Whisky Tango Foxtrot

As I said, my original SSTO's space performance was about the same as my R.A.P.I.E.R.-based one, with the extra efficiency of the Aerospike making up for the dead weight of the Whiplashes. That said, saying that an SSTO spaceplane isn't very good at landing on airless worlds is like saying that a Volkswagen Beetle isn't very good for transporting an entire marching band. Of course it isn't, but it isn't supposed to be. The right tool for the right job. I called my ship the Grasshopper for a reason; it goes up and then comes back down. That's all it does, and all it's meant to do. I have other craft that I use for long-range work, but those ones stay in orbit, lacking the heat shields and parachutes necessary to land. All I need an SSTO for is to get my Kerbals to orbit so that they can transfer to one of those other craft to carry out the rest of the mission. Even without a set of purely air-breathing engines, going on a long-range mission with all the stuff needed to take off from and land at Kerbin means that you're going to have a lot of useless dead-weight slowing you down. Hence my joke about people strapping NERVs to their SSTOs.

I've been building a lot of SSTOs lately. I'm fairly far into a career-mode game and it was annoying me that I didn't have a cheap way to get Kerbals into orbit and back down again, but while I have a good portion of the tech tree unlocked it wasn't complete yet and I didn't have access to the R.A.P.I.E.R. engines. Not to be deterred, I built the Grasshopper, a spaceplane based around a pair of Whiplash engines for atmospheric flight and a Toroidal Aerospike for space. The thing turned out fairly well, able to easily transport 4 Kerbals up to 250km orbits (which is where I keep my Kerbin space station) and back down again and, when pushed to its limits, can get up to a 500km circular orbit (although once up there I had trouble getting back down again, needing to use my RCS thrusters for that last bit of delta-V that I needed to get back into the atmosphere.) Today, after completing a successful mission with the Grasshopper (several, actually; I had four different Kerbals from four different rescue contracts on my station and brought them all down at once) I took a look at my new contracts and discovered that I'd been offered one to test the R.A.P.I.E.R. engine, effectively unlocking it for the duration of the contract without needing to invest the science points to get it normally. I immediately upgraded the Grasshopper with the new technology, replacing its Whiplash engines with R.A.P.I.E.R.s, ditching the Aerospike (putting a second shielded docking port in its place) and rebalancing my fuel tanks to better suit the new configuration. The new craft turned out to be slightly lighter than the old one (but also more expensive) and I immediately took it to the runway, got it into orbit and discovered that it performed... well... pretty much exactly as well as the old one. It could get to a 500km circular orbit but didn't have enough oxidizer to come back down again. The new design did have some advantages, with that second docking port meaning that I could attach a NERV tug to the back for long-range journeys and still have it dock with a station (where before I could only have it docked with one thing at a time) and I managed to fit a science container in where I used to have a small LiquidFuel tank, but it was also substantially harder to fly due to the R.A.P.I.E.R.'s poor low-speed performance and, as I said, more expensive. That got me thinking about the various SSTO designs I'd seen for this game. Nearly all of them are R.A.P.I.E.R.-based (with the occasional NERV engine for when you absolutely positively have to take a pair of wings and a set of air-breathing engines with you to Eeloo,) to the point where I don't think that a lot of builders are even considering the possibility of alternate designs. The R.A.P.I.E.R. is certainly convenient, being a jet engine and a rocket in a single package, but it has significant disadvantages in both modes, with its odd thrust curve requiring an exacting (and often tediously long) ascent profile in atmosphere and just being generally inefficient in vacuum. On the other hand, the Whiplash (and even the Panther) are still able to get a craft into the upper atmosphere with a significant fraction of its orbital velocity, are cheaper, get unlocked earlier and offer some significant advantages for in-atmosphere flying (with the Whiplash's smoother performance curve and the Panther's dry mode offering a very long cruise-time for when your re-entry falls wide of the KSC.) So what do you think? Is it time to re-examine the R.A.P.I.E.R.'s status as the be-all and end-all of SSTO engines?

