Search the Community

That is awesome design right there! Talk about an ekranoplan style / seaplane carrier. The only little suggestion I have is try and change the tail to a 'V' type so the fighter can land on the deck from the rear (less hazardous)

Welcome to the KSP Forums! There are a few tutorials and many posts on the forums that talk about how to get to the moon and back. Have a look around, almost anything you\'d care to know about KSP is here. Happy Launching! Arrr! Capt\'n Skunky

I second this. A couple more thoughts about \'books piracy\' which is constantly discussed in Russia. First of all, these \'pirate fighters\' speak about \'protecting an author\' while an author currently gets less than 0.5% of book earnings. Guess whom are they really \'protecting\'? And the second note. A publisher uses to talk about pirated book as it were money stolen right from his pocket, eh? A stupid son of a... female canine. If someone could not pirate books he would not go buy them. He would read less instead. Just win the fight against those pirates... and you\'ll not be getting more money. You\'ll get less. \'Cause destroying that free advertising mechanism that pirates provide will make less people know an author whose books you\'re trying to publish. Both notes are quite obvious and were widely discussed for last several years (not only in Russia). And -- finally here\'s that SOPA. \'Cause nobody fuckin\' cares >

Big Red Button Pressers has conquered space. We\'ve been to the Mun. We\'ve never returned. And now... we\'ve arrived at the conclusion: Why take our crew to space to die when we can do it easier inside the atmosphere? Introducing the new Atmospheric Crafts list, you\'ll be shown all of the most stable ways to fly inside the atmosphere and maybe even learn something! Craft Number One: The KSP Blackbird The Blackbird is so far the most stable craft I\'ve designed, created entirely with C7 Aerospace parts and a stock ASAS, this is the perfect beginners craft. Don\'t even ask about landing though. Go talk to Winter Owl about how to land this thing. With an average cruising speed of 100 m/s (360 km/h) this sucker can go pretty fast and if you\'re good on the throttle it\'ll last you around 30 minutes before you burn out. The reason there isn\'t a photo of it burning out is because it didn\'t. I tried to land it without any landing gear and it broke on the side of a mountain/hill.

After launching the KOS-1 (Kerbin Orbital Station also formerly known as KB-1 Orbital Operation) with some success I decided to give the go ahead on the KOS-2 system. Kerbin Engineers worked long and hard to build the station and after many stability issues and two attempts that only went sub orbital they decided to add one more tank to the second stage and that gave it barely enough fuel to achieve orbit. The station barely made orbit using the probe engine but had to jettison the kubble telescope payload since mostly everyone considered it a failure. They didn\'t even realized it was successful till bob check it\'s projected course and realized they made it to a 140Km by 70Km orbit which they soon fixed into a 144km by 140 km orbit. Here\'s some photographs that they sent back. The launch vehicle. Before Orbit when the crew were bracing for impact by jettisoning the telescope. After Achieving orbit they snapped a few photos. And to top it all off they got to see a few sunrises. Once Jeb got back to Kerbin after they sent up the replacement crew we heard him talking to an engineer about the possibilities of making this either a Munar station or Kerbol station. We\'ve heard some casual talk about a possible MOS-1 after that.

Man don\'t these parts look great for space stations. Here is my KOS-2 (Kerbin Orbital Station-2, We don\'t talk about KOS-1 anymore not after the incident *Shutters*) Getting KOS-2 into orbit was a pain though I almost thought it wasn\'t going to make it but that probe engine just kept on chugging until I saw we had a 130 KM by 70 Km going. I slowly adjusted that orbit into a more balanced 144 Km by 140 KM orbit and was satisfied with my creation. Before Orbit I had the Kubble telescope but when I thought I wasn\'t going to make it I decided to jettison it. After I magically Achieved orbit I snapped loads of screens. I love watching the sun rise from the KOS-2

Okay so I spent the evening designing a cipher and implementing it in Javascript for the fun of it and, aside from how lame that may or may not sound, I am just wondering how good it is. Anyone here know anything about Cryptography? Anyone want to try cracking this: ^;+.h4r\'-}$?n0=u\3,%7i0$z? You can try cracking it as is, or just try finding the key with my decrypter: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2434899/cryptography.html If no one is interested in this, we could just talk about Cryptography... I find it a fascinating subject.

