Shedao

@SteevyT Made my day

After finally my Munrocket was again ready for flight (the first was stable in 0.10, but selfdestroyed in 0.11) I decided to change the upper stage and go out for the sun. Mmh plenty of fuel left and Bob told his mum that he would be home for dinner. The days passed and the crew had to realize that they would not make it home because Jebs aiming ('Somewhere over there.') was not the best work. : Finally Kerbin was in sight and Jeb screamed 'Yeah we made it!' while Bill and Bob started to open the airlock because all hope was gone. PS: We will never know who forgot the parachute ;P

@Tiberion Just for understanding your arguments: You say the tanks in this pack hold to much fuel and so create to much weight for the rocket? I am experiencing a lot of 'wobblines' with the parts of this pack but I also need the real big engines in here... Are they also part of the problem or would they work just well with other tanks? Or do I misunderstand the whole thing here? ??? PS: My big rockets are all well balanced and connected with heavy struts, SAS etc. but always turn around at some point of the flight.

Seems familiar to me

Simply awesome! It\'s exactly this Jeb/boosters/Kerbal humor that makes the game so overwhelmingly good. Thanks for all the good work.

I agree with that. Since I don\'t know any other pack with so many decouplers of different sizes I use them quite often but there are clear limits in its usability.

Then just use MS Paint

I think I got it fixed! I\'m not an expert in graphics but windows shows me for every stock part a bit depth of 32bit and for the now red modding parts only 24bit. When trying Photoshop and Irfanview nothing really helped but when simply loading a C7 texture into MS Paint and just save it again the bit depth goes to 32bit. --> loading KSP and it worked! No idea if this is really an option but you could try. edit: I tried a few different parts from different mods and all are showing normal colours

Ich möchte an dieser Stelle mal ein wenig Werbung machen für eine Seite, die ich schon seit Jahren mit Begeisterung lese und die in diesem Forum mit Sicherheit Anklang findet. http://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/raumfahrt.shtml Es gibt Aufsätze zu so ziemlich jeder Trägerrakete, angefangen bei den ersten Abkömmlingen von ICBMs, bis zu den Ausbauplänen der Ariane 5. Dazu kommen Aufsätze zu Raketentechnik allgemein (also Triebwerke, Formeln, Treibstoffe, zukünftige Antriebe etc.) und so ziemlich allen Raumsonden die jemals gestartet wurden (von Sputnik über Hubble und Cassini bis Planck und New Horizons).

Because it ist not worth the effort. A video showing yourself while the rocket is flying straight upwards with no other requirements as pressing the space button? There are people without webcams and other people who don\'t want to show themselves... command pod, SAS, 2x fuel tanks, engine, seperator, tricoupler, 9x fuel tanks, 3x engines -> just stock parts and the design is not most effcient but it works for reaching escape velocity. There is no challenge in here. Look at other challenges and think of something more difficult and creative and the people will try it. For example in this challenge you could demand that no SAS should be used, only boosters or single stage design.

Hm, I think you can easily build a rocket that reaches escape velocity and with some SAS you wouldn\'t need any keycontrols...

I have a problem using the 3m adapters and decouplers. When I build a rocket as seen in the image it is perfectly stable on the launchpad, but when I attach the 3m decoupler to cover this upper stage the rocket will instantly blow up. I really want to build a rocket as shown in the first example for this pack.