Aeroboi

How big (wide, long, height) is the enterprise?

@RocketSimplicityKSP is a part puzzling game. Each segment should completely overlap the texture of the other segment just like when connecting Mk3 fuel, cargo bay or passenger modules. Then you would be able to chose 3 or 4 different srb engines. This would add more dynamic building diversity. It would also make SRB only missions more versatile and easier to build. It would give us additional looks on rocket builds and gets us rid of the same uniform SRB parts the game currently offers. @SQUAD Thought to remodel most of their parts, I hope they do something like this to SRB's additionally including changing the model/textures of it.

Seen the Elcano challenge? Maybe you want to use that vessel and submit. IIRC you could use refueling vessels along your route to refuel. I'm not sure if many people are going to optimize a craft that can do better, especially as your using mods. Maybe there's still room for improvement now that I see what limit there is

Well, Soyuz pods are shaped and specified based on real life utilities. The stock 1.25 - 3.75m ablator heatshields have max universal ablator protection because you can use it to do a interplanetary re-entry at very high speeds. Soyuz pods are made for Low Orbit and Translunar return trajectories for which you don't need that much ablator. In fact, using a Mk1 or Mk2 command pod without heavy attachment and you wont need any ablator to do a re-entry while the soyuz pods have less exterior and interior heat resistance so there is that for difference me thinks. There is no realistic comparison to make because the stock mk1, mk2 pods are custom based.

I got these weird mach effects while using a couple of mods. I don't want them but I can't figure out what makes them. This... I'm using these mods.

Meaning no sepatrons? (uses solid fuel)

Not actually what you desire but I got this ION shuttle with seats in a fairing. You can stand close to the fairing, pan the camera inside and right click the seat to enter. Just leave the seat and the Kerbal will spawn outside the vessel. Maybe a tad unrealistic but it can orbit Duna and land 4 times. Have a claw with xenon in orbit or on the ground to refuel. You could get it to Duna from LKO and aerobrake with the small landing gear instead of the current ones and fly it back to Kerbin.

Took me a while to get it done. It is a neat balancing act having tested various combinations for optimal efficiency. It's not something out of the sleeve

I lol at that. I have found that 1 Shock cone intake can easily feed at least 3.5 Rapier's but possibly at least a little bit more. More intakes generally are necessary when you are rolling slow when a plane is heavy and there's not enough intake speed to further feed the engines. Sometimes more intakes are necessary when creating VTOL air/spaceplanes. Sometimes you only have one attachment node and one stack and you need more intake then 1 i.e. shock cone then you'd want a precooler or nacelle on top of that but only then. I'm not sure why people combine precoolers and shock cones these days, unless the precoolers themselves are attachment points and fuel tanks are to heavy. I also just made a low tech juno SSTO that can reach 70-500km orbit which has 8 junos and only 2 circular intakes and can reach 600+ m/s. Front. back.

I adore ION engines. I suggest you use the better time warp mod and use a custom timewarp setting and add higher settings to the physics timewarp. The less parts and the more strutted the craft is the higher you should be able to set physics timewarp. Some craft of mine can tolerate 100x physical timewarp (often only small craft) and most can do 30 or 40 times. That means a ion tug with a twr of 0.1 could be as fast as 3,4 or all the way up to 10 TWR in real life seconds. I made a low thrust 45k dv ion vessel at 95x physical timewarp and went to duna. I started my burn at kerbin, ended my acceleration burn somewhat past midway and then did my decceleration burn. While the trip lasted 45 minutes in real time I have actually made a vessel that continuously fires it's engines from leaving departure upon arrival. I'm not sure why I see people complaining about ION engine burn times when they can use the better time warp mod to do the job.

Thanks, I just updated the above post with some additions

ION engines allowed? Wings, sph, runway or only VAB. Any or either way I participate.

Funny that I replied in regard to that quote as I decided to bump the thread particularly on the same point made there. While trimming itself can do the job if your plane is properly balanced in roll and yaw natively. This isn't always the case so this feature should really be implemented or in any other way possible.

I know this thread is quite old but I require such a stock function also (yes there are mods...) Hereby a deserved bump

I have finished my long tested work, my biggest rapier ssto i've made so far with reasonable part count. It can carry 1450 tons into orbit with ~350 parts depending on framerate.

