nothingSpecial

Of course, until you face sentences like "rockets usually have around 20% payload fraction and spaceplanes usually have 30% or more" and wonder what exactly is considered to be payload in such different launch designs.

It is also really fortunate surprise that neither Vostok nor Voskhod (they used the same blocks A (core) and B, V, G and D (boosters) as Soyuz rocket) had any fatal flights. There were a handful of disasters (unmanned) and crew escape was very limited (or nonexistent in the case of Voskhod). The safety of Soviet aerospace is slightly overestimated.

Up to date all three space station contracts that I have both seen and paid attention to had requirement for at least 5 Kerbals capacity. In the Contracts.cfg nothing considers any multipliers for the number of Kerbals, nor there is any declaration of minimum and maximum number of Kerbals. The questions are: 1. How many Kerbals can contract possibly require? Is there any conditions for them? Is there any rewards multipliers based on number of Kerbals? 2. Are reward multipliers from this thread still applied similarly to all rewards? If not, how this has changed in 1.0.4?

Oh I see now that he used "non payload", sorry.

No it's not in fact.Mass of payload: Mp = 50 t. Mass of rocket (mass of lifter): Ml = 50 t. Whole mass: M = Mp + Ml = 100 t. 50 t / 100 t = .5 = 50% Payload fraction of 100% means you have no lifter and still get your payload in orbit, possibly with Hyperedit.

I once thought about using this as a clever way to carry less fuel overall until I realize that that means pushing extra tank mass in upper stage. Ah, I see.

But that means payload participated in liftoff so it wasn't really a payload?

Okay. So when I had such design... ...the spaceplane was a payload! ...I don't think this is a cheap design but it should be more efficient than STS in terms of payload fraction... and more expensive also because of separated orbital insertion engines costs. Also I realized that if craft has no probe core, the pilot cannot be considered payload, only passengers. So my smallest spaceplanes have zero payload fraction...

A-ha!So. The STS orbiter is not a payload, but for example, Buran is payload for Energia lifter? And if I put one spaceplane on the back of another, piggyback style, into orbit, the first one will be payload if it's engines weren't used? So passenger rocketship SSTO with no cargo holds will have only passengers as it's payload, right? Like several dozens of kilograms at best.

I just realized that if you put a person under fairing, then one-way trip wouldn't be more difficult than Sputnik-1.

Never came past Eve unmanned or Duna manned. I've launched four interplanetary ore survey probes in 1.0.4 into LKO and set them nodes for Moho, Eve, Duna and Jool transfer (both to know when it will be and to survey possible base positions) only to find the save broken next day.

Yeah, that what I try to do here. Because if I try to think about it harder than just usual cached "STS was way too expensive", I realize that the single STS launch should be compared with couple of Soyuzes and a Proton.

Well that what I thought.But... Why?! Soyuz or Apollo, once in orbit, preform all the same things the Shuttle makes. Especially if we talk about Apollo: it has LEM that stays into space (as in Shuttle cargo), command module that brings crew back to Earth (as Shuttle cockpit) and service module that circulizes around Moon and then brings CSM with astronauts home (as Shuttle OMS). Isn't it... a little bit inconsistent? Well than the whole Shuttle or whole CSM, LEM and TLI stage are payload to low Earth orbit, so the whole SSTO spaceplane should be payload to LKO orbit, isn't it? Well this is interesting and not confusing. But I don't suppose it is useful if we try to compare different approaches...

