Cocoon90

The best method should be by taking advantage of wormhole, but nobody knows if they can really exist or not. Nuclear fusion would be a good alternative, fuel wouldn't be burnt all at once but a series of micro nuclear explosions would give the spaceship enough thrust to reach impressive speeds using just Hydrogen isotopes as fuel since it's the most abundant element in the universe. Antimatter in my opinion would be a better resource, ok, since the collision between matter and antimatter provides bigger amounts of energy than nuclear fusion, but at this moment even 10 grams of antimatter is an amount way beyond our capabilities. Only a few years ago (2 or 3) CERN recreated a few hundreds of atoms of anti Hydrogen. To achieve 10 grams it takes too much time, power, and the cost would be unsustainable. As nyrath said, half of the fuel would be spent for "breaking", and the maneuver would be similar to that on that you plan in KSP. Not exactly but this is the idea.. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be possible thou.. At this moment best ways to travel long distances are plasma thrusters like the VASIMR, the solar sail or fusion engines (even if the last one is just a short term theory). I know nasa is working on a solar sail of the dimension of few squared meters, with the goal to make a squared kilometer one; the best method to burn fuel is to burn intermittently the fuel as some hall thrust ion engines do, at 50 - 60 hz, which is proven to save some fuel over time and to travel longer distances, instead of burning the fuel as a SRB or a liquid fuel rocket does. Try to search something in the JPL archives. You might find something useful.

I know that most of heat shields are just glass or ceramic compounds, since these materials have the best resistance against heat. Try this link on wikipedia and check the picture in the top left corner.

I guess every element and isotopes can be reproduced in laboratory. A few months ago a swedish team reproduced the element 115 (the what so called the UFO fuel). With a today's particle accelerator you can obtain nearly every element. CERN obtained 300 atoms of Anti Hydrogen a few years ago.. The "big" problem is that the quantity you get from a Lab experiment is calculated in atoms, so running a particle accelerator for very few atoms of for example Copper, it would be just a waste of power and money.. Nowasays fusion reactors are still in theretical phase, engineers and physicists are "still just studyng" the concept of Tokamak (ENEA in Italy for example is working on it, even Russia, China and others are working togheter for the ITER in France), others are more towards the laser induced fusion (NIF in California). Energy requirements are not ridiculous (not too much at least), since once the reaction takes place it should self sustain. The bigger problem is to reach this self sustainment. If we can reach this point maybe producing new matter wouldn't be so expensive and inefficient.

When you reach apoapsis, even with TWR < 1.00 you can circularize your orbit. When you plan you maneouvre node, for example your burn is 60 seconds, point your nose in the node direction, and at -30 start to burn. if you have a 2:00 minutes burn, at - 1:00 minute to node start to burn. To be precise, you have to consider that in that period of time you burn fuel, so your vessel gets lighter, and you accelerate linearly faster as you burn fuel (your TWR slightly raises). For a 60 s burn, for example, start the burn at more or less -25 s, not -30s, because as you burn fuel, you go faster and you estimated burn time variation slightly drops. I usually go full throttle, then when I get 20 m/s ÃŽâ€V i cut off the engines (X) and i fine tune the remaining ÃŽâ€V at 10% thrust. Doing this you don't raise your apoapsis and you get a nice round (with an error of maximum 500 m between apoapsis end periapsis if you do it correctly). If you get periapsis = apoapsis you was lucky as hell, so don't expect to get a perfect orbit at first burn.

