Traches

The poodle isn't a great engine-- very heavy. Could you cluster LV-909s to get a lighter descent stage on your lander? Or use one of the KW rocketry engines? (vesta, maybe.) That'll directly give you more dV from your service module, and you also might be able to bring less fuel in your lander, which will help further. Edit: also, that blue thing that looks like an RCS tank isn't actually an RCS tank is it?

It does, unless there's an atmosphere. Don't feel bad that people are tearing up your challenge, it's a good idea! I'll be giving it a shot when I get the chance.

Heh, this makes me think of EVE online where camera shake was the second thing I always disabled on a new install, right after auto target back.

Oh! Thought of another one: Don't get sucked into the trap of installing tons of parts packs. They take up your ram budget very quickly, which will make your game crash. Once you start getting rid of them, any ship with parts that are no longer installed will disappear when you load your save, so you're kinda stuck with them. UI mods and plugins are fine though, go crazy with them. I'm just saying don't try to run B9, NovaPuch, FusTek, Kethane, and KW rocketry all at once. Pick a couple, and also dive into the mod folders and delete parts you don't use. (B9's structural bits are a good place to start!)

If you were to preface something like this IRL everyone in the room would want to smack you, even if they agreed with you. Don't take yourself so seriously Anyway, you've succesfully explained all the reasons that many people, including me, choose not to let MJ fly for them. It's too easy, there's no sense of accomplishment, you don't have any opportunity to screw up, ETC. (not to mention that it's not that hard to do a better job through human judgement and generally more efficient piloting.) And as you noted, those are also many of the same reasons that people build their own rockets rather than download someone else's. But you argued that it's unrealistic because it "just works", and my point is that everything else also "just works". I'm not saying that MJ is no different from the other parts in the game, I'm saying your realism argument is just as applicable to them. The sound arguments against MJ are gameplay based, not realism based.

I made a tutorial vid, check my sig. I'd be impressed if you managed to dock using the flight computer!

Seems like getting TO space is the hard part-- coming back all you need is some guidance, enough dV to hit the atmosphere and a heat shield. I don't think boulders need parachutes... I'm not saying it would be easy, but it certainly sounds feasible to bring back enough titanium/platinum/etc. to cover the cost of the launch. That's of course entirely based on my intuition and not at all in any kind of hard fact.

Instead of landing legs, try putting I-beams on the first stages you'll be dropping. They're a little heavier and they don't absorb shocks, but they're unbelievably strong. Test them on the pad if you like-- fly up to 10-20m and cut throttles. If anything breaks it'll be your ship, which can always be fixed with moar struts

Logitech G9x user here; I'll never buy another mouse again. It feels good in the hand, has great, precise control, just the right number of buttons, you can make the scroll wheel clicky or free-spinning, it's held up for a long time (almost a year now with no noticeable signs of wear), and most importantly it doesn't look like the design came to some weaboo in a wet dream (*cough*RAT*cough*). My only complaint is about the braid on the cable-- it got kinked and I had to cut it off. Whatever you do, don't buy anything made by razer. It will look cool and work great, for a month or two. Edit: Newegg page says the G9x has been discontinued. Bummer Anyway OP - it's worth looking into grip styles as well. Some people rest their palm on the mouse, some people hold it with a couple fingertips, and higher end mice are usually designed with a particular grip in mind. It makes a difference.

I agree with you here. Glitches/bugs aren't gameplay, and I'll use any means necessary to get around them (unless I'm participating in a challenge or something).

Which is why that "/10" is there in the axis label. I had no idea till you said something... I'm a smart cookie sometimes. Looks like it's just shy of 60, but at mach .83 where I was cruising it's closer to 40.

Can I pleeeeaaaaaseee use my pwings? Actually never mind, I didn't really need them. Excuse the low quality mach effects-- they make my joystick lag so I turned them down. And here's the proof. That was fun! Made 571 m/s, with FAR. I have several other mods installed, but they didn't really apply to this. It's tough trying to balance adding drag with keeping the craft stable. I've got a hunch that drag matters far more than mass; I bet if I added a little more ballast to the nose that would let me either shorten the craft or use fewer/smaller control surfaces (maybe even ditch the vertical stab altogether) and get a little faster. It's a good challenge, thanks jetter! I love how completely opposite this one is from the last challenge I entered-- started both with 150 units of fuel; in one I burned it in 2 minutes, in the other I made it around kerbin.

