Jump to content

SSTOs! Post your pictures here~


KissSh0t
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sorry, guys, I have one more here I want to post. I've actually been working on it for a bit and finally put the finishing touches-ish on her earlier this morning. Still might expand the design to do more, but for now it can make a pretty high orbit and, despite its looks, remain stable (again-ish when full of fuel) through most of the flight envelope.

I call it "Fireball," because, well, let's just it was a fun testing process. It also represents the reason why there is currently a maximum landing weight restriction.

Cheers!

http://i.imgur.com/P6EAeZg.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/5gvbp35.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/xBUjTce.jpg

That thing looks so cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSTOs for looks only xD

fp9e3pX.jpg

A multi-role light weight easy-to-fly SSTO capable of 80km LKO, to be used for shuttling crew, utility and research, and any other space endeavors. By default is unarmed, but features light armor plating (because you'll never know when you'll NEED armor plating) Additional features are having a K.L.A.W. in its rear and a fancy utility research bay laboratory complete with an ion escape pod, go figure :D

m4zcLiB.jpg

Another multi-role SSTO with high maneuverability and relative ease of controls, capable of a stack 100km LKO. Designed for shuttling crew, or utility and research, or interplanetary endeavors if installed with an interplanetary engine module. Also has light plating to protect the ultra-sensitive engine cluster from... anything. Additional features are having 4 dawn ion engines for the super-efficient burns, and that fancy utility research bay laboratory complete with an ion escape pod. Also aerodynamically shaped like a star to fit your shooting star ascent profile :D

x8Ykucd.jpg

Not a multi-role SSTO, well, not available for shuttling the least, but designed for interplanetary exciting-boring endeavors (interplanetary engine module required), capable of a 100km LKO, to be used for utility and research purposes, or a two-man mission to the unknown. Also has light plating for protection, because you can never get enough protection :D Additional features are having 4 dawn ion engines for the super-efficient burns, and that fancy utility research bay laboratory complete with an ion escape pod, and has a large fuel capacity for those delta-V rosters :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SHiftER2O how many RAPIERs clipped is that to make it fly?

Only has about 6 RAPIERS rotated in a flowery pattern :D

PS I like the flowery pattern, but clipping looks kinda eeehh...

- - - Updated - - -

This one reies on 9 RAPIERS and a Toroidal Aerospike

jklrLZO.jpg

FZyKsc7.jpg

HajJE8X.jpg

i0fO7if.jpg

l36Y5nh.jpg

w9YSb9A.jpg

Edited by SHiftER2O
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Behold, the sexiest plane I've ever built, the Nyx heavy shuttle.

mbaxsCJ.png

Currently still in proofing (read: she won't make orbit just yet).

Uses Turbo-RAPIER engines & Quad-block heavy intakes (both custom clipped subassemblies). Holy crap does she get up and go. Engines have overheating problems I gotta work out due to the clipping & there's also a thermal issue because of how dang fast she'll go under 20km (I'm blowing off my intakes before I'm hitting top speed if I don't throttle it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Behold, the sexiest plane I've ever built, the Nyx heavy shuttle.

http://i.imgur.com/mbaxsCJ.png

Currently still in proofing (read: she won't make orbit just yet).

Uses Turbo-RAPIER engines & Quad-block heavy intakes (both custom clipped subassemblies). Holy crap does she get up and go. Engines have overheating problems I gotta work out due to the clipping & there's also a thermal issue because of how dang fast she'll go under 20km (I'm blowing off my intakes before I'm hitting top speed if I don't throttle it).

