Deathsoul097

People always mention a tardis. Why not looping a star-gate through a solar flare! That works too! (Not that I have anything against the Tardis) Also, those parts look awesome! What program did you make them in?

I will see what I can work out. OK. According to KSP, with an engine of the same ISP and mass, using LH2/LOX, I came to about 130 tonnes total mass, and about 7 tonnes dry mass, to get the required Delta V for a TLI and LOI, for a 70 Tonne payload.

That is the EDS I was looking at, and nothing I have found indicated it had RCS. Oh Well. Best to keep searching.

I'm guessing your main source is Wikipedia? I'll see what I can scrounge up on it, but I don't think the EDS carried RCS fuel or thrusters. EDIT: From what I can tell, the EDS is a reshaped Ares I Second stage. It uses a J-2X, and is able to put 70 tonnes to a TLI burn, so the numbers seem to add up. (Ill test what I can and write up some numbers to see, but as far as I can tell, that's all we have on the EDS, It seems NASA didn't release much information about it other than "Hey, This can take stuff to the moon with this engine!"

WOO! We should launch our own KSP Chang'e 3 replica to celebrate!

Awesome! I might try out the other rockets over the weekend though. Do you have any plans to resize the Ares Rockets and Altair, because I might be able to help you. I assume you are just going off of the documented numbers for mass and thrust, considering Bobcat's standard 64% makes it much easier to physically rescale them.

Damn, Buran would be the only reason I would download this, sorry, but It is IMO the best.

Does this include a resized Buran?

Isn't that your BSC entry Kasuha?

I wonder, can anyone beat 5Km a second it the atmosphere?

I think you broke a wheel, so not exactly fully operational... Also, I spy a mechjeb unit, you're going to have to remove that if you want you're submission to be counted.

There are already polar ice-caps on laythe.

Change the VTOL engines to LV-T45s, they are slightly less efficient, but should allow you to land on any moon (Barring Tylo and Laythe), and maybe Eeloo.

If you want you can use the Gekka from the GNBC thread.

Actually, the fuel lines wouldn't create much in the way of drag, so you would gain Delta V from using asparagus. The problems are primarily: 1- Getting a fuel pump powerful enough to pump the fuel as fast as or faster than the engines are consuming it. 2- Getting a fuel pump light enough so as to not significantly affect the mass of the craft. 3- Though the losses due to drag would be minimal, the fuel lines would have to be strong enough to withstand several Gs of aerodynamic drag without warping or breaking. 4- It isn't exactly safe to dump a fuel line during ascent, as the fuel line would have to be closed and detached within less than a second, and would have to be dropped in such a way that it moves as far away from the craft as possible, as fast as possible, because there may be some residual fuel left in the line, and it could very well explode and damage the rocket. 5- These fuel lines could act as fins due to aerodynamic drag, and put the craft into a spin. (Never fun on a real rocket) The best thing I could advise you to do if you want to test this out (Assuming you don't have billions of dollars to go and start developing and testing this in the real world) would be to play the Realism overhaul mods (RSS, FAR, MF etc, you can easily find the thread in the add-ons section), and try this out there. (I personally play RO more than stock KSP nowadays, but I haven't attempted Asparagus yet.)

Sojurner: The Patent-Pending Not-so-stable-but-still-fun-rover for extraplanetary exploration! Did I also mention completely built stock (Obviously) and with part clipping turned off! (Yes, I know some parts are clipped, but I wanted it to look good, not like a hedgehog of RTGs and equipment.) VAB Description: "A take on the old sojourner, but on it's own and a LOT bigger. (The real Sojourner was the size of a microwave oven) Comes with a drogue 'chute garunteed to slow you down on any planet with an atmosphere, a fake heatshield for a false sense of security, and a rocket powered skycrane, because it turns out that jets need oxygen! *This is a very light rover, so be careful with the skycrane, and you dont need much to get where you want. (A poodle and an X200-8 will go to Jool)" Images: (Sorry for the dark pics) .CRAFT: http://www./view/bfs8qnvutoddm3o/BSC_%20Sojurner.craft EDIT: Yes, the miss-spelling of sojourner is intended as the name.

