Longer Runway

[Nothalogh]

For big honkin spaceplanes, you need at least 200m/s to get off the ground, and it takes a lot of runway to do that.

Often my behemoth runs out of blacktop before getting enough airspeed.

This becomes very apparent when optimizing for low super and hypersonic drag, for FAR.

So, am I the only one wishing for a longer runway?

[Tex_NL]

The KSC runway is already unrealisticly long.

200 m/s = 720 km/h = 0.588 Mach. Over half the speed of sound!

If your plane can't lift off before the end of the runway then, no offence, your plane is at fault. Not the game.

[Nothalogh]

Large supersonic, let alone hypersonic vehicles require obscenely long runways for both takeoff and landing.

Skylon is proposed to require a Mach .5 takeoff speed and 2.3km of runway.

Hell, the Space Shuttle landed on a 4.5km runway

[GDJ]

Well, I wouldn't mind a wider runway....some of my planes are a real Beyotch to land.

[Nothalogh]

Well, I wouldn't mind a wider runway....some of my planes are a real Beyotch to land.

Need a dry lakebed like Edwards AFB

[RoboRay]

If you need a wider runway, you've got the entire grassy plain around KSC.

If you need a longer runway, I'm sorry, but your plane designs are broken.

[Starwaster]

I agree with others. It's long enough already.

Your design is not necessarily broken however, if it cannot take off in the allotted runway space.

Rather, you may need some JATO rockets to help you get off the runway. (small jettisonable solid rocket boosters)

[GDJ]

Need a dry lakebed like Edwards AFB

Either that or something like Cold Lake Air Weapons Range up here.

- - - Updated - - -

If you need a wider runway, you've got the entire grassy plain around KSC.

Yeah.....but the grassy area has qualities that sometimes causes havoc with landing gears and such, and sometimes planes just don't like grass. I've had small light planes slide sideways and flip over on grass, where they don't on the runway.

YEAH YEAH YEAH I know....learn to land, right?

Well, sometimes it's easier said than done on a skinny narrow patch of asphalt, and most of us aren't building Ultralight fabric planes either.

[ZooNamedGames]

Here's a way to test if your aircraft is at fault, or the runway, hyperedit the craft to the North/South pole which is a MASSIVE flight area and try to take off- if you run from one side of the polar icecap to the other, then its your "air" craft (I say "air" since its really more of a massive car powered by airbreathing engines).

Moreover the space shuttle runway IS one of the longest runways in the world- but it also has a special grade on the runway to create addition friction and traction for the shuttle- and in the end, not needing the full runway. Moreover, if the shuttle had to abort mid-launch or end up re-entering in a different location than planned, then the shuttle had various contingency locations, some in Africa, Spain, Austrailia, and so on. Showing the Shuttle did not need a extra length runway to land. Moreover the shuttle never used a launch abort landing, but it did use a landing contingency location.

JATO might be the way to go. Best suggestion.

[drtedastro]

More engines.

If breaks, more strut's.

and then more engines again.

[Nothalogh]

More engines.

If breaks, more strut's.

and then more engines again.

The problem is MOAR engines makes for things that don't perform well at supersonic and hypersonic speeds.

FAR is a cruel mistress

As the fellow above said JATO is the most likely answer, although that means it's no longer an SSTO

[ZooNamedGames]

The problem is MOAR engines makes for things that don't perform well at supersonic and hypersonic speeds.

FAR is a cruel mistress

As the fellow above said JATO is the most likely answer, although that means it's no longer an SSTO

Obviously it's barely an airplane, much less a SSTO. So don't feel crushed about the SSTO aspect when you can't even achieve 1 aspect in relation to a SSTO.

[Nothalogh]

Obviously it's barely an airplane, much less a SSTO. So don't feel crushed about the SSTO aspect when you can't even achieve 1 aspect in relation to a SSTO.

Of course it's not an airplane, it's a SPACEplane.

My problem is I'm a sucker for things that look like Skylon or an F-104, which of course necessitate a long fast takeoff run.

We can all build big fat delta winged monstrosities that have canards as big as the main wing, but the only way they fly is by bludgeoning the air out of their way and frightening the ground away from them

[SuccinctLemon]

If you really need a large runway, use KK (Kerbal Konstructs). It has a massive Edwardsalike Runway, or you could build your own.

[Wanderfound]

A longer runway would certainly be useful. Skylon and the Silbervogel weren't intended to launch from normal runways.

In the meantime...

An RT-10 will burn out in about the time it takes to travel the length of the runway, and it doesn't hurt if they're mounted a little below CoM. Structural pylons make good mounts; no marks on the wing after they detach. Drop 'em in the water when you're done.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Wanderfound

[Nothalogh]

A longer runway would certainly be useful. Skylon and the Silbervogel weren't intended to launch from normal runways.

In the meantime...

http://i.imgur.com/v9mqh57.jpg

Exactly, when you've got a design that's gotta carry all its fuel, take off and climb out to Mach 3.5 at 20km, all while keeping drag to a minimum, a 5km runway is as expected as a multimode engine

[hab136]

Just to be sure, you're turning on your brakes, letting your engines spool all the way up (which takes a few seconds), and then releasing the brake right? Doing that shaves a bunch off the required takeoff runway length.

