HalcyonSon

Don't know about Structural Fuselage - haven't tried that. I did have a Kerbal detonate inside a 1.25 m Service Bay once. The Service Bay was already full of science gear, and I was trying to sneak the Kerbal in and around to collect data. He glitched inside and blew the entire thing to bits.

Try right-clicking the parachute in the VAB and changing the pre-deploy pressure to 0.75 and full-deploy altitude to 1,000 m. 0.75 should correspond to about 2000 m. Then you can stage the parachute (spacebar) as soon as you hit orbit and not worry about it anymore. As long as you don't re-enter at an extreme angle, you'll be below 250 m/s before the parachutes open. These settings will cause problems if you come down in the mountains... But most of Kerbin's surface is below 400 m altitude.

I will do this with the in-line 2.5m to 1.25m adapters. Cram them full of useful stuff, otherwise I feel like they're a huge waste of space and mass. My reasoning is that they're essentially empty space with only a small volume dedicated to actual structure. Best to use a radial decoupler at the top of the Kickback, and a strut at the bottom. Then staging gives the Kickback a bit of rotation that helps it clear the center stack. Ha - what he said.

Adding this before I forget... Heat shields block fuel flow if placed between a tank and an engine, but you can use the move tool to make a gap and then add a fuel line from the tank to the heat shield. The fuel line will be hidden when you use the move tool to close the gap. An engine placed on the inner heat shield node (without the fairing) will now pull fuel from the tank on the other side of the heat shield. My typical one-Kerbal rescue pod includes a top parachute, a few radial parachutes, a capsule without monoprop, a service bay with batteries and probe core, a small fuel tank, a fuel line, a heat shield with about half ablator, and a small rocket motor. Everything returns to Kerbin for maximum funds. (Main booster LFO tanks are dropped back into atmo before the rescue)

I agree with all of the above suggestions! The Visible / IR / UV mechanic is sort-of there with the various types of scanners, but cameras would be awesome. Everyone already takes screen caps, why not make it an in-game reward mechanic? Just tweak the flyby/orbit/landing/plant flag contracts to require a picture with a specific type of camera. A new class of contracts could even be added: take pictures of specific ship around specific body, and take picture of specific ship to inspect for damage. Do that, and now there's a reason for EVAs, and to bring more than one Kerbal on long-term missions (to take pictures of the other Kerbals).

Wow... this is the most comprehensive and knowledgeable discussion of in-game aeronautics I've ever seen. Thank you! Probably have to take my most of my designs back to the drawing board now LOL It would really be nice to have a mod similar to RCS Build Aid that gives a more detailed view of Aero forces while building a plane. Lift/drag/control force arrows can be shown in flight, so I wonder if there's a way to feed those functions just enough info to get values in the SPH. Maybe have sliders for user airspeed, altitude, and angle entry. Output could then be visible arrows and a chart of values... Now I wonder if the tables aren't already available in KER or MechJeb... Doesn't look like KER has it. Does MechJeb?

Very nicely written Val. Lots of food for thought. So in your experience, does the increased drag from increased main wing AoI (positive 1 - 6 deg) generally overcome the increased fuselage drag for low AoI? Does a negative AoI on the tail-plane have a similar effect? Does tweaking control surface AoI have much effect on drag? I've only noticed terribly high fuselage AoA (completely outside the prograde bubble) at "not quite enough" speeds at very low and very high altitudes. I wonder now if I could use control surfaces and action groups to correct AoA to compensate for fuel burned. My Mk2 SSTO design flies, and makes orbit, but is awful to land because the stall speed is too high and the CoL shifts forward of CoM at end of mission. If I can "set flaps," that might allow me to land it without losing pieces. [ALT] Trimming is just too slow when you're coming up on the runway at 200 m/s to maintain stability and flipping at 150 m is a death sentence. I knew about wing AoI effect on lift from various childhood experiences (kites, paper airplanes, flying models), but didn't think to try it in-game. Many real world aircraft (particularly fighter aircraft) have very significant AoI, and/or a noticeable difference in AoI between the canard, main wing, and stabilizers. Dihedral also affects lift from tailfins and canards - which will move in-game CoL without affecting CoM or Aerodynamic Center - more dihedral gives less vertical lift for the same drag (horizontal lift increases, but is balanced using mirror symmetry). I did tinker with dihedral for roll stability, but didn't notice much improvement. I use mirror symmetry exclusively to add all fuel tanks, wings, engines, and control surfaces, but some designs just have a slow roll that increasing dihedral doesn't seem to correct. Trying to trim it out just results in a slow roll to the other side. For new players, it might be more intuitive to picture moving AoA as moving a kite line fore and aft on the bridle (moving Center of Lift relative to Center of Mass). Farther aft (increased AoA) makes it want to climb more (lift), but also pulls on the line in your hands harder (drag). Too far either way is unstable. The effect of physics warp on in-game wings is similar to a kite bending around its spine to increase sail angle in a strong wind (dihedral). Drag stability from the vertical and horizontal stabilizers is similar to the kite's tail. Putting the tail up front results in a flip (Aerodynamic Center ahead of Center of Mass). http://www.kitesintheclassroom.com/parts-kite/

