Kergarin

Well, it is really nothing that special... But has someone before launched a science container from an unmanned rover back to kerbin?

I really don't know if thats bragging. I just want to keep the rules. I want to keep the rule what an SSTO is, and i wand to play stock to be on even terms with everyone else. Because i like to have a challenge. And @OHara has shown me in a verry friendly way, that i DO want to have the challenge of a "short" runway, one page ago. So i don't know what this thread is about anymore. I was just making suggestion in the suggestions forum, because i still think the runway length should vary by upgrading it. Maybe then the solution is shorting it on lower tech levels? But now i have the feeling, its just a hatefull discussion about what people think I'm doing wrong. I dont understand, why half of the people have to fill this thread with so much hate. it seems like some people are just posting to offend. What i cant understand.

Why are you still so offending? If I am in any way, I'm sorry, its not meant like that. I please you to read everything that i have said, before you make your posts. You are still missunderstanding the point, and it seems you did not read everything that i have written. But i will list it up for you again: I have never cryed that there is something wrong with the game. The game is absolutely fine like it is, and i love it. I cant get every weight i want from the actual runway to orbit and further out. It's just a fact, that a longer runway allowes designs that we can't use now without RATO. The VTOL SSTO were just to additionaly show, that you are not talking to a beginner, but to a record holder. (sorry if this sounds any arrogant) I'm playing stock and don't need or want a DV display. I have build the first ever fully working EVE SSTO without a DV display. (sorry if this sounds any arrogant too) I did never blame the game for it. And yes, it is my playstyle to go to the edges of the game, beacause building a normal SSTO that can pull up its nose at 1/2 the runway and go to orbit easyly became boring to me. And because i like to build at the edges that the game allowes, i was asking to expand them a little by a longer runway. To sum up: you are still making your statement before reading everything i have already explained. And the OP does NOT have any issue with CoM/wheel placement. If the OP would like to build a plane that can raise its nose while it rolls on its wheels, he would know where to place them, and where to place the control surfaces. But on these designs you have seen the OP does not want and not need the plane to be able to pull up its nose while it is rolling on its wheels. Just read here (from page1): Yes, a longer runway won't help in THIS case, you are right. But what I am talking about, is just not the case you are discrbing. The case is: a plane that is so slow at the end of the runway , that it will lose altitude while keeping speed or lose speed while keeping altitude, while it is able to climb and accelerate if you push it to a higher takeoff speed by RATO. And if the plane does not have the ability to climb and accelerate at the speed it reaches at end of the runway, it wont help in anyway if it can lift its nose while half way on the runway. The same plane will work with RATO. The same plane will work with higher TWR. The same plane will work with more lifting surface. You absolutely do not have to explain me all these things. But the same plane will work on a longer runway too. without adding extra parts and lowering efficiency. And this is not discussion about if this type of design makes sense or anything else. So please stop giving tips. I would have posted in a different forum if i wanted them. Thanks anyway to everyone who stayed objective. I was just asking if anyone would like this too. And we can close this now.

Why so offending again? Didn't I prove countless times that I'm "not bad" in doing so and I do not have any problem to build something like that? This thread is going in an absolute wrong direction... And I think we can close it. But it let's me think about a challenge who gets the most payload per rapier to orbit. anyone interested to prove what's the best concept? I know about this second barrier, too. If you manage to reach ~400m/s it will boost all the way to 1400-1500m/s easily.

I'm sorry, because I know you want to help. But it really makes me sad and a little mad, that someone again writes this, after I'm explainig for two pages what's the point I have never said that I do have any problems in taking of. Please reread the first post and all my following statements, to understand why I'm asking this.

That's an absolutely impressive plane And this design might be perfect if you want to stay in kerbin orbit, but what if you want to go further out? All those wings become dead weight, and how much do they all weight together? That's just what I would like to avoid One or two pairs of big-s wings would be enough for this size. (having only two pairs plus one pair of big-s tailfins as elevators on my ~440ton SSTO)

Ok. That's the first argument that really hits me, because I like to and want to be challenged

The point is: you are absolutely misunderstanding us. We CAN do this too. That's easy and not the point. Double it to 400+ tons or even more and that's still no problem to take of on the stock runway. Or what do you think does this weight? We are just perfectionists, who want to build these things more efficient and less overpowered or overwinged than its possible on that short runway.

