GoSlash27

Why don't you just enable "debris" in the tracking station and recover them? Best, -Slashy

KerikBalm, My "BigHoss" is rated for 28t LF&O per flight. I don't build spaceplanes to carry anything that doesn't pass through a docking port and I don't build them to go any farther than a station in LKO and back. You've got a radically different mission for your spaceplanes and I don't envy that challenge I used to focus on payload fraction, but I realized that fuel fraction was really key to economical SSTOs, so now I design for that. Aerodynamically clean, balanced to an economical profile, and designed to use the minimum fuel mass in the launch process. My spaceplanes are about as glamorous as a Maytag washer. Best, -Slashy

My little personnel transports work at under $150 per kerbal, which is under $300 per tonne. My large tankers are about $80 per tonne. Best, -Slashy

Yeah... I definitely wouldn't leave orbit. You'll waste more DV trying to get a new encounter than you'd save. a highly- elliptical orbit to the edge of SoI is darn- near stationary at Ap. It'd cost tenths of a m/sec to reverse direction there. Best, -Slashy

Method 2: raise your apoapsis to near- escape (using gravity assist if possible) and reverse at apoapsis. Use atmosphere to brake if possible. That's the cheapest way you're going to pull it off. Best, -Slashy

^ This is my understanding as well. Think of it as a reverse bi-elliptic transfer. In some cases you can save a few m/sec by intentionally undershooting and then circularizing at Ap. I personally don't bother doing it that way because the small savings (if any) generally aren't worth the hassle. Best, -Slashy

I design all of my lifters the same, so they tend to follow the same flight profile. Stage 1 has 1.4G acceleration off the pad and 1,800 m/sec DV computed with 50% atmospheric Isp Stage 2 has .5G acceleration and 1,800 m/sec DV computed with vacuum Isp. I launch vertically to 100 m/sec, then kick 10° prograde and follow the marker. Acceleration is held to 2sin(pitch). This gives me a uniform launch profile regardless of the size/ composition of the rocket. Usually when I've established my apoapsis I have less than 100 m/sec to full circularization. If I'm doing another stage from there, I'll kick off the second stage while periapsis is still in atmosphere (so as not to leave debris) and use the next stage to circularize. Best, -Slashy

IME if you wait until you see it rising, you're already too late. MoeslyArmlis has a good graphical representation of the alignment here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/127795-KSP-Caveman-Challenge!?p=2070705&viewfull=1#post2070705 Also, refer to 5thHorseman's videos. Good luck! -Slashy

I guess this will put me on the outside: I don't have any canon. It's just a game I enjoy playing. Best, -Slashy

I can't say absolutely that the second approach is cheaper in all cases, but it's certainly the way I do it. I transfer directly to orbital height (or below if aerocapturing). Best, -Slashy

Re. heavy payload spaceplanes: I made this last night fartin' around with someone else's design: Heavy- lift spaceplanes can be done, but I don't use them myself. Heavy/ bulky items are a rare payload item; too rare to justify the expense and development time for a spaceplane IMO. But I do a lot of crew transfers and lifting fuel, so I have spaceplanes for that. Best, -Slashy

Depends on whether you want to come back or not, but my money is still on Eve. Tylo is like any other airless body AFA the process goes. Nothing about it that's stretching the limit of the equipment. Eve, OTOH... Making something that will land on it isn't bad. Making something that can launch to orbit is a good deal harder. Making something that can do *both* is horrendous. Best, -Slashy

Sharpy, Yeah, you're correct. That's how I did my orbital tank. http://s52.photobucket.com/user/GoSlash27/slideshow/KSP/OrbitalTank But all this is different from what the OP is trying to accomplish. Best, -Slashy