Looks awesome. I'm just a bit disappointed that it doesn't have a docking bay on the belly for capturing pesky Rebel blockade runners.

Well I attempted that second rescue and managed to screw it up again. This time I took my nuke tug with me from the beginning, intending to use it for the orbital plane change, undock my lander from it to retrieve the Kerbal and craft, then re-dock to return to the station. Unfortunately, I forgot to disable crossfeed on my tug's docking port, meaning that it's NERV engine was pulling equally from its own fuel tank and the lander. When I sent the lander down it still had plenty of oxidizer but it was running seriously low on LiquidFuel, and I didn't notice this until I was already landed (and had already quicksaved after undocking.) I had to get most of my orbital velocity using my RCS thrusters. Luckily, I had just enough monopropellant to get into a circular orbit at about 8km, and my nuke tug is still in a relatively coplanar orbit with the lander, so I should be able to dock it and bring it back to the station.

Or he could make a sequel that's basically a string of lazily-conceived references to the original and renders the events of the original ultimately pointless by stating that thirty years after the heroes had apparently won things are basically in the same state that they were at the beginning of the whole mess. No, I'm not bitter goddammit.

As long as I'm submitting things to review, I might as well show off one of my most useful designs: The Shover Robot. It may not be pretty, but it (along with its predecessor, the Pusher Robot) is absolutely the workhorse of my fleet. I almost never launch vessels with enough fuel to get anywhere anymore; I just strap on enough rockets to get the payload into LKO, make sure there's a docking port in-line with the centre of mass, shove a Shover on that port and let it get to work. Need to transport crew to your station on Minmus? Just stick a docking port on either end of a Hitchhiker Container and let the Shover get them where they need to go. Need to move fuel around? Attach the Shover to a tank and let it go to work. When you're done just undock it and bring it to a station to refuel for its next job. Equipped with RCS for docking, A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S. for lowering apoapsis via aerobraking and an external command seat so that it can transport Kerbals unaided in an emergency. Guaranteed to protect you from the Terrible Secret of Space.

Update: The nuke tug was able to rendezvous with the rescue craft and take it back to the station. The contract is still incomplete since I haven't landed the stranded pilot and craft on Kerbin yet, but I already have plans in place to do that. Really glad to have that rescue craft back. The fuel supplies at Mun Station were getting seriously low, and that craft is also the one I use to dock with the mining installation on the surface to resupply (I detach the claw from its lower docking port and attach a large fuel tank in its place.) There's still another stranded Kerbal on the Mun's surface but that mission can wait until I've made a few fuel runs.

I've made a couple of lower-tech (i.e. non-Rapier) SSTOs that I'd like to see reviewed. First is the Grasshopper, a Whiplash and Aerospile-powered craft capable of carrying 4 Kerbals into space with enough dV left over to get to orbits up to 500km and no 1000-science parts. After I built that I decided to go even more low-tech with the Gnat, a Panther and Reliant-powered SSTO capable of carrying 3 Kerbals to LKO using only 160-science or lower parts. A few notes: Although the Grasshopper is pictured here with its top side facing the sun for better lighting in the screenshot, in actual use its belly should be pointed sunward most of the time since that's where the solar panels are (you'll have to open the cargo bay to access them.) You should also keep a bit of fuel in your tanks during landing so that you can use it to balance the ship on its parachutes to make sure it comes down wheels-first. With the Gnat, it's even more important that you have some LiquidFuel left on landing, as it doesn't have parachutes and needs to come down airplane-style. Plus, its batteries are typically nearly empty by the time it gets into the lower atmosphere so you'll want to run the Panthers in dry mode to use their alternators to recharge them. As such, it's absolutely critical that you not allow them to flame out on ascent; make sure you assign an action key to toggle them and shut them off immediately when their thrust drops to 10kN. Solar panel alignment is also important on this ship; it's got panels on both sides but they're inside the service bay so the sun needs to be shining directly at them for them to work. The Gnat has a HECS probe core to keep it under that 160-science limit, but it runs a lot better with an OKTO2, so you might want to swap one of those into the service bay if you really want to get the most out of this design. It'll still reach LKO with a bit of margin for error on the HECS, but I've got it up to a 110km circular orbit with the OKTO2 (that little bit of mass savings helps a lot.)

