cBBp SPC Pack v0.4: Fixed Failcan RCS and added some adapter pieces. Enjoy.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

The original X-33 would\'ve had a shuttle-sized cargo bay on it. Why not do that for your spaceplane? Saves trying to figure out how to attach a cargo pod. 8)

no the x-33 would have been cargo bay less. The venture stare also was deemed to need a redign to not have the cargo bay and instead hold more fuel inside. int he end they determined piggy backing cargo would be best design. But they never got that far. Believe me i watched shows about this thing when i was a kid

need an opinion windows. tempted to have no windows for they are all ugly.

[Spoot Knight]

The second one could work. If not, then maybe portholes on the sides like Kliper?

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

closer to something I like... however I still like windowless look more ahha.

[Guest GroundHOG-2010]

Windowless. Cause Jeb doesn\'t need to see where hes going.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Windowless. Cause Jeb doesn\'t need to see where hes going.

not like you coudl see over the nose in landing anyway.

[Gubru]

I really like the looks of the last set of windows. I think you have a winner there.

You should insert 3D models of the three Kerbals into them -- complete with a set of shades for Jeb, of course.

[Rico88]

The original X-33 would\'ve had a shuttle-sized cargo bay on it. Why not do that for your spaceplane? Saves trying to figure out how to attach a cargo pod. 8)

Actually, there were two spacecrafts. The first was the X-33, which would\'ve been just a techdemo, without cargo bay. If the X-33 had been a succes, then they would have been built the Venture Star, which would have had a cargo bay. Both was planned to be unmanned, but the Venture Star could have carried people as well, with the cargo bay modified.

[MC3craze]

In the end, they had problems with the fuel tank.

Tbh I preferred the shuttle anyway.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Actually, there were two spacecrafts. The first was the X-33, which would\'ve been just a techdemo, without cargo bay. If the X-33 had been a succes, then they would have been built the Venture Star, which would have had a cargo bay. Both was planned to be unmanned, but the Venture Star could have carried people as well, with the cargo bay modified.

no. In the end they decided piggy backing the cargo was better than the internal cargo bay actual. However they never got around to redesign. They determined it could carry more fuel, inject cargo upon abort and land safely and various other advantages.

In the end, they had problems with the fuel tank.

Tbh I preferred the shuttle anyway.

The irony is after it was cancelled and composites tech improved they managed to get a working fuel tank lol. There is just no funding for the thing. It could be built now days.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

decided to lok at my favorite plane windows such as tu-4, b-36, and c-130. Endded up going with this after much trial and error.

[Tiberion]

As big as you\'re making it, its going to look sort of silly ingame.

Heh, your test launcher looks like you\'re boosting a grain elevator to space. Maybe just send a whole elevator of wheat along to Mars so they can have all the pancakes they want.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

As big as you\'re making it, its going to look sort of silly ingame.

Heh, your test launcher looks like you\'re boosting a grain elevator to space. Maybe just send a whole elevator of wheat along to Mars so they can have all the pancakes they want.

it is not that big really. it is the width that makes it look huge. look at the venture star as compared to the shuttle. It is a SSTo for goodness sakes. the size is staying

note the venture star looks huge but only because it is wide as hell.

[Tiberion]

If those are 1m tanks, yours is gonna be twice as large as the VentureStar, though. Picture 7x of those shuttle boosters side by side, thats how big your fuselage will be in comparison.

Do remember, I told you that the giant Falcon9 looked weird too, and you ended up making another one

[Rico88]

I have to agree with Tiberion. I looked at your model again, and tried to determine the ship\'s possible size compared to the engines. It seems to be a little bit too big. I think it should be downscaled to 2/3rd of the size, at least. But I have to admit it might be early to say this before seeing how the ship actually looks in game. It\'s just, the whole model looks great and I bet it\'ll fly good as well, but it\'d be dissapointing if it was oversized. Anyway, I\'m looking forward to it.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

I am content with the size. it has room to piggy back cargo to space/ :-*

[Cepheus]

It\'s so beautiful. Now, four questions. How easy is it to fly this beast? Can this beast be landed? Easily? On the moon?

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

It\'s so beautiful. Now, four questions. How easy is it to fly this beast? Can this beast be landed? Easily? On the moon?

in the pictures it is just a fuel tank. it is no where near done. merely put in game to see how it looked size wise.

No idea how it will fly or land yet.

it will not carry enough fuel to reach the moon. it is merely for kerbin orbit injections. Boosters will be usable for TMI. (AKA munshots)

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

how ever shall I do the flaps on this sucker...

[Rico88]

It looks very cool in game. But I still think it should really be downsized. I understand, that you want to stay with this size because of the cargo, but it\'ll look really awkward, when we will have multiple ships in the game. It\'ll be way too big, compared to other ships. I mean the cockpit window itself is almost twice as big as the Durgun. But if you really want to stay with this size, you should downscale the cockpit window. This way it would give the impression of a huge ship, but not an oversized craft, compared to other ships.

Sorry for complaining all the time, I\'m just trying to be a constructive critic.

[RichieD76]

I like the size. If you make it any smaller it will be so fiddly tying to build it up when it\'s made of all the separate parts. Like some of the other pods on here there next to impossible to build unless you mess around zooming right in while othe VAB. Kept it big! Women like big ;-) and I like big women!

[sarkun]

I like it as it\'s now - the size makes it kind of unique I think. You\'ll need to add a lot of surface details to it though to make it work. But you are pretty good at this stuff so I have confidence in you

[C7Studios]

How did I not notice this until now?! Wow, that is just amazing. I love the linear aerospike engines. I certainly hope my small linear aerospike engines lives up the majesty of yours!

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

I think you are just self centered C7

Yeah I plan to add lots of detail. I am just roughing the shape out currently. it is quite a complex shape actually. It would be 100 time harder if i did the wings correctly but I will not be doing that

As for the window i think you are right. I should make it smaller perhaps. But at the same time no so much. Capsule windows are small but planes need more viability.

-looks up to 1.200 scale models of every boeing plane made on the shelves- they all have the same shape window and it is scaled to the size of the rest of the plane. so i will see how it looks smaller but if not I a content with the size of it

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

after much logical thinking and using various things i made flaps0 for the wings and fins which move well in their models. Also, i gave it a nose job. It now goes form a sort of trangular shape toa perfect circle looks much cleaner and nicer.

[Spoot Knight]

Definitely taking a joyride in this when it\'s done.