Stratzenblitz75

The thing is, all the drag is behind the center of mass and the rocket has plenty of reaction wheels (one 2.5 meter SAS unit for each of the boosters and one on the center core). In terms of the navball, When mechjeb turns over for the gravity turn, it doesn't pitch over perfectly, it moves slightly to the right. Then, mechjeb moves to the left and goes past the ascent guidance marker, then it moves right, then it banks hard to the left going completely north (or down into the ocean). Do you think the drag from the intakes could be causing this? The intakes are all behind the center of mass so the rocket should be stable.

Greetings all! Are you tired of having your space planes flat spin out of control because of a jet engine flame-out? Are you tired of wrestling for control of your space planes because of asymmetric thrust? Well fear no more! With this simple trick, you can avoid all* of these problems and enjoy a smooth, symmetrical thrust flight to space. Your space planes will perform better too! The trick is simple: Step 1: First build your space plane WITHOUT any jet engines or air intakes. Step 2: Place 1 jet engine WITHOUT symmetry, then place however many intakes you want Step 3: Repeat steps 1-2 until you have desired amount of jet engines. Its that simple. Please note that once you place all your jet engines/air intakes, You cannot move the engine or the part its attached to as this will reset the jet engine-intake(s) pattern we've set up. It gets more complicated if you want to make an engine sub assembly that you can use on your future space planes: This Imgur album will guide you through the process of constructing a sub assembly. This trick also has a beneficial side effect. Check out this test I've performed: This craft was built using the trick from above: This craft wasn't: As you can see, the first craft performed much better than the second craft despite the fact they both used the same flight profile, same number of engines, same number of intakes and the same payload. I hope this helps you make better, more powerful and easier to use space planes/SSTOs!

Ahh you've encountered the rare "Kraken planet" bug. I've encountered this particularly nasty bug before: Quick loading appears to fix it though.

I tried, oh did I try, but mechjeb hates me: Most of my flights ended like this... Hmm, The trick should have worked with 1 intake per engine. Are you sure you built it in this order? Jet engine Intake Jet engine Intake ... Nevertheless, thank you for the rep!

There is a simple yet extremely effective way to prevent asymmetric thrust.

That moment when you're playing with TAC life support and you put a food container on your Minmus ship rather than a life-support container. Gerely Kerman, you will be missed...

Just to let you all know, there IS a good reason other than ease of use to place your intakes/jet engines individually. By having your intake air distributed equally across all your jet engines you get a more powerful aircraft that is able to run off of jet power much longer. Take a look at this test I performed: I built one craft by placing jet engines and intakes in this order: Jet engine Intake Intake Jet engine Intake Intake ... Here's how it did carrying a 41 ton payload: Then I removed all the jet engines and intakes and placed all the jet engines first, then all the intakes. Here's how it did carrying the same payload following the same flight profile: While the first craft almost made orbit, this one didn't even get close as it kept falling back down and losing speed to the lower atmosphere every time I tried to ascend.

What do mean? Does the craft file not work? Or are you having trouble with the building technique? If you're having trouble with the technique, The trick is to build your craft first without any engines or intakes, then (without symmetry) place 1 jet engine, then place 2 intakes. Repeat this until you have the desired amount of jet engines. Once you do this you cannot move the jet engines or intakes as this will reset the intake flow. I'm sorry if this doesn't make much sense, I'll have to make a dedicated tutorial for this.

I have no idea what Mechjeb's true intentions are. Sometimes, it flies my craft straight into the ocean. Sometimes, it just steers it northward (always north though, never south) but then changes its mind and trys to go east to orbit (but fails, because it burned all my fuel going north). Rarely it makes orbit but if it does, the inclination is always greater than 3 degrees. I don't know why it just can't follow the dang ascent profile... I am controlling from the mechjeb unit (which is positioned radially and upright) and my Jet engines aren't flaming out or provided asymmetric thrust. Mechjeb, its weird...

MechJeb, space is the other way... So far, MechJeb has delivered more fuel to the ocean than to orbit.