Well, uh, it\'s a thread about music. Essentially, feel free to discuss music, post youtube videos and talk about your own aspirations (if you have any) but please keep it civil. No making fun of anyone\'s preferences, no slagging off artists or genres - you get the idea. It\'s perfectly possible to discuss and state your own opinions, negative or positive - as long as you remember that it\'s just your opinion - it\'s subjective, not objective. Personally, I find music in general really enthuses me - it\'s a bit of an obsession really. I\'ve given a lot of things a listen over time, from harsh noise to twee pop and frankly there actually isn\'t a lot I dislike. I\'m one of those who really means it when they say I listen to anything from anywhere. That said, I\'m still a pretty dedicated metalhead - and I know some people view 'open minded music lover' and 'metalhead' as mutually exclusive, but really it ain\'t so. There is no inherent contradiction in loving the most extreme metal along with the most lightweight pop or ambient or whatever. As to my musical ambitions I am a bassist, and I\'ve (finally) begun to learn theory and that kind of thang after playing covers for oh-so-long. But enough about me, y\'all have fun chatting about the latest releases and old classics and everything. have fun

This thread is quite useful! First we talk about the game, then we talk about something else... It\'s like the off-topic off-topic thread!

OK guys, this is the big moment, we are going off the drawing board and on to final mesh conversions and writing the config files. Then I will post a screenshot, talk to my beta testing team and off we go! ???????!

Hey guy\'s, It\'s me, Millst0ne. I just lost all my logins for pretty much everything by mistake. (Dont wanna talk about it) Anyways, Just letting you know.

Well hello to you good sir/madam! Wow, really cool video. If it were me talking, I would be so exited that I forgot to talk Anyways, welcome to the forums

They summarize and paraphrase because: 1. The 'politiburo demands so!' (Ergo, they take 'English Wikipedia' and make it barely '+1' over 'Simple English Wikipedia' because one one of the important head honcho admin types decides he wants to squat over the article over automatic transmissions after deleting some information about a specific model of automatic transmission offered by Chrysler.) 2. 'LOL I KNOW BETTER THAN YOU' (See above, then they decide to barf up some regurgitated information that has complete detachment from reality) Here, familiarize yourself with the internal politics of Wikipedia (NSFW: Encyclopedia Dramatica warning. Extremely NSFW, for the mentally mature especially.) http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Wikipedia Not feeling like doing some reading? How about this golden line: 'Talk page about USS Liberty in which Jayjg attempts to argue with the vice president of the USS Liberty Veterans Association about the Liberty incident. Yes, an Israeli agent involved in the cover-up is allowed to always have the last word on the article, not someone who was actually there and involved in the events in question.' Sadly, they\'re pretty spot on with the bitter mocking and sarcasm going on there. Not NSFW: http://images.encyclopediadramatica.ch/5/5c/Wikipedia_cat.jpg Pretty much how it rolls over there. I\'m pretty sure some people will argue with me about a 'moderate injury' like whiplash being 'LOL, TOTALLY NOT HARMFUL, EVER' over here. If it was Wikipedia, we\'d be waging a nuclear edit war right now. Ah, right, they do that already over there. Anyways, for those little 'fatalities in space' statistics, perhaps you guys might want to look at how many times the Shuttle has launched astronauts (Ergo, treat 'launch of crew into space' as unique instances even if the same astronauts go up) and divide that to the deaths. I\'m pretty sure that number looks real good. Or we can just claim RUSSIA MIGHTY, RUSSIA DESTROY AMERICAN PIGDOG WITH SATAN MISSILE. RIGHTEOUS JUSTICE.

Hey Look! I\'m Another Commenter! I already presented this idea in another thread, but since there is talk about asteroids and other 'small' objects, I thought I might put my idea out there: A small, soviet-inspired, abandoned space station, in orbit around one of the outer planets. It could mostly be an 'easter-egg' sort of thing. Once docking is implemented, it could be an interesting 'recon/intel' type mission.