The Turbo-Rapiers are a neat idea :D You can upgrade it to a 2-Turbo-RAPIER-Aerospike to have lossless power at all altitudes :D

Darnit, need to coll down my rep-giving powers :(

Edited by SHiftER2O
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Turbo-Rapiers are a neat idea :D You can upgrade it to a 2-Turbo-RAPIER-Aerospike to have lossless power at all altitudes :D

Darnit, need to coll down my rep-giving powers :(

I have never built a plane in my life big and heavy enough to need that much power. the turbo-RAPIERs are pretty good for what I'm doing. I'm also experimenting around with a standard jet-RAPIER combo so the jets die right as I begin the acceleration phase & kick in the rapiers. It might help the current situation of the engines running really toasty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never built a plane in my life big and heavy enough to need that much power. the turbo-RAPIERs are pretty good for what I'm doing. I'm also experimenting around with a standard jet-RAPIER combo so the jets die right as I begin the acceleration phase & kick in the rapiers. It might help the current situation of the engines running really toasty.

Got the idea from Roflcopterkidlol, aka his cronus titan engine :D

The jets die at around 23ft while the RAPIERS die at around 27ft, but by then, the jets have provided all the thrust you need to get to around 1000m/s plus the RAPIERS which could kick you to 1400m/s :D

I personally like your engine set up, because you have less unecessary weight than my SSTOs, which runs on 6-8 RAPIERS -__- But now, I'm planning to swap the 8 RAPIER setup for a more lighter 4 RAPIER 4 turbojet setup, which would first of all decrease the weight of the spacecraft, and make the spaceplane more efficient for burns running with less fuel-hungry rockets :D

Do you do a jet-only ascent THEN a RAPIER assisted ascent THEN a RAPIER only ascent THEN a closed cycle? or are both the jets and the RAPIERS in tandem to the top?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the TurboRAPIER used to work wonders in 0.90, but I doubt it's worth the effort now. See, before you would airhog until about 1,500-2,000m/s. Then you were already almost orbital and didn't need the RAPIERs high rocket thrust! So you saved powerplant weight by going with 50% RAPIERs (1.75mT each) and 50% turbojets (1.2mT). These days, tough? You'll be lucky to switch modes over 1,100m/s, and at that speed you still need considerable TWR to push your time to Apo back fast and minimize gravity losses.

That alone would be enough to make the TurboRAPIER not such a good idea anymore, but you have to add to that the fact that the RAPIER has a higher zero-thrust cutoff velocity: a ship with 100% RAPIERs will have higher TWR at top speed, and thus will be able to push it longer, faster, higher. Putting any other engine in there will just hurt your mass ratio, I think.

Rune. No, if you want to exploit the game, use the RAPIERs rear attachment node for drag-less intake area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the TurboRAPIER used to work wonders in 0.90, but I doubt it's worth the effort now. See, before you would airhog until about 1,500-2,000m/s. Then you were already almost orbital and didn't need the RAPIERs high rocket thrust! So you saved powerplant weight by going with 50% RAPIERs (1.75mT each) and 50% turbojets (1.2mT). These days, tough? You'll be lucky to switch modes over 1,100m/s, and at that speed you still need considerable TWR to push your time to Apo back fast and minimize gravity losses.

That alone would be enough to make the TurboRAPIER not such a good idea anymore, but you have to add to that the fact that the RAPIER has a higher zero-thrust cutoff velocity: a ship with 100% RAPIERs will have higher TWR at top speed, and thus will be able to push it longer, faster, higher. Putting any other engine in there will just hurt your mass ratio, I think.

Rune. No, if you want to exploit the game, use the RAPIERs rear attachment node for drag-less intake area.

Really? Hmm, so this decent performances are actually just sheer luck or an illusion in the brink of things :o Noooo~

Well, how about the 2-turbo-RAPIER-Aerospike setup? It is fuel hungry, but provides lossless power, or is it better to just have all-rapiers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Hmm, so this decent performances are actually just sheer luck or an illusion in the brink of things :o Noooo~

Well, how about the 2-turbo-RAPIER-Aerospike setup? It is fuel hungry, but provides lossless power, or is it better to just have all-rapiers?

