Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'spaceplanes'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website
  • KSP Pre-release
    • 1.2.9 Pre-release Branch
    • 1.2.9 Pre-release Modding Discussions
    • 1.2.9 Pre-release Bug Tracker


  • Developer Articles

Found 15 results

  1. Version 1.7.5 This is a parts pack intended to flesh out the stock mk2 parts lineup by providing new engines, air intakes, and fuselage segments and cockpits in the mk2 formfactor, to give players more options when building spaceplanes and more. All textures are stock textures where possible, using MODEL nodes, so RAM footprint should be minimal. -Command 2 kerbal Inverted cockpit with IVA 1 kerbal Multi-purpose high visibility cockpit with IVA 2 kerbal Mk2-1.25 cockpit with IVA 3 kerbal Mk2 spaceplane cockpit with IVA 1 Kerbal Bubble canopy with IVA -Control Aerodynamic Configurable Monopropellant RCS block Aerodynamic Configurable LF/O OMS block 5-Way heavy duty Mk2 conformal RCS block Roll control RCS chine block Prograde/retrograde RCS chine cap Stability Control RCS and SAS module Monopropellant OMS pod -Air Intakes 1.25m to Mk2 inline air intake Ramscoop intake Mk2 shock cone intake Mk2 precooler Mk2 subsonic circular intake -Engines 'Vector' Thrust Vector Turbojet 'Afterburn' TurboRamJet E.S.T.O.C. Dual-cycle Engine M.A.T.T.O.C.K. Dual-cycle Engine 'Pegasus' Inline VTOL engine 'Siddeley' VTOL engine 'JumpJet' radial VTOL engine 'Wedge' Linear Aerospike 'Pluto' Nuclear Engine 'Rontgen' Atomic Thermal Jet 'Mule' Thrust reverser turbofan 'Spirit' Xenon/Electric Engine 'J.Edgar' heavy VTOL engine "Mongrel" rocket VTOL Engine 'Wirligig' Turboprop Engine 'Boost-O-Tron' Air-Augmented SRB 'Mallet' Air-Augmented SRB 'Sledgehammer' Air-Augmented Ramrocket 'Banshee' VTOL Lift Fan 'Hyperblast' Scramjet -Aerodynamic Chines in three flavors Mk1 scale chine pieces - short, long, and end cap segments for 1.25m parts Mk2 scale chine pieces - short, long, and end cap segments for Mk2 fuselages Mk2 scale chine wing root pieces - chine adapter, short, and long segments -Fuselage and structural Shrouded 1.25m Engine/Docking Mount 2-State 1.25m Aerospace mount Mk2 Tailboom Hypersonic Mk2 nosecone with integrated RCS Nosecap with integrated RCS Spadetail Mk2 to wing adapter Mk2 inverter fuselage Mk2-0.625 tricoupler Mk2-1.25 tricoupler Mk2 short bicoupler Mk2-size2 short adapter T, X, and L hubs Mk2 Structural Tube Mk2 decoupler Mk2 Service Tank Mk2 Science Lab Mk2 airlock endcap Mk2 Radial Attach Mount -Utility Shielded Mk2 docking port Low-Profile Aligned Docking Port Mk2 Service Compartment Mk2 Nuclear Reactor Mk2 radial shrouded solar panel Mk2 nose cargo bay Shrouded Thermal Control System DOWNLOAD -Primary: SpaceDock -Secondary: Github Mk2 Expansion uses as dependencies, and is bundled with, Module Manager, CommunityResourcePack, and InterstellarFuelSwitch This mod is also CKAN indexed Kottabos review: (From Version 1.0) Image gallery: Compatibility This mod comes with Module Manager compatibility/interoperability patches for a number of mods. Connected Living Space kerbal Atomics RasterPropMonitor ASET IVA props Tweakscale Deadly ReEntry ExtraPlanetary launchpads Ferram Aerospace Research Modular Fuel Tanks Near Future Electrical Community Tech Tree Modular Kolony Systems WindowShine For KSPI and users, or if you want RF engine configs, there is a compatibility pack courtesy of ABZB: Link Changelog: Licensing The contents of this mod are distributed a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License' This mod uses the Community Resource Pack, Interstellar Fuel Switch, and Module manager as dependencies Suggestions and feedback welcome. Not seeing a part you want? Have suggestions or ideas for new parts to add? Make sure to post them in the Dev thread.