Hearts Chevron 96 [EHEV] *STOCK* Extra Heavy Extra Volumetric Cargo Lifter. [Carries ~12.5m wide and 60meter length cargo. Can lift ~1495 Ton into LKO/~1.5Kiloton @ 28.5Ton per rapier.] For only 368 Parts which includes stock cargo! Includes flight instructions below and on KerbalX https://kerbalx.com/Aeroboi/Hearts-Chevron-96-Cargo-Lifter-25MCP https://kerbalx.com/Aeroboi/Hearts-Chevron-96-Cargo-Lifter-2375MC https://kerbalx.com/Aeroboi/Hearts-Chevron-96-Cargo-Lifter-75MC 1. Front side. 2. Belly with 2x3.75m fuel tank cargo setup. 3. From above. 4. Using the 2x5m wide fairing setup. 5. Takeoff. 6. On it's way to orbit. 7. From below 8. Nearing Orbit Introduction The name "Hearts Chevron" relates to the exotic rapier engine blocks. "The" Engine block on one of either sides is a 3x5meter engine mount each holding 16 rapier engines (48 total) on either side (makes 96) In view of them they look either like a "heart" or a "chevron" (depending on ones viewpoint) In flight they distribute that unique engine exhaust effect in it's contrails. The 2375MC version for reference comes with only 368 parts, but mind you, that includes the 1450 Ton payload itself. Explanation I have been trying to build the largest, most part and aerodynamic efficient Rapier based cargo SSTO that can haul very heavy and very large payloads into LKO. Most SSTO's are limited to cargo size either due to the space planes setup or being limited by cargo bays due to CoM, CoT and cargo width/length limits. Usually people like myself build specific space planes for different cargo types for destined destinations. Typically a space plane can never carry more then a specific type of cargo weight or by volume based on the layout of the space plane or the cargo hold parts available in the game. While this space plane can have unique restrictions it should be able to haul anything into orbit that you could desire. Even if the payload should consisted of drag inducing outer parts that couldn't be faired the native engine thrust should be able to accelerate past 400m/s. I require 96 Rapier engines to accelerate to Takeoff speed using the length of the level 3 runway at MTOW. But that amount of Rapiers is more then the required thrust required to break past 400m/s. In theory/practice the space plane can always achieve past 400m/s even if it were to climb at 10° at MTOW so some minor drag shouldn't be an issue. To meet it's specifications I tried to make a layout that can carry universal payloads both in weight and volume/dimension. I reiterated this design many times. Each wing segment is placed locally so it can absorb the greatest aerodynamic stress. All elements of flight on all 3 versions are tested and the space plane can perform all the requested takeoff and landing procedures you'd expect from a decent SSTO. Directly under it's belly it can fit a 12.5m width rocket or space plane, even wider if it can stick out down below the outer mk3 fuel tanks until as wide as the closest engine block while being 60m long. This space plane can be used with reasonable frame rates depending on amount of parts added as cargo assuming you use a modern computer. Parts in fairings will not be succumb to drag and will ignore many aerodynamic physics calculations. You should be able to carry a several hundred part payload along with it on most modern computers when it's shielded inside a fairing. I made this space plane so I can effectively haul very massive and heavy cargo for a very high fuel and cost efficiency to haul mother ship parts or fuel depot parts into orbit.When payload is properly faired it can carry 1495 Ton into orbit. For reference, in total it can carry 17 x Kerbodyne S3-14400 fuel tanks on the 2375MC version. I have already created this space plane some time ago and have further optimized it's design characteristics and made 3 versions with several cargo attachment points. I consider these cargo attachment setups reasonable for most cargo weights and sizes.Tell me if you got any cargo you are unable to haul and I'll see if I can optimize the space plane further. Why would I need such a space plane you'd ask? You'd say lesser efficient or less heavier space planes can haul the required cargo to orbit also! However, if you want to build fuel stations, send space stations into orbit or haul ssto's into orbit using another ssto then this vessel should be able to do that. Physical Time Warp You cannot only use but are advised to use Physical timewarp. I'd suggest to use 3x physical timewarp during takeoff roll (change back to 1x during takeoff itself) Use 2 to 3x physical timewarp until reaching orbit (depending on computer hardware) If your computer is faster 3x should be the choice. Instructions Important *If you use no mechjeb or any other autopilot you want to use pitch trim so the space plane wants to stay level. As speed increases the nose wants to pitch up in the thicker parts of the atmosphere so you want to adjust trim for this. *In the upper atmosphere the CoT can be unbalanced with payloads that shift the CoM down. You can toggle on/off engines on the engine blocks with the action groups 2 through 6. This can be necessary if the weight of the cargo is further down when using a lower attached and/or wider shaped cargo. The combinations of action group 2 through 6 offers several dozen variations of engine setups. It's at your own leisure to find out the variety of engine combinations using a combination of action group 2 through 6 to be able to find the right balance. For most payloads the natural setup of all 96 engines should be centered so that you can maintain orientation up until the upper atmosphere in most cases. If your cargo's mass is hanging low though it is often better to find a better engine setup by toggling one, two or more sections on/off using the action group keys. *Use mechjeb *Stock SAS can be a bit wonky in the lower atmosphere due to natural pitching moment at higher speeds, the pitching moment can be to great under SAS input or very draggy cargo may succumb the pitching moment. If this happens there are 2 options. Firstly try to figure out which engine group to shut down using the action groups to re-balance the center of thrust at higher speeds to negate this effect in the upper atmosphere. If this happens in the lower atmosphere use action group 7 to toggle front spoilers for aerodynamic re-balance. If you do not remedy this when this occurrence occurs it can cause a RUD when pitching to great at higher speeds while carrying the heavier payloads at speeds above 500m/s. This shouldn't be troublesome as above 500m/s the rapiers have gained enough speed so that you do not need to have them running all at once. Above 10km you can turn all engines back on as the atmospheric stress is much less at this altitude and this problem shouldn't appear mostly. *Know that it is important that you know how to attach your cargo properly. Action groups. 1. Switches modes on all engines. 2 through 6. toggles different engines on either side for CoT rebalance. RCS toggles the fuel cells to generate electric charge (if you need it) 7 Toggles front spoilers for aerodynamic rebalance past 400m/s (isn't necessarily required but depend on cargo drag and weight) Facts: Make sure payload is centered so that the Com is centered at the CoL. Version 1 carrying a 7.5m wide center fairing. Version 2 carrying 16 x S3-14400 3.75m tanks in parallel formation with a 50.5% payload fraction. Version 3 carrying 2 x 5.5m(11m total) fairings next to one another. Make sure the payload across both sides is evenly matched. If your payload can't be distributed such way you should add dummy weight on one of either sides. NOTE: I would be happy if people could point out complaints or ways to improve the vessel. Happy flying

