Most efficeint way to get to the Mun

[KerikBalm]

I think its more that people got the joke, but just went on to discussing other things

@wumpus

That's why I highly recommend doing a rescaled game using sigma dimensions/kopernicus.

Doing a 3x resize (and I also do a 1.25x atmosphere resize, and 1.5x terrain height resize) results in orbital velocity just above the atmosphere being around 4,100 m/s.

I wouldn't do a full 10x reszie without switching away from stock parts - the rocket tanks and engines are generally underpowered relative to real engines/tanks in contrast to the OP'd airbreathing engines. A 3x rescale with stock parts just barely allows for SSTO rockets (with almost no payload, and so far a recoverable SSTO rocket that carries a payload has eluded me), but airbreathing spaceplanes carrying a payload are still possible, although my payload fraction has dropped from >40% in stock(and I know people can get above 50%) to about 10% in the 3x rescale. I find it well balanced.

Spoiler

^ This one without LV-Ns and with a heavy cargobay didn't have much of a payload fraction at all.

v this one using LV-Ns which fire for several minutes after closed cycle rapier cutoff, and a disposable fairing, gets around a 10% payload fraction

(The center engine module re-docks after payload release)

(same SSTO, different flights and payloads, 100% stock in all relevant ways- the only non-stock part on the SSTO craft is the life support container at the front) - its payload /excess fuel capacity to orbit of stock sized kerbin is ridiculously high

 

[regex]

1 hour ago, monstah said:

Is it me, or after the firstsecond reply, everyone started analyzing seriously the engineering of what was a good joke?

tbh I skipped commenting about the original post because someone was wrong on the internet.

[adsii1970]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

tbh I skipped commenting about the original post because someone was wrong on the internet.

I felt that it was a joke, which was why I took it all tongue in cheek when I said my comment about HyperEdit.

[monstah]

43 minutes ago, regex said:

someone was wrong on the internet.

Totally excused. My bad.

[OhioBob]

3 hours ago, Geonovast said:

Ssssshhh.  I was gonna make a comment about the joke going over their heads ...

I think we all understand it was a joke (at least I did).  But I've never found that a reason not to have a engineering discussion.  

[septemberWaves]

On 8/7/2017 at 8:46 PM, KerikBalm said:

A 3x rescale with stock parts just barely allows for SSTO rockets (with almost no payload, and so far a recoverable SSTO rocket that carries a payload has eluded me)

You probably want 2 sets of engines. A lifting engine for high thrust and lower I_sp, and a couple of light-weight vacuum-optimized engines for the better I_sp once you no longer need the high thrust. It might lead to increased mass compared to just using a single lifting engine or cluster, but it's probably a good way of getting a decent payload from a rocket SSTO at that scale. I've been using 4x scale with 1.5x scale atmosphere quite a lot, and I'm fairly sure that that sort of design would work even at the scale I'm using, so it'd probably also work at 3x scale - that said, I use modded parts (though with a reasonably-close-to-stock balance) and I'd be far more likely to successfully create a rocket SSTO using hydrogen engines than the usual liquid fuel + oxidizer ones.

[KerikBalm]

well, I hadn't tried that much, I was focused on spaceplanes and airbreathers.

I just gave it a go with a mammoth and 4x LV-Ns. I managed to get 7.5 tons of excess fuel into orbit, and then land it, with a 292.5 ton rocket... 2.5% payload fraction.

Its still about 1/4 what I get with the airbreathing SSTOs. The LV-Ns really make a difference. In stock KSP if you need that last 1,000 m/s, forget about them - but at larger scales you have more time to allow them to generate that last 1km/sec. Supplying 1 km/sec of 2.3 km/sec doesn't work so well, supplying 1 km/sec of 4 km/sec works much better.