ScriptKitt3h

If you'd like, once I've got 1.0 up and running, I'll do some live-fire tests on your ships.

Funny thing is, some of my ships I don't mind having a high part count, since lag is almost like a defense system on its own. I kid, I kid. In any case, I'll be building again once 1.0 rolls out for my region.

Awww yeah! Time to rev up the MU war machine once more! The Helios rides again!

I betcha Whackjob'll do it.

I crashed my last prototype rigid-hull ship, the Solo.

A pic of a prototype ship, one that will likely never see the light of day due to 1.0... (It was a lightly armed personnel carrier/transport, meant for logistics) Also, this SSTO fighter will probably be rebuilt fully for the new aero: Yes, the supersonic effects are in stock .90 aero, due to a RAPIER-turbojet hybrid engine. - - - Updated - - - Perhaps, but I'm probably just going to check once or twice to make sure my existing tanks work in 1.0, then upgrade them over time. After all, if I really wanted to obliterate for the sake of obliterating, then I'd just make a giant tank (allowing for empty space between armor layers) with little to no crew or external guns, and instead have a bunch of VLS-style cruise missile cells in the frame.

One thing I just realized: In 1.0, surface weapons are going to be MUCH faster, and will likely function a lot more similarly to space combat-type weapons, as the new aero will allow them to go as fast as their engines allow before either hitting the target or overheating due to aerodynamic stress and disintegrating. While this is going to limit missile speeds (as the faster you go, the more likelihood your shot will vaporize), it also means HEAT-type i-beams (where a cubic strut overheats in the back, and the blast force doubles/triples the acceleration of the missile) will have much shorter flight times. - - - Updated - - - Hey! I remember that, and I also see my old tri-wing starfighter (it was the D-13, I think?).

Hmm... should I post my hidden ships? Yeah, I probably should. On another hand, despite all the changes in 1.0, I think I'm going to rebud my fleet, saving some more venerable designs (although not without minor modifications), and retooling the rest of my fleet to be mainly manned heavy fighters and corvettes.

That SU-47 looks very nice and clean! Have some rep.

*Raises glass* To Squad and KSP! *Downs shot of LF/O mix, then utterly obliterates space bar restroom.*

I wouldn't say KSP space battles are "dead" by any means; it's much more like a technological stalemate in that most of the highly active militarist players have access to extremely durable and/or survivable warships with weapons designed specifically to defeat other warships of similar design and construction. I predict that shortly after 1.0 rolls out, we'll see a spike in space combat-related R&D. On a similar note, while this is pure conjecture, the new heatshield and fairing parts might be useful for armor, as the shields will likely be fairly strong and the fairings can act as ablative shaped outer hull plating. However, the new 'wet' wings might be a weakness due to their fuel tank status.

Minor update- a lightning strike fried my home's router, so I'm limited to forum browsing via mobile until it gets replaced.

I nominate HatBat for the series category with his Kethane Station sci-fi series.

Hmm... this is quite interesting. Perhaps this type of occurence in stock is a good incentive for more exoplanet mods.

Weapons/devices like K-Drive powered munitions, NaN-effect generators, etc.

It's really up to the players participating in an individual battle to agree on whether or not to allow the use of physics-bug-exploit based weapons, but generally most of us don't use 'em, since it's a surefire way to corrupt a perfectly good save. That, and it also helps balance weaponry firepower (despite the fact that at this stage of KSP dev history, the development of new stock weapons has pretty much slowed to a crawl since most regular battle-oriented players have pretty much maxed out their arsenals of weapon designs in stock).

Zamo posted last, so he will move first. Go ahead, Zamo.

We're waiting for the last person to setup and post their tanks (plus the latest save) to move first in the tank battle.

Thanks! I'm leaning a lot more towards turning my aesthetics OCD towards more... peaceful craft for a long while, and I'm glad I finally took the time to make something like this.

After seeing the SpaceX Dragon V2, I knew I needed to build a custom multi-seat crew vehicle in KSP. After lots of tinkering, I finally settled on a decent design, and (after seeing some technical models of the old Saturn 1) decided to build a specialty lifter stage to accompany the new craft. The Icarus NCV features internal LF/O storage, RTG power generators, and a set of 24-77 rocket engines for surface landings and orbital maneuvering. Carrying 4 crew, the pod also comes with hidden landing gear for soft touchdowns. The Icarus carries 4, and comes in 2 packages: one uses a simple 2-stage 3.75 meter rocket to acheive orbit, while the other uses the Artemis booster stage to do the same. (The Artemis is slightly more efficient.) Both packages lift the NCV and its twin LVT-45 engine-equipped transfer module into a 100x100 km orbit with ease, and the transfer module allows for placement into higher orbits. Instructions: To launch, right-click the probe core at the base of the pod, and select "control from here". Then, throttle up to max and stage once to engage the rocket's 1st stage. Once you've burnt out the 1st stage, stage again and use the trunk module for any further burns. Once the trunk is empty, stage once more to eject it and activate the landing/maneuvering engines on the NCV itself. (These can be switched on/off with action group 1.) To land, deorbit using a trunk module or the NCV's engines, and then use the parachutes and engines to slow descent. Deploy the gear once within 100 meters of the ground. Downloads: Icarus NCV: https://www.dropbox.com/s/quuf0e039wa11n9/MU%20Icarus%20NCV.craft?dl=0 Icarus NCV with Artemis Booster Rocket: https://www.dropbox.com/s/v7r2glgvjvur3yt/MU%20Icarus%20NCV%20w%20Artemis%20Booster.craft?dl=0 Artemis Booster Rocket (subassembly): https://www.dropbox.com/s/wia94yxpfh2zsiu/%28Gen.%201%29%20Artemis-Class%201st%20stage.craft?dl=0 Warranty void if used as a boat or Eve/Tylo descent craft.

My current experiment in reverse-angled wing SSTOs: It also features a zero-zero ejector seat/cockpit, which is nice for more... Jeb-style landings.

I couldn't help but test it... For some reason it didn't want to stay pointing in the direction I wanted it to though. Hmm...

It's much more reliable, but the legs still break occasionally. (I'd say to only use single-leg design K-Drives ATM for craft you want to repair in-flight, as my attempts to repair a multi-leg drive wound up turning into a Kraken-ball match, and the Kerbals becoming the balls.)

Yup, and some have gotten around or over 20g of acceleration in orbit.

Ooh! This looks interesting... I remember the original discovery of the K-Drive... fun times. Time to make an Interstellar-capable ship using this tech.