"Fuel hungry", I think, means that you are going through your dV budget, fast, but you get the same mileage. RAPIERs have 305 isp, so they are not THAT fuel hungry, and so on a short hop to LKO the extra... ~5-10s is it? isp of the aerospike can't be worth lugging its weight through the atmosphere. In fact, I suspect if anything is better than 100% RAPIERs it would be 25% turbos and 75% RAPIERs... but that's gonna be close. I'm talking payload fraction to LKO, where your dV budget is about 1,5km/s, obviously, if you want to go farther high isp is more important.

Now if you burn through all your LFO too fast, you probably have too much TWR. That is only inefficient in the sense that you could lug less engine mass with you, and achieve a greater payload ratio, and maybe if you go very shallow you are doing slightly higher drag losses. But other than that, taking less time to get to orbital speeds on chemical engines is always a good thing. So just put enough TWR to go supersonic, and no more, for the best results. My 25% payload fraction Longsword has 8xRAPIERs and 2x Turbojets for a takeoff weight of 140mT, if those numbers help you, and even though it struggles with the Mach barrier a bit, show me the one that improves on that carrying a Big Red to orbit.

Rune. Every extra engine you don't really need could be extra payload and/or fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Fuel hungry", I think, means that you are going through your dV budget, fast, but you get the same mileage. RAPIERs have 305 isp, so they are not THAT fuel hungry, and so on a short hop to LKO the extra... ~5-10s is it? isp of the aerospike can't be worth lugging its weight through the atmosphere. In fact, I suspect if anything is better than 100% RAPIERs it would be 25% turbos and 75% RAPIERs... but that's gonna be close. I'm talking payload fraction to LKO, where your dV budget is about 1,5km/s, obviously, if you want to go farther high isp is more important.

Now if you burn through all your LFO too fast, you probably have too much TWR. That is only inefficient in the sense that you could lug less engine mass with you, and achieve a greater payload ratio, and maybe if you go very shallow you are doing slightly higher drag losses. But other than that, taking less time to get to orbital speeds on chemical engines is always a good thing. So just put enough TWR to go supersonic, and no more, for the best results. My 25% payload fraction Longsword has 8xRAPIERs and 2x Turbojets for a takeoff weight of 140mT, if those numbers help you, and even though it struggles with the Mach barrier a bit, show me the one that improves on that carrying a Big Red to orbit.

Rune. Every extra engine you don't really need could be extra payload and/or fuel.

Very very interesting.... Thank you for the write up :D

Rep rap is R.I.P. for now...

Edited by SHiftER2O
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...You'll be lucky to switch modes over 1,100m/s, and at that speed you still need considerable TWR to push your time to Apo back fast and minimize gravity losses...

You can scrape 1400m/s on air with an aggressive build - which I suspect the Nyx above qualifies as. It does take your intakes well into the red though, but past 18km I find it very hard to increase temps :)

If anything, I reckon that plane could lose two turbos and have exactly the same capabilities, if not a bit more delta-v in orbit due to losing the redundant mass ^^

Pretty sure turborapiers are still a good thing for a plane that is best with 4 engines; one turbo and three rapiers in symmetry should give some powerful oomph through the mach barrier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can scrape 1400m/s on air with an aggressive build - which I suspect the Nyx above qualifies as. It does take your intakes well into the red though, but past 18km I find it very hard to increase temps :)

If anything, I reckon that plane could lose two turbos and have exactly the same capabilities, if not a bit more delta-v in orbit due to losing the redundant mass ^^

Pretty sure turborapiers are still a good thing for a plane that is best with 4 engines; one turbo and three rapiers in symmetry should give some powerful oomph through the mach barrier.

But aggressive builds have a high powerplant mass, and that hurts the payload ratio... yeah, the answer is probably around there in the middle. Call it a target 1,200m/s for takeover, and about 75% of RAPIER power, for a mass-efficient ascent to LKO.