I think a rss variant challenge using ssto's is a little to big of a leap unless you use exotic/future engine mods. Maybe on a 3x kerbin scale the challenge is more universal and more people will apply. Still, it's good to see a rather alternative challenge posted

I can completely relate this. On top of this wing incidence helps even further in this regard. It lowers the drag co-efficient of the vessel while it sinks through the atmosphere. When coupling a craft with several degrees of wing incidence while holding prograde is a usable idea. Through this way you can burn 1/2 away from the ksc with a periapsis of let's say i.e. 50km (could be 30 aswell) If the spaceplane is aerodynamic while having mk1, mk2, mk3 fuselage parts, heat resistant parts, wings and landing gear and everything else in a cargo bay it can maintain close to orbital velocity nearing the ksc while dipping down to ~30km altitude. In that case you can pitch up when nearing the ksc to do a massive aerobrake (many g's involved) I have a couple of such spaceplane that do this and it's a way to dead stick your aproach to the ksc easily. If using a capsule it is trickier. It's best to dip down low by creating a longer retrograde burn then a typical lowest one. The consequence for this is that you have to do your burn somewhat earlier compared to the least efficient one which is a burn just enough to get into the atmosphere. You can install reaction wheels so you can pitch a few degrees. Heatshield have a lot of drag and a pitch angle can create a skipping effect to either elongate or shorten your aproach. Use quiksave first so you can try again if your first attempt fails. Remember that many people in the youtube videos re-capture their attempts to get the successful aproach. Or they couple it with the trajectories mod, mechjeb or other instruments while having the UI shut down (F2)

