HueHue

The Dragon IV is the state-of-the-art in jet interceptors. With a maximum thrust of 450kNs and high-speed, high-altitude ram air intakes; the Dragon IV is capable of extreme speeds at extreme altitudes. Perfect for training kerbonauts or interception Kermunist bombers, the Dragon IV is as versatile as it is high performance. The Dragon IV carries the exclusive RCAF "Wide-Step" landing gear system, making ground rolls nearly impossible. Guaranteed against tail strikes, bird strikes, labour strikes and lightning strikes, the Dragon IV is a capable aircraft in the hands of experts and novices alike. The Dragon IV is also equipped with a state of the art zero-zero ejection system, allowing emergency ejects under any possible conditions. http://www.filedropper.com/dragoniv

Examples of planes you might want pictures of are the Saab 35 Draken, the MiG 25 / 31 Foxbat, the Blackbird, the English Electric Lightning and the F-105.

Jesus Christ man. What altitude did you achieve your top speed under power at?

How does the pilot get back out of the capsule?

Quick idea to cut down on processing power. I'm not a genius when it comes to programming and backend wizardry, so forgive me if I'm making a really stupid suggestion. What if you kept the planets and non-focused ships on rails, and only ran newtonian calculations on the ship you have focused?

Xeldrak, if you're going to be away for a few weeks, why not just find someone else to host the next challenge?

My SSTOs tend to crash or explode nearly as much as the Space Shuttle (huehuehue) so slapping a nuclear engine on it seems rather environmentally unsound. Thanks for the tips, all.

I still can't make a working SSTO for the life of me, is it because I feel bad about intake spamming and refuse to use nuke engines in-atmo? Any design tips?

Now hang on a minute. When I think tech tree, I think Victoria II. (Hearts of Iron 3's tech tree being so absurdly in-depth it's not worth even making a pass at implementing). A quick overview, you've got tech families. Military, Industrial, Cultural, all that fun stuff. You can choose the focus of your administration: this gives bonuses to some tech family research speeds (or point cost, if we go that route) and nerfs others. For example in this image, Bavaria has a Corporatist-Industrialist complex that gives very significant boosts to commerce and industry research while hampering your military and naval research. Each level of technology you research in a tree in a family gives you a specific bonus. Here I have Clean Coal selected as an example. Clean coal is a massive boon to coal and iron production, but also comes with two inventions. Inventions are a percentage chance over time of triggering. I've highlighted the invention of Proto-Existentialism to bring up that UI. Now how does this translate to KSP? We could have five families: crew modules, probe parts, engines, science and utility. Obviously there would be fewer inventions and trees than Vicky at first (Victoria II espousing a whopping 150 techs and over 500 inventions) but the idea would be the same. In Crew Modules, you could have the trees of Aircraft, Life Support, 1-Man, 3-Man, Lander. Etc etc.

Point conceded.

Friendly reminder that the only "trainer" plane that actually supports an instructor pilot is mine

Updated the scores. It's rather hard to define the edge between "really high-flying spy plane" and "suborbital spy plane", but Hejnfelt has provided me inspiration on that. If your Ap goes above 60km, OR you have a Pe above 25km, we'll call it suborbital. I'll let Hejnfelt's update slip by though, since the rule is new.

No no, it's fine to go slightly over 25,000m; the altitude is a minimum. The only rule on height was not going sub-orbital. By suborbital, I mean you're still flying upwards on a ballistic trajectory long after flame-out.

Entries added

As far as I can see, there's a difference between Mechjeb (which is a whole different ballgame I'm not going to really touch on here), Engineer, Protractor, etc etc and modded parts. And there's an even bigger difference between groups of said modded parts. An excellent example of a very balanced (admittedly quite small) parts pack is the RLA Stockalike pack. An excellent example of a very unbalanced mod would be the Orion mod. Is your Jool mission with Orion worth the same as someone else's who uses only stock parts? Let's cut the post-modernism crap for a second. No, it simply isn't. By using parts that are simply superior in every aspect (looking at you, KW Rocketry's Vespa) you dilute the meaning of your achievements.

Today, gentlemen, I come before you with grave news indeed. The Kermunist spies infiltrating our space program, fluoridating our water supply and our children's toothpaste, wreaking havoc, have succeeded in stealing the plans for our NERVA engine. I come before you, the best and brightest engineers of the Kerbal Space Program, to ask for a spy plane of our own. This vehicle must be capable of extreme speed at extreme altitudes to evade Kermunist interception. However, it must not be powered by rocket engines as they are too visible, and it must not be suborbital due to high-altitude Kermunist radar. All entries must be capable of 2000m/s at 25,000m altitude and capable of flying due east over both the nearest continent in that direction and the one following. The following mods are allowed: - RLA Stockalike - Autopilot mods / Information-only mods - FAR (separate category) Entries for the program will be judged as follows: - 50pt baseline specifications met - Return to sender, drop a NERVA on one of the continents - 50pts per NERVA - Sanic speed - 10pts for every 100m/s over 2000m/s - Gotta go far, circumnavigate Kerbin and land at KSC - 100pts My Canadian Electric Fishbed barely meets the requirements, but meet them it does. So it would score a baseline of 50pts. Blackbirds - allmhuran, 2100m/s, ??,000m, (6(!) NERVAs) [460pts] - British Rover, 2110m/s, 30,000m, (1 NERVAs) [210pts] - Hejnfelt, 2400m/s, 26,000m, [90pts] - MarkoeZ, 2030m/s, 27,000m (0 NERVAs) [50pts] - - FAR Flyers - - - - -