Same here. Larger Turbo Jets would cut down on a lot of lag for the heavy lifters. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we'll get such engines in the stock game soon... Thank you! Yeah, I agree that "babying loads into orbit" is kinda boring. I'll play with the MechJeb ascent profile and see if I can come up with something. Thanks man! I appreciate it

Hello, I'd like to submit my collection of Firefly Launch System (FLS) SSTOs. FLS SSTOs are Turbo Jet powered and have no wings; They launch and land vertically. Each FLS SSTO is constructed so that the intake air is equally shared among all the Turbo Jet engines, resulting in symmetrical thrust without having to throttle down or turn off engines in pairs. They are also reusable and if the launch vehicle is recovered after the flight, they can lift payloads to LKO at a rate of 22 funds per ton. Here's an album of the 5 SSTOs: Here's a rundown of the 5 SSTOs: Deimos-3600 (Deimos-21) - 21 tons to LKO Charon-7200 (Charon-41) - 41 tons to LKO Triton-14400 (Triton-82) - 81 tons to LKO Io-21600 (Io-123) - 123 tons to LKO Titan-28800 (Titan-164) - 164 tons to LKO FLS SSTO Fuel Tankers: https://www.dropbox.com/s/24rm21xo02qtcnv/Firefly%20Launch%20System%20Fuel-Tankers.zip?dl=0 FLS SSTO Lifter Sub-assemblies: https://www.dropbox.com/s/j9seh4psv5wx4qq/Firefly%20Launch%20System%20Subassemblies.zip?dl=0 If you'd like to learn more, click here.

Here's my heavy lifting SSTOs: The smallest SSTO, the Deimos-3600, is capable of lifting 20.5 tons to LKO and the largest, the Titan-28800, is capable of lifting 164 tons to LKO. I designed the crafts so that the engines all share intake air equally, and therefore, you don't have to throttle down or shut off engines in pairs to avoid flame outs. You can see here that all the engines are still running, despite the thin atmosphere The cost per ton delivered to LKO for each of the SSTOs is about 22 funds per ton. If any of you are interested, check out my main thread for more info/pics.

