What is considered a easy to fly SSTO profile?

[Jestersage]

This is less of "how do I fly an SSTO carrying X ton of stuff to Y-km orbit", but more of: Based on what you recall, what procedure of SSTO (aka flight profile)  would you consider to be easy for most players?

[TheFlyingKerman]

Engage prograde lock and watch

[fulgur]

Take off at about 5 degrees until you pass the magic 400m/s. Then pitch up - depending on your engines - to between 10 and 20. You can go higher if you have a tiny stunt craft. At around 18km engage the atomics or rockets and at around 25km depending on how many intakes you spam switch to Closed-Cycle mode. When your craft pitches up (relative to the surface, it is travelling very fast) you shouldn't stop it unless you have very low thrust. At Ap80 shut your engines and warp to the circularisation burn.

[James Kerman]

Moved to gameplay questions because it's about the arcane science of KSP space planes.

[Guest]

Try to keep a shallow angle after takeoff until you build up a bit of speed then try to pitch up slowly (so you keep that speed) and with a bit of experimentation figure out what angle you can pull off with your thrust and then kinda ride that up until when your closed cycle kicks in. 
hmmm, then you kinda have to change to prograde lock and manage your throttle a bit.. you probably won’t need full thrust in closed cycle at that point, you just want to keep your apogee in front of you but not push it up too high. You can circularise at 70+ km if you need to, that height should have you just outside the atmosphere.

You just need to practice and adjust your plans until you get it, each SSTO design will be different.

[Jestersage]

6 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

You just need to practice and adjust your plans until you get it, each SSTO design will be different.

While this advice is helpful to teach people how to make a good SSTO, it does not help with my question.

In short, my question is more of "how to make an SSTO so that I don't have to learn how to fly", or in a more professional way (as in, creating crafts with other users in mind) "how to make an HSSTO that even a total noob can fly and get to orbit."

Or to flip your proposal around, design an SSTO so that "You just need to adjust your SSTO design until you get it, each SSTO practice and plans are similar".

A few things I can think of: 1) Anything that does not require adjusting trim and... not sure what else.

Of course the SSTO itself is NOT efficient. I am not asking for efficient in engineering. Yet, in itself is a challenge. It helps take us from thinking like engineers and thinking like management

Edited December 30, 2019 by Jestersage

[Guest]

In learning how to building it you will learn how to fly it.

Unless you develop amnesia. 

With no knowledge of either I guess what you are asking for is for someone to build for you a one button rocket that is designed and setup to achieve an orbit with no inputs.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Guest

[Jestersage]

4 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

In learning how to building it you will learn how to fly it.

But in a way, to build something a noob can fly is a challenge in itself.

4 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

With no knowledge of either I guess what you are asking for is for someone to build for you a one button rocket that is designed and setup to achieve an orbit with no inputs.

So pretty much aim prograde is the best answer. (TBH, follow by fly and aim a x degree without further adjustment)

I am not asking for others to build that one button rocket that is designed and setup to achieve orbit with no inputs; I am asking for that goal, which happens to be"one button rocket that is designed and setup to achieve orbit with no inputs". 

In any case, the main reason I ask this question is because I am wondering why my SSTO "ascensor" have significantly less downloads in comparison to a bunch of other crafts that are just as "non-standard", and I always look back, when I am a noob, -- and I realize that (aside from it's not optimized) step-based flight profile is more difficult for most people.

That is where you and I think differently, I guess. When you say the last line, you may think of me "so you are trying to have someone to build something for the OP." But I see that to be challenge and the answer itself -- because the less control a customer need, the more we builders have to account things for, which is what make craft building interesting.

---

I think the comparison of engineer vs management in terms of space flight: Whether to try to build a useful probe, or just strap some battery and radio transmitter and send it on an ICBM (sputnik); Whether STS should be a good TSTO, or make the space shuttle as happened to satisfy customer requirement of big payload and budget. It's a challenge, and they did it; they didn't say the schedule is too tough; they didn't say stop.

They built it. They should have congrats themselves for finding a solution and not say "well, you have to fly it this way." Some call it overbudget. I call it a good product.

Or something more relevant: Apple may have the best hardware, the best software engineer, but what make them successful, in my opinion, is that they actually have management hats. Customers say "I don't want to manage my stuff but stable"; linux say all these Command Line. Windows assume drag and drop. Apple just say "sure thing" and gave what customers want. Sure, user no longer have control, but they want it easy. And they can overcharge if needed.

This is precisely what I mean by think less like engineers and think more like managers. Or for long term, we need engineers who can think like managers and marketers. Sometimes don't look at the evil, but that our moral, our "baseline" limiting ourselves.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Jestersage

[bewing]

I like to lock SAS to "stability", and then tap F whenever my AoA gets over 10 degrees. Light the rocket engines when the airbreathing speed just starts to drop. And that's all there is to it.

[TheFlyingKerman]

6 hours ago, Jestersage said:

In any case, the main reason I ask this question is because I am wondering why my SSTO "ascensor" have significantly less downloads in comparison to a bunch of other crafts that are just as "non-standard"

But on Kerbalx people mainly download based on looks. Just see those replicas with obviously poor performance.

[Guest]

Man this thread is so hard to figure out... I guess I can’t help. I’m not sure what you want >_<, now it sounds like you want marketing tips to achieve more downloads on your designs. Best of luck.

(maybe post a link and ask people what they like/dislike about the design)

Edited December 31, 2019 by Guest