sky-crane to me. Engines etc all ready to go, with a docking port releasing the payload. Done that a lot of times. If it is DECOUPLERS you want to use...well that makes it a little more complicated. I would build the engines first, then try coupling the payload...but then that would end up being rather weird...hmm. I want to experiment and see if that would work. But I would still recommend going with method 1.

I quiet enjoyed that hahahahaha And learned somethings too ;D

That is weird.... It's the same code, should be identical. I would rely on the fact that it could simply be a bug due to parts maybe? I would think that maybe its the 4 SAS units you have, the 2 and 2 are pointing in different direction, so that could be throwing off the orientation for the SAS? Maybe reaction wheels over those? That's just my guess...because its the same vehicle, same code, its not like we have weather issue like IRL or something...so I would guess it's the conflict.

There is no fool proof way but a few things you COULD try. First of all, quicksave as often as you can. You could make your orbit speed 0m/s and just "fall" towards your site. Also, don't forget that the planet will rotate as you descend you will need to compensate for that...SO, the lower your start the more dV you will need to slow your speed but less dV (i THINK) as you ascend (but you will have parachutes so shouldn't be too hard). Another way is you "flying" down where you lower your PE or AP overshooting the landing site by a bit (to compensate for drag) and deploying your shoots when you are almost over the landing site. However, it will mainly be trial and error. A few runs and you will get the general idea of how the craft will behave and be able to compensate That's all I can offer my self....I am sure there will be others who can contribute more detailed instructions.

If anything ever breaks off....struts. Unlimited struts.

I adore balance, simplicity and efficiency.... and I have to say, I respect the work you do a lot. Very nice. I have the previous planes (mainly the one with the rover) and the ring. Very well done throughout.

What T-Pilot said. I personally use the B9 airbrakes. Really like them, they also almost look stock and nice and neat. I recommend them. haven't tried the other ones yet.

Exactly how Johnno said: built it backwards. It helps a lot and much much easier to manage. if you want to get very technical, the most difficult part (at least to me) would be making sure that your actual "drive" part of the ship would be powerful and efficient enough to move all of your other weight (ie: your lander, rover and return craft) But that is also the fun part, to see if your ship makes it or not and then rebuild if you need to.

Ok...that #9, is sexy as hell. Neat, compact, looks awesome....I want it D:

Why won't it land? I know MJ is using a new way of landing, mine is suicide burn. I was really close to hitting the ground and I was 100% sure I will crash...but nope....last few inches, full burn and a nice stop lol