TheFlyingKerman

Another trick not mentioned above: flying with prograde lock. Fuselage parts (even MK2 ones) have absolutely minimal drag when flying perfectly prograde. Besides prograde lock is easy and repeatable. As an example this SSTO manages to deliver 24t to LKO with 2 rapiers and 68.5t MTOW and can do 1600m/s at 21000m in jet mode In practice I'd just design the wings so that I taking off and then setting prograde lock after reaching some speed/altitude gives a good ascend profile.

I am trying to build a more practical SSTO than a tour bus. This HKA-6B is what I've got so far...

Kerbus is revisiting our seaplane line. With the K-240, the K-230-300 is clearly obsolete, so we decided to replace it by a bigger and more fuel efficient seaplane. The Kerbus K-310 https://kerbalx.com/TheFlyingKerman/Kerbus-K-310 Cruising speed: 640m/s Cruising altitude: 11850m Fuel burn during cruising: 0.074 unit/s Range: 5000km KPPM: 0.0033 Cost: 25 007 000 Part count: 39 Notes for taking off: Pull up at 70m/s. Climbing at 10 degrees. Turn on the afterburners (AG1) at 7000m. Ease off the climb at 10000m and fly level at the required altitude and at 650m/s. Turn back to dry mode and engage prograde lock for cruising. In prograde cruising mode, the plane would first climb and descend in 200m cycles, gradually converging to the optimal cruising altitude. To make convergence faster, temporary turn to SAS when the vertical speed is above 5m/s, level the flight and turn back to prograde mode. Notes for landing on water: Lower flaps (AG2). Fly at about 50m ASL with nose pointing 10 degrees above horizon. Lower into water at less than 2m/s vertical by further reducing throttle/speed. Notes for taking off from water: Lower flaps. Gradually increase throttle (so that the thrust doesn’t push the nose down). Pull up at 60m/s.

I built an electric powered plane as shown (click for higher resolution) I used the 5 RCS balls as bearing, there is a similar group at the back near the docking port. I managed to takeoff and fly it for a few minutes at 100m/s, then the entire propeller group manage dislodged and fell out. I don't understand why that happens and how can I fix that? Thx.

Kerbus is revisiting our plane offerings. The first major update is the Kerbus K-350-600. https://kerbalx.com/TheFlyingKerman/Kerbus-K-350-600 We managed to greatly increase the capacity of the K-350-300 to 144, and the price only increases to 29,723,000 Kerbucks, making it one of the cheapest supersonic jet. Unlike the K-380-400 jumbo jet, this plane is optimized for shorter flights, with range of about 3000km, and by carrying less fuel we make it even more fuel efficient than the K-380-400! Cruising speed: 610m/s Range: 3000km Cruising altitude: 10600m Fuel burn during cruising: 0.12 unit/s Notes for taking off: Pull up at 75m/s. Level off to pick up more speed. We recommend climbing at 200m/s. Turn on the afterburners (AG1) at 4000m. Ease off the climb at 9000m and fly level at the required altitude and at 620m/s. Turn back to dry mode and engage prograde lock for cruising. In prograde cruising mode, the plane would first climb and descend in 200m cycles, gradually converging to the optimal cruising altitude. To make convergence faster, temporary turn to SAS when the vertical speed is above 5m/s, level the flight and turn back to prograde mode. Notes for landing: Approach at 75-85m/s and land at 70-80m/s. To save review time we suggest replacing the K-350-300 entry with this one. ================================================================================================================== The second update is the Kerbus K-250 With newly designed wings, we turn the turboprop into a usable bush plane. It now takes off at 42m/s, requiring 550m of runway, and can land on the same short runway without problem. Eco. cruising speed: 200 m/s @6250m (about 1/3 throttle) Range: 1200km Max. cruising speed: 320m/s @8500m Notes: For taking off: lower flaps (AG2) when the plane reaches 35m/s. Pull up gently (about 5 degrees nose up) at 40m/s. After taking off quickly retract the flaps (AG2) and landing gear and level off to pick up more speed. The pilot may then pitch up further. For landing: AG1 toggles thrust reverse. However, high reverse thrust pitches the plane down, so we recommend no more than 1/5 throttle for reverse thrust. Lower the flaps (AG2), approach at 55-70m/s and land at 45-55m/s. The pilot needs to adjust throttle quickly, because the plane is a little underpowered below 50m/s, but accelerates quickly above that speed.