[FungusForge]

Slap some SRBs on it to get it airborne. If its Angle of Attack is above ten degrees then it need more wings. If it has a decent AoA but starts bleeding off speed when the SRBs run dry, then it needs more engines.

Maybe an image of the craft could help us determine the issue.

[*Aqua*]

KerbalKonstructs adds some long runways all over Kerbin. There's also the giant runway in the desert which should fit your needs. Or build your own runway with this mod.

[cantab]

If you really need a large runway, use KK (Kerbal Konstructs). It has a massive Edwardsalike Runway, or you could build your own.

+1 to this. We can argue about whether planes should or shouldn't need high takeoff speeds, but the runway at KSC is on the short side at 2.5 km / 8200 feet. Major real airports such as London Heathrow, Paris CdG, New York JFK, have runways around 12,000 feet or longer.

[Montieth]

It WOULD be nice if there was an option for flight testing like the facilities at Edwards. I know we have the KSC, but a land locked facility near KSC that has the expansive runways like they use at Edwards would be nice. If only for the ability to be far enough away from the assembly facilities when your test aircraft crashes and burns....

Runways 36 and 30 at Edwards are HUGE.

Pull up google maps and eyeball the strips...

The runway data per wikipedia:

There are three lighted, paved runways:

04R/22L is 15,024 ft × 300 ft (4,579 m × 91 m), and an extra 9,588 ft (2,922 m) of lakebed runway is available at its northerly end. It is equipped with arresting systems approximately 1,500 ft (460 m) from each end.

04L/22R is 12,000 ft × 200 ft (3,658 m × 61 m) and was constructed to temporarily replace 04R/22L while it was being renovated in 2008.[8]

06/24 is 8,000 ft × 50 ft (2,438 m × 15 m) (this runway is technically part of the South Base) and an extra 10,158 ft × 210 ft (3,100 m × 64 m) of lakebed runway is available at its easterly end.

There are 13 other official runways on the Rogers lakebed:

17/35 is 39,097 ft × 900 ft (11,917 m × 274 m) Imagery from the 1990s shows an additional approximately 7,500 ft (2,300 m) extending to the north from 17L/35R, including a visual cue and centerline markings that extend about 15,000 ft (4,600 m) down the currently declared portion of the runway. This extension and the centerline markings are faded in current[when?] imagery[examples needed].

05L/23R is 22,175 ft × 300 ft (6,759 m × 91 m)

05R/23L is 14,999 ft × 300 ft (4,572 m × 91 m) and is immediately adjacent to 05L/23R at the 23L (easterly) end.

06/24 is 7,050 ft × 300 ft (2,149 m × 91 m). This is not to be confused with the south base 06/24 paved runway (which also extends onto the lakebed), or the north base 06/24 paved runway.

07/25 is 23,100 ft × 300 ft (7,041 m × 91 m)

09/27 is 9,991 ft × 300 ft (3,045 m × 91 m)

12/30 is 9,235 ft × 600 ft (2,815 m × 183 m). It is actually marked as two adjacent 300 ft (91 m)-wide runways (L and R). Runway 30 rolls out onto the compass rose, so its corresponding, unmarked, runway 12 is never used.

15/33 is 29,487 ft × 300 ft (8,988 m × 91 m)

18/36 is 23,086 ft × 900 ft (7,037 m × 274 m). It is actually marked as three adjacent 300 ft (91 m)-wide runways (L, C, and R).

The Rosamond lakebed has two runways painted on it:

02/20 is 4.0 miles (6.4 km) long

11/29 is 4.0 miles (6.4 km) long

[etheoma]

On 7/27/2015 at 9:19 PM, Tex_NL said:

The KSC runway is already unrealisticly long.

200 m/s = 720 km/h = 0.588 Mach. Over half the speed of sound!

If your plane can't lift off before the end of the runway then, no offence, your plane is at fault. Not the game.

Actually the Skylon is estimated to need a at a bare minimum a 5km long runway so no "realistic" SSTO's would need a very long runway, although I admit some of that is encase the takeoff has to be aborted, and as I personally use realism overhual neither can I use the land next to the runway because it is bumpy, and neither do I have the option of removing fuel because it will mean I will not be going to space today, neither do I have the option of adding more lifting surface as that would increase my dry mass and there for cut my delta/V significantly.

btw the craft weighs 288.13 tons which the actual proposed Skylon is said to weigh 325 tons loaded, so I really have optimized it as much as possible, although I have not tried a polar orbit yet... although I have 700m/s left over so I should be able to get into a polar orbit. Although part of that may be that I have had to result to having external tanks which I drop full of LOX to get the acceleration I need to get off the ground. So it isn't even a real SSTO, but given that you could easily recover tanks 1km or 2km away from the runway I don't feel so bad.

Although it is completely unrealistic because you would melt the runway by using rocket on it, but considering I am dealing with a runway that is half the length I am supposed to have I don't feel too terrible.

Edited October 1, 2018 by etheoma

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

Get the KSR Airports mod and its dependencies. Then go to Krackensbane Galactic and voila, you have a 7.5km long runway (the center one)! If you need only a 5km runway, then go to Jebediah M. Kerman International.