Search the Community

Last month when I was surfing in the forum for topics about 0.17, I found a topic about Eve return. I was shocked by this idea, which was treated as impossible before. I did tons of testing but none of these designs succeed entering Eve orbit. But, just before I give up, a video of Scott Manley appeared. He made it. I copied his craft and made some tiny tweaks, reduced this craft's part count. So, let's return his miracle!

Hello everyone, Is Squad going to add more stock parts? I know they have added some in the past, the making history expansion will be coming out and the recent release of 1.3.1 patch but I was hoping they can add more modern parts into the game. Does anyone know? Also, what do you all think they should add?

Real Control Surfaces Almost all controls in KSP run on mana. You don't need hydraulic, pneumatic or electrical power to operate elevons, landing gear, steering, brakes, cargo bay doors etc. Not only that, all flight controls are immune to compressibility effects, something that has killed many pilots during WW2, before powered assist became available. So I've built this ugly duckling to address this issue. Yes you can laugh at its appearance but it flies well, although like all airplanes it has a few quirks. The only thing that might interest you is what's behind the skin. Short answer: lots of parts. Slightly longer answer: linkages, rods and lots of ball joints. Long answer: elevators and ailerons are combined in the control stick in front of the pilot seat, the rudder is operated through the pedals, just like real life. Since we don't have a giant to sit in that chair, both have their own power supply, reaction wheels and probe cores. The reaction wheel of the main structure is disabled; its probe core controls flaps, landing gear and throttle. This is pure flying. Is it practical? No. A bit of a hassle really. You need to change focus often, especially during take-off and landing. That's why I made the plane very easy to fly. Here are some pictures of what's inside. First the control column and rudder assembly seen from the front. And the control column seen from behind the pilot seat. Is it perfect? No. This was my first attempt. I'm actually surprised I was able to pull it off. Due to space constraints the geometry isn't perfect, this means there is some coupling between pitch and roll. But the plane is very forgiving so it doesn't matter. The elevators are the strongest but only with positive pitch, The rudder is next but in practice you won't be using it. The ailerons are quite weak, especially at higher speeds. Yanking the pitch control helps the ailerons a bit. Is it beautiful? Hell no. But it's stock and that's what counts :-) Instructions: It's best to steer the plane a bit off the runway, to prevent collisions with the tower. You don't really have the time to apply rudder. Stage, only once for now. Now look at the control column. Right click on the docking port and stick the window to the screen. Do the same with the docking port on the rudder column. And also pin the window of the MK2 probe core (the cockpit dashboard). Now change focus to the right until you see a change in one of the window. Choose "Control from here". Do the same with the other windows. You have to change focus 7 times to select the control column and you don't need to go further. Go back to the main craft (the MK2 probe core). Start the engines and throttle up. Don't use the flaps, they're for landing only. It will take off by itself at around 30 m/s. Retract gear and switch back to the control column. You're now in control. Do not fly with SAS! Only with trim. Do not use the wrong control input for the wrong column. Don't use yaw when you only have pitch and roll, it might break the linkages. Same with the rudder pedals, only use yaw. Due to the construction, the control column has a tendency to yaw a bit. Ignore it, it will correct itself. Flaps are operated with action group 1, afterburner with action group 2. No, this plane is not supersonic. Pilot fatigue: Both columns use reaction wheels stacked into each other. Both use RTG's for power. You might notice the aircraft suddenly becoming less responsive. This means you've drained the battery. Control will return to normal if you don't touch it for a few seconds. I call it pilot fatigue. If you don't like it, go to the cheats and enable Infinite Electricity. Have fun! Craft file: http://kerbalx.com/crafts/34781

This topic is to develop guidelines for optimizing a space station. I would like to limit it to stock parts, since mods can easily change the rules that will apply. So what makes your space station work well? Some guidelines I like to follow: 1) Keep the part count as low as possible. This has more to do with performance than gameplay. This is just to avoid performance lag as you dock new parts/ships. Keep this in mind as you add parts such as strut connectors, batteries fuel tanks, ladders & solar panels. They all add up. As rule of thumb go for the largest part you can manage. For example, one Z-4K battery bank has the same capacity/mass as 10 Z-400 batteries but in a single part. 2) Keep the heavy stuff in the middle. You have no doubt by now noticed that if you have a large station and dock something massive at far end it will flex so much that the station becomes difficult to control. The farther you get from the center of mass the more the wobble will be magnified. So if you have a central hub with six nodes it is better to dock six modules to the hub than to stack them on top of each other to form a lengthy chain. 3) Keep it balanced Same idea. If you have something heavy on one side and something light on the opposite side, it makes the station difficult to control. 4) Keep one source of torque in the middle. If you have more than one source of torque (remember, most command parts will have built-in torque), they can fight each other and create wobble. The farther it is from the middle, the more wobble it will create. Remember that you can disable torque if you have more than one source. 5) Don't overbuild. While big stations are impressive, make sure you're building to its purpose. So if you're building an orbital lab, do you need a Convert-o-tron? 6) Pay attention to tolerance You want to have sturdy parts in the middle or an accident could cause the whole station to come apart. For example, an adapter may have a tolerance of 6, while a girder adapter will do the same job but has a tolerance of 80 (and it's cheaper too).

Factorizing values... Calculating trajectories... Treating kessler syndrome... Results: A lot of numbers. What I found out with a (hacked) K.E.R. was that engines in the stock game are about 200 to 300% less efficient than they should be. Thus meaning, your mün rocket should have enough delta-V to get you at least to Eeloo. So I made a fix. Release in 2 weeks. LOADING...

Real Aircraft & Inspiration This concept was inspired by a combination of NASA and Air Force test programs from the late 1960's and early 1970's, specifically the X-24B project, which was arguably one of the most successful lifting body aircraft of the era. It was far more maneuverable then previous X craft and had sufficient performance to change runways before landing at Dryden. The X-24's concept would lead to the direct development of the ISS X-34 project (which was cancelled) and later the US Air Force X-37 spacecraft. MSP T-5B "Top Flight" Development of the T-5 spaceplane began with initial concept of a runway launched aircraft which would "skip" over the atmosphere in sub-orbital hops, without the use of a carrier aircraft, or the use of a large rocket launch platform. Once the air frame design was finalized, a number of aircraft were produced under the T-5B designation. These aircraft were not optimized for space flight, but did reproduce the general handling characteristics of the space plane. The aircraft were powered by the J-404 "Panther" Jet engine, and featured simple airbreaks. Some engineers and test pilots questioned the "nose up" additude of the aircraft while sitting on the runway, but this feature proved to be advantageous to the aircraft's handling characteristics. MSP T-5G "Top Flight" After several developmental models and wind tunnel tests as well as Test Pilot feedback from the T-5B and T-5C programs, Matagorda Space Program rolled out the rocket takeoff assisted T-5G model, which was powered by the CR-7 Rapier Engine, and boosted into the air by the RT-10 "Hammer" solid rocket booster. This novel approach allowed the T-5G to quickly gain lift and speed as it cleared the runway, saving the aircrafts external tanks and internal fuel for ascent, and powered landings. After leaving the atmosphere, the CR-7 engine will switch to LOS, and the external fuel tanks can be jettisoned to gain additional speed for a sub-orbital flight. Upon re-entry, the T-5G would rely on a series of six air breaks to slow the craft sufficiently to keep it from burning up as it decelerated to less than 500mps. At this point, the CR-7 engine can be re-started and the aircraft flown to a safe landing. If there is enough interest, I'll gladly produce the flight profiles, ship files, and a bit more information about them. They were made using KSP's stock files... so they are easy to reproduce.