Hodo

ok will do... Only one I have right now, had a bad game crash after that shot... the screen went dark except the UI. Finding that RT2 is having a horrible time with .23. Yeah I run DRE, it is possible this could be the cause, but the drag readings are the same as before.

Ok that maybe the problem...lol

Not sure if it is KJR that is having a problem or something else. Stock parts made a craft, sat on the runway, and the cockpit slid backwards through the fuel tank. It was the Mk1 cockpit, switch to the other cockpit, the one with attachment points on the front and back, mk2 I think. worked till it got to 250m/s then it just exploded. Structural failure between cockpit and fuel tank.

Having a minor problem with FAR. Downloaded the new patch, and now don't see the control surfaces settings menu anymore. Just gives me the simulation options. This along with a dozen other issues, but not with this mod luckly.

For the 30,000 dollar question..... What mods ARE you running that are broke? Seriously, answers like that are like going to a restaurant and saying "I want food".

In stock KSP building a asparagus airhog monster to get 400 tons to orbit is easy, but not in the slightest realistic to me. This is why I use a couple of CORE mods, FAR+DRE+RT2+KER+TACFuelBalancer. Those are things that are a MUST for me, I hate flying anything that can reach light speed just using the control surfaces and flapping its way there. Or coming into an atmosphere at just shy of the speed of thought, and surviving the atmosphere interface when in reality you would be atomized by the speed and friction. Not to knock those designs, if someone wants to build something that is that way by all means it is your game. FAR doesn't make things easier, it just makes things respond in a way that it is predictable and vaguely realistic.

Possibly, and thanks for the answer, I will mess with them after I finish what I am doing in another game. I can say I am not a huge fan of SABRE engines, even though I use them quite a bit. They are just to heavy, for the power you get. I use them because they cut part counts.

I have asked this question a few times.. I know of SABRE engines but not this RAPIER.

Glad I don't have that problem. I can dock on a tumbling docking port now... I know because I had to do it with my first station.

I find I have less uses for rockets than space planes. I use my SSTO space planes for anything, from sending replacement crews to and from the space stations I have in orbit at 125km and 350km orbits. I even use them to go to other planets, like Duna or Minimus. My SSTO space planes actually have larger cargo capacities and range than any of my rockets. So this "space planes are harder to build than rockets" is just wrong. They just require a different frame of mind not the typical Jeremy Clarkson mentality of "POWAH!" To anyone who says that they are inefficient for getting payloads into orbit I will show you these three craft. SP-406 SP-406VB SVO-24 And I will leave you with this. SVO-9A see you soon!

If you use Steam I use the steam screen shot ability F12, if you don't I think print screen works. Also sharing pictures use Imgur, imageshack or something like that. Last, sharing craft files, dropbox.

Having had experience with M1 tanks, yes they WILL go that fast, but as you stated they are governed for a very good reason. The wear on the tracks and the drive train is ridiculous, the other reason is the M1 doesn't stop on a dime and if you were to lock the brakes at those speeds it would tear the road up and cause serious damage and strain on the driveline. Old "Christy" suspension designs from the 1930s were capable of 100km/h or more with ease, but again they were unreliable and prone to throwing tracks under load of changing directions or quick stops.

I have no clue what a RAPIER engine is. I know what a SABRE is but never heard of the RAPIER... when I here of it I think of the flimsy sword used in the later 17th century. But SSTOs are easy.... I have only built a few. And a couple without wings, that are lifting body designs.

I highly suggest Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. It has done wonders for my larger SSTOs. I also suggest Procedural Wing for your wings. It will save you on parts count and odd wing flex issues. Oh And to help with flex through the cargo bay on long body cargo bays, use the B9 invisible struts, connect one to one segment and the other to the other segment it will help reinforce the whole body making it far more ridged. I also do the samething for my wings so they dont flex up under lift.

I love subassemblies, and I like rovers. There is a trick in KSP to get them to work together easily. When you first start building anything you will see that you can choose only certain parts. I like to start when building something that is going to be subassembly saved with the docking port. I then build backwards from there. This way I can pick up that part dump it into a cargo bay of what ever I need it to go in and launch it. Here is my RV-100 mining rover...

No Fez's are cool.

True, but I have seen some other nations use 00. I don't know why, but they have.

Your "arms" still create a fair amount of drag with fairings slapped on them like that. I have a set of arms on my station I just launched up to 350km orbit, but I used infernal robotics to make the fold up alongside the body of the station while it was on the rocket inside the fairings. After it reached its target altitude and finished its final orbital burn I deployed them. I should really get some pictures of that ugly thing. You are also lacking any form of control on that rocket, so as it starts to slip out of the flight path it will become more and more unstable. Till finally it will be unrecoverable.

The funny thing is, being a former LOS communications tech in the Army I take these little things for granted and do them automatically. But Jordan is pretty much spot on with his answer. The best way to handle long range missions like that is to have a secondary set of satellites that have REALLY long range broad band antenna on them for communications with probes that far out. I know for my Eve landing I used the dish that has the 25deg sweep on my CommSat 3K network which sits at 350km orbit around Kerbin. And the probe just had a simple Omnitech 32 and the other black collapsible one. I had a pseudo relay unit in orbit, the XI-2 craft which brought the probe, it was manned but wasn't a mobile command center, it only had a crew of 4 and no large remote control unit, but it did have the antenna to reach kerbin when it was in sight.

My newest... SVO-29

So messing around with infernal robotics... this is what I came up with. It's ugly, it's big, it has over 7000d/v.... SVO-29! Test flight altitude 270km... this was an accident I was playing Candy Crush on my phone and paying NO attention to my current AP. But it still had over 54% of its fuel left so I am happy. It has a large docking port on the rear for attaching extra tanks and such for deep space missions. Crew space for 4, and a small cargo bay that handles all of the communications gear and scanning equipment.

09=090deg 18=180deg 27=270deg 00=000deg You get used to the runway numbering system when you play Falcon4.0 for as long as I have, and lastly FreeFalcon5.5.

SVO-21 SVO-18 SSTO to the Mun. SVO-11 and SVO-12 I don't do small SSTOs to often. I couldn't find much of a use for them.

It's stock parts but I run FAR+DRE so I am limited a bit. X-151 And to see how high it will go and how fast it will top out.

That is not intake abuse, not by a day'n sight. The only thing I see that could be a problem, is the turbojets quit producing power around mach 4.9. I can't test it becuase I don't have Mechjeb or Kosmos, but it looks quite good.