Based on 707\'s 2012 Survival challenge, this has a little more structure to it. Your task is to construct a rocket or spaceplane capable of keeping the Kerbal race going following the destruction of Kerbin through means unexplained. However, here there are a few rules. ========================================= -Balanced parts [with the exception of all C7 parts bar the tiny little fuel tank.] -Solar collectors may only be used with ELP [Extremely-Low-Power] engines. [This includes any kind of ion engine, lander thruster or small radial liquid thruster.] + 8 bonus for asymmetry. + 5 bonus for Mun landings. + 3 bonus for Munar orbits. + 3 bonus for Kerbol orbits. + 1 bonus for extra Kerbals. -There is no cryogenic suspension, so no sending Kerbals into deep space. ========================================= And this is the most important part - the nescesities. Scientists recently discovered [through dubiously legal means] that you need only ten Kerbals to achieve a genetic pool large enough to rule out inbreeding as a major problem. Therefore, your craft must be able to carry at least ten Kerbals. Oxygen is, of course, not self-replenishing, and your craft will need to carry [potted?] plants. Each Kerbal requires two plant points. Though inbreeding will not be a major problem, the ethics people don\'t like it, so bonus points for the more Kerbals your craft can carry. Your craft must be robust, able to survive the harsh environments it comes across. Your ship must have at least six Survivability Points. Once you have met all requirements, extra points are converted to bonuses. As there is no requirement for Ethics points, they are basically a bonus already. The person with the most bonus points wins. At the end of the competition, I will be choosing at random [using this: http://www.matazone.co.uk/animpages/bouncing_cow_luck_test_game.html] whether Kerbin is actually destroyed. If your craft can return to Kerbin if Kerbin has indeed survived, you will recieve fifteen bonus points. Three or more bouncing cows means Kerbin survives. However, before that, I will be using the bouncing cows to decide whether your primary power source fails [damaged solar panels or a radiation leak, depending on your primary power source.] [Rocket fuel generators and Physics Module batteries count as secondary power sources, and are not susceptible to damage] Also, having eight or more Survivability Points will allow you to repair your primary power source quickly. This means you can bypass this problem entirely. Only six survivability points means it will take until your emergency power runs down to fix your engines, so not having an emergency source would disqualify you. ========================================= Different modules have different capabilities. =Habitation modules= A 1 meter Hab can carry two Kerbals in comfort, or three squashed together. -1 ethics point for the second option. A 2 meter Hab module can carry five Kerbals. [if they exist.] Wet Workshops are allowed. They carry the same number of Kerbals as Hab modules. -1 ethics point for forcing Kerbals to live in a fuel tank. =Cabin modules= Cabin modules are your capsules or the equivalent. A 1 meter Cabin can carry three Kerbals. A 2 meter Cabin can carry six Kerbals or three Kerbals and a rack of plants. +3 plant points for the second option. +1 ethics point for the second option, as the pilots get fresh air. A remote control/Probe \'Cabin\' carries no Kerbals, as it is piloted from ground. However, they are generally less heavy. -1 ethics point, as Science has shown KSP pilots are more likely to crash when their own lives are not at stake. =Science modules= Science modules are useful. They allow you to do things. A Science module may carry one Kerbal. However, they do have plus points. You may chose to make your Science modules one of three types. Points are doubled for 2 meter modules. Biology Modules can carry plants. +4 plant points Chemistry Modules allow maintainance work on the ship. +2 ethics points +3 Survivability points Physics Modules allow environmental research or they may carry batteries. +3 ethics points +2 Survivability points.for the first option. + Night-time Power for the second option. + Emergency Power for the second option. =Communications modules= Communications can be comprised of anything from a satellite to a dish attatched to an SAS device. These allow your vessel to recieve communcations from other escape ships, any Munar satellites you might want to get information from, and to talk to Ground Control. This will be morall boosting, as it gives your crew and passengers conclusion. It will also tell your vessel whether Kerbin has, in fact, been destroyed or not. +4 Ethics points. + Ability to return. =Power Modules= Power modules can be made from disused engines with fuel remaining, to nuclear power from converted NERVA thrusters to solar panels. Bear in mind that for vessels that may enter shade, there must be power during night. Power is required. It is needed for lighting, which feeds your plants, it is needed for your computers, and it is needed to use communications modules. Solar panels + Daytime power Physics Module + Nighttime power + Emergency power NERVA engine +Long term power Disused fuel + Emergency power SAS +Emergency power ========================================= If I have missed anything, please tell me so i can rectify it. Thanks to Gabyalufix, for SAS as power.

