Warzouz

Stock "Kerbal-X" in sandbox can go to Mun or Minmus. There isn't a big margin for error, though.

Pray the Kraken leaves you alone

If cocpit and chutes suirvived, you have a successful reenetry ! More seriously, I had some issues with MK3 reenetry in the past ***. That was in 1.02. Your ship shouldn't explode in atmo. Do you use air-brakes ? Did you tried to put your ship sideways ? *** I notice your ship isn't a shuttle and don't have wings. Strangely, the ship I had issue with didn't have wings either. It was a MK3 body (mostly a cocpit, and passenger bay and a small fuel tank) with 2 LVN engines on the side and a heatshield at the back. I was returning from Minmus and did 4 aerobrakes to slowdown. I blew in atmo while getting lower on the 4th pass.

Val, I agree that some KSP players could scale up a space plane in 10 minutes, but that requires some skills ! I think it took me much more time to create my SSTO (used for passenger and LKO kerbal recovery) than to design my whole Cygnus rocket family (and only the recovery part was really delicate). Creating a SSTO rocket is even easier that a staged rocket : keep your TWR between 1.3 ant 1.6, pack some fuel up to 3200m/s (3400 if you want a very comfortable margin), add fins. You're good to go. For space plane, you have much more things to care about, it's more complex : if a KSP player likes building stuff, SSTO space planes are much more rewarding than SSTO rockets (which are even less fun than stage rockets).

Here http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/123195 The 400T and 600T payload launchers were created from the 200 and 300T in less than 10 minutes. First test was successful. If I had the computer for, I could scale it up to whatever. 10 minutes per new variant. - - - Updated - - - Well, true, but that's no the point. The OP asked why using space planes. Answer has been given many times : Pros - Lowest cost per ton to LKO - Fun to fly - Nicer look Cons - Not scalable (not heavy friendly) - Harder to design (more parameters to handle) - Longer ascent + flying back to KSC - Needs higher piloting skills (not an issue after training) As usual with KSP, there is no correct "way" to play. We play as we want and fix our own objectives (until multiplayer game comes in...) - - - Updated - - - You say that SSTO space planes are "more reliable" ? That's not relevant. Relibility depends on you skill for building stuff and flying them. Building a space plane is much more demanding than a rocket (what ever if recoverable or single stage). It took me a very long time to create my SSTO spaceplane. It needed a lot of tries (but mayb ot as many as my Eve ascent vehicle). I use recoverable SSTO rocket because they are cheap and easy to use. I don't loose launch because of the LKO stage once I mastered the 1.0 new aero. Using rockets you can also use pre-built stages (that I do very often) from 15tons to 600tons. They are alsi very reliable.

Nice plane !

I've learnt the hardway to shutdown all engines before docking...

Thx. I like space stations a lot. I don't use them to refuel departing ships but to refuel landers. I like small optimized space stations (I played in science in Beta 0.9 and in career in 1.0). Recoverable SSTO rockets LKO stage were a necessity in middle gmae when I decided launching my first space stations. They were very expensive for the funds I had back then and contacts payed very little for those. In late career game, I've so much cash I d'ont even care. Even though SSTO rockets are very easy to fly and I don't have to bother with building them. I just use one of my predefined sub-assemblies. I even have a 600 tons launcher and the Moho station was lifted by a 400 tons payload to LKO... The only station I don't use in my game is my Kerbin LKO station.

You might notice that all Small space stations are heavier then large one (except those that can manage to go to their target without interplanetary stage). I'm wondering if small station make sens. True that you don't need a large station to explore Eeloo or Dres, but they're more efficient anyway...

OK, here is more data (from the real prototype, not the charts). I relaunched the mission to LKO then rechecked the fully fueled station. - 101,8 tons fully refueled = +10180 pts - 1071 tons on launch pad - 175 tons recovered = -1792pts (the launcher wasn't a RR-300 but a RR-200, which is lighter) - 6 kerbals on the original mission = +600 pts - 1 hitchhikers = +800 pts - 1 lab = +500 - Lander is 1 seat = 0 - Intergrated return = +1000 - Miner ISRU = +2000 Total = 13288 x5 (Eeloo) = 66440 pts VAB data Launching Orbital insertion and operations Returning stage Interplanetary ship Station at Eeloo (from the real voyage)

The true fact is that all those stations were set in place few weeks ago. All missions are done, crew returned home leaving only a skeleton crew waiting for next crew rotation with return ship... I don't have much pictures, except those I used in the linked Salamander topic. But I still have craft files. I could at least relaunch them to LKO orbit to get more precise data/pictures. I calculated mass from the Salamander stations charts, but Moho and Eeloo were prototypes (lets say RC's one ). PS : the only gameplay change mod I used is "Kerbal Joints Reinforcements" BTW : you can read about the fate of the Dres Salamander prototype here. It was the first one and let's say I miscalculated