True Thanks for these objectively posts You are right, the landing gear would be way to far back, if i would consider pulling up while I am on the runway. But since i allways use the entire runway to build up speed, i do never have to do so. I do pull up in the moment when the plane gets airborne by "falling" from the end of runway, so it doesn't matter where the wheels are, because they do not touch anything. I do build all my SSTOs so that they need the entire runway to reach takeoff speed, because - like i said in first post - the runway length dictates the minimum numer of engines and lifting area, and i want to keep both as low as possible.

Thanks for your suggestions. They are all true. But please have a look at the post above yours, I'm not a beginner i think I do build my Spaceplanes for a takeoff speed around 180m/s cause this seems most efficient on the current runway. If you want to go interplanetary, every wing and every engine that would not have been needed on a loner runway, is dead weight lowering the efficiency. And this is an indiscussable fact. Thats true, RATO can be cheaper. But if the plane works with RATO, thats just another evidence that it would work without it too, if the runway was longer. And this is an indiscussable fact too. Anyway, i think this wont happen and if you say this pops up fequently, and does not get considered, we should close here. I don't want to argue Fly safe and happy landings to all

That would be fine RATO is an option, but the Spaceplane the would not count as an SSTO, what i always like to build and fully recover. Landing never is a Problem, i use chutes too. half the runway would be enough for that. Hey JadeOfMaar, That depends on how far out want to take your Spaceplane. In the upper atmosphere or at least once you are in space, every lifting surface and every additional engine is dead weight which you need to take with you all the way. This sadly sounds a little offending to me. It seems, like you are saying, the person who: created the first ever EVE SSTO that can also land on its own managed as first ever to SSTO at first vessel launch in career to space high planted a flag everywhere including EVE based on a single SSTO launch build a reusable 48ton Duna transfer SSTO pushed a fully assembled station to LKO at the back of an SSTO made the stock stearwing an SSTO without any external parts build an SSTO that can get to orbit and land 4 times without refuelling ....... Does not know how to build efficient spacecrafts? So please explain, why am I the reason for the fact, that the TWR thats needed to go from sealevel to LKO is lower than the TWR thats needed to reach takoff speed until the end of the runway? (aiming for 180m/s on efficient designs) I just do not like to carry a bunch of engines and wings throug the entire solar system, which would have been obsolete by a longer runway. Sorry if this sounds any offending too. It's not meant like this. I just had the feeling, i need to justify myself.

Hello, Would it be possible that the runway not only gets broader and less bumpy by upgrading it, but also gets longer? Sadly, the minimum required number of engines (EDIT: and lifting area) on all of my spaceplanes is defined by the number of engines required to reach takeoff speed until the end of the runway, while the number of engines needed to get to orbit would alwaysbe lower. That means we could build much more efficient planes, if the runway was longer. So please think about a longer runway, at least at the highest upgrade level.

Thanks I don't have time to try this, but I would start adding some vector powered boosters/drop tanks, if you want to increase payload.

Have you seen the small version too? It's also launching from a lower landing site. Maybe you can build something based on this, or split it into a two stage version? Good luck

A plan that i had since more than half a year, finally realized.

Is there any award for pushing something into Duna intercept? The Kergarin Aerospace Crossbow SSTO launch system:

Congratulations! Looking forwad forward to see this. But...Could you make a highlight version with less pictures, too?

I had this mission too, when I was really new to the game. Since I'm playing stock, this took all my money and several launches, it was absolutely the biggest rocket I have build so far

Like @5thHorseman said, the hardest was the ultimate challenge, but it's doable (it just took a quarter year of all my free time not at least because this was at times without 64bit support and long burns at high part count) https://youtu.be/FXAzQk01vuw

Congratulations and welcome to the Eve SSTO club @EvermoreAlpaca Did you know that "someone" had this asteroid idea too? Sadly never found the time to realize it...

Thanks! Looking forward to see it once it's processed. It's really sad how many videos we can't display here because of this

Can't be displayed because of unlicensed music

This is how i land and return from eve

what about:

Exactly. I think you are right. But it feels like time wasting to do the dull things, while so many challenging things are left.