I will TRY TO DO A 6000m\s JET SPEED RECORD !!!!

[Rocket In My Pocket]

38 minutes ago, prorokbmx said:

It dont want to take off  Maybe because of those holes in the wings XD

3 freaking hours of developing and it dont want to take off

And btw i never landed on mun

Sounds like you placed the landing gear improperly, the rear set of wheels should be just behind the center of mass, it acts like a fulcrum to rotate the plane's nose up and increase the wings angle of attack.

Also, 6000 m/s isn't going to happen with just stock jet engines.

I like your attitude but I think you may be in over your head on this one lol.

Best of luck.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Rocket In My Pocket

[Grenartia]

7 hours ago, prorokbmx said:

This week i will try to set a new record in KSP. I will try to reach a speed of 6000 m\s OH YEA

Only with stock parts !

I dont know what more i have to say

IF i will do that i will upload a video on YT !

As somebody who has been trying to do a Mach 10 jet (IIRC, 6km/s is Mach 20, which NASA classifies as High Hypersonic), I'm just going to say this is impossible without mods/hacks/cheats (I'm finding it hard to do even with B9).

Most stock parts overheat before you even get to Mach 5. And even the ones that do withstand that tend to overheat before Mach 5.5 (I actually had a 1.25m service bay overheat on me, and that has one of the highest heat tolerances in stock, outside of the heat shields). As I recall, the highest anybody here has achieved was Mach 6, and that was in 0.90.

Also, a problem I encountered in my runs is that there's a pretty small envelope you have to fly in in order to maintain speed. You can't go so high that your intakes stop providing air, but at the same time, you can't get so low that drag starts slowing you down (and the subsequent friction heats you up). This generally means staying somewhere between 20-30km, but in practice, is closer to 25-29km. And at these speeds, you're moving so fast that level flight is hard to maintain with SAS (and I've found that without it, its nearly impossible), simply because you're moving so fast that you're pitching up as the surface curves away from you.

The second design I tried, has only one non-stock part, and that's MJ.

A while later, at Mach 5.2:



Notice how the radial intakes and ram intake are gone, as are all of my landing gear (and airbrakes). I'd also like to point out how I'm having to pitch down, in order to approximate level flight. Also, my service bay (that first part that's showing) overheated a few minutes later. I don't recall getting much past Mach 5.4, and certainly not to 5.5.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Grenartia

[Grenartia]

2 hours ago, prorokbmx said:

Guys i made a badass plane http://imgur.com/wP9QT6c

 

F-CK the Aerodynamics THIS IS POWERRRRRRRRR !!!!!!!!!!!!

I see you have your tail fins mounted directly aft of your engines. That's just asking for trouble. As is not using mk2 parts for a kerballed plane.

[GoSlash27]

15 minutes ago, Grenartia said:

As somebody who has been trying to do a Mach 10 jet (IIRC, 6km/s is Mach 20, which NASA classifies as High Hypersonic), I'm just going to say this is impossible without mods/hacks/cheats (I'm finding it hard to do even with B9).

Most stock parts overheat before you even get to Mach 5. And even the ones that do withstand that tend to overheat before Mach 5.5 (I actually had a 1.25m service bay overheat on me, and that has one of the highest heat tolerances in stock, outside of the heat shields). As I recall, the highest anybody here has achieved was Mach 6, and that was in 0.90.

Also, a problem I encountered in my runs is that there's a pretty small envelope you have to fly in in order to maintain speed. You can't go so high that your intakes stop providing air, but at the same time, you can't get so low that drag starts slowing you down (and the subsequent friction heats you up). This generally means staying somewhere between 20-30km, but in practice, is closer to 25-29km. And at these speeds, you're moving so fast that level flight is hard to maintain with SAS (and I've found that without it, its nearly impossible), simply because you're moving so fast that you're pitching up as the surface curves away from you.

The second design I tried, has only one non-stock part, and that's MJ.

A while later, at Mach 5.2:



Notice how the radial intakes and ram intake are gone, as are all of my landing gear (and airbrakes). I'd also like to point out how I'm having to pitch down, in order to approximate level flight. Also, my service bay (that first part that's showing) overheated a few minutes later. I don't recall getting much past Mach 5.4, and certainly not to 5.5.

Yeah, another example from my early 1.0 intake testing:

 The heat rips parts off long before you get to Mach 6.

