The Nightstar Zoo

Lines 4 and 5 in the KSP settings.cfg file

VAB_USE_ANGLE_SNAP = True
VAB_ANGLE_SNAP_INCLUDE_VERTICAL = False

Change the second one to 'true', and vertical snap is now enabled.

problem solved.

Awesome

Moonlanding in new KSP version 1.14 only stock parts.



Also now it persists all fligts unless you manually end them. So it's possible to do orbit meetings, but no docking yet. Those lunar landing legs are part of the new update, but due to size you can only use them with new small liquid engine.

I've made a monstrosity capable of orbit...and survivable deorbit, next up, the moon?

The more monstrous it is, the more fun there is.

Since in 0.14 it keeps track (persists) all objects lunched, I tried to meet up with some other mission in orbit. And I have to say, meeting in orbit is MUCH MUCH more complicated than going to the Moon. Going to the moon entails getting close enough so it's gravity snags you, and than breaking. But in orbit object with which you are meeting generates next to no gravity, and you than need to painstakingly match orbit with it. Only to find out the object is on the other side of Kearth. So than you need to do catching up manouvers, which a finiky without doing math. Closest I managed to get to the destination object is 10km. And believe me that's CLOSE, but definitively not enough.

My people are bored with mun, they shall be sundered in sun.

Anyone else run into an issue where if you wait on the pad for a launch window, you get catastrophic failure whenever you go from 5x+ speed back to 2x or 1x?

No. But I ddi notice my ship swaying in the wind a lot more after time lapse. Probably due to uncertainty in calculations, because after you speed up time, your position is updated less often.

I just beat this game.

there's no topping this:

1. build scrapheap monstrosity capable of over 10km/s. Make it fly. Without exploding.
http://i.imgur.com/umImr.jpg
Where do you think We're going?

2. break planetary escape velocity at sunset.
3. solar deorbit burn, at apohelion zero your orbital velocity. (I was able to finesse it down to 0.1 m/s, didn't have RCS on this trip)
4. enjoy the growing warm embrace.
http://i.imgur.com/OsezA.png
http://i.imgur.com/giMsn.png
5. blinded by the light, watching velocity grow increasingly ridiculous. Pretty sure there's no actual surface for the star, just a point gravitational source, and a light source with a hell of a lens flare filter.
http://i.imgur.com/sf6zs.png

6. I accidentally pressed shift when near the star, instantly shredded by tidal forces. Maybe I just happened to pass through the center at the same time.
http://i.imgur.com/9PKb5.png
7. but the dudes survive?!
8.They were pushed by the fuel tanks out of the gravity well with a ridiculous velocity, well beyond solar escape velocity. or maybe the velocity just overflowed something when passing through the Sun. How could I name their ship anything else?
http://i.imgur.com/TRil9.png
9. Maybe someone will find them someday.
http://i.imgur.com/okNl2.png
10 post mortem(I'll leave it running for a day to see if there's an invisible wall out there somewhere, canceled the end mission screen):
http://i.imgur.com/hqT6K.png
http://i.imgur.com/b5mZK.png

NaN m/s? Yeah, that's a division by zero. Congratulations! Your kerbonauts have explored a singularity!

_________________
Living in a state free from the burdens of privacy and democracy since 2008-06-18.

A few images of the staging for anyone curious: http://imgur.com/1lIax,TeeNG,SVI9f,gvk42

liftoff:
All 57 engines are running, inner 21 engines running on drop tanks.

Orbit and/or planetary escape:
The outer layer of 36 engines, as well as the drop tanks that fuel the second layer during the initial burn are ejected. Inner 3 engines still running on drop tanks.

Beyond: outer layer of 18 engines dumped when they run out of fuel, remaining 3 engines continue on drop tanks until they run dry, then eject them and run on the core tanks.

What I want to know is that, whether, using stock parts and various singularity-effects, is it possible to create a ship that exceeds the speed of light?

Sparky, I don't see any RCS on that design, and last I looked you only reaped the benefits of one ASAS module, no matter how many you have installed. Did you experience different? And did the lack of fins or RCS hinder you in any way, or are all those engines Vectored?

Apart from that, I really like that design, and actually had something similar half-done, but it was shorter and wider, and impacted with the gantry of the control tower on liftoff almost every time, because it was so wide. I wonder how easy it would be to repurpose your design for Mun shots and landings? And would it benefit from solid fuel boosters...

On the ASAS, I guess im a noob then, removing those should improve my delta v
As for vectored thrust, the 3 on the core module are vectored, as are 1/3 of the rest.
Solid boosters might help, but lfr have more thrust, and as you mentioned, the most difficult thing to do is to get the damn thing to fit on the launch pad. I think i'd benefit more from tighter packing and another shell of LFR Ideally I have hexagonally tiled engines, just far enough apart to not overheat, and the largest radius which neither impacts launch tower nor hangs off edge of launch pad and breaks something.

I think added SAS and ASAS modules do give added torque; I could be wrong, but it's seemed to work for me.

SAS adds torque. ASAS is more of an autopilot.

ASAS works just like a regular SAS with the addition of being hooked into winglets/gimbaled engines/RCS blocks for extra control. So right now, non-advanced SAS modules are pretty redundant.
Oh, and 0.14.1 is out for those who've preordered it. It's supposed to fix the NaN issues.

_________________
Living in a state free from the burdens of privacy and democracy since 2008-06-18.