  2. Hello Kerbal Community, Recently I've been trying to create a space plane on a heavily modded install of KSP version 1.2.2. However, it does not work. Any of the jet engines that I use (ie: whiplash or RAPIER) do not generate a high enough TWR and cause the plane to run out of fuel before ever making it to an orbit. I know that this is not a design flaw, becauseI I've tested a very similar SSTO Spaceplane in a stock version of KSP (also running 1.2.2) and it got to an orbit just fine, with plenty of fuel remaining. This leads me to believe that one of the mods that I have installed is causing the jet engines to work less efficiently, and/or causing a tremendous amount of atmospheric drag. I do not have FAR installed. Below is a link to a picture that shows my game data folder: Can someone please explain to me why this is happening and how I can fix it? Thank you very much, R_Aerospace!
  3. Background: A while back I remember a fun challenge I picked up that involved BD Armory and delivering a bomb to a target about a third of the way around Kerbin in the fastest possible time, it was fun and all but I really wanted to break a barrier I saw in Kerbin speed possibilities. I wanted Jeb to go faster, farther, and more efficiently, then any Kerbal before him and thats when I began looking up real world hypersonic craft and became really interested in this subject area. What I have discovered already: There doesn't seem to be a lot of info regarding people who are building craft meant to travel in excess of 1300 m/s and above 20 kilometers, most of this is due to where the stock Whiplash engines cut out around 1300 m/s and 20,000 m, you might as well just use rocket engines and insert yourself in orbit at that point anyway. To go above and beyond this I picked up the X43 Hyperblast Scramjet Engine from the wonderful MK2 expansion pack (aptly named after its real world vehicle). It's kinda hard to use as it wont start until you are close to 1250 m/s at 20,000 so the whiplash acts as a good stepping stone to using it on your vehicle. Also, while looking for a design to start from, the real world X43 fills exactly what im trying to. A successful knockoff of its design produced a craft capable of breaking 2000 m/s at 33,000 meters in game. I fully realize that once you start getting into using modded engines, tweakscale and other mods that asking about game mechanics regarding them becomes magnitudes more difficult. So im just curious about general design, and if anyone else has tried to tackle this or something similar before Actual Question: Are there any tips/tricks or for building vehicles that travel in atmosphere at speeds between 13-2000 m/s? Why is the real world X43 designed the way it is; flat front vs pointy, smaller control surfaces vs larger, and flat topped body vs circular fuselage? Also would it be helpful to add a pic of the craft I already have so it can be critiqued, etc?
