Smallest stock SSTO Spaceplane (i think) + 1

[Neotician]

The +1 in the title is there, because i'm posting both the wee one and it's older brother, didn't see a reason to multipost

When i say "Smallest (i think)" I mean that i think it is the smallest stock ssto spaceplane.

And i mean stock, that includes no cheat menu, as in no fuel/intake stacking

Anyhow, saw a post recently stating it had the smallest space plane, which proved to be a fuel tank with a jet engine and 2 wings on it..

So i decided to make the actual smallest, as far as i know i have succeeded

This is the Firefly Mk. III, most of the relevant stats are in the shot.

I haven't tested it with empty rocket tanks, but i do have it in a stable orbit with about 100 m/s of deltaV left so i wil de-orbit and test later.

This is the predecessor to the Mk. III, the Mk. II (duh), It's main difference between this and the Mk. III, is that the Mk. II is manned and gets significantly more deltaV from it's rockets, it does however weigh an extra ~4 tons and suffers from poor lift, resulting in a lower atmospheric max speed.

.craft files:

Firefly Mk_ III.craft

https://mega.co.nz/#!JosiRTzD!J_ojD0Ccb6qHpB2_-PF_ETbMQcUn8sxvzzfOqIqbdvg

Firefly Mk_II.craft

https://mega.co.nz/#!dosAzLqD!ZkwkNmzrFL2cav3qk3Z_C3xZRd5boEWLz6M2evRehAI

Edited October 15, 2013 by Neotician

[dennislinux]

YOU sir is epic.

[inigma]

I got ya beat.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52317-SSI-Ion-Class-Shuttlecraft-%28Smallest-Operational-VTOL-SSTO-Spaceplane-Ever

Now if you can top that, SSI could really use you! In fact your ship as-is is worthy if an SSI submission if you are up to it.

[Neotician]

I got ya beat.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52317-SSI-Ion-Class-Shuttlecraft-%28Smallest-Operational-VTOL-SSTO-Spaceplane-Ever

Now if you can top that, SSI could really use you! In fact your ship as-is is worthy if an SSI submission if you are up to it.

Psh yeah well you used stacked vents...

Jokes aside, sure i'm game, sounds like fun Having watched everything star trek, i'm aware of what a shuttlecraft is

[Capn]

Neotician actually did not beat you, your Mk.3 is lighter than his by about a ton.

[inigma]

His Mk. III looks like its unmanned, so I'm not entirely sure that it's a true comparison. The manned SSI Type I Ion is 7.7 tons, 48 parts, and the footprint is smaller (even if the 6 clipped intakes were stacked instead of clipped). This is a healthy competition. As I said, if he or anyone can do better, SSI is definitely looking for you! We aim to catalog and certify the smallest closed-cockpit SSTOs on the market.

His Mk. III unmanned could actually be even smaller if he shed a fuel tank, removed the struss, dumped an RCS tank, and replaced his forward wings with fins.

Edited October 14, 2013 by inigma

[Neotician]

His Mk. III looks like its unmanned, so I'm not entirely sure that it's a true comparison. The manned SSI Type I Ion is 7.7 tons, 48 parts, and the footprint is smaller (even if the 6 clipped intakes were stacked instead of clipped). This is a healthy competition. As I said, if he or anyone can do better, SSI is definitely looking for you! We aim to catalog and certify the smallest closed-cockpit SSTOs on the market.

His Mk. III unmanned could actually be even smaller if he shed a fuel tank, removed the struss, dumped an RCS tank, and replaced his forward wings with fins.

Exatly, that's why i conceded, exchanging the cockpit for my probe setup would shave that ton off, then comes toonage saved on fuel and tadah, your craft is lighter than mine.

As for smaller, working on it as we speak

*edit* Got ya beat on parts tho! 38

[Spica]

Does it have to be manned to count, also, must we use jet engines?

[Nephf]

Tiny... very tiny...

[inigma]

*edit* Got ya beat on parts tho! 38

ok. 38 vs 48. I look forward to seeing what you can do to shrink your craft footprint. Do you think your Mk. II could pass SSI certification? If so, it would have to be capable of undocking fully fueled from 120km, landing at KSC, and flying back up and redocking at 120km without refueling. Let me know if you can do it. If so, post in the SSI thread in Rocket Builders forum (or click on our link in my sig below) and we'll get an engineer to test it for you (or you can post a video of your flight to self-certify and be automatically published in our General Catalog)!