The OP claimed to have reached 3km/sec on stock parts and jets. He must've been mistaken. 3km/sec is impossible, let alone 6 km/sec.

Best,

-Slashy

 

Edited December 31, 2015 by GoSlash27

[Grenartia]

4 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

Yeah, another example from my early 1.0 intake testing:

 

I'm thinking of refining my design by cutting out all of the intakes save for my precooler. I'll also slap a heat shield on the front. I'll probably also create a mothership to take it to cruising altitude, to save fuel.

[GoSlash27]

Grenartia,

 A single precooler would definitely be the way to go. The heat shield... it's worth a shot. Heat tolerance seems to count for more than aerodynamics at that speed.

 I think I may fart around with it a bit myself.

Best,

-Slashy

 

[Grenartia]

10 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

Grenartia,

 A single precooler would definitely be the way to go. The heat shield... it's worth a shot. Heat tolerance seems to count for more than aerodynamics at that speed.

 I think I may fart around with it a bit myself.

Best,

-Slashy

 

Really, at these speeds, the design philosophy morphs from plane to missile.

Honestly, the only reason I wanted to do this was to make something that could kick the SR-71's S.

Edited December 31, 2015 by Grenartia

[GoSlash27]

This one was quick and dirty. I just gave it a couple drop tanks and launched it vertically.

1687.6 m/sec. Your concept is sound.

 

Best,

-Slashy

Edited December 31, 2015 by GoSlash27

[Gojira1000]

Hmm. just tried a tiny 1 rapier, heatshield, intercooler combo standard takeoff from the strip. Seemed to hit a wall at 1485 m/s that I couldn't beat. That heatshield is certainly ... blunt.

Yeah, a little faster with no heat shield but still stopped at 1577m/s - interestingly the precooler didn't blow up. May have had to do with the cubic octagonal strut I accidentally left on there, which also failed to melt.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Gojira1000

[Redshift OTF]

I admire your spirit OP but, as others have said, I believe it is impossible. You could probably get up to 3000m/s in older versions of the game where I think you could reach escape velocity in the atmosphere but squad nerfed it so jets couldn't get you faster than 2400m/s, (which is about orbital velocity at 100km). Then I think they nerfed them again so jets lost thrust the closer you got to 2400m/s so you could never reach that. And of course when version 1.0 came out they nerfed the engines again so they lost thrust a lot sooner than that as well as thrust stopping completely over a certain height, (I guess to prevent airhogging at 30km). That's not even taking the new heating mechanism into consideration.

When you look at all that you'll see why people know it is impossible.

[Grenartia]

47 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

This one was quick and dirty. I just gave it a couple drop tanks and launched it vertically.

1687.6 m/sec.

 

Best,

-Slashy

I managed to just barely break 1600m/s. Then again, I didn't stick with that mothership idea like I probably should've.

Breaking Mach 4 (my total guesstimate of SR-71's actual top speed, as opposed to its declassified speed).



Shortly after losing the canards, nose cone, and nose gear.



Mach 5.38.



It was sunset when I took off, and now its sunrise. That's the power of Pinesol Mach 5. Well, ok, I know its not Mach 5 now. But it was for most of the flight.

Safe landing, even without nose gear.

[GoSlash27]

Grenartia,

 What you did was flying. What I did was merely "falling with style"

Best,

-Slashy

[prorokbmx]

guys ehm this isnt thread for showing your planes

[GoSlash27]

10 minutes ago, prorokbmx said:

guys ehm this isnt thread for showing your planes

Uhh... yeah, actually it is.

That's what challenges are. In this case, "how fast can you go using stock parts and air breathing". For the moment, the winning entry is 1,687.6 m/sec.

 If you can somehow recreate your alleged "3 km/ sec" super- plane, feel free to join in. I'm sure we'd all love to see it.

Best,

-Slashy

Edited January 1, 2016 by GoSlash27

[Rocket In My Pocket]

11 minutes ago, prorokbmx said:

guys ehm this isnt thread for showing your planes

To be fair; this is a challenge thread, and they are trying to complete the challenge you've outlined. (Or come as close as the game will allow.)

When you make a thread in the challenge section of the forums you are pretty much implying that you want people to try and complete it, as well as discuss it in said thread.