  4. Hey folks, I've been playing KSP since 1.2.2 and I've managed to get rocket launching pretty much sorted (stock game, no mods, except AFPW, to get my Saitek HOTAS to work properly), but man, I appear to be utterly useless at space-plane design/flight. I've designed a number of regular planes, which all fly just fine (I do have some experience in full size and model aircraft), but for the life of me, I simply *cannot* get any of my space-plane designs (SSTO specifically) into orbit successfully. I can get them *close*....and I mean *really* close, but I just always end up running out of rocket fuel. I've watched countless YT videos from guys who seem to just point the thing at the sky and blast off into orbit with no drama whatsoever, but my designs all seem to just barely struggle to the upper atmosphere, then invariably fall *just* short of making it into a stable orbit. The closest I've managed to get is an AP of about 72k, but didn't have enough fuel left to circularise. IIRC I managed to get to about 12 or 13K PE before it ran dry. One thing that most of the videos I've seen have in common is the ability to accelerate at the mid-flight stage to well in excess of 400 to 500m/s, but no matter what I do, I can't seem to get much beyond the 300m/s mark. I've tried adding more and various engines, but I either end up running out of fuel too fast, or being too heavy to climb steep enough to make it out of the thicker part of the atmosphere in time. I've managed to find a couple of *really* good posts in the tutorials section for how to get rockets to launch with the most efficient profile, but there doesn't seem to be anything like that for space-planes/SSTO. Can someone point me to anything like that? Or perhaps share their 'hot tips' on space-plane design, so I can try to work out where I'm going wrong? I'd rather not just download someone's craft file and go fly. I'm rather enjoying the challenge of building/flying stuff by having to do the trial and error process myself, but I've run out of ideas for SSTO. Cheers,
  5. Okay so, lots of people can make spaceplanes these days; there's plenty of tutorials, good parts, and so on. But in general those planes can't carry as much mass into orbit as some guy who slapped some stuff on top of a Mammoth, for various reasons. This leads to a lot of "put an orange tank into orbit" challenges and the like. I'm tired of them... So here's a challenge to build spaceplanes that can carry the biggest, heaviest payloads into orbit. The rules are as follows: 1. Horizontal takeoff; 2. No decoupling (or undocking, or explosive staging), with the exceptions of deploying the payload or jettisoning fairing covers; 3. Payloads must be a single unit that doesn't contribute to the vehicle's flight (i.e. no thrust or fuel can be consumed from it; electricity and reaction wheels are acceptable); 4. The craft must be able to land, intact, on Kerbin after payload deployment (landing at KSC not required, landing need not be horizontal); 5. The payload must be deployed into at least a 100x100km orbit around Kerbin; 6. Payloads cannot include ore (empty ore tanks are acceptable, but not ones with anything in them); 7. For purposes of fairness, only stock craft are legal, but flight info and autopilots (e.g. KER, MechJeb) are fair game. 8. No refuelling of the vehicle is allowed; 9. FAR users get a separate result table. There will be two kinds of scoring: A. Raw tonnage to the 100x100km orbit; B. The per-payload-tonne cost of all consumables used during the full flight (i.e., until the vehicle is landed on Kerbin). The minimum payload to be listed here is 100 tonnes. Happy launching
  6. I haven't had much luck with space planes, everyone i tried to design did not get far before it crashed. At the same time i am wondering what exactly a space plane can do that a rocket can't?
  7. I am having this problem where during take-off on completely balanced and symmetrical planes that the ships always want to pull hard to the left. I am using medium gears with 2 on the back and one on the front. Once the ship is in the air it's rock stable. Can someone suggest what to do with the wheels?
