Alias72

awwww its so cute. Can I pet it? Actually micro sats are one of my favorite things to build. and this one looks efficient!

And then there was science...

I was really surprised how much fuel I had left. After running the numbers from the last pick through Tsiolkovsky I got 150 m/s. Not a huge amount but I could play with some orbital maneuvers. Not to mention the overabundance of liquid fuel for atmospheric fun. Or more likely flat-spin recovery.

The reason most space-planes ascend at an angle and keep going till it stops working is because no one can be bothered to do an efficient ascent to a high altitude. The reason that the angle is usually 30 degrees is that most spaceplanes have a TWR less than 1 at low altitudes and speeds and instead rely on lifting surfaces to ascend. Once the straight line stops working you're usually at the point where you can begin your ACTUAL ascent to space. The problem is that the turboramjet with ram intake won't produce enough thrust to overcome drag past mach 1 at the highest point. This is why players level out just before max altitude to accelerate to mach 1.5-2.0. From here ascent becomes easy as you normally have an excess of thrust versus what your plane can handle. Long story short we go high because we are bored. We go fast because we need to to go high, and we explode because we go fast.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/117845-13-Ton-Spaceplane

So THAT'S how you get the crew cabin into orbit!

The Hall Effect test is nice and all, but that is not why they built this vehicle. The soviet union first used hall effect thrusters in 1971 and after the fall of the USSR the design entered Europe and American Space agencies where it is now available to power your satellites and put on pretty light shows at University engineering parties. The vehicle is most likely a floating lab for micro gravity materials testing. The air force may be looking at blowing up satellites and nuclear warheads while in transit. They may also want to develop new crystals. Perhaps for laser lenses.

Welcome; let me introduce you to the X-03C Silver Dart! The X-03C Silver Dart is an SSTO space-plane capable of reaching an 80km orbit with plenty of dv to spare. The ascent profile is as follows 45 degree ascent to 10km -Configure orbital computer 10 degree acceleration to 500m/s (will be at 12km after pitch over complete) 15 degree acceleration to TEC (Turbine Engine Cutoff) -20km LES (Liquid Engine Startup) -25km TEC -Ascending without horizon (allow the horizon to fall beneath you) 35km 10 degree ascent Ascending with horizon (compensate for curvature of Kerbin) -Thrust to 85km apoapse -Coast along curve 55km apply correction burn to 85km Apoapse Circularize and enjoy the show!

By the way. I am noticing a lot of you are using horizontal wings. This may be causing some issues with stability, especially when rudder input is minimal. I suggest tilting the wings up a single notch or two; this works exceptionally well on the flying wings. In fact if you look at the HO 229 cross-section you will notice its wings are angled 5 degrees to provide roll stability.

Welcome to the world of realistic space-planes. are you beginning to understand why no one has built one yet? Sarcasm aside. It is entirely possible to build a reliable space-plane but you have to work on a scale larger than you're used to. I can get 1400m/s at 20-22 km with an appropriate ascent profile. My space-plane could carry an additional 1 ton satellite If I reworked it a bit. This plane weighs about 15 ton. The payload gets much bigger as your plane gets bigger. Try designing something massive. I have seen a Mk 3 space-plane that carried an orange tank into orbit.

I have built a working SSTO. The only problem is that my strakes keep exploding so I need to mess with my ascent profile to keep my alt/speed higher.

I would like to see radiators and heat sinks. I know fuel tanks and pre-coolers can both store a lot of heat but I still feel that a dedicated heat sink which draws energy from all craft parts and distributes them to radiators would be useful.

Here are a few suggestions for things that would have helped me out: Mach tucking or why a plane is a lawn-dart beyond mach 2. Ballistic Missile Defense. The relation between velocity and explosions in the atmosphere. (actual curves here would help) Do a Barrel roll. Why aircraft that appear outwardly stable may in fact roll on their side and stall. Re-entry for dummies and rocks. how to reenter the atmosphere without heat-shields and without fiery death. Tailless aircraft stability. The REAL way to make a space-plane!

If you are concerned about your crafts balance you can open the heat-shield configs in the parts folder and comment out the part that says physicssignificance = 1. This will cause the heatshield to affect the CoM

http://fas.org/nuke/space/nerva-spec.pdf pg 50 launch weight of engine shall be: 35, 200 lbs. 15966 kg thrust is from pg 18 75000 lb 333616 N twr = T/M = 33400/16000 = 2.0875 These are design requirements. They should be used as an indicator of final performance. Units converted to metric for the sake of intelligent life everywhere.

This is a non-issue. The nuclear reactor in a NERVA engine is included in the engines structure. Also nuclear fuel is used primarily because it does NOT run out quickly. These engines would not need to refuel for decades. rebalance is the most important thing. maybe operating a NERVA engine could reduce your programs prestige.

a perfect example being thrusting towards kerbin. you spend a lot of delta V and don't change your velocity. Look at the map and you will find the shape of your orbit has changed.

generalizing a bit. V is a letter that we use to represent the physical quantity velocity. Άis a mathematical symbol that means "the change in/of". so Άanything is the change in that thing. ÃŽâ€V is the change in velocity.

a new coat of paint and it will be fine. Trust me i'm an engineer...

The game's graphical style is Modern in the sense that it does not limit itself based on technical difficulties or perceived necessity. The realistic grittiness of 2006 is gone may it rest forevermore. It's implementation is not modern, but because the game is under development it is not obsolete either. The graphics appear to be under development and will probably be improved following 1.0.

F=M*A Sorry I just had to fix that! I also like the model, 1.0 is looking like one big leap.

Kerbal Space Program 1.0 Liftoff!

This would be awesome. It would also add importance to probes. Who wants to launch an expensive mission to the Mun only to learn you're landing zone is on the side of a cliff?

Here's a suggestion! as was mentioned there would be a crew consumables resource. There would also be a life support module. The life support module would convert electricity and crew consumables into time for your Kerbals to not die. Newer life support modules use more electricity and less consumables to simulate the switch from open loop to closed loop systems. Everything else would be behind a "black box". Essentially all you're doing is converting Electricity and Crew Consumables into Crew endurance which Kerbals use as they go. This would also provide a framework for EVA suit endurance as it would only be able to store a certain amount of "endurance". say 1 days worth.

well... on that upbeat note! I like the idea of combining science with a contextual situation. having to place a telescope in an appropriate orbit would add challenge and variety without adding a substantial new mechanic or part. This is almost like combining satellite contracts with science instruments. great idea!