Mmmmyum

The decouplers mass goes to the decoupled part I've found, not sure about the struts though. (Had a craft that had it's return pods mounted on top of the main nuclear boosters)

It does have a throttle limiter, it's in utilities I think... And I find that the weight of all those RTGs tends to make that ion engine work even harder, as you need so many of them

Would using something like a mainsail as an impulse engine save any delta-v? I was messing around awhile back with the 3.75m KW Rocketry engine with 4000 KN of thrust, and a single pulse would push my craft to terminal velocity, then I'd wait till vertical speed dropped to zero before firing another pulse

Soo it's been around a month since the update. Has anyone noticed any incompatible drivers, bugs, etc? Personally I found that the Dolby HD audio thing doesn't work any more, and there's a bug with my Intel HD4000 drivers (updating now) that causes a BSOD when using DX9 with resolutions that are at a aspect ratio of 3:4 (namely Worms Armageddon (upscaled) and Supreme Commander for me)

Personally I found that Aardwolf (a MUD) was quite complex. I really enjoyed it awhile back, even had quite a nice Lv 23 Lizardman Ranger (remort 0, I think)

Hmm... Maybe it's a glitch with the root part? Try rebuilding it from scratch and see if that fixes things

It looks like your wings have a very slight downward angle, thus acting as a racing cars spoiler

Seeing threads like this reminds me of my first few attempts... A three stage rocket that lands and returns on it's final stage should do it. I can't post a craft file (way too many mods), but this is able to take a kerbal and a rover to either Minmus or the Mun and return , that's the equivalent (kinda) of 3 of the long solid fuel boosters, and that's a skipper pushing the equivalent of the orange tank

He's using FAR... I'd say that your center of lift is way behind your center of mass, thus your wings are just trying to shove the rear of the craft up and the nose down. Also I find with bigger planes it's easier just to have "bicycle" gear and let the reaction wheels get your craft balanced for takeoff, as it doesn't jitter as much as more traditional tricycle gear

Ah well, I guess it's impossible. Anyway this is what I eventually managed to get into the air, weighing in at 88.2t

It's too heavy to get into a sub orbital fight, it flies surprisingly like the 747 from FSX, it can only climb at 20 degrees, it keeps level flight with a trim of two mod+s's, and needs solid rocket packs to help get airborne, similarly to the heavy gliders of WW2. The problem is that I can't control both I guess, I give the rocket a slight angle, but it doesn't keep the throttle, just rolls around on top of the plane

(I should ask stuff less) So I was building a few planes for fun today, gave up on getting a horizontal plane that's capable of getting into orbit and came up with this: What would be the best way to launch the rocket? The plane doesn't have the thrust to get into a sub orbital trajectory, but it could lift heavier loads with that wingspan. edit : Just realised this isn't really a question, I need to sleep

I don't think drones will take over completely, and that's because of the cultural impact of pilots. Think of Flyboys, Pearl Harbour, there was another one about a drone that went rouge that I can't remember...

How would you improve this design? (I like the jet engine's location, reminds me of older German fighters) It used the B9 pack The rockets fire just to boost it out of the atmosphere, oh and those are KW Rocketry Vesta VR-1's, running on liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. I use FAR. It tend to not want to pull up, and ramping it off the end of the runway puts it in a flat spin, which I can't fix in time. (Reminds me of IL-2 Sturmovik lol)

I found that it breaks the game at around a thousand petameters (1.0 × 10^18 meters or 1000000000000000000m)

What, if this were to be a military plane, would it's targets be? China?

Well this is what I have installed

How much memory does KSP need free of it's 4GB to be safe? I've just added another 3 mods to my collection and KSP is using 3650MB in the science building

I found a scientific paper talking about how to calculate the most fuel efficient descents to Mars, https://behcet.ae.utexas.edu/sites/default/files/comparison_aiaa.pdf, would any of that be useful to our landers if we wanted to have a very tight delta-v budget? The maths in it is pretty complex, with matrices and stuff that's far ahead of my level though.

I find that rockets that are over 500t tend to be to hard to launch as they tend to rip apart while while gravity turning (5 degrees at launch), this is the biggest I've gotten up so far

I can't bring more fuel. Literally my LV-N with 4 of the Service Propulsion Engines (KW Rocketry) radially attached has 6k Delta-V once it gets to LKO. Any more fuel and it's inefficient. My last shot at it was good enough to only require 3.5km/s delta-v in the capture/circularisation burn at 30km. Shame that because of the burn time I smashed straight into it (tend to fly in map view/minimised with mechjeb) as I wasn't watching the orbit.

Also it might help to pack more delta-v than needed. There's no penalty for having too much fuel "in the tank". Just so you can mess up a bit

Ah, so Eve it is. I just had a really interesting Jool slingshot at the inner system with one of my probes (it would have cost me very little delta-v to go anywhere, but that's another story). Guess I'll increase the conic's drawn and mess with maneuver nodes

How fast is it hitting the ground when it lands?

You also unlock them when you get a solar panel, but for deep space missions batteries need to be charged. I mostly use batteries for when the sun is out of sight for some reason or another, and they lose charge quickly when transmitting, and powering probe cores and SAS units