NoXion

How implausible are we talking here? nuclear salt-water rocket, or closer to anti-gravity? Because if it's too implausible then that kind of spoils the fun for me.

Thanks for the replies and advice everyone. So what kind of values are 'realistic' for rocket performance? I notice that the Omnipotent Bertha is even more powerful than the E-1000, although admittedly it's physically bigger as an engine.

The thing is, I've had engines fall off my rockets at times other than take-off. Another problem I encounter is with really powerful stages; if I'm over-generous with the throttle, it can get 'stuck', which greatly increases the chances of my Kerbalnaughts exploding in mid-air or crash-landing, due to being forced to either try and wrestly back control until the fuel runs out or attempt to eject the faulty stage (which can be a dangerous since there's a good chance the ejected but still-burning stage will simply accelerate through you). Thoughts: The throttle sticking issue appears to be a natural consequence of my tendency to over-engineer things - One of my latest designs, and the one with which I can say I am most pleased with performance-wise, is the Kratos MkI, which has as the lowest stage a cluster of nine E-600 engines with 'big red' SAS modules. I reckon the best solution here is to just take care with the throttle. With great power comes great responsibility. However, in the event that a stage does get stuck in such a manner, the thought occurs of including a more explosive coupler or even a dedicated rocket motor to ensure a safe seperation distance. Here's an image of the Kratos MkI, perhaps the first truly stable large rocket design of mine: This thing is powerful enough to get into LKO without expending any stages:

Hi everyone, I've been playing around with KSP for a couple of months now, but it's interesting how long the learning curve is. Although I've achieved both stable orbits and a powered landing (although I fell over... ), I still have a long way to go before I can achieve consistent results, both in terms of design and piloting. A symptom of this that I'm finding particularly irritating is the tendency for my larger rocket designs to start listing fairly rapidly, despite having multiple beefed-up stabilisers and a symmetrical design. Sometimes I'm able to wrestle back control, but by the time that happens I've so used up so much fuel and gone through too many stages to do anything other than a sub-orbital arc. Another problem is the seemingly inconsistent strength of parts - some of my large rockets manage to keep hold of their engines despite wobbling wuite badly on the way up, while other times the rocket takes off using its boosters - and leaves the main engine on the launch pad! o_O I can't provide any details of the designs I'm using because little I've made so far I've considered worth saving. I'm a bit of a perfectionist. But I would appreciate some general tips from experienced builders of larger rockets. I have a large supply of custom parts, all of them awesome work by the way.