Greetings all! May I present to you something that has sucked up a surprising amount of my time to develop, The Firefly Launch System: * If you are allergic to moderate part clipping, do not proceed any further * Introduction: The Firefly Launch System is collection of Turbo Jet Powered reusable SSTOs designed to lift heavy payloads at minimum cost. Each FLS SSTO only has 2 Ram air intakes per engine so I think it qualifies as a "non-airhogger" (however it really depends on what your definition of a "non-airhogger is"). What makes FLS SSTOs unique is how they are built. By placing the Jet engines and intakes one-by-one, I was able to "trick" the game into sharing intake air equally across all the engines of the SSTO. As a result, all engines burn at the same thrust without having to shut off pairs of engines or throttle the engines down. What difference does this make you ask? A huge difference. A very HUGE difference. My current line up of FLS SSTOs outperforms previous airhogging variants that had 4 intakes per engine! The new versions actually can get their apoapsis out of the atmosphere on jet power alone whereas the airhoggers needed heavy assistance from rocket engines. They use less fuel too! To demonstrate this, just try building a replica of a FLS SSTO and try to get it into orbit by shutting off engines in pairs or throttling down. I can guarantee you that the replica will not make it anywhere near orbit without assistance from rocket engines. All FLS SSTOs are powered by FLS Pulsar Boosters, 2.5 meter engine cores consisting of 4 Turbo Jet engines and 8 Ram Air intakes: NOTE: If you use the FLS Pulsar Boosters on your craft, be sure to place them one at a time. Do NOT use Symmetry. With that out of the way, lets take a look at FLS Fuel Tanker line up, now known as the "original series" (Launch vehicle sub assembly in parentheses) --- FLS Deimos-3600 Fuel Tanker (FLS Deimos-21 Booster) --- Description: The smallest of the FLS Fuel Tanker line up, the Deimos-3600 is capable of lifting 1 Kerbodyne S3-3600 tank or 20.5 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. It is powered by 1 Pulsar Booster and, unlike its larger brothers, it does not come with a RCS Tug to assist in docking. Specs: Parts: ---------------------------- 97 Cost: ---------------------------- 56605.9 Funds Payload Cost: -------------------- 9560 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: ------------- 47045.9 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 463.7 Funds Payload mass: ------------------- 20.6 Tons Launch Vehicle Mass: ------------ 10.82 Tons Total Mass: --------------------- 31.42 Tons --- FLS Charon-7200 Fuel Tanker (FLS Charon-41 Booster) --- Description: The Charon-7200 is capable of lifting 1 Kerbodyne S3-7200 Tank or 41 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with a RCS Tug and funky purple lights Specs: Parts: ---------------------------- 166 Cost: ---------------------------- 116253.8 Funds Payload Cost: -------------------- 18400 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: ------------- 97853.8 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 927.4 Funds Payload mass: ------------------- 41.4 Tons Launch Vehicle Mass: ------------ 22.86 Tons Total Mass: --------------------- 64.26 Tons --- FLS Triton-14400 Fuel Tanker (FLS Triton-82 Booster) --- Description: The workhorse of the FLS Fuel Tanker line up, the Triton-14400 is capable of lifting 1 Kerbodyne S3-14400 tank or 82 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. The Triton-14400 is the largest FLS Fuel Tanker that does not suffer any noticeable lag (at least on my end). Comes with a RCS tug and funky sky-blue lights. Specs: Parts: ---------------------------- 274 Cost: ---------------------------- 206,731.5 Funds Payload Cost: -------------------- 26,800 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: ------------- 17,9931.5 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 1854.8 Funds Payload mass: ------------------- 82.4 Tons Launch Vehicle Mass: ------------ 44.9 Tons Total Mass: --------------------- 127.3 Tons --- FLS Io-21600 Fuel Tanker (FLS Io-123 Booster) --- Description: The first of the FLS Fuel Tankers to use a nuclear engine, the Io-21600 is capable of lifting 1 Kerbodyne S3-14400 tank and 1 Kerbodyne S3-7200 tank or 123 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with a RCS Tug, a detachable LV-N Atomic Engine, and funky red lights. Warning, this craft suffers from mild lag. However, it is still completely flyable. Specs: Parts: ---------------------------- 432 (MILD LAG WARNING) Cost: ---------------------------- 318029.2 Funds Payload Cost: -------------------- 43000 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: ------------- 275029.2 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 2782.2 Funds Payload mass: ------------------- 123.4 Tons Launch Vehicle Mass: ------------ 69.93 Tons Total Mass: --------------------- 193.33 Tons --- FLS Titan-28800 Fuel Tanker (FLS Titan-164 Booster) --- Description: The flagship of the the FLS Fuel Tankers, the Titan-28800 is capable of lifting 2 Kerbodyne S3-14400 Tanks or 164 