Dispatcher

The designation "UV" in the context of 3D editors applies to the arrangement of all of the surfaces of an object onto a single flat plane. UV "unwrapping" is how this is accomplished. For more success in texturing the exported "unwrap" image (which typically consists of shape lines on a blank background), open the image in your favorite editor (Gimp, PS or whatever). Duplicate that layer (that way you don't mess up the original). Wand select the outside of the shapes and fill with black. Wand select the inside of the shapes. Then "grow" the selections by about 3 pixels (this will help keep the object edges from looking stupid later). Fill with white. Then texture the white portions. I hope these will help answer some of your questions.

While I'll not be competing in this challenge, here are some stats and test info on the turbojet engine. Thrust: 225 kn, iSP at surface is 800 and while the Wiki says 1200 in vacuum, that would be zero in practical terms, since it cannot function in a vacuum. The average iSP is 1000 and more realistic as you near flame out. The Wiki listed its max dV as 11760. Its TWR is listed as 12.7. Launching vertically with no aerodynamic parts, it is able to lift about 5.651 tons (including its own 1.2 ton mass) and carry the non fuel mass up to about 23729 meters with a single simple air intake. Its fairly fuel efficient. Using only one small octagonal tank of fuel (which in turn carries unused oxidizer as well), the vertically launched turbojet engine can get its very small non fuel payload up to 10526 meters altitude. For the interested, it generates an electric charge of 5 units per second. From the above, it appears that one could succeed in the challenge on two "fronts"; by spamming air intakes and of course using aerodynamic parts for lift: the greater the surface area of a single pair of wings, the need for fewer wings overall, with their attendant drag. I'm guessing that one might use one of two approaches in flight. Either max your horizontal speed before attempting to thrust higher, or spam the jet engines for enough thrust to brute force your momentum up to the target altitude. Good luck to you who accept the challenge!

I've updated my Engine Comparison Chart to reflect more accurate TWR for the RAPIER modes. The column for the TWR generally follows the data in the KSP Wiki, however the Wiki's RAPIER data and my test results differ. Specifically, while our vacuum mode figures are similar (and my lift test result was 18.676 tons, including the engine), the air breathing mode figures differ quite a bit. My testing in the latter mode demonstrates that the most mass which a RAPIER engine can vertically launch from Kerbin space center is about 5.176 tons, including the engine. In practical terms, the TWR in "air" mode would be about 3, instead of the 10.2 figure given in the Wiki (which is the figure properly given for the vacuum mode). The link is in my sig line too.

This is a very useful practice which I always use for translunar and interplanetary missions (since I have yet to assemble large craft in orbit). I find that for Kerbin lift off, if I design for dV, the TWR tends to take care of itself. Any problems at that point can be reduced or eliminated by further tweaking. The tools mentioned in previous posts will help.

Grab some popcorn: Grab the game! Windows/ Linux: http://marathon.sourceforge.net/games/marathon2.php Mac: http://sourceforge.net/projects/marathon/files/Aleph%20One/2014-01-04/

The video: See ya star side!

Another game that isn't out yet (beta this summer) is Destiny (by Bungie). It'll first be published for PS4 and PS3; its thought to later be available for Xbox 1 and still later for personal computers. Some game play takes place on other locations in our solar system. Source: http://www.bungie.net/7_Destiny-Launch-Date/en/News/News?aid=11318 Here's a look: (Edits in italics.)

Its great that you are willing to do the math. Its probably best. If you ever decide that you are spending more time doing math than you are actually building your rocket (and you want to reverse that), you might want to try using a mod: Kerbal Engineer. It is unlock-able early in the tech tree during career mode play. It seems to do a good job of calculating dV as one builds a rocket (based on Kerbin and Mun gravity; I think the other objects' displays are not reliable). As always, this is something you can choose to use, or not. The info in the above posts is good.

It seems that for me, its harder to get these guys up the ladders and into the capsule than it is to get to orbit, to another world and land. Trial and error on the pad is the only way I know how to eventually get kerbals to ascend ladders and board capsules.