If this isn't a challenge for people to attempt/discuss than it should be in the Mission Reports forum, or possibly the Spacecraft Exchange.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Rocket In My Pocket

[prorokbmx]

ah so sorry

[Grenartia]

54 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

Grenartia,

 What you did was flying. What I did was merely "falling with style"

Best,

-Slashy

This is true. I actually tried falling with style as well. Got up to 66km (sorry, didn't take shots), then fell back. I dropped down to 3.5, so I decided I was better off trying to fly level.

Edited January 1, 2016 by Grenartia

[Gaarst]

As said above, 6km/s with jet engines is impossible; only way you could achieve it is dropping a plane from LEO in RSS (Earth orbital speed is 7.8km/s) and fire your jet engines during reentry hoping for your plane to be aerodynamic enough for intakes to kick in before air slows you down below 6km/s.
But considering the fact you'd have used rocket engines to get to LEO, I guess that doesn't complete the challenge...

Though I'm pretty sure you could hit 2km/s when falling from space: if your plane is powerful enough to give you an apoapsis high enough in space, then falling straight down and lighting your jet engines during the fall might get you close to 2km/s, surviving it is another thing though...

Edited January 1, 2016 by Gaarst

[Grenartia]

1 minute ago, Gaarst said:

As said above, 6km/s with jet engines is impossible; only way you could achieve it is dropping a plane from LEO in RSS (Earth orbital speed is 7.8km/s) and fire your jet engines during reentry hoping for your plane to be aerodynamic enough for intakes to kick in before air slows you down below 6km/s.
But considering the fact you'd have used rocket engines to get to LEO, I guess that doesn't complete the challenge...

Though I'm pretty sure you could hit 2km/s when falling from space: if your plane is powerful enough to give you an apoapsis high enough in space, then falling straight down and lighting your jet engines during the fall might get you close to 2km/s, surviving it is another thing though...

I suppose one could put oneself in an orbit at the literal edge of Kerbin's SOI, and then bringing periapsis down to between 20-30km.

Actually, I recall back when I had the 0.18.3 demo, I got up to 2300m/s. Forget what altitude it was, but it was above 10km.

[GoSlash27]

1 minute ago, Grenartia said:

Actually, I recall back when I had the 0.18.3 demo, I got up to 2300m/s. Forget what altitude it was, but it was above 10km.

Those were the good old days.

 You could hit near- orbit on jets alone and circularize with a puff of the RCS...

I once made the trip to Eve surface and back in 8 days with no engines or fuel whatsoever. Never could get the hang of the Kessel run, tho'...

Best,

-Slashy

[Gojira1000]

Right, that's as fast as I can go. Val actually survived and landed after doing 1690 m/s and lost nothing off the x-2 - Precoolers seem to be very heat resistant.

[GoSlash27]

Gojira,

Absolutely outstanding!!

And that's an actual *airplane* !! O_o

My hat is off to you!

-Slashy

[prorokbmx]

2 hours ago, Grenartia said:

I managed to just barely break 1600m/s. Then again, I didn't stick with that mothership idea like I probably should've.

Breaking Mach 4 (my total guesstimate of SR-71's actual top speed, as opposed to its declassified speed).



Shortly after losing the canards, nose cone, and nose gear.



Mach 5.38.



It was sunset when I took off, and now its sunrise. That's the power of Pinesol Mach 5. Well, ok, I know its not Mach 5 now. But it was for most of the flight.

Safe landing, even without nose gear.

What is that airplane icon on the right top corner ?

[Grenartia]

1 hour ago, GoSlash27 said:

Those were the good old days.

 You could hit near- orbit on jets alone and circularize with a puff of the RCS...

I once made the trip to Eve surface and back in 8 days with no engines or fuel whatsoever. Never could get the hang of the Kessel run, tho'...

Best,

-Slashy

Kessel run?

 

 

57 minutes ago, Gojira1000 said:

Right, that's as fast as I can go. Val actually survived and landed after doing 1690 m/s and lost nothing off the x-2 - Precoolers seem to be very heat resistant.

I'm trying to figure out how do. Also, what's that front part? Doesn't look like the front of the inline cockpit, and its not big enough to be a precooler, and it doesn't have the right shape for an intake.

1 minute ago, prorokbmx said:

What is that airplane icon on the right top corner ?

Pilot Assistant. Its a mod, but I didn't use it for this. Just got it, need to try out its full features.

[GoSlash27]

Grenartia,

 It's a nerdy "Star Wars" reference.

Apologies

-Slashy