I present you all with the creatively named Ares 3b. Ares 3b file The Ares 3b was designed around a specific set of specifications. Zero-Zero ejection capsule for both pilot and instructor, Mach 1 capability at 7000m, maneuverability and inherent stability. Several features have gone towards achieving these goals. The wings have significant dihedral, giving a natural rolling stability. It is possible to fly this aircraft entirely without SAS for even the least experienced pilot. The full front of the aircraft separates via solid rockets to parachute for recovery in an emergency. With an extremely short takeoff roll and quick low-level climb rates, the Ares 3b even makes an effective light fighter aircraft for cost-conscious kerbal nations.

It's not impossible, just tedious. Edit: I've gotten to 22,000m so far.

It's been said that the Career mode will start essentially in the early days of rocketry. In the early days of rocketry, we weren't entirely sure what would happen when someone went into orbit. You didn't just look up and say "rockets and space must exist for a reason, therefore people can go up there dandy". Call it life support research.

Done! Base points (20): Two man vessel does a Munshot or landing Munar Orbit Rendezvous (+6): Using two launches to low Kerbin orbit, separately send two spacecraft to Munar orbit. Once there, dock them together and complete a landing mission. Landing prestige: One Kerbal on the Mun (+7). Second Kerbal on the Mun (+4). Happy together (+3): Both crew members are never separated by more than 10km We're done with that (+3): Detachable support module (Jettison from command module before Kerbin landing at least three of:RCS cells, electrical systems, lighting, legs, retro package) Just in case (+3): Launch Escape System present Wow, A Titan III!(+3): At least one of the rockets earns 'Is that a Titan II?' and has two strap on SRB's on the first stage. Saturn S-3? That's your full-size (+5): At least one rocket uses a 3 engine first stage and a 4 engine second stage. On your space bike (+4): At least one open cockpit lander Dropping some weight (+3): At least one of the primary or backup Munar surface return vessels leaves behind its Munar descent stage. Making it count (+2): Earn 'Dropping some weight' and have a powered probe core on the discarded descent stage. Must remain powered at least until the crew lands on Kerbin. Welcome home (+10): Both crew return to Kerbin We can take it (+3): Be able to safely return to Kerbin on water or land without damage. 76 points, if I did the math right. I can't figure out for the life of me how to imbed Imgur albums, so I'll leave a link here. It looks like a few pictures failed to upload, but what's left should give you enough to go on.

I wonder how much of a realism bonus you'd get if you did the entire mission with replica parts

I've finally got a first stage Saturn that doesn't explode at every launch, so I'll leave you guys with a preview as I launch my first official mission for the challenge.

If I launch the Gemini by Saturn S-3 and the lander by Titan III, do I get both launcher bonuses?

I've got a sketch of a 500 day mission plan now, easily extendable out to 1000 days. It's a Duna-to-stay mission, with possible rescue of all crew every ~500 days (every second launch window). The launcher is 25 tons to easy LKO, which my landers push at 29 tons (I have to dig into the lander's fuel for circuralization burn). I rounded this to 30 for simplicity and cost reduction; we won't be in a big rush to build the rockets. FIRST WINDOW: - 1st lander launches on TDI. Carries 1 Kerbal (seating capacity 3), a two seat rover, and 750 units of supply. //Not much time to prep much else. Total supplies at landing: 700 units of supply, living space for 1.5 kerbals, two rover seats. Base sort of able to use rovers for mobility but this is very, very inadvisable. SECOND LAUNCH WINDOW: - 2nd lander launched 80 days before window void of crew, carries extra living space instead of rover. Extra living space burns up on Duna entry. - 3rd lander prepped for launch 20 days before launch window, with 1 kerbal and a rover. Launched 10 days before, if Buzz Aldrin Base on Duna continues to give O-K signal. - At time of 3rd lander launch, two kerbal crew is lifted to 2nd lander by means of semi-reusable Ares rocket (crew transfer, free launch). - If O-K signal is not given by Buzz Aldrin base, third launch is scrapped. 2nd lander is deorbited, Ares rocket put back in hangar. Instead of 3rd lander being launched at Window minus 10 days, rescue craft launched. //If successful and no rescue mission is needed, the base will have the following supplies once landed on Duna, fulfilling primary objectives: 4 kerbals, 2 rovers (with 2 seats each), 3 hab modules, ~2000 units of supply (500 days for each kerbal, enough to survive until next rescue window). THIRD LAUNCH WINDOW: - 4th lander, same configuration as 2nd lander. Launch at W-20, crewed at W-4, followed by TMI. - 1500 units of supply, unmanned. //This will bring the total kerbals on Duna to 6, and give them a very healthy chest of supplies. Future missions will launch with 2000 units of supply. Additional kerbals would require either tighter launch windows or additional funding. FOURTH THROUGH TO DURATION LAUNCH WINDOWS: - 2000 units supply (unmanned) - Unmanned rescue ship for 6 kerbals on 10 day launch notice - 5th lander ready for replacement of any kerbals lost through stupidity or natural causes, on 20 day launch notice.

My Saturn IB first stage may keep exploding for reasons unknown, but at least the LES works...