With 52 LFTs, 9 LV-T30s, 8 LV-T45s, 4 3x-couplers, a single ASAS, no RCS, 3 RCS fuel tanks (?), 15 struts, 15 fuel lines, and 3 of CaptainSlug\'s LEM-5 lander legs, because the stock options for landers are just lame. Overbuilt for what it needs to do? Yeah... but it\'s stable and controllable and fun all the way. My second 'stock' mun-craft. At launch, the Deneb X is burning twelve engines — six inboard LV-T30s, three outboard LV-T45s, and three strap-on LV-T30s. The fuel lines are routed so that at launch, all fuel is provided by the twelve strap-on LFTs. After approximately one minute of full thrust, these tanks empty and are jettisoned. For about another fifteen seconds, all twelve engines are supplied by the three upper tanks above the strap-on T30s. After that point, the two fuel systems are separated, with the nine main engines burning fuel from their 21 remaining tanks, and the strap-on engines burning their remaining tanks (one each). At 140 seconds into the flight, the strap-ons burn out, and are jettisoned. The nine main engines provide a few more minutes of lift, with the lower-thrust outboard T45s burning slightly longer than the inboard T30 cluster. When burning straight up, the Deneb will be at 100km after first-stage cutoff, with velocity to take the remaining stages to a 200km apogee. The next stage is the one I envisioned as the 'trans-munar stage', although it doesn\'t quite make it. Powered by three LV-T45 engines, it carries nine fuel tanks. Three of them are radially mounted (without decouplers) to serve as attachment points for the first stage. Those RCS tanks I mentioned before are simply to stop the fuel in these tanks from flowing from the second stage down to the first, since 0.13 marked stack decouplers as capable of passing fuel. The second stage is capable of lifting its payload to over 2,000km when flying a gravity turn. Next is the munar descent stage, which also powers the rest of the trip to the Mun. Its core is a stack decoupler, with three fuel fuel tanks mounted to it radially, an LV-T45 mounted below it, and lander legs mounted to the fuel tanks. It\'s quite a sturdy lander, and lands easily at 10m/s, even when 5 of that is horizontal — making Mun landings easy and saving me the trouble of having to carry RCS. Three tanks of fuel is way more than sufficient for the landing, but good for structural stability. For the trip home, I take off with the descent stage and burn the remaining fuel, before leaving it behind to crash back into the Mun, then burn the rest of the way home with the ascent stage, which is just one LFT, another LV-T45, and the ASAS sitting below the CM. Re-entry is done with just the CM and chute; usually I have enough fuel that I can stop in orbit and pick which ocean I want to drop in. Okay, that\'s way more than enough talk. Here\'s the pics and craft file.

Make the burn at the right point in your parking orbit; this general situation is what astronavigators mean when they talk about a 'window'. The Orbit Mechanic or guides can give you precise figures, but I haven\'t yet been let down by the rule of thumb that a Hohmann orbit to the Mün should lead it by about 30 degrees. There\'s no value in widening your transfer orbit, unless you\'re orbiting opposite the Mün\'s revolution to make damned sure you hit it first try. Yes, some people have taken that approach

If I\'d wanted to use F2, I would have. Instead, I left the GUI up, and closed the nav-con. Can we please talk about the spacecraft?

PM me and we will talk.

Welcome to the forum! Yes, that was a good interview, I had a couple of questions for Martin Schweiger aswell, but mainly to do with Orbiter. HarvesteR was there aswell, so it was a good chance to talk to him. But yes, welcome aboard, and let\'s see your crazy rockets! ;D

Easiest way is to specify distance from local star, body mass, body radius, angle and initial velocity. The best way is much more involved, for H. if he wants to make it easy for everyone else, for everyone else if H. is lazy. It\'s outside the scope and intention of the game, IMO and let\'s have no more talk of it.

Put it on the Mun and then we\'ll talk.