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with a RCS Tug, a detachable LV-N Atomic Engine, and funky orange lights. Warning, this craft suffers from moderate lag. It is still completely flyable but time-dilation makes orbiting take longer that the other FLS Fuel Tankers. Specs: Parts: ---------------------------- 566 (MODERATE LAG WARNING) Cost: ---------------------------- 409136.9 Funds Payload Cost: -------------------- 51400 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: ------------- 357736.9 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 3709.6 Funds Payload mass: ------------------- 164.4 Tons Launch Vehicle Mass: ------------ 90.66 Tons Total Mass: --------------------- 255.06 Tons --- Download FLS Original series --- As you can see all of these SSTOs are fairly efficient, with the cost per ton lifted to orbit being around 22 funds. How to Fly: This Imgur album will walk you through the flight profile of a FLS SSTO. All of the FLS SSTOs have the same flight profile. NOTE: If you just want to refuel a station and bring the fuel tank back to Kerbin, do NOT undock the fuel tank. If you do this, all the struts will break and horrible things will happen if you try to take it back to Kerbin. Instead, dock the entire SSTO to your refueling port and then transfer the fuel. The Io-21600 and Titan-28800 have a nuclear engine that can be detached and used for some other purpose (like an interplanetary tug). If you do this, press AG 5 to activate the backup 48-S7 engines for de-orbiting. In case of emergency, press ABORT to shutoff all the engines on the craft. If one of the side boosters fails, click on the radial decoupler and detach it and the booster opposing it to balance the thrust. If the payload is too heavy for the remaining boosters to have a TWR greater than 1, then press AG 4 to decouple the payload. Remember, the launch vehicle is far more expensive than the payload so try to save it if you can. Each side booster can be controlled individually and they come with a solar panel and a battery to stay powered during lengthy "accidents". Here are two examples of a typical FLS SSTO flight. Titan-28800 Fuel Tanker: Triton-14400 Fuel Tanker: ----------------------------------- Edit --- 9/14/2014 --- ----------------------------------- Introducing the FLS KLAW series! FLS KLAW lifters are designed to be more reusable than their FLS Fuel Tanker counterparts. Where the FLS original series lifters had to be recovered after every launch, the FLS KLAW series lifters can be reused indefinitely. This is thanks to their underside mounted ARM klaw which allows them to "grab" payloads. The FLS KLAW series includes three lifters: --- FLS KLAW Charon-7200 --- Description: The smallest FLS KLAW lifter, the FLS KLAW Charon-7200 is capable of lifting 41 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with a RCS Tug and funky purple lights. Specs: Parts: -------------------------------- 260 Total Cost: -------------------------- 126647.8 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: -------------- 125647 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 1000.8 Funds Total Mass: ------------------------- 26.28 Tons --- FLS KLAW Triton-14400 --- Description: The workhorse of the FLS KLAW series, the FLS KLAW Triton-14400 is capable of lifting 82 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with a RCS Tug and funky sky-blue lights. Specs: Parts: -------------------------------- 423 (MILD LAG WARNING) Total Cost: -------------------------- 212202 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: -------------- 210237.1 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 1964.9 Funds Total Mass: ------------------------- 48.56 Tons --- FLS KLAW Io-21600 --- Description: The largest of the FLS KLAW series, The FLS KLAW Io-21600 is capable of lifting 123 tons of payload into a 75 Km orbit. Comes with 2 RCS Tugs and funky red lights. Specs: Parts: -------------------------------- 513 (MODERATE LAG WARNING) Total Cost: -------------------------- 304004.5 Funds Launch Vehicle Cost: -------------- 301002.1 Funds Launch Vehicle Fuel Cost: -------- 3002.4 Funds Total Mass: ------------------------- 72.6 Tons For all of the FLS KLAW lifters, the payload must be loaded separately. There are three payloads provided with the FLS KLAW series: - FLS Fuel Tank 7200 - Parts: --- 22 Cost: ---- 18968 Funds Mass: --- 41.4 Tons - FLS Fuel Tank 14400 - Parts: --- 24 Cost: ---- 33368 Funds Mass: --- 82.4 Tons - FLS Fuel Tank 21600 - Parts: --- 28 Cost: ---- 49568 Funds Mass: --- 123.4 Tons All these fuel tanks are available in the SPH and as sub-assemblies. The FLS Fuel Tank Tug is designed to transport these heavy fuel tanks: --- FLS Fuel Tank Tug --- Description: The FLS Fuel Tank Tug does what it says on the tin; it moves FLS Fuel Tanks. Has space for 1 Kerbal to perform maintenance on FLS KLAW lifters. Specs: Parts: --- 51 Cost: ---- 19289 Funds Mass: --- 6.26 Tons --- Download FLS KLAW series --- This Imgur album will walk you through how to use a FLS KLAW lifter: Here's an example flight of a FLS KLAW lifter That's all for now. Hope you find some use in these SSTOs!

