Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Spaceplanes are better than rockets, but much harder to build and fly. They are better than rockets since most of them are reusable. But they are harder to build, you really need to check your fuel and stuff.

You do not have to land them on a runway (although i do recommend doing that) you can land them in any flat area, but not in the hills or the mountians.

Chutes are a really good idea for begginers to land, you could also use the to slow down your plane while landing, you could also use airbrakes for that. But it still wont help for landing in the hills or mountians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I prefer rockets and have little use for space planes.

Its more bother getting a spaceplane up and back down. Plus the payload tends to be small. Oh and they are harder to fly in general. There's not much of a cost saving either. 

Lot of fun though :wink:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main advantage of a spaceplane is that it uses aerodynamic lift to carry its own weight and the engines only provide lateral acceleration while in a rocket the engines also have to counter gravity.

Additionally spaceplanes use jet engines which are far more efficient, but rockets drop dead weight (used stage) to improve their payload % efficiency.

Edited by RevanCorana
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RevanCorana said:

but rockets drop dead weight (used stage) to improve their payload % efficiency.

Just as spaceplanes do. Seriously - Many people use solid fuel boosters for takeoff, or droppable fuel tanks for extended range/payload. I even recently made a few actual two-stage spaceplanes - the ones I have built look like a tiny winged craft mounted instead of the cockpit of some modern fighter-class jet (with RAPIER engines). Plus, of course, you have actual spaceplanes (mounted as the payload of a rather normal rocket).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

Just as spaceplanes do. Seriously - Many people use solid fuel boosters for takeoff, or droppable fuel tanks for extended range/payload. I even recently made a few actual two-stage spaceplanes - the ones I have built look like a tiny winged craft mounted instead of the cockpit of some modern fighter-class jet (with RAPIER engines). Plus, of course, you have actual spaceplanes (mounted as the payload of a rather normal rocket).

Oh but of course dropping a few under wing fuel tanks == decoupling a rocket first stage thx for the precision. rofl 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, NSEP said:

Spaceplanes are better than rockets, but much harder to build and fly. They are better than rockets since most of them are reusable. But they are harder to build, you really need to check your fuel and stuff.

You do not have to land them on a runway (although i do recommend doing that) you can land them in any flat area, but not in the hills or the mountians.

Chutes are a really good idea for begginers to land, you could also use the to slow down your plane while landing, you could also use airbrakes for that. But it still wont help for landing in the hills or mountians.

well what about space shuttles. If i built a shuttle and gravity turned it on launch to where the shuttle is on top would that make the launch easier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eagle92lightning said:

well what about space shuttles. If i built a shuttle and gravity turned it on launch to where the shuttle is on top would that make the launch easier?

Placing the shuttle on top of a rocket is easier, but the shuttle has to be lighter if you want to keep things cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eagle92lightning said:

Well that makes sense. Jet engines. I have an idea for a certain type of liquid booster. What if I put jet engines and intakes on a rocket for lrb's

I thought of that too once. The RAPIER engine increases thrust when you go faster and faster and more air comes in to the intakes, i suggest using them for that. The RAPIER engine can automaticly switch from airbreathing to normal rocket fuel and oxidizer mode, but i suggest doing it manually with an action group, because the automatic system can get messy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NSEP said:

I thought of that too once. The RAPIER engine increases thrust when you go faster and faster and more air comes in to the intakes, i suggest using them for that. The RAPIER engine can automaticly switch from airbreathing to normal rocket fuel and oxidizer mode, but i suggest doing it manually with an action group, because the automatic system can get messy.

I was planing on jettisoning them before I got to space though but for interplanetary space travel with small KSPI warp drive craft it could work really well

19 hours ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

spaceplanes (mounted as the payload of a rather normal rocket).

I think you mean space shuttle when you say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eagle92lightning said:

I think you mean space shuttle when you say that.

NOT AT ALL!!!

This is a "spaceplanes (mounted as the payload of a rather normal rocket)." (this concept here has no aerodynamic fairing, but using one can make things much easier if your spaceplane is not too large):

Znalezione obrazy dla zapytania x-20

While a space shuttle is this:

Znalezione obrazy dla zapytania space shuttle

An actual space shuttle (even one based on the Soviet Buran, let alone the NASA shuttle) is generally something much more advanced than even going to the Mun, so if you want to start using spaceplanes, I recommend starting with very small spaceplanes mounted as the payload of a normal rocket. If you do this in sandbox, fairings (they are unlocked a bit further down the tech tree in science/career modes) can make it easier to make the rocket stable during launch. Also, your first spaceplane likely won't ever return any payload back to Kerbin, so it is easier if you optimize its atmospheric flight characteristics for when it has its fuel tanks already empty. A good idea might be building the plane in the SPH, giving it good aerodynamic properties for flight after it has fuel tanks empty (bonus points if you can make it flyable with full fuel tanks :D), and then loading the plane once in the VAB, and then attaching a rocket to the bottom of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

NOT AT ALL!!!