You can keep both. After dropping the rover, quickly switch to the rover, lock the brakes and deploy the parachute (if not done). Then quickly switch back to to plane. Circle slowly above the landing site so that you are within the 23km bubble. Wait for the rover to land. You can check that from the map view. After the rover landed it is safe and you are free to fly home and go back to the rover from the tracking station. Just be careful not to land on a cliff or flip your rover.

KSP is about engineering challenge...

To get closer, you just do a small correction burn mid course. It is actually easier to insert into orbit and then wait for a transfer window to go home.

Eeloo Elcano complete! Everything was stock 1.3.1. The rover is my standard nuclear powered science rover, just 22 parts and 0.82t without the kerbal.

It's Kepler's law. For Keostationary orbit the altitude is 2863333m, or 3463333m form Kerbin's center. For a Hohmann transfer form a 75000m orbit, the Pe is 675000m from the center and the Ap is 3463333m, so the semi-major axis is (675000+3463333)/2 = 2069167m. By Kepler's law the time it takes for the transfer is (2069617 / 3463333 )^( 3 /2 ) / 2 = 0.23 Kerbin day In other words your Ap should be a little less than 1/4 of a circle (83 degrees to be precise) ahead of your target, by the time you burn.

I flew the K-380-400 under question in both wet and dry mode. Flying east over the equator with prograde lock, the plane automatically levels at 15000m and 12000m respectively, from the panel the AoA is below 0.02 degrees in both cases, and the thrust and drag balance out. In wet mode, cruising speed is 872.8m/s, burning 0.34 units a second. In dry mode cruising speed is 627.4m/s, burning 0.17 units a second. So wet mode only flies 3000m higher, with about 10% lower drag, and burns 2x the fuel for 1.4x the speed. Tried another plane and the result is similar Moreover the engines flames out at around 13200m at 922m/s so it is not very feasible to further save fuel by flying higher.

Dry mode should still be more efficient at 9000s ISP vs. 4000s ISP in wet, provided your plane is low drag enough that you can cruise in dry mode at 600+ m/s at 9000m+... FYI for 4000s ISP the Whiplash is better at everything. The Kerbus K-380-400 is a typical example. There is not enough TWR to go above mach 1 in dry and climb in dry mode.

Yes. I suspect there is no jet stream in Kerbin and there are places with super good seeing, like the crater island.

Laythe spaceplane

I sent out my fast recon plane just to see what I am up to... I am playing 1.3.1 so no Woomerang and no refueling stop. I'll see how to land on them...

At least this one makes orbit...

A non-role play reason: I have a large relay station, with 10x the power of the DTS station, parked at KSC. I am sure someone with a more CPU power would want a even bigger station when sending interplanetary probes.

Can something like this work as a spy/recon plane? https://kerbalx.com/TheFlyingKerman/LKA-1CIII

I think I understand their physical meanings. What I am asking is whether there is any rule of thumb for setting these? For instance if I am sending a 0.8t rover with 4 rigged wheels to the Mun, expecting the wheels to absorb jumps of several hundred meters, how should I set up my wheel?

You mean something like an ion engine with 2000KN thrust (same as a Twin Boar)? Scaling up form the Dawn, it would weight 250t and good luck generating enough electricity to keep it running.

Welcome back and thanks for the review and purchase

I am considering that and I am trying to write up a test review. Not sure if my keyboard piloting skills is up to the task.

Thanks. Note that I have recently done some minor updates to the plane, mainly trying to make the flight smoother. Looking forward for your review :)

Yes my Kerbus K-380-400 (update of the K-380) is one of them. The other entries I am aware are @CrazyJebGuy's Topolev and a super jumbo by @Bob Saget. @CrazyJebGuy was to review the super jumbo but lost the writing and is not doing it. What is wrong with the other and how can I help?

There are some planes in the old thread still not being reviewed...