My SSTOs use the Supersonic Diverterless Intake, which works better than the Adjustable ramps because it holds fuel. Still waiting to unlock Shock Cones, which will replace the nose cone on the engine pods. Right now, my Panthers flame out above 850 m/s. My Minmus Station and Lander are in transit - ten days is a LONG time in-game when you're only passing two hours at a time doing SSTO flights. Val's design makes me wonder... I've heard engine exhaust can be occluded by other parts, but is intake air occluded? If those Nacelles are the only intakes, will the engines run at all? Finally got the HWGAA to orbit with about 300 m/s to spare. It has one cheat - the second set of Panthers are clipped over the Swivels. The extra weight and drag of a second set of engine pods would prevent it reaching orbit. Looks bad-ass when all six engines are lit and when they're off, you can just see the tip of the Swivel inside the Panther. It gives KER fits though - delta V readings don't show separate rocket and air-breathing stages.

What is that outer delta wing? I don't believe I've unlocked it yet.

How about some Low Tech Level SSTOs? Panthers and Mk1 parts will work, if you put in the effort. Just two Panthers and a Reliant can get a Crew Cabin to orbit with about 400 m/s remaining. It's not fancy, and it's not huge, but it works. I haven't had time to complete a Mk2 design yet, but am fairly close with four Panthers and two Reliants.

The Kerb Fan Delta (Crew) SSTO is a natural extension of the model line. It includes a crew cabin, RCS, and Junior Docking Port for personnel transfers to LKO Stations. The loss of running gear continues, with another perfectly smooth water landing.

The Kerb Fan Delta (Prototype) SSTO is a highly modified variant of the strictly atmospheric Kerb Fan Delta. The Wheesley has been replaced by two Panthers for increased speed, wihle the Inline Cockpit and Small Circular Intake have been replaced by the Mk1 Cockpit and Supersonic Intake. All Liquid Fuel only tanks have been replaced with Liquid Fuel and Oxidizer tanks to feed the Reliant engine. The distinctive large delta wing has been pared down to account for increased lift at high speed, and also to reduce weight. All science payload has been removed, with the exception of KER component. Unfortunately, the first successful flight lost a wheel on takeoff, and had to splashdown just beyond the KSC runway after returning from orbit. As always, many small changes are made between flights, so minor differences are apparent between pictures. Some variants have a service bay immediately behind the cockpit.

The Kerb Fan Delta SSTO Prototype and Crew variants are based off my most successful long-range survey aircraft. Fitted with a Wheesley Turbofan, the Kerb Fan Delta can fly non-stop around Kerbin with a maximum sustained altitude of approximately 12,000 m. Maximum speed is not impressive, but it carries a sweet of scientific instruments that includes thermometers, barometers, accelerators, goo canisters, and materials bays. If three to four stops are needed for readings, it can still make a near approach to the Space Center with a safe landing in the grassland or sea. Parachutes on the Kerb Fan Delta allow for safe touchdown even under complete loss of control. Minor modifications have been made throughout its service life while attempting to improve sustained speed and altitude. You'll notice that some pictures have a service bay, different intakes, or fewer attachments to the fuselage.

I've seen a LOT of questions about low tech level SSTO Spaceplanes. Most of the info I could find was horribly generic, conflicting, or outdated. So here are a few of my designs that either work, or just need some details ironed out. I have Stations in Kerbin, Mun, and Minmus Orbit, as well as a Mun Surface Base. The primary drive for my reusable spaceplane mission is crew swaps and training runs. I'll post hangar pictures here of each craft full and empty showing the Center of Mass and Center of Lift. Following that will be a few pictures of successful missions for each SSTO. I also plan to post KerbalX links once I get familiar with that system. I am running a lightly modded install of KSP 1.1.3: Kerbal Alarm Clock, Kerbal Engineer Redux, Navball Docking Alignment Indicator, Better Crew Assignments, Aviation Lights, Final Frontier, KIS/KAS, and SCANSat. Since the forum glitches for me if I leave it too long, I'll submit this first post, and then reply to it with each design. The first successful SSTO Spaceplane I managed was the Kerb Fan (Prototype) SSTO, followed by the Kerb Fan (Crew) SSTO, and my current project is the Kerbal SSTO HWGAA*. There is no real naming protocol yet. Everything can be considered in-house pre-production equipment, but the plan is to eventually standardize designs and naming. *The "Here We Go Again (Again?)" follows the Kerbal SSTOs "No Way," "Maybe," "Possible," and "Here We Go Again."