True, but the Kraken can create orbital changes

Here is my Moho prototype of my Salamander Exploration Space Station (fully detailed) This stations are designed to do extensive exploration o local planetary body. This station has 2 parts (the station itself and the miner). The miner is the station engine section able to move it quite far if fully loaded. Obvisouly the weight of the Moho return vehicle is to high : the torque is not managable. But with the Jool variation, it can be mooved nicely. Here it is crossing Tylo SOI en route to Vall from Pol refuel pit stop. For counting points : - The station is 95 tons fully refueled with it's miner = 9500 - The weight on the launch pad was 355 tons to LKO + 1710 tons RR-400 launcher (306 tons recovered) = -4130 + 612 = -3518 (technically the launcher is a SSTO which I recover) - The station is designed for 6 crew, even there is 10 crew capacity = 600 (after exploration, 2 stay there, 4 come back) - There is 1 hitchhiker pod = 800 - A MPL = 500 - The miner + station ISRU can refuel from most bodies (except Eve, Tylo, Laythe and Duna) = 2000 = 9882 -> Moho x6 = 59292 The same station is around Eeloo, Dres, Vall (a sligly bigger one), Mun, Minmus. PS : I'm not counting the lander and the return vehicle because they were brought with another flight and I don't recall the weights of all that (especially the launcher). I think it was - 7 tons lander + 20 tons (at least) return ship = +2700 - 50tons(payload) + 169 tons (RR-50 SSTO launch stage) - 49tons recovered = -340 - no addtionnal crew or feature = 0 = 2360 points -> 14160 additionnal for Moho (if valid). EDIT 1 : I forgot to take account for the dry mass of the SSTO stages recovered near of KSC. I fixed it EDIT 2 : I noticed my Eeloo launch was fully integrated, so more points - The station is 95 tons fully refueled with it's miner + 7 tons lander + 6 tons return = 10800 - The weight on the launch pad was 236 tons to LKO + 1294 tons RR-300 launcher - 232 tons recovered = -2596 (technically the launcher is a SSTO which I recover) - The station is designed for 6 crew, even there is 10 crew capacity = 600 (after exploration, 2 stay there, 4 come back) - There is 1 hitchhiker pod = +800 - A MPL = +500 - The station has a build in return vehicle = +1000 - The miner + station ISRU can refuel from most bodies (except Eve, Tylo, Laythe and Duna) = +2000 = 13104 -> Eeloo x5 = 65520 (which is better) Capturing at Eeloo (after dumpint the interplanetary stage. The return vehicle is on the lander which is on top of the station. The inward (Moho) variant have solar panel there, I can't stick ship at that location, hence the separate mission. EDIT 3 : real weight is even higher, I didn't fill the oxydizer tanks (I took the travell mass : the fuel you need to take to go farther with the LVN, so I didn't count the reserve tank oxydizer + lander oxydizer + return vehicle oxydizer or various RCS tanks. This adds 16 tons for Eeloo (+8000) and 12 tons for Moho (+7200). But lets forget about that : the station is not meant to have full Ore and full Fuel/oxydizer at the same time. It can, but that doesn't make any sense. That's why I don't have those mass in my charts.

My definition of payload is quite simpe : useful part you deliver at target. - Lifting stage target is LKO - Interplanetary stage target is low body orbit

Yep, I thought of that but discarded it due to dV. The isue though is you can't stop instantly. You'll deviate from you target and you'll have to close again while falling. But I think this is the best solution except using wings. You example on Duna is valid. With high TWR engine, you could get quite close. But again, you'll have to eyeball it... One Eve, that may not work. As LEO speed is 3000m/s, each second you miss the target you increase your distance by 3km. Burn should be ultra precise and quick. But again eyeballing maybe not precise enough, depending on OP definition of "precise"

Hmmm. KSP has a very steep learning curve. There are not many build aids in the game (no dV, editor of more focused on "Squad-Tech" then beeing use friendly. Most parameter are not explained (ISP, heat management...) The game doesn't need more parts, maybe marginaly (some missing adapters with or without fuel). But they could be more catergorized. The game would need more user friendly tools and a better stack management. I can't imagine a game relying on mods to help new players getting into it.

Sure airbrakes are the simplest control you can have. But this is very unprecise. And don't forget they can be absolutely needed not to crash. Again, the OP didn't mentioned what it meant by "precise landing". 10m, 1km, 50km ?

