Chris_2

Cool thing!

Nice things being posted. I like all of the above!

Nice. I really really wished they introduced a 'real' and working cargo bay door like that. Also a nice idea of landing rovers and stuff on other planets when introduced to a spaceplane.

This was my 0.90 spaceplane refueling truck, but I've lost the save when upgrading to 1.0 Need to rebuild it..

What is this? A craft that looks nice and is actually useful?!?

Wow! The first 'large' mk3 SSTO I've seen that also looks nice! Download?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119655-Yet-another-mk3-SSTO-UPDATE?p=1925036&viewfull=1#post1925036 Even VTOL SSTO: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/121328-Mk3-VTOL-SSTO-with-rotating-engines I think you should forget the 'super heavy' part of your idea. A medium sized Mk3 seems to work pretty well, but anything larger than what I built has substantially more drag so also needs more (jet) thrust. There is no way to add these engines in an aesthetically nice way except if you want to double-clip engines or stuff like that... 4 Rapiers and 2 turbojets seems to be the sweet spot for me, and that limits the craft weight to about 70 tons.

Try adjusting your flight profile? After getting above 35 km, you basically want to pitch down to the horizon, and throttle back so the apoapsis stays ~1 minute in front of you and not further ahead. Drag losses above 45km get very minimal, so a long low power burn is much more efficient. Maybe even equip your craft with a LV-909, as this engine has the best performance/weight ratio for the required delta-V, and probably sufficient thrust to perform this long low power burn (except when you're building a really heavy SSTO you might want multiple LV-909's).

Update of the start post with fully functioning craft!

This is the VTOL version of my Mk3 SSTO. It uses jet engines on a rotating bearing / hinge to create thrust vectoring engines for hover and cruise flight. Download Notes: The turbojets have been throttled down to 85% to allow vertical takeoff without tipping over. You might want to throttle them up to 100% after takeoff. Because the turbojets spool up so much faster than the basic jets, the basic jets should be started first (press space), then wait ~10 sec to allow them to spool up, and than start the turbojets (press space again) to prevent tipping over during takeoff. Action groups: 1 Decouple engines and shutdown forward hover jets 2 Shut down center hover jets and close bays 3 Toggle rapier mode 4 Toggle turbo jets 5 Toggle 2 of 4 rapiers 6 Toggle other 2 of 4 rapiers 7 Toggle LV-909 Sometimes the engine mounting might be a bit rough, try to wobble a bit, or throttle back and then 'aim' the engine assembly: Old prototype showing the working principle: Vertical takeoff: Rotating engines: Horizontal flight: Engine/bearing assembly: (just built from girders and docking ports)

They are quite heavy though, and wing parts might work better as radiator: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/116993-Helpful-1-0-observations?p=1870791&viewfull=1#post1870791 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/118938-The-infinite-full-throttle-LV-N-cluster-Temperature-curve-flattens It's also not really necessary anymore in 1.0.2, but it sure looks nice indeed!

I don't understand the relation between fuel density and tank pressure... The tank pressure depends very much on engine cycle used (expander, staged combustion, or even pressure fed etc.) and also of the specifics of the rocket engine (turbine inlet pressure, boost pumps used?)... Also, the tank pressure depends on the tank. The stainless steel tanks of the centaur upper stage are extremely lightweight, but that is only because they are at high pressure. Because the tank walls are so thin, without the internal pressure they would collapse under their own weight ! (which obviously adds a lot of problems and costs during the transport of the stage, integration of the rocket etc because the tanks need to be kept pressurized at all times, but this is offset by the extremely high performance and light weight of the stage...)

Cool! I see what you did there, turned the cargobay around to bomb bay style to drop the rover on the mun. Nice!

Ohh, I do exactly the opposite... I'll go for a 5° climb until 20km when the rapiers cut out, then I'll pitch up to ~20°, and at 35km altitude I'll pitch down again (to 5°). Then I'll reduce throttle on the way so the apogee is never more than 1 minute in front of me. That's much more efficient... Basically I'll pitch up never more than 20° (except for the sub-sonic part of the lower atmosphere but that doesn't really matter). And I'll make a very long low power burn 'towards the horizon' until apogee is 70km. Then circularisation is hardly required.