I have recently read several threads that are concerned by payload fraction, and now I want to ask: what exactly is considered payload? Just to keep things straight: 1. The question is in ambiguity what is exactly being compared. 2. The compared designs in question are a) multi-stage non recoverable rocket lifter and SSTO reusable spaceplanes. Other designs will be questioned later. 3. Spaceplanes usually bring crew to the orbit too. 4. If rocket launched craft is being returned to Kerbin, what is considered to be payload? 5. If spaceplane performs orbital maneuvers, isn't it become a payload as a whole? So. Fig. 1 shows what I can easy understand - something that is put in orbit is payload, everything else is launcher. Fig. 2 is what brings me the initial confusion. As I understand from reading KSP forum, usually people suppose "what comes into cargo bay and then put into orbit" (2a). But if my spaceplane's mission is to add module to station and bring crew to the same station, or maybe not the same, aren't crew quarters become payload (2b)? What about probe that has it's own RCS or LFO engine or ion engine? Does propulsion of this probe counts as a part of payload? If so, isn't the whole spaceplane becomes payload if the mission contains making orbital maneuvers (2c)? What about single stage to Mun or, why the hell not, single stage to Laythe? Fig. 3 is even more confusing. What is considered payload for the manned vehicles? Crew capsule that safely returns home with all the sciency equipment (3a)? The spacecraft as whole (3b)? Doesn't it mean that spaceplane as a whole should be considered payload?! And then STS-like stacks come into consideration and I am completely lost. Please help me someone!

You know, limiting torque fixes this problem. Helps me a lot. ---- Well, not sure about complete fix, but oscilations become so miniscule that I can ignore them.

It's not that difficult to make pure SSTO rocket. It's not that difficult to land launcher either. Payload fraction will suffer, but if you care for recoverability... Also why do you mind vertical launch with airbreathing engines? It was easier in 0.90 than in 1.04, but still possible. I had some fun with such designs, but I mainly tried to make rocketship SSTO, not shuttle one.

Yes please. Also what about possibility to determine icon in VAB/SPH? I like to make unmanned functionality (for testing and for emergencies), but remarking stations to be stations, not probes (or rovers, I suppose I have a ship once with rover icon) is kinda bothersome.

I want at least mod for this.

The problem is, while they are good for payload (maybe even reasonable - to put structural elements of the tank outside the tank), they go against streamlining if you use them for rocket parts. And they don't look good enough with spaceplaneparts, so you are limited to use fuselage (or not; I frankly never used it after maybe my first playthrough) and mk1 jet fuel tank.Maybe vertical ribs could add some detail to spice up plain design without throwing aerodynamics out of windows? I agree on possible rockomax tanks solution, only think it would be better to keep palette muted. Orange can be bright because, you know, STS and SLS, but green and yellow are not so... "spacey" colors. Or maybe not. We need at least some mockup.

I'm okay with most of the 1.25m rocket textures, but the models are... oh come on, they have ribs everywhere. Is it aerodynamic?! Rockomax rocket parts are boring. Half cylinder, cylinder, two cylinders, ORANGE. On the other hand, I don't really like payload bits. RCS tanks (inline ones) and batteries are too dark-n-messy to use with anything except maybe probes. Scientific experiments are too sticky... but this can be really good. Had not gotten to ISRU stuff yet. So. I know, different manufacturers and all, but can they look good to be used together, please? Is it too much? Or please make it possible to use different existing styles on most parts. I sometimes tweakscaled larger 1.25m tanks to 2.5m (and smaller 2.5m tank to 1.25m), and they blended good. And I doo like clumsy rubbish style of some early rockets. Okay, noone will do it. But at least make them less disturbingly distinctive, please.

I want them both. As alternatives. For every part. Am I insane?

So familiar.Also I today finally break KSP trying to get better graphics (no mods, just OpenGL/memory optimization/etc), so even my "go get Laythe" project is shelved. I suppose I will wait for 1.1.

I'd like to say yes to this, but current categories do not seem to me as very good, because most of them cannot be combined (like structural or thermodynamics ones: selecting them and aything els as filter will return zero parts, as I understand). But the general ability to click, for example, "Crew" + "2.5m" + "Resource convertion" to get lab, than uncheck "Crew" and get ISRU is something I'd really like to see in stock. Even without mods I sometimes find myself in part clutter, and I do like to use part-heavy mods like Tantares.

Oh my. Well. Oh. I'm speechless, but this is definitely good.