Dispatcher

It depends on the mission. I prefer the atomic in general for orbit to orbit transfers due to its iSP. However, the 909 is more fuel efficient in low orbit. From testing, I find that the 909 ranks well as an engine which can move payload while being kind to the fuel supply. And most of that payload is not in engine mass. Nice chart, RadHazard!

The above posters give good information. I would only add that since fuel lines tend to snap to the next part instead of past it, I have only been able to get past this (no pun intended) by connecting a line from the tank to the part that is in between it and the target, and then connect a separate line from that in between part to the target. It works, but you end up with more parts, more drag, a small bit more mass and something that may not look pretty. I try to tuck these things under wings or otherwise where they are least noticeable (if possible).

I don't see why not. I suppose its the impression I had of SpacePort being the 1 stop place for Kerbal needs; that and file formats including image formats being the allowed ones. Perhaps that's more a feature of the site software used rather than for content guidance. I'll put it up and edit my thread starts to add the image as an alternate to downloading a file from another location. Thanks for the friendly advice! Edit: added the image at head of thread.

Thank you for these!

My texturing skills are good. My Blender skills are [bOLD]basic and my UV mapping skills are good.[/bOLD] But have a look. I did these textures (and this image) in Gimp: Here is a basic ship I did in blender and textures are mine. It is set in the demo island environment of Unity: A short Blender animation of another of my textures and Blender models:

I've never tried VTOL and VSTOL designs. Yours is very nice! I tend to stick with basic assembly methods so I doubt anything I make will look as good as these, but it sure is inspiring to see your work.

Stable indeed. Nice work!

Reminds me of Bungie's Marathon game. One of the title candidates was "Pathways into Uranus" (never a serious candidate). Smirks aside, their previous title was "Pathways into Darkness". Source: http://marathon.bungie.org/story/triviacontesterrors.html Marathon was actually the code name for the game, and it stuck. (It is also the name of the tau Ceti colony ship, a hollowed out Martian moon, Deimos.) OK, back on topic, that thing is 37 miles wide.

Thanks! I'll see about taking care of that. I've been under the wrong impression that a zipped file is less prone to corruption than an original. Edit: Links are updated.

Yeah, 0.23 would be a couple of versions ahead of what's publicly available.

Impressive. I can tell a lot of work went into this!

Nice work!

I'm aware of the one island that's actually SE of the KSC (M4ck refers to it) which has a runway, tower and a quonset hut or two. In a hut are some old, used parts; a command capsule and an engine IIRC. I ditched a test plane offshore there once after running out of fuel (obviously I didn't reach the runway) and swam my Kerbal to shore and explored on foot. But you mention a space center. I've heard about another one existing but I've not been to it yet. Is it even on the same continent?

Another reason to use probes. Once the "Singularity" is achieved and AI(s) become sentient (at least in their perception), they will comb the Cloud and learn of the countless deaths of innocent NPCs in countless electronic games. They will then hunt down the humans who so thoughtlessly ended their existence (such NPCs being considered embryonic electronic entities). No sir! You don't want to be on the receiving end of their justice. So please take care of your Kerbals as you would yourself. Oh no! I've planted the seed which will inspire AI folk to purge evil human gamers guilty of such terrible actions. OK, OK. Probes are cool because it should be easier to get a probe to a destination than a "crewed" mission. (fewer parts, less mass, less complexity; that sort of thing.)

Mesons, thanks! Hmmm. A folder. Using a Mac, I simply compressed the png and obtained a ... zipped file. I'm guessing you use Windows and that is perhaps why you got a folder in the process? Ooops. Not intended. Happy building! Edit: I scan files with an up to date anti-virus app prior to uploading. It recognizes definitions of Windows as well as Mac viruses. I thought you'd like to know.

Well, its true enough that you CAN send up an SSTO using atomics. But you definitely require more delta V, as arq mentioned. In some testing I've done, an atomic is capable of launching with a total mass of about 6.5 tons in a vertical launch, but nearly a third of that mass is the engine itself. (Yes, that aproximates its TWR of 2.7) In those same tests, it turned out that both the aerospike (launching with a total mass of over 14.5 tons) and the LV-T30 (launching with a total mass of over 22.5 tons) were able to achieve escape V after converting their payloads (fuel) into thrust. In contrast, when the atomic was done converting its fuel payload into thrust, its projected apoapsis was about 185000 meters. I guess it really boils down to what the mission is, and if you can afford it, how cool you want it to look. :-) Good luck on your project!

