G'th

Presuming your launcher is decent enough, the best trajectory I've found for a Shuttle-like stack is as follows. This is also presuming FAR and the procedure starts from lift-off. I'm also going to edit in an Imgur album of my Shuttles launch profile once I get done walking the dog. 1. Fly straight up until ~60-75m/s, depending on TWR. On the higher end, from 1.4 to 2.0, go for 60m/s. On the lower end, from 1.2 to 1.39 go for 75m/s. During this phase, roll your craft as you need to get both in the belly up position and in position to fly into your desired inclination. Depending on the launcher, you may also want to use this phase to correct your pitch. Most shuttles have a tendency to pitch in some direction (as its really hard to zero out your torque, and the stock engine gimbals don't always correct for it fast enough, even if their started before your boosters), so make sure you pitch accordingly to keep your velocity vector on top of the NavBall. With my shuttle, even though the Main Engines are also my boosters, my auto-pitch is a result of the (only slightly. KER gives an offset of 0.049 in negative pitch, which is enough to push the shuttle backwards a bit. Its also kind of nice though because this neg-pitch also helps with stabilizing the stack as then its able to fight the stacks tendency to pitch the other way) off-balance thrust and the weaker gimbals in the engines. 2. Then, begin pitching over. With my shuttle, I'm actually able to just pitch over a bit and then lock SAS to prograde, and that will work up to about 7-10km up (where the air starts to thin so my stack isn't pitching over on its own anymore). On yours, you may have to go manual more. Best pitch over process is to hit 45* at ~10km, and then continue pitching to about 20-15* after that and hold that position until you hit your desired apoapsis. If you fly the trajectory just right, your MECO (or in my shuttles case, booster ejection), which should be happening once your periapsis hits ~30-40km, should also occur just as you're hitting your max/desired apoapsis. But, as most of the time you aren't going to be packing the max payload of your shuttle, you'll typically have to go about this the KSP way, with MECO 1, Main Engine Reignition, and then MECO2. IE, once you hit your desired apoapsis, MECO, then coast until apo, then MER until periapsis hits the 30/40km region, then MECO 2. In my experience, the difference between doing this and flying the optimal trajectory is negligible, so don't take this method as wasteful, more, just something the Kerbals have to deal with given their wildly different planet. 3. Use OMS engines to circularize. From 30km, should only take 200m/s max to circularize with any given apoapsis. Presuming your shuttle is the basic one you can make with this mod (Mine isn't), then that should leave you with plenty to perform reentry. Here's an album showcasing a launch of my shuttle. Should help give you an idea of how it should be flown.

Idk, I like my method better

^ Yeah the Mercury-Atlas in this mod is kind of iffy, and even more so if you happen to have FAR installed. The main reason you can't control it is because the Verniers can't actually control the rocket, and with the main engines having no gimbals, you're essentially flying the rocket with no real ability to steer it. Easiest way to deal with it is to explore one of these options: 1. Skip Mercury-Atlas. 2. Clip some SAS modules into the rocket somewhere. (sometimes works, sometimes doesn't) 3. Add Wings to bring the COL down below COM and use the Wings for steering.

When your space shuttle finally comes together as an operational vehicle. What a great feeling that is. Specially after toiling away at it for several days trying all kinds of different configurations.

Finished a baseline for my new Shuttle. Its actually really cool and fun to fly:

Is anyone elses Airlock (and the docking port you attach to it for that matter) exploding on reentry? Doesn't seem to matter how hard I reenter, the Airlock explodes, taking the docking port with it. Strangely enough though, the lights lining my cargo bay don't explode despite having even less heat resistance.

That is a good point, but still, the numbers are far too astronomical (heh) for that to make up the massive difference between the math and what the article is claiming.