The Kerbals perfectly embody the "throw stuff together and see if it flies" spirit that this game embodies. Of course, when I play the game would be more accurately titled "Probe Core Space Program." Then again, maybe they could add little holographic representations of the various probe core's avatars where the pilots' portraits normally go. Someone should make a mod for that.

I've made some adjustments to the Gnat and was able to improve its performance while lowering its tech level. It's still LKO-only, but it has enough extra dV to give you a bit more margin for error on ascent. The thing now uses only 160-science and below parts (although if you have the 300-science OKTO2 available I'd recommend replacing the existing HECS probe core with it to save mass and improve functionality.) As the ship now functions as more than a curiosity I've uploaded it to KerbalX. Enjoy!

Michael Bay should direct.

My philosophy on spaceplanes is that they should be planes first and spaceships second. They're great if you need to ferry Kerbals and small modules to and from Kerbin orbit, but if you're going anywhere beyond LKO then you should hand things off to a dedicated space vehicle. No point in hauling wings and airbreathing engines through space, and no point in hauling the engines and fuel for a prolonged space journey through Kerbin's atmosphere. Planes are good if the thing you're putting into orbit needs to come back down in one piece afterwards, but if you're sending something to space with the intention of leaving it there then it's best to use a standard rocket. You can attach parachutes to your booster stage if you're really concerned about recoverability.

I'm constantly hearing people's stories about how people launched missions to the Mun that left their Kerbals stranded, either with a damaged craft or without enough fuel to take off or return to Kerbin. However, I always felt left out as my first Mun mission (which was my only land-and-return mission to the Mun; the next ship brought the first parts of a space station with it which became my base for Munar operations from then on) went fairly smoothly and its pilot made it back home without issue and didn't need a rescue. I got a taste of what those other players went through today, though, as I accepted a "Rescue Kerbal and recover craft" mission, got my Claw ready, picked up the Kerbal in her derelict lander can and then discovered that I was almost completely out of fuel. I had enough to reach a safe orbit, but not nearly enough to reach my station. Luckily I had a Nuke-tug docked at the station so I got it fuelled up and ready to rescue the rescue mission (although the actual rescue will have to wait for another day,) so there's no major crisis, but there's an odd sense of satisfaction in being able to cross the "bungle a Mun mission leaving a Kerbal stranded" checkbox off my list.

I just tried that (just a ring of Vernors around the centre of mass to give lateral movement) but unfortunately that caused the ship's performance to be degraded to "atmospher-skimmer" levels. Small bits of extra weight and drag make a big difference when your entire craft only weighs a little over 7 tonnes. I was still able to dock with just the main engines, though. It's more difficult, but not impossible. Now I just have to see if the thing can land.

I haven't made a spaceplane that can fly to Dres (and I probably won't; no point in hauling all that airplane stuff in space, or all that space stuff in the air) but I did make a series of increasingly lower-tech SSTO-capable spaceplanes. One could carry 4 people into a 250km orbit, dock and return, all without any 1000-science parts (i.e. no R.A.P.I.E.R.s,) one that could carry 3 people to an atmosphere-skimming orbit and back using only 300-science and lower parts (so your research lab doesn't need to be fully upgraded to build it) and one that could carry an experiment container to 250km and back using only 160-science and lower parts (good for when you want to get the full science bonus for recovered data but don't want to actually land your ships.)