There's no law that tells you really how to build a vessel, but there are a few guidelines you should follow and some rules. Efficiency is a ratio between two factors, in this case is a ratio between space travelled and fuel spent. While you proceed in the career mode, you unlock even more parts, and that make think that more is better, but it is not that simple. The best thing to do for all types of vessels are to keep things simple and efficient, and take time, don't expect to bring in orbit a 300 t probe in one shot or to fly a 100 t airship without praying the God of struts. So here's my advices: Rockets: don't build them too heavy, do multiple modules on multiple launches. Keep things as simple as possible. For just exploring the space i usually use the lightest manned capsule, so that i can do eva and crew report with the kerbinaut. I add the minimum of science parts, i try to foresee the fuel i will spend for my destination and back, plus an extra for inconvenients. Spaceplanes: they are maybe the most difficult thing to build because they must be stable and manoeuvrable at the same time. Some rules are that center of mass must be slightly in front of the center of lift always, even when tanks are empty. I usually don't attach anything to the wings and keep everything on the fuselage lines, exept maybe air inlets or light parts. Strut everything, especially wings and fuselage and gear bays and fuselage, so that nothig is too wobbly. Usually i use 2 types of wings: the main couple of wings evolving from the center of mass backwards, for roll control. Two other wings on the tails as horizontal stabilizers for pitch control, one vertical of nearly the same size of the previous 2 for yaw control. Canards are helpful if the aircraft won't lift even at 120 / 130 m/s on the runway. I usually place one or two engine in line with the center of mass, so that in case one of the engines flame out i still have yaw authority. This is an example of mine: XF-101C Center of mass should be roughly in the center of the vessel , never in the back, so put fuel tanks in the front, otherwise you will flip over even if center of lift is behind the CoM. Spaceplanes are even harder than aircrafts in my opinion, because you have to consider that that thing must travel huge distances, maybe enter an atmosphere, land, get out, travel again and get back to kerbin and land.. All of this in one ship, all that science in one vessel and all that fuel in one vessel. Just follow the rules for the aircrafts and your' re fine. In space your worst enemy, the atmosphere, is not present. Just make it simple and stabilize it with struts. Refueling stations: there's not any rule, I just make it as big, deformed as i want, just make it in modules and launch them separately, otherwise you will struggle too much for nothing sending in orbit a rocket that with fairings looks like a mushroom because on top is too big. Fuel lines: asparagus are the best way to launch something in orbit. I usually don't go under a TWR of 1.30 at the launchpad, otherwise i will spend more than half of my fuel under 1000 m above the launch pad. For the aircraft building guide there is this very helpful thread by keptin.

XF-101C XF-201C The Super Sylph XF-101C "Ikarus" is a one seat experimental aircraft capable of long period flights over Kerbin at supersonic speed thanks to its low weight and high lift wing design. The XF-101C is also capable of transporting small payloads into its cargo bay, such as small fuel tanks, science modules or utility parts. The XF-101C "stock" aircraft can reach Mach 2.4 (at 10'000 m) and 2.8 (at 22'000 m), thanks to the twin F119 Turbofan engines, capable of 396.000 N of thrust, and 1.96 t of liquid fuel provide great flight authonomy. This aircraft if just the first of the Super Sylph class aircraft/spaceplanes, specialized on atmospheric flight. The future variant of the XF-101C, the XS-101C, will be a spaceplane for non-atmospheric flights and capable of landing on low gravity satellites, such as Ike or Minmus. SPECIFICATIONS .Super Sylph XF-101C "Ikarus" Lenght: 17.46 m Wing Span: 11.79 m Height Overall: 4.32 m Dry Mass: 11.248 t Fuels Mass: 2.33t Max Thrust: 396 kN Top speed @10000 m: 3008.52 km/h (Mach 2.4) Top speed @22000 m: 3422.52 km/h (Mach 2.8) Minimum speed: 230.4 km/h (Mach 0.18) MODS B9 Aerospace KW Rocketry Procedural Wings Aviation Lights RealChutes Ferram Aerospace (Optional) DOWNLOADS Super Sylph XF-101C "Ikarus" Notes . I didn't want to exceed the number of mods used because I wanted this aircraft to be the most compatible with other players, since these mods usually are the most used in modded KSP, at least for aviation fans. I did not include in the craft file the XF-101C with Near Future, KSP Interstellar, KAS, Aies and some other mod parts since some people could be interested in this aircraft but not with component from these mods. If you are interested in the complete aircraft just contact me. . Super Sylph is a "real" name, it is the name used for high speed tactical fighters in the anime "Sentou Yousei Yukikaze", so I didn't invent anything new, just took it as inspiration. . Early aircraft designs won't be nothing special, with the time I hope to come out with more intriguing designs. . If you want just to change engine type, my advise is not to choose a turbofan/rocket engine exceeding 2.5 t each, or with empty tanks you will keep flipping over while trying to land.