Wanderfound

Members
  • Content count

    4854
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1192 Excellent

About Wanderfound

  • Rank
    Mach 6 is my launchpad.
  1. Will comfortably handle 60 ton payloads.
  2. Only 1,983m/s, but I'm claiming style points for aesthetics.
  3. One RAPIER up, one RAPIER down. No staging, no other engines. Just try to figure out the most efficient load-carrying combination of wings and tanks that you can get to orbit and back down again.
  4. This is very basic: 1) Fly an SSTO to LKO (a 70 x 70 or higher orbit) and then back to a safe horizontal landing at the KSC runway. 2) Engine is limited to one RAPIER only. All stock, no physics or part altering mods. 3) Must be crewed, with a cockpit. No drones, no command chairs. 4) Highest ΔV in LKO wins. It's a test of building and piloting efficiency. How much fuel can you hoik into LKO on a single RAPIER? LEADERBOARD Rosvall 2,792m/s Zolotiyeruki 2,766m/s Foobar 2,570m/s ManEatingApe 2,463m/s Wanderfound 1,983m/s
  5. This. Pottering along at minimum throttle on a grounded jet requires very little fuel. You can do it for miles. Try something like this:
  6. The other point is: if you're using a plane, you don't need the rover. Just land and taxi to where you need to go.
  7. The Sci Jr is the problem; it, like most science parts, has a very low heat tolerance. Either hide it in a fairing or cargo bay, or collect the science from it and dump it before reentry.
  8. If you've got Kerbal Engineer or similar to look at the ΔV values of your ship... KSC to LKO requires about 3,500m/s. LKO to Duna landing under power requires about 3,000m/s, but you can replace up to half of that with aerobraking and parachutes. Getting back off Duna takes about 1,500m/s, returning to a Kerbin Intercept for aerobraking and landing needs about 750m/s. Build in a bit of slack to allow for piloting imperfections and you're all good. Be aware that Duna aerobraking needs to be done at scary low altitudes due to the thin atmosphere.
  9. Demonstrating the above suggestions re: hydrofoils etc... Water landing is more about controlling your vertical velocity than an issue of horizontal speed. You just need to have a stable, controllable aircraft and practice flying level at extremely low altitudes. A pair of downwards-facing searchlights (Dambusters style) can be useful as an easy altitude reference mark, like this one has: See here for inspiration:
  10. Low-tech budget space taxi. Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/tejunadl18mczvn/Twotone.craft?dl=0
  11. Another vertical-stack build:
  12. Given what everybody has said above about console processing limits...your other option is to build for part efficiency. It's entirely possible to make a Mk3 interplanetary ISRU-equipped SSTA with less than a hundred parts. 102 parts on that one, but you could drop twenty from that if you removed the seaplane floats and hydrofoils.
  13. Rule of thumb: you always want the nose as close as possible to prograde, and you want prograde as close as possible to the horizon [1]. However, limiting factor: you don't want prograde to drop below the horizon. So, I'll generally do the 45 degrees at 10,000m thing to get out of the low-atmosphere soup, but from then on I keep the nose on prograde and watch the time to apoapsis. If it's getting too close to zero, pitch up a few degrees; if it's racing away from you, drop back to prograde. A bit of practice and you can get your circularisation burn down to almost nothing. [1] Within reason. I'm talking about the latter part of the gravity turn, not going straight sideways at launch.