Fun with intake spamming

[SkyRender]

This thing got to a stable 70KM orbit with around 2/5ths of its fuel left in one stage. I'm pretty sure that shouldn't even be possible, but excessive amounts of air intakes save the day again. It was almost in orbit while still in the atmosphere, and got up to nearly 28KM before it had to be switched over to the rocket engines. Anyone else have amusing tales of impossible spaceplane feats made possible via this delightful feature?

Edited January 31, 2014 by SkyRender

[Pixel of Life]

Well, with careful throttle management, 28km on jets isn't a problem at all. Besides, 4 intakes isn't really "spamming". I think it's considered the standard amount of intakes per engine for a spaceplane. More can be added for extra efficiency.

My record is 2150 m/s on jets. IIRC that thing had 12 intakes per engine. Fun stuff.

[Nebur Wolf]

Isn't there a moment at a certain altitude where it doesn't compensate anymore to have so many air intakes? The maximum altitude I got was probably around 20km, but it had 4 engines.

[Starwhip]

My current spaceplane, the Avion Mark Two, can get up to 40,000 meters on jets alone. It has 12 intakes and 1 jet engine, so no throttle management.

I replaced the LV-909s with Aerospikes, to maximize efficiency.

[PDCWolf]

if we make case, anything above 1:1 is spamming. When contrasted to real life though, real engines have a combustion chamber that needs certain ammount of air, and adding more intakes doesn't necessarily make more air flow to the combustion chamber, on top of that, intakes need a logical, straight way to reach the combustion chamber which is not the case in KSP.

[Captain Sierra]

if we make case, anything above 1:1 is spamming. When contrasted to real life though, real engines have a combustion chamber that needs certain ammount of air, and adding more intakes doesn't necessarily make more air flow to the combustion chamber, on top of that, intakes need a logical, straight way to reach the combustion chamber which is not the case in KSP.

I personally never go above 4:1 and I can get 6 tons to orbit on 3:1

[Starwhip]

/\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\

This is why real SSTO spaceplanes are nonexistent at the moment. Although, the Skylon has a good shot at it. But we'll see.

OOOH I just had an idea: What if you have GIANT compressed air tanks, and feed air from them into the engines, WHILE IN SPACE? Would it even work? I don't think so, but it may work to add some extra altitude to a jet SSTO.

[Basilo1146]

Actually, i can get an ssto with 5 intakes and 2 rapier engine's into a stable orbit with more than 440/990 units of oxidizer left. It does do its circularization burn with a nerva, but still, it's a bit more than the 2/5. So yes, there are a lots of ways to make spaceplanes that have a wide margin of safety as far fuel goes.

[Idobox]

Starwhip, I don't know if you're aware, but Avion means airplane in French (and maybe a few other languages), which makes your ship's name super weird to me.

And for your second post, I'm not sure if you're sarcastic or not.

I'm going to risk being captain obvious, and say it wouldn't work. Jets are that good because they use a lot of air as reaction mass. Carrying your own air to burn where there is none would make a rocket, except 70% of the mass would be useless nitrogen, and the shape of the engine wouldn't be adapted to 0 bar.

[Fiddlestyx]

I don't think that is intake spam, intake spam is when intakes block each other and still work to the fullest.

Anyways, that's a cool plane, can we get the craft file please.

[zzz]

This picture is better demonstratration of intake spam

I'm personally usually use 1:1, 1:2 and try to make it look somehow reasonable. It's still easy enought to get in orbit with it, maybe less effcient.

[SkyRender]

I don't think that is intake spam, intake spam is when intakes block each other and still work to the fullest.

Anyways, that's a cool plane, can we get the craft file please.

Sure! It's not really a very complex spaceplane, actually. And I forgot to stick a docking port on it, so you'll have to add one to the underside yourself if you want to use it for any sort of mission. But it's kinda nifty, I suppose.

[Captain Sierra]

/\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\

This is why real SSTO spaceplanes are nonexistent at the moment. Although, the Skylon has a good shot at it. But we'll see.

OOOH I just had an idea: What if you have GIANT compressed air tanks, and feed air from them into the engines, WHILE IN SPACE? Would it even work? I don't think so, but it may work to add some extra altitude to a jet SSTO.

Somebody has done this by abusing the radial air intakes high capacity. They got into a stable orbit with just a turbojet. Sux to be the pilot, cuz he's not coming down! And, isn't that exactly what the Skylon does? It just compresses it to the point of liquification.