As you would need at least some control over it to glide and target location, it'll be very much like a plane (or a space shuttle not able to climb)

True, this is a real question. Further more, SSTo rockets have another advantage : they keep the same aero profile up to LKO, no need to bother about flipping second stage and adding fins in the middle that may screw your first stage balance (Eve experince...) I use SSTO a lot because they are easy to fly. After dozens or hundreds hours playing KSP (ask my wife ), the real challenge is not ascending to LKO anymore. On the other hand, the purely cost efficent argument fades when you get a lot of cash. Past a certain point, you don't need to recover those SSTO recoverable stages. For example, in my career game, I could send to LKO 40 of my ludicrous "600T to LKO" stage, even I converted 100% science and cash to reputation. I remember in beta 0.9, I designed a lot of first stages (preciserly calibrated for the payload). As it was in science game mode, I went to asparagus to ahev some mass efficiency. Tweaking multiple boosters took me quite some time. In the end, I visited Duna and all Jool's moon. But much less than in my current game in which I went everywhere. All the time I didn't designed ascent stages to LKO, I used it to land on Dres, Moho, Eve, Eeloo and built space tations everwhere... End game (which ever "science" or "career" game mode) looks like sandbox. The cost efficiency only matters in mid game, when you leave Kerbin SOI. But again, as for the MPL debate in another topic : it depends on what you want. If you like grinding satelites fees, you don't need recoverable SSTO. Maybe something could be done to change the game balance makin SSTO rocket less appealing but I don't know what to do (avoiding wrecking all the gamplay)

Strangely, since 1.0 I don't have that problem anymore. I notice that putting the radial decoupler a little above the middle of he booster helps a lot. I used to pur them very low and the booster were blasted the wrong way. Since 1.0, I never use any separatrons (I used a lot of thelm in 0.9)

To improove the landing at KSC, I should send a plane/rover to the crater to have a point of reference. By night, you can't even see the ridge or the crater itself. As the west KSC moutains are insta-kill for reentry, I prefer overshooting. Delaying the deorbit by 10s will change you're landing location by 23km. This is less tahn 3° of a full orbit, so eyeballing is highly volatile. Deorbiting from 60 to 65m/s make me going from overshooting 70km east of KSC to crashing to the mountains (100km west of KSC ?). Numbers are very important here.

I didn't test MJ for atmo renetry, but I use it on some vacuum landings I already did a lot of time. (I use the "land anywhere" feature). Beware that MJ can go very wrong with shallow angles... It crashed me quite a few time... Now I only use it for touchdown (50/100 last meters) to get a very slow one (< 1m/s).

With a regular lander (airbrakes and chutes) that may not be enough. Landing site depends on orbit altitude + deorbit burn/PE, atmo density and ship aerodynamics. Particing can be enough for returning LKO ships (not planes) near KSC. I do that a lot. But even I did it a LOT (50/100 times). I landed on KSC only 3 times, but always in 70km from it (usually 40km). Sure I don't have a precise mark where I must deorbit, but I know where to do it. Eyeballing is not enough for precision landing. For a specific landing (closing on a pre-landed ship on a laythe or Eve...), you won't be able to do it with parcticing returning on KSC from LKO. You'll need reliable prediction mod like those th OP don't want. Without that, your lander would need wings to glide and control surfaces, but that a heavy constraint on design. - - - Updated - - - From LKO, I usually burn 60m/s (exactly) on the western ridge of the big crater (which is usually in the dark, so I've to guess it). I usually land in water very near KSC. But again, that depends on the aerodynamice of the ship (I recover SSTO rocket stage which can weight up to 550T). How many airbrakes you use is very important. Here is what I use :Cygnus Recoverable SSTO Rockets (15 to 600-tons) Don't be too eager to land on KSC: KSC is 98%, 50km from KSC is 97% of dry cost. Precision may not be worth it. But I don't think OP meant KSC reentry.

The most expensive part of a launch (not counting LKO payload) is usually the stage you take-off with : the first one. It's true that SRB are quite cheap, but their inefficiency requires you use a lot of them. IMO, If you use a STS, you'll recover it, sure. But you have to put it to LKO. What is the size increase of your first stage to do that instead of a cheap second stage ou won't recover ? The answer is not that obvious. The cost inefficiency many have noticed may be related to the first stage increased cost for the real payload. As for SSTO rockets, it doesn't really matter. All you pay for is fuel and recovery error margin on the dry cost (which is 3% for me). How many engine I put in a launcher will only cost me 3% of their cost. If I couldn't recover the whole ship, I would focus on retreiving the take-off stage and throw away the orbit insertion stage which is usually MUCH cheaper (for a regular rocket anyway). SSTO space planes have the same problem : they have much added mass to LKO, BUT, their "take-off stage" (which isn't jettison) is very highly efficient. This largely compensate for the overweight.

Warp to nearly max (x1000, maybe x10000).