This is a "spaceplanes (mounted as the payload of a rather normal rocket)." (this concept here has no aerodynamic fairing, but using one can make things much easier if your spaceplane is not too large):

Znalezione obrazy dla zapytania x-20

While a space shuttle is this:

Znalezione obrazy dla zapytania space shuttle

An actual space shuttle (even one based on the Soviet Buran, let alone the NASA shuttle) is generally something much more advanced than even going to the Mun, so if you want to start using spaceplanes, I recommend starting with very small spaceplanes mounted as the payload of a normal rocket. If you do this in sandbox, fairings (they are unlocked a bit further down the tech tree in science/career modes) can make it easier to make the rocket stable during launch. Also, your first spaceplane likely won't ever return any payload back to Kerbin, so it is easier if you optimize its atmospheric flight characteristics for when it has its fuel tanks already empty. A good idea might be building the plane in the SPH, giving it good aerodynamic properties for flight after it has fuel tanks empty (bonus points if you can make it flyable with full fuel tanks :D), and then loading the plane once in the VAB, and then attaching a rocket to the bottom of it.

first off. Why does the stinking soviet shuttle look more futuristic than NASA's? NASA is at the top of the space agency tower NASA rules! And secondly thanks for the clarification. I was just getting confused I know a bit about rockets but I obviously don't know as much as you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Leafbaron said:

I have used "space gliders" with varying degrees of success but basically a plane with no engines except a stageable engine. the glider then sails back to Kerbin. Launched from a rocket of course.

that's interesting. How did you launch it from the rocket. Payload style or shuttle style?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2016 at 10:05 AM, eagle92lightning said:

that's interesting. How did you launch it from the rocket. Payload style or shuttle style?

I launched it payload style. These were rather small gliders designed to hold a few tourists for suborbital flights all the way up to mun/minmus flybys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eagle92lightning said:

could give me kind of a run by of how you built them I am about to play KSP and I would like to try these for my self

Eagle,

When I get home I will try and upload some photos. Generally I would start with the Mk1 cockpit and add a couple passenger cabins followed by a small LFO tank and the Terrier engine, these are very small. For wings I use a V tail setup for the rear and a dihedryal main wing attached near the belly of the craft. Add control surfaces and some RCS don't forget to turn of all control surfaces on the glider until you reach orbit. Don't want those acting on the air stream during launch. I would then attach it to a rocket that was very reminiscent of a nerf football with a tail. The goal here is to keep as much mass towards to the top of the rocket. Since we have quit a bit of lift on the nose, the more mass we have up high the less hysterically large our stabilizer fins on the rear of the rocket have to be. Id recommend attaching the glider to a 1.25 to 2.5m adapter and using the smallest tanks needed in the 2.5m selection to get the desired amount of fuel, still using 1.25m rocket engines. If you don't have those parts to make a tear dropped/ nerf football shape, youll have to use very large rear stabilizers like the swept wings with control surfaces. The Mk1 cockpit isn't to terribly good at handling re entry heating so make sure you use very gently re-entries. These gliders are all about finesse. 

Build the glider in the SPH and save it as a sub assembly. Then go to the VAB and build the rocket.

Edited by Leafbaron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Leafbaron said:

Eagle,

When I get home I will try and upload some photos. Generally I would start with the Mk1 cockpit and add a couple passenger cabins followed by a small LFO tank and the Terrier engine, these are very small. For wings I use a V tail setup for the rear and a dihedryal main wing attached near the belly of the craft. Add control surfaces and some RCS don't forget to turn of all control surfaces on the glider until you reach orbit. Don't want those acting on the air stream during launch. I would then attach it to a rocket that was very reminiscent of a nerf football with a tail. The goal here is to keep as much mass towards to the top of the rocket. Since we have quit a bit of lift on the nose, the more mass we have up high the less hysterically large our stabilizer fins on the rear of the rocket have to be. Id recommend attaching the glider to a 1.25 to 2.5m adapter and using the smallest tanks needed in the 2.5m selection to get the desired amount of fuel, still using 1.25m rocket engines. If you don't have those parts to make a tear dropped/ nerf football shape, youll have to use very large rear stabilizers like the swept wings with control surfaces. The Mk1 cockpit isn't to terribly good at handling re entry heating so make sure you use very gently re-entries. These gliders are all about finesse. 

Build the glider in the SPH and save it as a sub assembly. Then go to the VAB and build the rocket.

okay thanks. I want to get done with my K.S.S. Aurora and I think these could work to get crew home. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, eagle92lightning said:

she only had enough thrust to hover on the launch pad so I am going to get better at space plane design my voyager spaceplane works really well.

I couldn't figure out how to upload my photos but when I do I'll post them. Tinkering around with my design last night I managed a 5 person glider with 1054 M/s of D-v not including monoprop. And she glides well very small glide slope. The rocket that launches her...well its not so pretty but it works. If only they would add 1.25m cargo bays, Found 1.25m cargo bay on modular rocket systems mod,  this glider will be perfect for launching cube sats or small comnet sats. 

Edited by Leafbaron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...