LV-N (which is as safe as any other chemical rocket); the ISP is the most important factor for interplanetary missions. It happens that the higher the ISP, the more efficient is the use of fuel in a vacuum, so the rate of consumption is relatively lower. When I'm not able to obtain the LV-N (career tech tree), the LV909 is good. Either engine is good in clusters too.

Approaching the speed of light via chemical rockets would require a fuel/ propellant mass greater than the mass of the entire universe.

The lost clan returns. Cool to watch. Better to play: http://marathon.sourceforge.net/games/marathon2.php See ya star side!

That's right! If you've ever noticed some worthless trivia or stats while playing KSP, here is your chance to share. It need not be much (and let's face it, if its worthless, it isn't much at all). Here's one I encountered in recent KSP play: 19 Mainsails can cause 8 launch stabilizer clamps to fail. See? Totally useless. What will YOU share?

What's interesting to me is that the large diameter engine we encounter first in the tech tree is ... the poodle.

Besides your cockpit crew, you can have your two "lab personnel" EVA and take soil samples (and plant flags too for that matter). They can help the science points that way.

You mean self flying planes, such as these? http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/dispatcherplanesv1-2/ I don't have the time right now to make something from scratch (and some of the flights can take a long time), but check them out. Some of them might prove to be interesting to you. So while I'll abstain from this challenge, I wish you all well!

I've made self orbiting rockets before, but the results were not dependable (i.e. the inclination, ellipse shape, apoapsis & periapsis) were random, or nearly so. It involved the use of a top-heavy payload. Eventually the mass at the top began to overwhelm SAS and it would simply stray from a straight vector up. With enough dV, you either get into orbit or into an escape trajectory.

I've made self orbiting rockets before; but they were basically a little top heavy and ultimately the balance would shift enough to allow an orbit to occur. However, there was no control of the ultimate inclination, orbital shape or altitude range. Nice work, Jamie!

Happy New Year!

I recommend Kerbal Engineer (and the use of a dV chart) simply to be able to focus on a mission without guessing about the ship mass, fuel needs, TWR; that sort of thing. I also enjoy seeing my apoapsis stats without using map mode; so I stay in game view until I kill my thrust upon reading the proper peak. As always, anyone not wishing to use these things can simply avoid doing so.

Various OS/ platforms include some image editing software. If yours does not, check into open source products.

Watch the action: Be the action: http://marathon.sourceforge.net/games/marathon2.php See ya star side!

In real simulation terms, I've found that its easier for me to design and successfully orbit SSTO planes with RAPIER engines than is my use of a combination of jet and rocket engines. For those interested, I've updated my engine comparison chart by adding the two RAPIER modes (see the sig line). Edit: some people might be wanting their air engines to provide an electric charge. The RAPIER does not do this, in either mode.

The use of "loss" in conversion could make a player pause before committing to the exchange. Either way, I think the whole science/ money/ rep/ contracts thing will be good for career mode, as trying to stay within budget will be challenging (poor Whackjob!).

Yeah, Macs are great (except for the native gaming department)! Check out this site. Its focus is on mac compatible co-op gaming. It has a growing list of games. Most run natively. Some are run using Wine/ Crossover. The idea is not to be required to use Windows. (I went from Mac to Win and back to Mac, so I know its a challenge finding mac games.) Besides the co-op list just mentioned, here is a list of mac games. You would want to make sure your system runs a particular game. Among those are open source games, many mac playable. As for commercial titles, they're easily sorted at Steam, if you have that. Back on topic, I'm playing these: Bungie's Myth II, Half Life, Half Life 2, Portal, Portal 2 (via Steam), Bungie's free, open source Marathon Trilogy, Unreal, Nexuiz, Red Eclipse, Sauerbraten, Tremulous, Vega Strike, Xonotic, Warsow, Halo and World of Padman 1.5. I'm getting The Journeyman Project: Pegasus Prime. In a year or two I'll get Obduction, when it comes out. Edit: just got this after finding it in another Space Lounge thread: Outer Wilds.