At what stage does the problem occur. While I het it is the upper aerospike stage I do want to point out that the asparagus tanks are very volumetric and the dry mass of those tanks plus the engines could be beneath the top cones as you drain fuel. Under aerodynamic stress the heavier side would want to flip upside down where the engines are. One way would be to use less wide tanks (1.25m) so that you have less dry mass hanging onto the ship as you stage the outer tanks of. Some small fins at the center stage on the bottom should do the trick. The other solution is to drag the parallel tanks further down so that the natural drag of the tanks is further down. My bet is that this should be enough to regain stability. I'm not sure about radial parachutes in terms of drag. But my guess is that they induce a lot of drag. You have a lot of them on the top of the rocket. Best is to put them on decouplers and stage them off anyway to reduce weight and their affiliated drag as you launch. Since a aerospike has no gimbal the drag of the chutes can easily flip the rocket.

@Mukita12 Mk2 does indeed cause a lot of drag. But the greatest drag penalty from Mk2 is when you have a extended frontal cross section due to pitch. If the air hits head on to the spaceplane mk2 cockpit there is the least frontal cross section. Usually this isn't the case as you have to raise your nose somewhat to climb whereby air hits the belly of the fuselage and over extends the cross section. What you can do is rotate the main wings on a incline (wing incidence) by a degree or two (sometimes 3 or 4) so that the nose can stay on prograde during the highspeed airbreathing stage. IME Mk2 isn't draggy at all if you put the wing incidence right. Just make sure that all the mk2 fuselage parts are distributed evenly over the length of the spaceplane so that the fwt and aft have the same amount of drag so as not to cause re-entry instability. Mk2 is also most noticeably a spaceplane part and it represents a lifting body. It's almost a wing around a fuselage. Aerodynamically air gets distorted around a non aerodynamic surface and a Mk2 is wedge and somewhat faired along the edges but it still represents a non aerodynamic platform that isn''t shaped with curves. So in reality the fuselage should act as a drag inducer. On the other hand drag on Mk2 is good if you want to sufficiently do a re-entry from Orbit. Because it has drag you have to install less wings. Less wings is more Dv on a spaceplane and people generally install to much wings on their spaceplanes anyway. It's better to make a spaceplane to get off the runway using the least amount of wings. This usually means your takeoff is at the end of the runway between 150-200m/s and not any slower then that where you'll require excessive amount of wings.

Finished my mission for the 20ton speedrun. A TSTO (nearly a SSTO) that delivers the ION orbiter. I dediced to put it on KerbalX if people want to toy with it. https://kerbalx.com/Aeroboi/ION-Speedrun-TSTO-Mk-5

Xenon collector/distiller on atmospheric bodies (Eve, Kerbin, Duna, Laythe, Jool) Currently there is no way to collect xenon and there is no way why we couldn't

Mine has a TWR of 0.52 on Duna fully fueled Handles 10x physical timewarp using bettertimewarp mod.

Finally made the entire mission. I made a 6 stage 9.5 Ton ION upperstage. The staging only achieves marginal better Dv. However it also means I have more TWR for the amount of Dawn ION engines. So in reality I have more thrust to achieve more speed in the amount of travel time I have. This means you can get quite a bit faster especially as you accelerate over a larger distance. The solar panels are also arranged in such a way that they catch 100% sunlight but that each stage has just above the required EC gain to achieve the least dry mass on every stage. The only problem is that you have to manually allow fuel flow on each and every tank on the next stage which is a bit of a hassle. The vehicle can withstand 30x physical timewarp using better timewarp mod. That means the entire trip only costed a half an hour from the runway up to SOI escape, but several re-attempts where made because of solar panel and fairing collisions I had to avoid. Result: After the run I achieved a whopping 33.718,2m/s Kerbin escape velocity and a Solar escape velocity of 42.943m/s. It took 19 Days to get to Duna orbit. 39 days to get to Dres Orbit and 77 Days to get to Jool/Eeloo orbit. Quite a few pictures so I spoilered them...

I'm against emptying fuel tanks. As someone who builds spaceplanes I wouldn''t like carrying the dry mass of half a empty tank. A fuel switcher with a option for LF only should do. And people can point there finger at mods for the time being but it is a very simple feature and stock should have it I agree on the original request, there should ultimately be more of anything stock wise.