So I got to thinking, putting Kerbals into orbit with 300-science parts is cool and all, but what if we went even more primitive than that? I didn't think it would actually be feasible to transport Kerbals using 160-science parts (although given how well the craft ended up performing I'm rethinking that) but we can still transport their work, can't we? It was with that thought in mind that I created the Tick. The goal was to make a fully-reusable craft that could transport an Experiment Storage Unit into Kerbin orbit, be docked with to transfer the data and carry the results back down to the ground safely. I expected another atmosphere-skimmer like the Gnat, but this craft completely exceeded my expectations, having enough fuel left over after achieving orbit to re-circularize at 250km. With this, I can fly directly to my space station, load up with data and come back down (although I haven't tested the landing part yet.) The docking might be a little bit difficult since the ship doesn't have RCS (and I'm not sure where I'd store the Monopropellant if I added RCS thrusters) but it should still be do-able.

Since my Grasshopper worked fairly well while using no 1000-science parts, I started wondering if I could make an SSTO that was even more low-tech. After all, that 550-science barrier is a pretty major one, requiring an expensive upgrade to the KSC to unlock. With that in mind, I created the Gnat. This Panther and Reliant-driven craft can take three Kerbals into an atmosphere-skimming orbit just above 70km and bring them safely back down again. No parachutes this time (couldn't spare the mass) so you'll have to land airplane-style, but I've confirmed that it can be done, especially if you save some LiquidFuel to run the Panthers in dry mode for a powered landing (and you don't need much; those things are incredibly efficient.) Like the Grasshopper, it contains a probe core, solar panels and communications equipment that will allow it to stay in orbit indefinitely, and it's capable of docking using the shielded Clamp-O-Tron on the front. It doesn't have much monopropellant, though (all it has is what's included in the cockpit) so you won't have much margin for error. I see a typical mission profile for this craft being to reach orbit, wait for another, more space-oriented (but likely not reentry-capable) craft to rendezvous, transfer its crew to the second craft and then wait for that crew to complete its mission before docking again and loading its crew back on for landing.

I think that the bottom of your rover is acting as a lifting surface, and the angle of your jet engine is ensuring that there's a good amount of airflow over that surface.

I needed to retrieve a small part from orbit to complete a contract, didn't want to build a disposable ship for the job, but didn't have Rapiers unlocked yet either. Not to be deterred, I built my first functional SSTO in my career save: The Grasshopper. No Rapiers, just a pair of Whiplash jets and an Aerospike. Gets to a stable LKO with plenty of fuel left. Power and communications gear allow it to stay in orbit indefinitely, and the docking port on the front means that I can refuel it in space or attach one of my NERV tugs for longer-range missions. The Grasshopper's main payload: An RCS-powered grabber drone. The drone has its own solar panels, but it lacks communication gear beyond what's built into the probe core, however the Grasshopper's relay antenna means that that isn't a big problem. Tested to be reentry-capable. It could probably land airplane-style (especially if you saved some fuel for a powered landing) but that's too much work. I haven't tested landing it without at least some fuel left, so I'm not sure if it'll stay level on its parachutes when it's completely empty, but as long as you have a bit of fuel to shift between its tanks for balance/ballast it comes down pretty easily. I tried building a passenger variant to ferry Kerbals to an from my space station, but the changes I made unbalanced the COT, causing the craft to spin out of control when under thrust in vacuum. I tried replacing the Aerospike with a pair of Terriers (since they have some thrust vectoring) and while things stayed stable that way I ended up almost completely out of fuel after achieving an atmosphere-skimming orbit. Since my station is at 250km that's a bit of a problem. I think I'll still have to wait for Rapiers to become available before I can really expand my spaceplane fleet, but I'm glad I was able to build at least one useful craft without them. EDIT: Looks like I spoke too soon. I made a few adjustments to the passenger Grasshopper variant (most significantly flipping the utility bay so that the antenna and solar panels deploy from the bottom) and was able to get it balanced to the point that its reaction wheels are enough to compensate for any remaining balance issues, even with the Aerospike. I now have a non-Rapier SSTO capable of carrying 4 Kerbals to a 250km circular orbit and back again. Doesn't have RCS yet, though, so docking will be a bit of an issue. Hopefully I'll be able to add some thrusters and monopropellant in ways that won't impact performance too severely. EDIT AGAIN: Since I figure other people might be in the same position I was in and want a good SSTO without unlocking the entire tech tree I've uploaded the passenger variant of this craft (after some modifications to add RCS) to KerbalX.