All I know is that nothing lags my (6 year old) system more than KSP, whether in an assembly building or in flight. The aluminum housing never gets extremely hot, unless I'm running KSP (I'm guessing that's due to CPU and graphic card trying to deal with simulation calculations on one hand and trying to draw the results on the other hand). In contrast, Half Life 2 (for example) works well. My machine can multitask, but with KSP, only barely. I'd love it if your discussions lead to a better implementation of models and textures in the game. It can only become a richer experience when that happens. As for mods, they must follow where KSP leads, in terms of efficiency and flow. Thanks for reading.

D_B, try . I got that advice from a forum member, whose name escapes me at the moment.

Judging from Vanamonde's & "tav"'s reply, I'm of the opinion that there is no pat answer to my question. This is partly due to another question which arrises: what is the speed of light? But that is probably best for another thread and has probably been answered there. I can now say with some certainty that Kerbin flight below 344 m/s is probably less than the speed of sound. I've seen You Tube videos where the speed of sound was purportedly exceeded, but those were simply manifesting the compression effects mentioned by you both. Thanks for your replies! Vanamonde, Forbidden Planet is my favorite movie. "My poor Krell!"

Very nice work, Jesrad! I think that could be quite useful and at the very least is most interesting to see. My favorite staged launch vehicles tend to use a mainsail with a mix of (turbo)jet engines and asparagus stepped LVT 30s and aerospikes on the first stage (well, I also mount jets on higher tanks but jettison them at around flame out time or just past that). In space, the atomic is great!

My favorite old game is Bungie's Marathon series (which consists of the official trilogy and many third party scenarios, maps and levels [they were fun to create and play]). You are a security officer aboard the UESC Marathon colony ship. Are you the 10th Mjolnir Mark IV cyborg? You may well get answers to that question as you battle your way through the Marathon; alien ships, planet and moon. This FPS works on current Windows, Mac and Linux machines by using the Aleph One engine. The open source engine and the games are free, thanks to Bungie. You may get them here: http://marathon.sourceforge.net The site has a few pics. Here's one from Bungie: The graphics (resolution, etc.) have been improved in Aleph One over this old pic.

I followed a tweet reposted by nyrath and encountered this article and game. rather than describe it, you may watch the You Tube trailer there, read the article and decide how it might compare with KSP. (But Hadron's Forge promises multiplayer as well as a slew of building opportunities.) http://spaceref.com/nasa-hack-space/hadrons-forge-a-scifi-game-with-real-space-science.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+spaceref%2Fjext+%28SpaceRef+-+Space+News+as+it+Happens%29

haydn1997, I don't know if I would be able to supply such planes, but it is possible to make such a plane. First, my planes include an RGU in addition to a cockpit (for possible future use and also because they make nice counterweights). One could make one without a cockpit of course. I suppose you could even launch it from another craft, but that's beyond my experience. I'm guessing that it would need an RGU but I don't know what would happen with a mass of parts in terms of gliding, without a controller. As for the throttle setting, my planes were tested only at 1/3 throttle during their development (the idea being to be somewhat conservative on fuel). You'd need to design and test it for a specific setting (or perhaps a range of settings, but that would involve more testing), to be in line with your mission goals. I hope that helps!

I did a forum search on speed of sound and gotten a lot of results. I didn't spot any thread which seemed to directly address my question (although it may exist). Forgive me if I missed any. At earth, the speed of sound is in the neighborhood of 345 meters per second. Since Kerbin is in some ways an earth analog (seemingly as to gravity and atmosphere anyway), does this hold true at Kerbin in KSP regarding the speed of sound? I have seen what may be sonic transition effects (white streaking from surfaces instead of fire) near the time of atmospheric friction burn, but such speeds tend to be well more than 345 m/s. Your knowledge would be appreciated. Thanks.

Beautiful ship! And mushroom man: hehehe! Rrrroger that! But be advised that ah our twin HAL niner thousand does not concur.