DPAI doesn't look stock at all - which is why I prefer the Navball Docking Alignment Indicator. It just gives you that one tiny piece of information that's missing in the base game - where the ******* docking port is facing. Everything else is already right there on the Navball.

Whoa whoa whoa there. You had me until "Mk3" and "NERVs." That stuff is WAY up the tech tree. If you're in career mode and trying to unlock science and probe parts too, it takes a LONG time to get into Mk3 parts. By that point, I would hope you're not too worried about recovering a few thousand funds. I just unlocked NERVs but don't have Mk3 anything yet and have about 5 million funds. I have stations around Kerbin, Mun, and Minmus, a probe going to Kerbol, and a Mun base. Still haven't built anything that I get better dV or TWR (per KER) with nukes than with a Poodle. Their weight and the lack of a large LF only tank in 1.1.3 makes me regret unlocking nukes at all. Maybe they'll be useful for crew transfers to Duna or Jool, but in-Kerbin they're junk to me. Docking isn't THAT difficult if you have a slimmer design with plenty of control authority. Big sluggish ships with minimal / no RCS are a nightmare though. That said, a mod like Docking Port Alignment Indicator or Navball Docking Alignment Indicator saves a LOT (TONS) (just absolutely positively HUGE amounts) of screwing around with the camera.

It's important to be careful which contracts you take. My early rockets cost less than 100,000 funds, and a four Kerbal orbital tourism gig brings in nearly 250,000 funds depending on exactly how it's written. I can recover between a third and a half of the launch cost by dumping the rocket and just recovering capsules. A Swivel really isn't that expensive. I didn't bother much with recovery until I got to the point of using Mainsails on every launch. At 15,000 funds a piece, those are worth bringing back. Luckily, a Mainsail with two orange tanks attached (plus other helpers depending on payload) will make it most of the way to orbit. About 10 Mk-2-R parachutes and a probe core buried in the tank lets me successfully orbit the payload and then switch back to the Mainsail stack and ride it down. SRBs are staged away because they aren't worth the trouble to recovery manually.

Not that hard really. Just a Klaw, RCS, and a 1.25m heatshield with a pile of parachutes will bring back anything I've run into so far - including an orange tank or mainsail (as long as the tanks are empty). Agreed. I complete every rescue contract, but I don't have nearly enough scientists for the three stations I currently have or am working on. My roster is almost entirely pilots and engineers. My engineers finally have some work with KIS/KAS allowing them to do orbital assembly, but my pilots aren't useful enough to spend the extra weight on a control capsule compared to a probe pod. Even my Astronaut Center recruits are all pilots and engineers.

Same problem. I'll switch ships to my Mun NERDS (Newly Expanded Research Development Station), and it will drift off the surface, and then settle back down. Not terribly problematic given the small size of my station and the low gravity, but irritating. My next trip up will include some of the KIS/KAS ground stanchions and portable struts. I intend to see if I can strut the station to the ground and prevent this "bounce". I've also seen this happen with landed ships if I'm walking a Kerbal around. Time warp a little bit, and you've got an action movie trailer: dramatic walk away without looking back at the explosion.

Somewhere around Year One, Day Forty-Six. Definitely juggling time, even though I don't have life support mods. Just last night I had to take breaks from station construction to complete an orbit modification contract on a KEO satellite, transmit an orbital scan back to KSC, and check on my sun-diving probe. My biggest moment to date is completing the docking ring on my largest Kerbin station yet. My klaw tug and two micro tugs worked amazingly once I worked out some errors in un-packaging the ring components from their launcher. I've come to think of those three as "Cat in the Hat" and his helpers "Thing One and Thing Two." All three have Jr. and Std. docking ports for station component jockeying. 34 flights in progress, 12 open contracts, and only a few pieces of debris in far-flung locations. I could terminate them, but I can only rationalize that around Kerbin and Mun. I've already proven that my Klaw Tug can de-orbit them and my Klaw Recovery Vehicle can bring them back in one piece. The return on investment just isn't there to justify recovering every single piece in LKO, and it's not worth my time to ride a piece of (barely) suborbital debris through multiple orbits till it burns up.

[ALT][F12] worked for me. All the boxes were checked on the contract in the sidebar except "Launch new station." I had other projects underway, so I certainly wouldn't have started such an ambitious station without a lucrative contract to pay for it. Amazingly, it only took a few days game time to launch and assemble. Real time is another story... Launching the docking ring was giving me fits. The Kraken made it clear that you DO NOT attempt to dock a tug to a component in the middle of a ship and try to undock the ports at either end. I had the spokes of my docking ring packaged neatly where I thought they'd be easy to remove without disassembling the entire launcher... nope. I'll start a thread with the journey.