Rune. Engineering is the science of trades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Behold, the sexiest plane I've ever built, the Nyx heavy shuttle.

http://i.imgur.com/mbaxsCJ.png

Currently still in proofing (read: she won't make orbit just yet).

Uses Turbo-RAPIER engines & Quad-block heavy intakes (both custom clipped subassemblies). Holy crap does she get up and go. Engines have overheating problems I gotta work out due to the clipping & there's also a thermal issue because of how dang fast she'll go under 20km (I'm blowing off my intakes before I'm hitting top speed if I don't throttle it).

BTW, Cpt, that is about twice the payload that the Dart carries, with four times the engine power. Where you going for in-orbit dV? Or is that the perfect example of an overpowered SSTO? The Dart gets a respectable ~500m/s in orbit and 1.3 TWR at sea level, BTW, with two RAPIERs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm finally getting somewhere with SSTOs again. It's been a real headache trying to combat the drag and the RAPIERs in 1.0.2, but I am getting somewhere.

I've decided that RAPIERs are a little iffy, sometimes working fine and managing to push you up to around 1300m/s, and sometimes deciding to not even breach the sound barrier despite an identical flight profile. The only reliable solution I have at the moment is to use them in unison with turbojets. The problem with that approach was that the turbojets died at around 16km ASL, often leaving a bit too much speed for the RAPIERs to pick up on their own, and so there would be no orbit-making. However, I discovered that air-hogging isn't completely dead, surprisingly, but it's so close to it that it only just proves itself to be useful. I get the feeling that beyond a certain number of intakes, the drag starts to counteract the operational altitude gains. That being said, I have managed to keep the turbojets going at as much as 23km up now, which is undeniably better.

http://i.imgur.com/frF2iPH.png

The only problem that remained after that was fuel, or more specifically the lack thereof. That's where those fuel pods on the wing tips come in; they provide just enough fuel to get this result:

http://i.imgur.com/UmHeXvh.png

You can see there's enough fuel to de-orbit comfortably or head for a refuelling depot that I've now placed at roughly 84km (my lowest orbiting station for Kerbin ever, made entirely necessary by all this).

http://i.imgur.com/GVd7PB9.png

http://i.imgur.com/b9LEPU9.png

http://i.imgur.com/eGYZ3Rm.png

It can land back at the runway just fine, but physical timewarp has obliterated two spaceplanes on the way down, leading me to try and pilot the remains back down (this is from a slightly earlier model of the Hypersoar):

http://i.imgur.com/EJG6RX8.png

They glide remarkably well, those half-spaceplanes. Jeb managed to land 'successfully' on both occasions. That is to say, just the cockpit survived and the rest of the plane blew up. Any landing you can walk away from... :wink:

All stock, save for the utility/nav lighting.

What's that visual mod? AFAIK EVE hasn't been updated yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, Cpt, that is about twice the payload that the Dart carries, with four times the engine power. Where you going for in-orbit dV? Or is that the perfect example of an overpowered SSTO? The Dart gets a respectable ~500m/s in orbit and 1.3 TWR at sea level, BTW, with two RAPIERs.

I'm guessing that means it's... inefficient?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, if you want to see an overpowered SSTO, here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's that visual mod? AFAIK EVE hasn't been updated yet.

Astronomers Visual Pack: Interstellar v2. EVE works just fine for me, not too sure about others. The only thing with this pack is that you absolutely need an x64 version of the game to run it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Astronomers Visual Pack: Interstellar v2. EVE works just fine for me, not too sure about others. The only thing with this pack is that you absolutely need an x64 version of the game to run it.

Does it work for 1.0.2 though?

- - - Updated - - -

What's that visual mod? AFAIK EVE hasn't been updated yet.

By the way, where did that quote from Scott Manley come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a little vertical SSTO I built when another thread whetted my appetite. Used it to throw a 3.8t rescue drone into orbit which later went on to low Mun orbit (12km) to retrieve a stranded kerbal.

PgjvETt.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...