Or put a docking port in-line with the SSTO's centre of mass (a shielded port on the nose is good for this) and rendezvous an already-in-orbit Nuke tug with it for any long-range work. I have several of these patrolling the Kerbin system (refuelling at stations orbiting the Mun and Minmus using fuel mined and converted on the surface) and consider them to be an essential part of my space infrastructure. I only ever plan my launches to get their payloads into a stable orbit outside of Kerbin's atmosphere; the tugs always take things the rest of the way.

I've used a Stayputnik on one satellite that I have orbiting Minmus, but I transported it to orbit using a manned craft and only released it when it was already in the correct orbit. I agree, it's mostly useless, both due to its lack of SAS and the fact that it needs to be positioned in that ultra-valuable end-of-stack position. I use the red and white antenna (Communotron 16) pretty often, since nearly every craft I launch that isn't a relay itself is going to be operating within range of a relay so a larger antenna isn't necessary. The only reason why I put a DTS-M1 in my SSTO is that it was the lightest antenna that would fold up nicely inside my cargo bay. If space wasn't a concern, I would have used the basic antenna there, too. The 16-S, on the other hand, I almost never use because it has the same capabilities as the regular 16 but is three times the weight. Not much point to using that, especially in space.

Most of the fun of a game like KSP (for me at least) is to figure out ways to accomplish tasks within a set of rules and limitations. Mods change or outright remove those rules and limitations. If I was just trying to make something that looked pretty I might use some mods, but as for actually playing the game I prefer all-stock. It also really bugs me when I'm looking around for videos and forum posts on how to solve a particular problem and all I can find are suggestions to use modded parts. The only mods I would install are ones that either purely address aesthetic or usability issues (docking port alignment, KAC, graphical mods, etc.) or add their own rules, limitations and challenges (life support, colonization, RSS, etc.)

I spend more time around Minmus since its low gravity and flat surfaces made it easier to set up a mining base there, plus my Minmus Station contract required that the station be significantly larger than the Mun's and hold more fuel, necessitating that I put more priority on it. That multi-day travel time (plus the several aerobraking passes necessary to lower your apoapsis to LKO) is annoying, though, so I'm looking forward to getting my Mun mining base up and running (I've got the drill, tanks, converter and electrics landed already, but it's very tall and on a slight slope which make the whole thing lean over dangerously when I have a fuel tanker lander docked to the top. I've got some new modules that I'm going to attach to the sides of the base that should increase stability, but I'm vacation right now and away from my main computer so that mission is going to have to wait until I get back.)

I've used micronodes when I was building a large landing scaffolding to land a heavy mining installation on the Mun. It was mostly built with modular girder segments but I used micronodes for the corners. I use a ring of eight Ants on my Mun and Minmus landers. The landing legs, RCS blocks and science gizmos that I had around the bottom of my lander meant that I didn't have room for Twitch engines, and if I used a Spark or Terrier engine on the bottom then I wouldn't have had room for a medium-sized docking port there, which is necessary as I often use the landers to dock fuel tanks with ground-based mining installations in order to transport fuel to my space stations in orbit. They're a bit under-powered, especially for the Mun, but they still have enough thrust to overcome the moons' gravity when the lander is un-loaded (and I have some Twitch engines on the tanks to provide thrust when they're attached.) I've also used Puff engines for a small craft meant to grab an object off of Minmus and take it into orbit. I needed RCS on the craft to give precise enough control to grab the object in question and I didn't want to have to bother balancing two different fuel types so I put the Puff engines on and made the craft 100% monopropellant-fuelled. I second the mentions of the Fly-By-Wire Avionics Hub, though. It would be useful in theory but the fact that it only has an attachment node on one side keeps me from using it. My ships' nose real-estate is too valuable (for things like parachutes, intakes and docking ports) to be taken up by what is essentially a probe core with less functionality.