Starhawk, It matters where you've got the rudder (s) mounted in the vertical axis. If it's mounted high, it creates the same roll response as dihedral. If it's mounted low, it merely yaws into a slip with very little roll response. Dihedral works better with low rudders IME. Best, -Slashy

noname117, I've never seen the white ovals either. That seems to be a different phenomenon than the "wake angels". Mine are disembodied light sources; glowing white transparent spheres. Best, -Slashy

veeltch, It's a little complicated... Adding dihedral doesn't automatically add roll stability. It instead creates the tendency to roll away from a slip. If you have proper rudder area and leverage, it creates a tendency to self- level *BUT* If you overdo it or have insufficient vertical stabilizer, it can create a very odd roll coupled oscillation that makes it wallow. It has to be balanced with the vertical stab to create a critically- damped state, or else it will not only not add roll stability, but will actually throw you out of control. I like it in very small amounts for spaceplanes, but it's not really necessary. HTHs, -Slashy

10Char

"economical" would be launching it empty and filling it in orbit using SSTO spaceplanes. But you're asking about a full tank in one go, so let me consult the mighty trash heap... 80t, 2 stages. 1/2 atmospheric first stage at 1.4G, .5G second stage at vacuum. *inserts quarter and pulls lever* Upper stage: Mainsail with 96.6t full tank. 183t mass and $30,600 Lower stage: Mammoth with 228t full tank. 426t mass and $78,000 ($108,600 total) Will need some SRBs to get it moving, as a single Mammoth will only generate .9G loaded to this weight. The trash heap has spoken! -Slashy

I would say it's natural. Right in the resonant band of hydrogen and it's merely representing signal intensity. If ET is going to broadcast messages out into the universe, they probably ain't gonna do it using AM and if they do, it ain't gonna be a short blip with no follow- up. I'm with Kiwi on this one; just a star fart. Best, -Slashy

maceemiller, No worries, and you're very welcome. Answering questions like this one makes us cantankerous old farts feel useful You now have a better understanding of how the rocket equation works than probably most people who play this game, and first-hand experience of why "moar boosters" doesn't work. You'll run into more confusing and counterintuitive stuff in the future (I sure as heck did). When you do, give us a holler. We don't mind. Best, -Slashy

Building on Sharpy's earlier cleanup: It's got a little more room in the tanks (I didn't fill it completely). http://wikisend.com/download/191948/LTPII.craft *Edit* I chose to go with parts that were visible in the original pic, so I skipped the RAPIERS. Had I known they were okay, I would've used them instead of the TJ hybrid layout.

I'm really enjoying the narration of this new attempt Keep banging those rocks together! -Slashy

The short answer is DV is not additive like you were expecting. It's proportional to the natural log of the wet mass over dry mass. You effectively doubled the mass of the fuel, which is good. But then in addition you also doubled the mass of the tanks (which you have to do to hold the fuel) and engines (which you didn't have to do). Plus throw in the random equipment to connect them together/ etc. You haven't improved your mass ratio at all. In fact, you made it worse, so DV goes down. Your acceleration did improve, but that's not what you were after. If you were to try it again with just an additional fuel tank, you would see an improvement in DV. Not a doubling, but an improvement. If you were to fire the attached rocket by itself and then discard it when empty, you would also see an improvement. Again, not a doubling. And no, not a dumb question. You have to ask questions like this to get a handle on how the rocket equation works. It would only be dumb if you didn't ask. HtHs, -Slashy

Red Shirt, They're the same thing. Squad didn't put them there intentionally, they just show up at the same places. Notice when the "wake angel" appears in my shuttle launch; right at 6.8 km altitude and approaching Mach 1. I happened to catch that one as I was photographing the SRB sep. Since (at least in my case) the light sources behave the same way as the puffballs and both are particle effects, I assume they're the result of the same mechanism. Best, -Slashy

These things are really hard to capture in pics. By the time I screen-cap them, they're already gone. Here's a "puffball": And here's the same patch of sky a couple seconds later after it had passed to show it's not normally there: Best, -Slashy - - - Updated - - - Actually, I think this is the cause of all of the effects that I see, both light and smoke. They always generate along my flight path, either ahead or behind. I don't have BD Armory. Best, -Slashy