Ravenchant

You read the specs correctly. But they look good when placed in strategic locations- that's all the reason we ever need.

I've been playing for 8 months now, and while there were some interesting times to be had, I'll consider myself a noob until making a manned landing and return from every planetary body in the system. Except for Jool, because that ****'s glitchy.

I part clip quite a bit, but never through the debug menu (cubic octogonal struts to the rescue!) and with some basic restrictions: no intake stacking, engine nozzles can't clip through each other, and fuel tanks can't be clipped more than, let's say, halfway through. My Kerbals also frown upon doubling wings and clipping command pods too much. Other than that, it's fair game...it's hard enough to construct aesthetically pleasing craft as it is.

I KNEW Mimas was up to something! Anyway, my neglected planet is Jool. Actually, the whole subsystem. I landed on Moho before I visited it.

Sounds ominous. Let's see what I have... Kerbin: one old station in LKO, a fuel depot in 100km orbit with docked tankers, some satellites and returned interplanetary craft I haven't had the heart to deorbit Mun: one station/depot, two surface bases under construction, couple of comm sats Duna: a 3-Kerbal expedition on its surface, with mothership, landers and supporting craft in orbit... ...and a lot of probes/rovers pretty much everywhere outside of the Jool subsystem, which I've been neglecting up until recently.

I felt bad for even making a manned Minmus mission with only the capsule, let alone interplanetary trips! Usually my rule of thumb is: 2 Kerbals per Hitchhiker, which goes for stations as well. You know, if their chances to suffer a horrible fate are this high, they might as well have some comfort

My Kerbals don't do a lot of heavy lifting, so these four designs get used the most. The left one lifts 8 tons, the right one about 38. Some are asparagus staged, some are onions. The subassemblies are a bit broken though. I'm also currently working on a series of launchers with fairings and without fuel lines. But part counts are through the roof, especially if you want to put in some details to make the launching less boring...

We need to go deeper! 18 engines on first stage.

We will keep on using them, of course! Clustering is your friend Anyway, there are at least a dozen similar threads around, so... inb4lock?

As it seems that the current trend are Duna pics:

It would be interesting to see how the final design will turn out. After they add some little details like power source, comms, telemetry, instruments etc. On a related note, I always wondered how a recumbent quad would do on the Moon

Fiddled around with stock fairings for a bit 2.5m: check! 3.75m: check!

sgt_flyer, that launch tower is incredibly well built! Anyway, my Proton- equivalent is pretty much done. The fairing halves eject at a weird angle, though- have to fix that. A Briz-inspired fourth stage inside the fairing.

Still working on that lifter family, and redoing the 20-ton one to be less boring. It started out as a Proton lookalike, but it's too pudgy and needs 15 engines on the first stage instead of 6. (Also, those fairings are placeholders. It's still missing a third stage)

Er. It's 1.5 meganewtons. But still not that much.

Mine has aged about 4 years since last October, when I started the save. *sigh* never missing a launch window and all that stuff...

Trope: Frictionless Reentry Type: very much averted Explanation: Reentries and aerobraking are always taxing on both the crew and ships, to the point of seriously endangering the mission.

In KSP? Nothing. But in real life, I finally spotted the ISS! And totally inadvertently, too- just walking to the store late in the evening, thinking about having to do something against the flour moth infestation in our dorm- and a bright, moving speck shows up. Looked at Spot the station later to verify. Best feeling of the day!

If their starting point and velocity vector are somewhat randomized, they can be already in orbit if spawned with a sufficiently low speed relative to Kerbin and within its SOI.

I'm okay with the orange and second smallest one, but the other two look like oil drums. Also, the wide rims detract from a rockets' aesthetic appeal and make it look cobbled together.

Gravitational "waves" do propagate at the speed of light, but AFAIK this isn't breaking anything. To be in orbit around a black hole, your centripetal force simply has to counter the gravitational acceleration. Inside of the event horizon, the required speed exceeds c. Since nothing can travel faster than c, well...stuff can't get back out.

You DO know this could be taken horribly out of context, right? I'd imagine the proper reaction to being called a Boostophobe is challenging the offending party to a duel. Which would be a drag race. Using SRB-powered rocket sleds.

Thanks, that's nice to hear By the way, I have a question for the people reading this: would you like the .craft files to be posted along with the reports using them? I still have most of them saved, but usually they aren't good enough for the a rocket builders thread, so I'd like to know whether they're worth uploading.

You are not alone- besides multiplying my interest in space exploration by about an order of magnitude, at the very least I've also taken an orbital mechanics class this semester because of it. And it's easy because KSP teaches the core concepts intuitively!

Presumably many of us would be content with the simple addition of female- (or at least unisex-) sounding names to the generator. While at it, a bit of variety in naming would generally be a whiff of fresh air. Current crew rosters read like a redneck gathering. One could argue this was intentional, but still...