1) Yes, it did happen, and yes they would. (Or they would just burn up and die from prolonged thermal exposure) 2)The crew at NASA miscalculated the burn as they had forgot that the crew didn't land, and accidentally calculated the mass of the moon rocks they would have been carrying for the burn to return home and finalize the trajectory. This put them into the shallower trajectory mentioned above. 3) No clue. I don't remember that happening in the movie... 4) Yes it would, but they didn't have the resources to sustain that kind of trajectory for that amount of time, due to limited supplies of food, water and air, so the crew would either die from starvation, oxygen deprivation, de-hydration or burning up in the atmosphere due to the heat shield not being designed to take that kind of punishment, being ablative.

10. When NASA gets a better budget and realistic goals.

Other than cupcake's designs, which I can barely even fathom on my best days, I would have to say these are the best SSTOs on the forum IMHO. Well done, and well deserved, Exothermos.

Fixed. That was a slight miscalculation on my part.

Okaaaaaaaay, that's a bit too much! Right, moving the moon further out, About 35 to 36 Million metres sound good? The whole system of gaia and tallifrae is tilted by 9 degrees, and tallifrae is tidally locked to gaia. (But not both to eachother,I like the idea that tallifrae is perfectly calm and gaia is more like earth in that regard.) Scale height for gaia will be 7.5 Km (and yes, that 100m is so very important. ) Scale height for tallifrae will be about 12 Km, and the average density is about 5390Kg/m^3. Surface temperature would be between an average of 3(Night) to 20(Day) degrees for gaia, and about 1(Night) to 10(Day) for tallifrae. And if there is still problems with atmo loss for tallifrae I will just say that the oxygen particles get caught in the magnetospheres of the moon and planet and eventually return to the atmospheres. (These are all just estimates, because I just finished my exams and I am not doing any more math this year unless you pay me.)

Its the third for me already, do I have to wait until the fourth?

Oh well. Anyway, back on topic, We are specifically talking about this planet guys, not discussing the possibility of life in black holes. (Actually seems like that may be an interesting topic, if only for a bunch of people getting into an internet war over it) The planet itself is probably about 3.5 Billion years old, the sun about 4.8 Billion years old. (I guess in the grand scheme of things 200 million years isn't much, but I'm finicky about this kind of thing.) Also, I do know about Hill Spheres, and that is why I am being kind of cautious about stuff relating to the moon, simply because I don't want to get a rogue planet wandering and causing havoc in the system.

Im sorry, but did you really just call it a Wurmhole!? Wurm!? What? (I apologise, but even if English is a second or third language for you, wow) (Worm, not wurm) (Man, my mom really has turned me into a grammar ****) EDIT: Okayyy, KSP Forums don't like people saying grammar ****. EDIT EDIT: Oh, COME ON! REALLY!?

Well, I was planning on having the moon tidally locked to the planet, but not the planet to the moon, so the planet would have tides but the moon wouldn't. Also, the planet's day is about 30 earth hours, due to a larger radius and slightly slower rotation. I will reduce the gravity to 1.1G as well, and (AFAIK) having an increase by 0.1G will not render chemical rockets null and void. Scale height would be about 9Km, as opposed to the 8Km on earth, but the atmospheric pressure at se level would be slightly higher than earth, maybe about 1.2 to 1.3 bar? (Given how small drag losses are on ascent, putting a rocket into a 300Km orbit shouldn't take more than 12Km/s-1) Both the planet and the moon have a magnetosphere, most likely from having a molten spinning core. Gravity on the moon would be approx. 0.7G, with an atmospheric scale height of around 7.5Km, and about 0.7 to 0.9 bar of pressure on the surface, considering the entire moon is ocean. Bollator (The star Gaia orbits) is very similar to our own star (Sol), but slightly larger and slightly younger. The moon would be orbiting slightly above Geo-Synchronous altitude, so that satellites in synchronous orbit may be pulled into it's SOI. I'm going to say axial tilt for the planet would be about 9 Degrees, and about 1 Degree for the moon.