Alright, time to get serious about this incredible piece of artwork! 8) All questions will be answered at the bottom of this original post, thanks for the feedback! This is the Pegasus-42, named after several equestrian animals that have the ability to fly with the talents of agility, speed, and guts. Video, if you think this is TL;DR --- As you may have noticed it has a unique design in which it uses a stepped-down fuselage from the main body attached to the sides of the craft. This adds more stability, fuel, and space for weapon mounts. Don\'t forgot to mention it has a highly aesthetical finished look to it. -Two dual-mounted railguns (three rounds each) -Six deployable bombs -and six wing-mounted WASP missiles For increased effectiveness, each projectile is fired no unanimously, but one at a time. Vertical Take Off and Landing (VTOL) capable with numerous stability and control RCS thrusters for vertical thrust. Highly agile. The winglets and flaps are near-perfectly balanced for ease of stability. These improvements make it a great glider, fast target (+600 m/s under 10 km), and a lethal predator. --Questions-- Put it on the Mun and then we\'ll talk. - Feragorn Although I am aware of the craft\'s incapabilities, I can, infact, land on the moon. Thanks to the VTOL systems I can make a realistic landing without a sweat. But it is quite more difficult without gliding at hand. --- He called it AIRCRAFT buddy. Not SpacePlane. - mario972 I called it aircraft because the video only has limited footage, mainly within the atmposphere. Either way it can easily manuever in the air, and in space. Some weapon systems are defective without the air though, such as missiles; winglets on them prove to do nothing in benefit of it flying straight. --- Herp de durr, I\'m aware. These things tend to be said about impressive designs, since everything is better on the Mun. Even aircraft, who can\'t fly without air. Which the Mun doesn\'t have. - Feragorn Lemme level with you guys for a sec, Planes - Pretty Smart Spaceplanes - Pretty F-cking Smart Spaceplanes that can land on the m--FUCKING GEEEEEEEEEENNNIUS! (if you get it, you get a booster) I really would like for everyone to stop comparing flying vehicles on how far, or fast, they can go. Seriously, everyone knows how cheaty the C-7 pack is on it\'s own, there is really no definitive bar that anyone would have to set. I would rate planes on their effectiveness on landing on the moon instead (not easy), for that requires a bit more inginuity, ya know?

Talk about over-engineering Congrats on a successful mission, and on flying that thing through lower atmo.. I\'ve landed a lot of times but using mod parts, so I decided to try it with stock. Did it yesterday after a few attempts. First landing was successful, but when I disengaged SAS the lander toppled over (was parked on a tilted surface). Second landing came in at just a bit too high a vertical velocity, decoupling the engine from the tank. Funny thing is, I had a full tank of RCS beneath the capsule, then a decoupler, then the tank and engine that got knocked off. So I decoupled the capsule + RCS and actually managed to get back home. It was a close shave - almost didn\'t have enough. Spent almost the last of the RCS fuel setting the periapsis inside Kerbin atmo for some aerobreaking. If I had a few seconds of RCS less the capsule would have never come home. Even managed to hit water on the way back by timing my chute deployment. The landing after that went great. I landed on a flat surface, the lander was secure with SAS off. Had almost a full liquid tank left and full RCS. Therefore more than enough to get home. Then I decided to go for an 'immersive experience' and switched on time warp so they actually spend 2 days on the Mun. It used to only be possible to get 2x time warp when on the Mun surface but now I was able to get it to maximum. Everything was ok, 2 days went by, my craft stood stable. Then I switched back to 1x time warp and my ship immediately exploded. Well, everything beneath the capsule did, anyway. I only used stock parts. So, basically, I only managed to get my astronauts back safely once after landing on the Mun (using just stock parts, and only RCS to return), the other missions went wrong due to silly reasons.. But there was enough fuel to get them back on each occasion. At least I got a lot better at landings, I\'m having much less problems killing horizontal velocity now which results in a much higher number of safe landings. Anyway, I\'ll see what pics I grabbed when I get back home.

Weapons:SMG, Shotgun, combat knife, two zed flares Armor: sensor helmet Inventory: C4, beacon, radio, a flare gun with 3 shots, and a heavy piece of metal. Currency: 150 credits Time:1910, Zed date 7-03-0 Place: Fort Harris Health: Normal Cpl. Staten: Fully-armed, Normal health Harris: Fully-armed, Normal health James: Fully-armed, Normal health Tagger: Fully-armed, Normal health, Plenty of Medical supplies ??????????? Y ??????????? The convoy stops, and the lead vehicles set up camp as the others park strategically, with transports in the middle and tanks on the outside. The lead truck extends a tower and serves as a lookout post. You go to set up up your team\'s tent. 0034 hours, Zed date 7-04-0 You try to sleep, but something is keeping you up. You decide to go take a walk. You reach the tower, and decide to talk with the lookout there. 'How\'s the horizon?' 'Good, but I thought I saw something about 3 miles North of our position. I don\'t think it was anything though. I just got to keep a wary eye, so nothing sneaks-' With that last word, a shadow leaped out of nowhere and attacks the lookout. You then hear screeching and moaning in the distance. The only way you can alert the base in time is to press the button on the top of the tower, but that shadowy figure is still up there, and you only have your knife with you. What should you do? A) Climb up and confront the figure. Go Paul Revere on the base. C) Screw it, you can take on that horde. D) Run like hell!