Edited October 14, 2013 by inigma

[Exothermos]

That's a nice small SSTO. But "smallest" is a contentious claim. If you come to the dark side and embrace clipping you can get designs like this:

Tiny Tot SSTO

It's right on the boundry of what is physically possible for smallest FOOTPRINT for an SSTO and still be fully functional. Manned, 1 jet, 1 rocket, 1 can of jet fuel, 1 rocket fuel tank, clipped wings and intakes, full size docking port and ballanced RCS.

I could make it even lighter (if not physically smaller) if I redesigned it with some of the new parts that were released in 0.21 like the little FL-t100 fuel tank with a Rockomax 48-7s stuck to it.

It's so ridiculously small because it is meant to be shoved into a cargo bay and taken to Laythe

My unmanned designs ended up looking similar to yours as well:

If we constrain ourselves to not clipping fuel tanks and engines, and not airhogging then yes your design is as small as it gets... well except for astropapi1 who put two 48-7s on a Rocket Fuel tank and went to orbit

[Neotician]

ok. 38 vs 48. I look forward to seeing what you can do to shrink your craft footprint. Do you think your Mk. II could pass SSI certification? If so, it would have to be capable of undocking fully fueled from 120km, landing at KSC, and flying back up and redocking at 120km without refueling. Let me know if you can do it. If so, post in the SSI thread in Rocket Builders forum (or click on our link in my sig below) and we'll get an engineer to test it for you (or you can post a video of your flight to self-certify and be automatically published in our General Catalog)!

Working on the Mk. IV Right now, basically a closed-cockpit version of the Mk. III with a slightly smaller footprint, it'll be my "bid" once it's done

[Fellow314]

Wrong place!

[Neotician]

Wrong place!

Elaborate?

[pinolallo]

This one, manned, SpaceStation rendezvous capable and 2 complete mission run capable, less than 7 tons.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Neotician]

This one, manned, SpaceStation rendezvous capable and 2 complete mission run capable, less than 7 tons.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Replacing my current nose with the can would bring my Mk. III's weight up to 6.5 plus i can prolly shave those off again in fuel, if i also used stacked vents

[pinolallo]

Ok tiny... but the meaning of? Actual minimalist record for a ssto is

with 1.14t (!!!) check the K-prize challenge.

Under the 10 tons this one.. with 5 kerbals crew capability and full SSI certs and front docking.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Download link here

[Neotician]

Ok tiny... but the meaning of? Actual minimalist record for a ssto is

with 1.14t (!!!) check the K-prize challenge.

Under the 10 tons this one.. with 5 kerbals crew capability and full SSI certs and front docking.

Download link here

The k-prize one is old, i've also seen an mk1 pod and 2 rcs tanks make it to the moon in older versions

The landing gear on the k-prize one weighs 1.5 tons alone today, then comes wings, fuel and engine.

Judging by the external mechjeb, your craft isn't up to date either

[pinolallo]

My crafts are uptodate, and are far away better any you showed up here.

You can't claim a records: your isn't the smallest/lighter SSTO.

What you can do before claim records, or criticize other ships is just to learn to make some 'better' (and useful I hope) and this without suppose it's easy to do.

[Exothermos]

See?! Contentious.

hahah wow.

[Neotician]

My crafts are uptodate, and are far away better any you showed up here.

You can't claim a records: your isn't the smallest/lighter SSTO.

What you can do before claim records, or criticize other ships is just to learn to make some 'better' (and useful I hope) and this without suppose it's easy to do.

There we go, there was an angry child in there somewhere

Well, as for claiming records, the title says that "i think it's the smallest" as in, i thought so and i have been proven wrong, i admitted so on the first page

As for criticizing others' work, well, this is my thread, i made it to show my plane and you come here and dump screenshots and download links to yours, i have every right to criticize

[inigma]

Bear in mind too the definition of a spaceplane is that the craft has wings of some sort, and can take off horizontally. This obviously disqualifies a number of contenders.

Edited October 14, 2013 by inigma

[TheWanderer]

i like it, kind of unmanned space drone ;-)