how to spaceplane post v1.0

[Vashts]

i made a few space planes pre v1.0 that used the ram air/hypersonic climb method to reach orbit.

these designs no longer work, and i doubt they are salvageable. not only have they lost all stability in flight, but they will not reach the speeds they used to, not even close.

so what is the trick now? how do i make spaceplanes now?

Edited October 2, 2015 by Vashts

[The_Rocketeer]

Make the very most you can out of being in breathable atmosphere while you still are. You want to hit optimal air-breathing velocity at optimal altitude, and then hit the rockets. The ascent profile is a good bit more gradual than it used to be:

Steep climb to 10000m

Gentle climb (~5 degree pitch) to ~20000m

Hit the rockets when you stop accelerating on air.

Push your apoapsis up to vacuum.

[Bubbadevlin]

Well the rapiers are now the best jets for SSTOs, and function at the highest altitudes. Also you need a lot less intakes (like 1 per engine) and a lot more oxidizer for your rockets

[GoSlash27]

All of the above. The focus is now on eliminating drag. The cleaner your design the less engines you need to get it up to ludicrous speed.

-Build it so it looks fast and it probably will be. Think needle shapes without blocky junk hanging out in the breeze.

-And don't be afraid to use wings. Wings generate a lot less drag to generate lift than fuselages.

-Build it so the nose is pointed as close to prograde as possible during the flight. The closer the better.

-Intake spamming will only hurt you. Just give it enough intake to stay lit up to 23 km or so.

If you can get it past about 360 m/sec then it will be capable of exceeding 1 km/sec and possibly as much as 1600 m/sec depending on how it's built.

So get it up to 18km and get all the speed out of air- breathing mode you can while you drift up over 20km. Then engage closed cycle and proceed like any other rocket.

SSTO spaceplanes are a little more difficult than they used to be, but not all that much. If you can figure them out they're still way more economical than chemical rockets.

Good luck!

-Slashy

Edited October 2, 2015 by GoSlash27

[Vashts]

thanks for the help guys.

is there a new intake to engine ratio? i pretty much lived by the 3 to 1 rule. it seems ram air just generates way too much drag for 3 to 1.

[The_Rocketeer]

1 intake per engine is plenty. Engines will flameout at certain altitudes/speeds regardless of a supply of intake air.

Some of my planes use less than 1 intake per engine. It's probably suboptimal but fun isn't optimal.

[GoSlash27]

Vashts,

1:1 is plenty for series mounted intakes. In truth, most intakes are more than you need to feed an engine.

Best,

-Slashy