  8. I know it's been done before, but in light of the space plane parts that came with, what was it, 1.1, I've decided to have a go at a non-vertical-launch space program. I'm setting myself some basic rules. The basic philosophy is that what takes off should be like a plane and what comes back should also be like a plane. I definitely don't want to just launch rockets from the runway, or come up with "workarounds" that let me launch from the runway what I would in another safe launch from the launchpad. My rules are, to an extent, a work-in-progress, and if anybody has any feedback or comments, I'd be glad to hear them. My first goal, though, is to make a fun challenge (the fun part is as important as the challenge here). So the first rule is: 1) if it leaves the ground, it starts on the runway, rolls on wheels and is powered by air breathing engines. Obviously I want to be able to collect the science from the launch pad, and I don't mind using the launchpad for things like "test landed at Kerbin" type easy-money contracts. I think this isn't enough, though. If My craft are going to be like planes rather than horizontal takeoff rockets, they have to do what planes do, and also come back. I don't think the tech tree is is well suited to SSTOs and SST-far-away if you're playing career mode, and I want to have fun, not grind in this save. I think therefore it's safe to allow for things like one-way probes, drop tanks, disposable stages (or, if funds allow, like the B52 that carried the X15 up to launch altitude/speed) and missions where I use dedicated non-returnable vehicles for things like transfers or landings (elsewhere). so, 2) If it lands, it has to be capable of a controlled rolling landing on the runway on wheels. If it doesn't come back, it doesn't matter. By basic criteria here are that I want to definitely exclude "falling under parachutes but happen to land on the runway" but definitely allow "I messed up my de-orbit burn and don't have the range to actually fly back to the KSC", hence the "to be capable" rather than "lands". Also, I think drogue chutes are cool. Parachutes are totally allowed if you deploy them after your main landing gear touches down. Hypothetically, if you can deploy them but maintain or regain controlled flight afterwards, that's OK, so in-flight chutes that you cut away before landing, or early-deployed landing braking type chutes are OK, provided you work within the basic concept that we are dealing with flying things not falling things. SSTO is not a requirement. I have no problem with drop tanks, one-way probes, disposable stages etc. I also want to allow the idea of an SSTO spaceplane that gets a refuel in orbit to allow it to fly on to somewhere interesting. The X15 space plane was dropped from a B52. I'm playing stock, so if I do something like that, the B52 analogue will be lost. That's totally OK by my rules. Equally, you may want a Mun lander or interplanetary ship that has no chance of coming home. These are all entirely fine by me. What I specifically want to exclude is cheating with a heat-sheild-and-parachute lander where the crew is rescued by a Kerbin atmospheric plane. Also, the simple solution of one-way mission is not really in keeping with the idea, so the last rule: 3) No Kerbal left behind. I've made a start, under 1.2 pre-release, and I'm having a blast. I want the career play through to be fun, so I've allowed myself two starter-flights of Mk1 pod, Mk16 parachute and Flea booster to unlock enough science to get to the "Aviation" tier that unlocks the basic "toothpick" undercarriage and Juno engine. I could have build some sort of rolling capsule based science-from-KSC type craft to get there, but that's too much of a grind for me. So far, I've got some nice planes that can do low altitude observation missions, and built a "SSTsubO" that gets me into space to achieve the "leave the atmosphere" contract. I've hit a bit of a barrier, though. I've unlocked the Weasley engines and built an orbit capable craft. It comprises 3x FL-T 200 fuel tanks, a LV-T45 Swivel first stage engine, a pair of Mk1 liquid fuel tanks radially each with a Weasley and basic circular intake, basic swept wing and a tail on the back, resting on toothpick tricycle undercarriage. On the front is a TR-18A stack decoupler, LV-909 Terrier, FL-T200 fuel tank, 1.25 m storage bay with science and a Mk1 cockpit. This will take off on the jets (needs extremely careful handling on the runway as the undercarriage is right at the limit), climb to about 8000 m under jets, light the rocket, the jets flame out at whatever altitude they get to, when the rocket burns out the capsule and terrier can get to orbit at 85 km with plenty of fuel to spare. I'm totally convinced this can form the basis of more substantial missions. The problem I'm now having is how to get back within the rules. I want my rules to allow for the game to still be fun to play. I have tested this ship by adding a pair of AV-T1 winglets as wings (placement vital to allow stable but controllable gliding) and a simple fin tail and a couple of batteries in the service bay. This allows the pod to re-enter from orbit, establish controlled gliding flight (using reaction wheels for control) and approach an arbitrary point on the surface nearby at a speed and descent rate that corresponds to a safe wheeled landing at the KSC runway. I see a couple of decisions I need to take now. Is it feasible to bring a craft down from orbit with the basic toothpick undercarriage, or will the blow up all the time? If they aren't viable, I'll work on the assumption that a safe ocean landing (i.e. one that doesn't involve destruction) in the water next to the KSC is as good as a landing on the runway, on the basis that they have a seaplane dock? I'm entirely convinced I could manage a safe splashdown on this craft. Would it make the challenge better if I required returning craft to not just manage a controlled glide approach but also a powered flight approach? I'm pretty sure I have the dV on this craft to do it, the question is will that requirement make for a better game?