Some helpful tips: 1. Forget the non-retractable wheels exist, don't fly until T3 runway. 2. Use the right wheels for the expected weight, and don't be afraid to throw in more wheels. 3. Lock steering across the board (if using the small/medium wheels), make sure you're rudders are adequate for your craft. With the in-ability to limit the steering authority, you'll be hard pressed to get steering to not throw you off course. THere is a point where it isn't stupid, but its a very fine line and depends on the mass the wheel is carrying and where its placed. With good rudders, you shouldn't need wheel steering anyway. 4. Forget landing is a thing unless you have both a joystick and time to spend creating a plane that can slow itself down to sub 70m/s and still maintain glideslope. Use parachutes instead. 5. Don't attach rear wheels directly to wings. Instead, attach them to your fuselage and then offset them. This will prevent wing flexing (thats caused by your wheels anyway) which can also contribute to you running off the runway. It will look strange if you lose a wing, but at that point looks shouldn't matter. 6. Use the friction override. Rear wheels should be higher than nose wheels. 7. Don't be afraid to just drop wheels altogether. On the shuttle type craft I've been toying with lately, I don't use wheels, one because they're useless on landing anyway, and also because they just look bad when attached to a heat-shielded underbelly. Instead, I use the Space X legs tweakscaled down as landing skids. Looks neat and doesn't stick out on the heatshielding.

Yeah I think a figure is missing here, as the article itself is referencing a rate of 1 light year a year for all of our signals, meaning that by 1500 years from now, our "bubble" will only be 1580 ly wide. What it might be talking about is the expected amount of stars/planets reached by our signals at that time should equate to about half of whats present in our galaxy, but a rough crunch of the numbers still indicates a far cry from "half".

So as I've been playing the mod more and more, some things arise: Has any thought been given to trying to extend the Earth SOI a bit? I've been making flights to the Moon and it takes the same amount of dV (and sometimes less) to get an escape trajectory as it is to get a Lunar fly by, so I'm essentially having to fight the maneuver node to get a good Lunar flyby instead of flying right out of the system. On the subject of the Moon, is tidal locking supposed to happen? It certainly isn't in my install if so.

In the endgame, the one that converts Science into Funds is essential for keeping the funds rolling even when you aren't taking contracts.

If hes referring to the Shuttle never launching out of Vandenberg, thats because after Challenger the military pulled out of the Shuttle program for the most part, leaving the polar satellites the military produced to be launched by fully expendable launchers, and abandoning the idea of bringing down enemy satellites.

Right? Love the look of my LM.

^ That. In the mean time, I recommend using the legs in AIES Aerospace as a temporary lookalike. Theres a fix for them in the thread for it, and it really doesn't look that off (aside from what i had to do to make it functional gameplay wise anyway:

You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that failure is an option.

Stock Visual Enhancements, and Stock Sized Real Solar System. SVE is fantastic on its own, and with SSRSS, it gets even better as SSRSS adds even more. Both don't change gameplay. (SSRSS does, but only if you don't install stock inclinations) As for how they perform, it just depends on which version of SVE you install for either mod. Range from Ultra Low to Ultra High. This is what SSRSS looks like:

^ That sounds like a conflict with another mod. I'd recommend uploading your KSP.log somewhere so it can be looked at.

The vast majority of the mod works in 1.1.2. The only things that actually need substantial updating are the LM Landing legs and the landing gear for Winged Gemini (and the Gemini lander legs, though I haven't played around with them to know that for sure). And in those cases, they aren't likely to be updated until after 1.2 at least, as the modules governing landing gear/legs now is broken at best and needs fixing (on Unity's part).

*drooling intensifies* In other news, Hurricane Kerbo finally passed over Florida, though unfortunately in the middle of a time warp so I wasn't able to see under it from the ground. (and too lazy to make the flight over to it) However, I did get some excellent shots of it as it passed over the East Coast: Have to say, the texture for the storm is really, really good. Doesn't lose its immersiveness as you ascend like other clouds do.

Finally landed something on the Moon!

Just to set the record straight, I knew the image was a joke, my curiosity was just piqued as to exactly why it didn't work.

So, whilst trolling google images becuase boredom, I came across this image: And a thought occurs. Does this actually work? Logically my mind says no, and even if it did move it'd eventually stop anyway, I would think. Intuitively though, my mind is saying well of course it works, duh! Someone with a bit more knowledge on magnetism weigh in on this.

Whats the ratio on the engine? If LF/OX isn't running at 0.9/1.1 respectively then that may be the culprit.

^ Thats fair