zxczxczbfg

It might be worth pointing out that, according to the sadly-postponed resource chart, LF isn't kerosene or hydrogen, it's Propellium

It occurs to me now that the good folks down at Groom Lake and the Lockheed Skunk Works are essentially playing KSP with all their fancy new aircraft designs.

Without FAR With KJR EDIT: Ah, frigglenuggets. Just reread the previous page, it seems KJR is what's causing my issues. I might just have to use a really tiny decoupler.

My sounding rockets seem to be having issues with jettisoning themselves. The stages don't detach properly when the fuel runs out.

Does this by any chance work with 0.90? If not, I'm going to have to rebuild half my rockets

My personal theory is that it's a hybrid nuclear-chemical rocket, not just a nuclear thermal rocket, so the oxidizer is necessary.

I find that, in addition to the ALT key, it's easier to node-attach one piece to the back of the other by rotating the camera 90 degrees and just lining up the ends of the parts. (Basically, go at it from the side instead of the end.)

The vibe I'm getting from this thing is "scaled-up T-34 with the turret of an Abrams". Which would be a cool design in real life, if you think about it.

Very nice, though the armor looks a bit too spread-out to be structurally sound. (I guess with enough struts that's not a problem.) It's quite fun to see people taking the BDArmory mod and making something great with it.

As many others have said, take a break. Wait awhile, play something else. Come back when you feel like it. Not only will that help rekindle your interest, it'll also give you a fresh perspective on your designs.

So in other words, the shuttle is correctly sized for humans but not Kerbals. But mein Gott that's a big craft! My computer stumbled briefly over the Imgur album, I'd hate to have to actually load that beast. It'd probably liquefy my computer just loading it into the VAB!

It's "SSTO" (Single Stage To Orbit). 1) Possible, but very hard. As in, VERY hard. It's more practical to just refuel on the way. 2) Depends. A few screenshots or a .craft file would be nice. 3) Replace your regular chemical rocket engine with an aerospike for better efficiency. Of course, if you want a total redesign you could just go with the RAPIER engine. 4) No. Even if the seat weighs very little, Kerbals weigh a LOT when they're outside of a command pod. The extra weight of the Kerbal will unbalance your craft. 5) Go for "fast and fuel-efficient". Maneuverability doesn't really matter much. As for weight, just consider what you're trying to do. Are you going for a heavy cargo lifter? A refueling tanker? A science platform? This post assumes you're talking about an SSTO spaceplane; SSTO rockets are generally simpler but also require a lot more fuel. EDIT: Ninja'd. EDIT AGAIN: I reread the original post. I think you've got a CoL (Center of Lift) problem, most likely that it's ahead of the center of mass. You want it to be slightly behind it.

Granted. You can ONLY walk in slow motion. I wish that my computer had more memory.

One quick request though. Would it be possible to make a jet-driven version of this? Or even a prop-driven version using Firespitter or somesuch? Really late edit: I'm going to try my hand at replacing the rocket engines with a single KAX radial engine. Wish me luck! Edit again: It worked! But ironically the inline engine looked a bit better.

When you see the film Gravity and even though (SPOILERS!) Kowalski's death was supposed to be really dramatic, you find yourself laughing at the enormous physics mistake.

Indeed, it does look quite like the F4U Corsair, radial engine included.

I'd like to make a quick suggestion of some non-modern (or less-modern) weapons. Fixed .50 machine gun such as the Browning M2 Fixed 20mm non-buzzsaw autocannon such as the Oerlikon FF (possibly in an under-wing pod) Fixed .30 machine gun such as the Vickers or Browning M1919

"Billie" is the feminine form of "Billy" or "Bill", if I'm not mistaken.

Granted. Unfortunately the laws of physics prevent that, so an equivalent amount of matter is obliterated to generate it. I wish for Ragnarok.

As the title of the thread would suggest (possibly), today I encountered my first solar (Kerbolar?) eclipse on Kerbin. I was testing a lifting body twin-engine high-altitude hypersonic research jet (hooray stock aerodynamics!) and the sun was just coming up over the horizon directly ahead of me. (Thankfully Kerbals are immune to sunlight and radiation, otherwise poor Jebby would've been blinded.) I didn't even notice the eclipse at first, and when I did I thought it was a graphical bug. Then I checked the map view, and noticed that the Mun and Kerbol were both perfectly aligned to deliver a beautiful eclipse to this part of Kerbin. Alas, I didn't get any screenshots, but still a very neat event! EDIT: Hooray for zero-eccentricity orbits causing monthly eclipses!

Looks good! As noted, it does look a bit like FTL. (Maybe they're set in the same universe?)

I'm not sure that's possible without cracking open the tech tree and modifying it directly. But you can always modify your save file for just enough science to afford all the parts you want.

The nature of infinite anything simply cannot be harnessed by any sort of device, because we don't have mathematics capable of designing devices to deal with it. Part of why perpetual motion is such a transparent sham; if your little device contains infinite energy, how the heck is it stored? To contain infinite triangles inside a circle, you'd need a printer with infinite resolution, and also a scanning device with infinite precision, and some kind of processor capable of handling infinite input. You'd also have to be cramming information into a very small space for an infinite amount of time, and entropy ensures that will never happen. To quote XKCD: http://xkcd.com/675/

0/10. No idea who you are. But awesome avatar nonetheless.

I rather like "vertical clearance", though I suppose that could be misconstrued as ground clearance (i.e. the distance from the belly of the plane to the hard, unforgiving tarmac). I think rockets could just use "length" since they're usually measured that way in real life. EDIT: Ninja'd. By HarvesteR, no less.