  9. Greetings! I have been playing K.S.P since 0.90 as of 2014. Throughout this period I have learned a lot ( from the rage had trying to make my first rocket get into space). Spaceplanes were by far the most difficult of my adventures but I believe I have mastered their creation by now. Rocketry is fairly easy to me and anything can be superlifted into orbit with a few giant thrusters and petal staging. If you notice my crafts they are all designed to be aesthetically pleasing to my O.C.D as well as functional/efficient. Anyhow, this is my repository for anything and everything I create (practical uses such as getting cargo into orbit/other planets. We hope to see many requests for AuraTech Industries Aircraft and will sell them for knowledge of the universe or kerbinverse. (Basically download links will be available soon but feel free to post comments to persuade me to work on them faster :P). All of these crafts are for version 1.0.5: Mods Used: [1] Kerbal Space Station A.k.A K.S.S: (Editing in other files soon) Have fun!
  10. A shadow company that's been developing spaceplanes that run the razor's edge, and the edge of the presence of IntakeAir and possibly give even Jebediah the heebie keebies has finally shown its face. Its philosophy is to stretch the usability of IntakeAir like no one else ever can and spare every feasible design from carrying the unsavory bulk weight of Oxidizer, therefore NOX means No Oxidizer. To qualify to wear the Fort NOX flag, if you so desire (I'm not trying to make this a challenge thread but it's just turning out that way. The firm does have its rules.) :: The firm is quite intimate with the parts from, and has a very healthy partnership with the pre-existing brands, Orbit Portal Technologies, Insanity Aerospace, and N5 Aerodynamics and Space. The associated mods are known to possess true scramjet engines: OPT Spaceplane Parts, Mk2 Stockalike Expansion, Mk3 Stockalike Expansion, Mk3 Hypersonic Systems. The craft must have adequate thermal protection at the front-most part(s) and its pilot must be prepared to avoid asymmetric flameouts which can mean insta-death for the crew. A craft must be able to effectively blow holes in Kerbin's sky and reach high orbit to complete its mission. Not every craft actually needs to be hypersonic or to contain mods. Any stock craft that can get into space, preferably fast, and with the use of fuels other than Oxidizer are eligible. Now if only I had an example for a SolidFuel Hypersonic... That'd be great for Vanilla design. Craft Gallery.
  11. Hey everyone! During my time in KSP - I've only recently started playing - I've mainly used rockets from the VAB. I have barely any experience making space planes, but I see people using them all the time. Should I start using them? Which do you prefer? Rockets or Space Planes?
  12. Hello! My name is Lewis, and I'm an astroholic. This is my first post here, I hope you like it. Mountain Thrust Aerospace Technologies presents: The SCI-LON micro C4. Capable of taxiing 4 brave kerbals up to a 250km circular orbit, the C4 is: Cheap! Cute! Easy & fun to fly! Vital Statistics - Parts: 44 Mass: 22.23t Height: 3.9m Width: 6.7m Length: 10.6m Flight Manual - Engage the parking brake Press 'Z' Press 'T' Check mirrors and blind spot Release the parking brake Hit 'space' or '1' AT THE END OF THE RUNWAY* pitch up to ~10 degrees over the horizon Sit back and be rocketed towards space with our patented THRUST OVERKILL TECHNOLOGY (TM) At about 15km up, engage SAS prograde setting When rapier thrust = 50kn, hit '2' to enter closed cycle mode When your apoapsis reaches the desired altitude, cut thrust and coast. Then circularise with a manoeuvre node. Easy-peasy. * disgregard this if you are comfortable landing without a parachute. Action groups - Toggle Rapier engines Switch rapier mode/toggle air intakes Toggle monoprop OMS The micro C4 is one of a range of multipurpose SSTOs that I plan on sharing soon. I hope she's a tasty enough bite to whet your appetite. I guess the craft file would also help:
  13. Let`s talk about spaceplanes.But not the SSTO or STS kind. More like this: The esa`s hermes. or,this: The Roscosmo`s Klipper. Are they useful? Capsules are better?Why? Does ksp have a good suport on making this kind of spacecraft? There`s a mod on this subject? Will we see a spaceplane like this in our lifetimes? What company/country will build one first? Let`s discuss.Be friendly.