My most ridiculous craft would have to be... Big rocket 2: Over 4000 parts, and almost 40,000 tons of the launch pad. Because of the extreme lag, it took 3 hours of real time to get this thing up to 26 Km and 1200 m/s. Too bad it exploded before I made orbit...

I never haven't been nowhere except for the celestial bodies of the Kerbol System.

Yes, the center core is actually the payload (the center engines are on decouplers so they don't drain from the payload fuel). There's about 3000 tons of fuel in there.

May I present to you... Big rocket 2 Over 4000 parts Almost 40,000 tons And a cost so high, the game displays it with scientific notation. (15,500,000 funds) Surprisingly, it launched just fine Unfortunately, problems arose much later in the flight: Because of the lag, it took 3 hours of real time to get the rocket this far, so, you can imagine how pissed I was when this happened... (In hindsight, I probably should of turned down the texture quality to make the lag slightly more bearable but... oh well...)

... But we HAVE given you an alternate formula for scoring: Also, if your intent is to reward more "work", then you should really rename your challenge from "Economic fuel to orbit" to "Most fuel to orbit" because as it stands, you scoring system promotes building the largest rockets possible rather than the most efficient or cost effective ones (See Vector's post).

As stated above, I think you should have contestants build lifters for one payload like a jumbo-64 fuel tank (or multiple payloads and divide them into categories based on their mass). Not only would this make comparing entries easier, it would also get rid of insanely low or high mass entries and therefore, put the focus on efficiency rather than size.

I definitely agree. There's no reason why you shouldn't be able to see the real science reports in sandbox mode.

First off, let me just say that Space Engine has to be one of my favorite "games" ever. I've sunk countless hours into flying around the universe, landing on all the different planets and takings screenshots of all the crazy and unique scenes I've stumbled across. Heck, even after all this time and over 1000 screenshots, I'm STILL finding new things to gawk at! Anyways, here are some of my latest Space Engine screenshots:

Wow Ziv, this is simply incredible... Now if you don't mind, I'm just going to gush about it... [gush] HOLY **** THIS IS AMAZING. I mean, less than 10 tons from Kerbin's SURFACE on a grand tour! MIND-BOGGLING! And your designs actually look good (unlike mine lol)! Your ion lander is especially beautiful. The way you used those cubic struts and solar panels, its a work of art! You even landed an ion lander on Duna with a TWR of less than 1 and without a parachute. Just. INCREDIBLE. In addition, your introduction/setup for the mission was quite clever. I especially enjoyed your launch tower contraption. The hyper optimization is REAL. I can't think of a single way to improve your design, its near perfection. Seriously, this has to be one of the most impressive missions I have ever seen in KSP. Fantastic work! [/gush] Now excuse me while I hopelessly attempt to remove my jaw from the floor.

I made a flow chart to help me plan out an optimal flight plan for my Grand Tours of the Kerbol System (Delta V predictions included for each maneuver). Yeah, as you predicted the best planet to visit first is Eve as you get to dump your heavy Eve lander early on in the mission. Then, Moho because its easiest to get to, ect. Also, if you are only planning on planting a flag on every planet in the Kerbol System, don't bother using jets on Laythe (Jets are heavy!) or designing specialized landers for any planet other than Eve. Its often a better idea to just have a "universal" lander that can perform many landings. Here are my two Grand Tours for reference: The Sigma Mission: 36 tons from LKO, planted a flag on every celestial body, used three landers in total (Eve lander, General Purpose Lander, Ion Powered Lander), one launch, no refueling The Outer Wilds Mission: 100 tons from LKO, planted a flag on every celestial body (and skimmed into Jool's lower atmosphere), brought science instruments and a MPL, gathered 42,981 science points, one launch, no refueling Hope this helps!

Ahh, I'm guessing you don't fully understand the fine (tedious) art of grinding science. In KSP, you aren't supposed to transmit anything (except crew reports and eva reports). What you're ACTUALLY supposed to do is: Step 1: Activate all your science instruments Step 2: EVA your Kerbal Step 3: Once in control of the Kerbal, move him to a science instrument and right-click it, then click "take data" Step 4: Repeat step 3 for all science instruments. Step 5: Board the command pod, (This will store all your science results in the command pod) Step 6: Move science instruments to next biome Step 7: Repeat steps 1-6 until you have sufficient science reports Step 8: Return command pod to Kerbin and recover your science You see, the MPL is a very powerful tool in your science grinding toolbox as it allows you to reuse the otherwise "1-use" Science jr. and Mystery goo container. With this in mind, your lander-station combo should work quite well. Simply send your lander to the surface, get science, put science in command pod (which can store infinite science reports, but no duplicates), return to station, clean mystery goo and science jr. experiments and refuel, send the lander to another biome. Repeat until you have enough science reports to max out the tech tree, then return the command pod back to Kerbin and recover it to get your science. .... As you can probably tell, I'm very dissatisfied with the way science is implemented in the game. I think you should get 100% value for transmitting things like temperature readings and gravity scans while you would need a MPL to transmit science from Goo containers and surface samples. Even then, this is just scratching the surface of how I think science could be improved...