I searched already... Didn't find anything of use. Is there a way to change the age of a station? I accepted a contract to place a new space station in Kerbin orbit, launched a new station and improved it, completed all the requirements, but the contract won't complete. The requirement to launch after accepting the contract will not clear. If it were a simple satellite, I'd just launch a new one. I'm on career mode though, and the required station is quite large and expensive. Antenna, power generation, research lab, viewing cupola and room for nine Kerbals. The only thing I can think of that may have screwed me over is if I docked an older ship at the station before meeting all the requirements. My game is basically stock 1.1.3. Just KIS/KAS, KAC, KER, Nav Ball Docking Alignment Indicator, and Nav Lights. No extra parts on the station beyond nav lights, and no contract configurators. Edit: apparently, the answer is "When in doubt, cheat!" I'm good with that in this case, because I clearly met and exceeded the intent of the contract. It certainly didn't mention a docking ring ;-)

I'm currently working on my first major station - one that isn't just a 2.5m Science Lab with attached Hitchhiker and Fuel. This station will have Standard and Junior ports with additional KIS/KAS struts for rigidity because I haven't unlocked Senior ports yet. Only mods are KER, KIS/KAS, and KAC in my Career play-through. Laid it all out assembled in the VAB, then broke out sub-assemblies to configure for launch. All of the boosters will be completely reusable, taking each station component to orbit in a single stage and equipped with Probe Core and Parachutes. Between the Core and Science Arms, I'll have more than enough Kerbal capacity to meet the contract that spurred this project. The second Science Arm and Quarters pods and docking ring are just for fun. Launch One: the Core - Two Hitchhikers, Cuppola, KIS/KAS Storage accessible from inside, twelve 1x6 Solar Panels, RCS jets for station keeping and orientation, five standard docking ports. Lower center-line port intended for fully reusable LFO Refuel craft. Launch Two: Science Arm Number One - 2.5 m Science Lab, 2.5 m Cargo bay full of 400 EC batteries an RCS tank and Probe Core, Standard ports on both ends. Tons of EC storage here to get it through the night. Haven't yet done the calculations to see if the Core Solar Panels will be enough to recharge it during the day. Launch Two also includes CO Quarters / Escape Capsule Number One - Mk 1-2 Capsule, 1.25 m Crew Cabin, Heat Shield, Parachute, RCS. The Station Commanding Officer gets a small amount of personal space, at least until the station has to be evacuated. Officers and Men need some separation. Launch Three: RCS Refueler - 3,000 units in 2.5 m tanks with attached jets, Probe Core, Parachutes and Heat Shield, one Standard port. Intended to be a standardized, reusable unit. Launch Four: Docking Arm - had planned a simple "T" shape to keep incoming craft away from the station's other modules. After seeing some of the docking rings on KerbalX, I believe I'll make a small ring to fit below the Core instead of the "T" being opposite the RCS Arm. The Docking Arm will not have RCS. Instead, I plan to launch a small tug for assembly and Recovery of any unneeded bits. I've successfully recovered intact components from orbit using a variant of the Klaw Pod that includes a Heat Shield and Parachutes. The tug variant will have a Junior and Standard docking port as well as the Klaw. The Ring will be made of 1.25 m Structural Fuselage and Crew Cabins. I picture these Structural Fuselages as simple no-frills pressurized passageways. Launch Five: Same as Launch Two - Kerbal of the Month Quarters rather than CO Quarters. Launch Six will probably be KIS/KAS containers of anything I forgot in the first four. Launch Seven will be a full Orange Tank. That's the end of planned assembly launches. If the EC storage shows signs of depletion, a launch may be added to attach additional Solar Panels.

Careful with "control from here." It can help with docking orientation, but depending on ship design will force you to re-learn your RCS controls. I built a Mun Lander with the docking port on the side (because I really wasn't planning to need it) and a large parachute up top (whole vehicle return). Needed to dock to refuel for biome hopping. Since the docking port is "vertical" while the control pod is "horizontal," RCS controls were skewed. Also - Alignment and Fuel Balance are very important. Docked that Mun Lander to a refueling tanker and brought both back to Kerbin from Mun. I remembered to shutdown the Lander engine so the Refueler was driving, and the ports were in the same plane, but the Lander port is off-center and its tanks were empty. The first burn was backward and resulted in an awkward spin. Had to fix "control from here" to a forward facing port, and transfer some fuel to the Lander tanks to balance the load.

One more with the same issue. Kerbal EVA Headlamps won't work at all. EVA from my crewed Mun Lander to Mun Station (which landed uncrewed and unlit) was hell on the dark side. After wandering around for a half hour in a search pattern hunting the green battery indicators, I found that it was easier to set Mun Station as Target and simply fling Kerbals at the Target marker using their jetpacks. They arrived in a most undignified manor, bouncing and tumbling until they slammed into the Station's bulk face first.