  14. "a solution for every problem we create" Welcome visitor! We at the Antinormal Aeronautics dedicated our pilots' lives to spend valuable tax-funds to deliver you irregular, spectacular, and totally safe methods for tasks that would have been easier boring to fulfill by conventional ways. Our management decided to share the joy of flying (sailing, submerging, orbiting, etc) our most advanced constructions. We hereby deny the accusations of the lowly press that our goal is to ruin other space-programs by providing them dangerous, untested equipment that could damage their buildings and chase them to bankruptcy. While these quite possibly can be among the results of using our crafts, such nuances are overshadowed by the joy of utilizing such sophisticated creations. Disclaimer notice: the crafts in this thread aren't designed for easy use, super precise balance, extreme efficiency or similar noble causes. They were made to demonstrate the principle that if it's stupid but works, it's not stupid. So, without further blabbering around, here comes our first featured product - as an appetizer: (note: the big blueprints you see are linked to .craft files. Your engineers know where to put those*) See this cute, tiny thing? It's the dream of every CEO to flabbergast their colleagues and rivals by casually landing such an exquisite piece of technology in their backyard or on their yacht. Sadly that won't really happen, as flying that with a certain chance of survival is limited to the best of the best pilots. But it's an excellent tool for weeding out the less gifted candidates when recruiting for a space-agency. It might look cheap to manufacture, but it's pricing includes the rather high development costs, as we had to rebuild the VAB seventeen times before we could take the flight demonstration photos you see here. * * * * * Behold the pineapple of our technological expertise. This is -the- universal vehicle. It roves on the ground, flies in the air, lands and skims on water. What's more, it can also submerge to great depths underwater, and then fly to orbit. In that order. Only silence can suppress our pride about this marvel. So I shut up now and let you check the test flight documentation: Ok, just one more thing. The Leapfish Mk II. is also in development. It's capable of everything it's smaller sister is, but it also features an ISRU and appropriate drilling equipment, for infinite interplanetary journeys. It also contains a small nuclear reactor close to the feet of the pilot, so it can be kicked when some malfunction happens. Though this advanced design is pushing the limits of it's category, and it's not easy to bring to orbit, thus it's not yet sold to the general public. But you are an entirely different matter, so feel free to download it. * * * * * This is an older model from before our first Mun landing. It's designed to take a lander with 3.6k dV to orbit. It also uses pretty old technology - ideal for a recently launched, still developing space-program (provided if you can steal obtain 8 turboramjet engines from one of your competitors). After the payload separated, the lifter part can land and be reused. Though taking it down safely requires some expertise - it has the aerodynamic capabilities of a brick. * * * * * And last but not least, behold the workhorse of the company. It's big. It's expensive. It's -heavy-. It takes off with spectacular fireworks**. It can carry a huge and heavy payload to orbit. It either goes up there SSTO style, or it can decouple most of it's body to arrive with a ton of fuel left (that's just an expression, it's actually many tons of fuel). We would never admit if the lack of landing gear on The Husttle was just sloppiness on our part. Instead we claim it's a feature to train the pilots for gentle splashdowns. Unlike the one in the attached documentation below***. That is all for today. Thank you for your attention, and stay tuned for further product releases. Safe flights out there! *Nope, not -there- silly. **Optional feature. ***After extensive testing, we figured the way how to land it in one piece with a heavy payload.