I don't understand your reasoning here for a few reasons. For one, this idea is so far outside the realm of what the stock game is meant to be (non-sci fi, realistic space exploration) that the only way it will ever enter the game is as a mod. I'm not trying to shut you down, just stating a fact. It's not gonna happen brother. For two, have you seen the quality of some of the mods out there? FAR, B9, KW Rocketry, Kethane, SCANSat, and a whole bunch of others all show exceptional quality (better than stock in many cases) and add a huge amount to gameplay. If someone makes a mod that does exactly what you are asking, why wouldn't you be willing to install it?

Have you tried using pitch trim? It's not an autopilot, but if you trim it out it's hands-off flying. Your trim setting will tend to climb or dive to maintain a constant EAS, so you can control ascent/descent with thrust.

Or just use I-beams. I'm lazy, so I'm gonna quote a couple posts I made in a similar thread a couple days ago:

Haha thanks, at some point it's gotta be cheating? Then again, the longer you make your wings, the harder it is to fly, so I suppose it all balances out in the end. Highest I ever saw my L/D was about 30 while gliding back to KSC, so comparable to a real world U2 in cruise if the wikipedia article is right. Fitting, that's what the first couple iterations of my design looked like before I switched to canards for a little more efficiency. I'm sure the design could be improved further if I actually knew anything about aerodynamics. It's a good challenge, thanks for setting it up!

Better test: mount a pair of intakes symmetrically, preferably further outboard than inboard, and close only one of them. If it tries to yaw towards the open intake, you've got your proof! Practically, I don't think it makes a ton of difference. I usually stick them in my "gogogo" action group (shut down jets, close intakes, turn on rockets) for spaceplanes.

Made it! 82.5 units of fuel, plus the point for making it back. I have several mods installed, but the only applicable ones are FAR and Pwings. I guess I'll call the aircraft... Pwing abuse? It's slow and ugly, but holy bejesus is it slippery. The thing will glide across continents, and the hardest part of flying it is getting it to stop. Cut the gas about 400 km out; Wasn't sure we'd make it over K2 but Jeb was cool with it. (He remembered something he learned somewhere about terrain only filling 1/3 of the windscreen.) Not my best approach or landing; even with the speedbrakes out for the last 20km I still came in hot and off centerline. Good news is I can log 2 or 3 of them. And the proof. Max G force was only 1.7 before the landing... (Take THAT runway 9!)

The whole point of the challenge is to make it using only the fuel in a mk 1 fuel tank.

I'll give this one a shot! Should have an entry in a couple days.

Dude... Seriously?

Hahaha I made exactly that same mistake with my first landing too. (Legs too short, landed on the engine...) Congrats!

That's awesome. Definitely going to use that in the future.

I'll throw in a few I've figured out: -My personal first rule is instead of building bigger lifters, build smaller spaceships. Saving as much weight as possible will have huge payoffs in the end, especially when dV is critical. -For the reasons stated above: If all you need RCS for is a couple docking maneuvers, there's really never a reason to bring more than 2 of the small radial monopropellant tanks (and even that's too much, it just makes symmetry easier.) If you're tight on dV and are done with your docking maneuvers, burn the rest of it off! RCS thrusters have terrible isp. You might be tempted to save it as an emergency backup, but you'll get more total dV from your engines due to your ship being lighter. -If you can, drop stuff when you're done with it. Why carry ladders and landing legs back to orbit? -I-beams make awesome landing legs, if a bit heavy. I usually try to leave them on the surface. -Gravity assists are your friend, if you don't mind time wasted. I rarely go to moho without catching an assist from eve, it saves tons of dV, and with its short orbital period you won't have to wait too long to get an intercept. -To rendezvous with a planet (or anything else), you don't have to match planes with it; You just have to get either the ascending or descending node in the right place.

I always have better luck with I-beams angled down and out a little. They're astoundingly strong; your ship will break before they do. No shock absorption though.