(hopefully) a fix to the thermal / reentry system. ()

Thanks. Had a hard time to make all of it fit in the cargo bay. Used only a little bit of clipping on the structural parts (girders, bulkheads) but thats allowed in my opinion. I'll post the craft file. Thanks for trying out the craft! It's basically a 'standard' efficient SSTO profile: Takeoff, start pitching up slowly gaining speed. At 8km the pitch should be 45° and speed 300m/s. Then start pitching down gradually until level at 12km gaining speed, continue accelerate to 600m/s, and then pitch up to 5 to 10°. Accelerate all the way to 20km and 1200m/s. If the engines are about to flame out you should pitch down. Any (thrust) instabilities you can just have handled by SAS (If it starts to wobble a bit that's a clear sign you should level off your pitch to gain more speed). Don't worry about the thermal heating, I have never lost any parts during ascent. Then at 20km, switch over to rocket power, pitch up a little bit more (say, to 20°) until you are at 32km. Then pitch back down to 10°, switch to map view and watch the time until apogee. Regulate the throttle (throttle back) so it is never further away than 1 minute but always in front of you. A long burn at low throttle is most efficient. Burn all the way to 70km apogee. Then the perigee should also have appeared and only a small boost is required to circularize, which can be done by ion engine or rcs. No no, engine mounting while not (yet) in orbit! :D Thanks for the rep!

Single stage to the mun with warp and nuclear engines from some parts packs. And cannons of course. December 2011, so must have been .12 or .13.

Use it with moderation, however...

I like those big wing strakes!

And I'm starting to build a constellation of 'rods of god' to destroy other players centers already.

Close to earth, the temperature in space, averaged, is actually the same as on Earth. Pretty logic, because the average solar flux is also the same. But, the differences between cold and hot are also much larger. And because there is no air (so convection and conduction to the surroundings don't work) getting -hot- is a very big problem. Only means of getting rid of heat is by radiation... So that's a very large problem for electronics and such in vacuum, as you basically have to 'heat strap' everything to big radiators prevent overheating.

I'm posting this one more time, as to me it's pretty obvious what is wrong with the thermal system: The biggest problem of the new system is the way too high thermal conduction. Heat should be much more localized to the place where the heat is generated. In what reality does the cockpit of a spaceplane heat to 1500°C from burning a rocket engine? Sure, the engine might get hot (well, actually, just the nozzle and combustion chamber of the rocket will heat or else there will be serious problems...), but now -my entire spaceplane- becomes glowing hot. Also, most parts should have much much lower heat resistance (say, 600C or so), but, decreasing the heat resistance of parts (that shouldn't have heat resistance) is not really possible, as these parts would then be destroyed as the spacecraft becomes 'uniformely hot' during an LV-N burn or reëntry. The solution is obvious: increase the thermal capacity of parts; decrease the thermal conduction between parts; then heat will become much more localized and only then the heat resistance of some can be decreased. That would also make reentry more interesting, so only parts that are designed to resist heat can be in the airstream. Aero feels pretty good. I like it a lot that breaking the sound barrier is really hard. SSTO's should definitely -not- be made easier. I like that it is pretty hard to build a decent (like this ) SSTO. The only thing is that the wings need re-balancing in my opinion. Right now a plane barely needs wings and can glide with 40m/s. I'd suggest reducing the lift of wings (so more wings are needed), but also reducing the weight and drag of wings to compensate, so basically the same performance spaceplanes as now are possible, but with larger wings (so they don't look so rediculous as some do now). Also, IMHO, the mark 2 parts generate too much body lift. I like lifting body's, but right now mk2 planes don't need wings at all...

UPDATE: I've now 'perfectionized' the craft so it has a 10t payload capability without using a nuclear tug. Weight without cargo is 60t so the payload fraction is 16%. Not bad! It also has ion engines which are very useful for circularisation, orbital maneuvering, inclination changes, deorbiting, etc, and 2 build in 'bomb bays' in the wings, with solar panels, xenon and VTOL (mun/minmus) landing engines! An extra fuel tank, canards and wing strakes compared to the previous version. Very smooth lines! Can launch a fully loaded nuclear-thermal tug. A full 9t fuel tank for the tug: Launching space station modules. Goes through the sound-barrier easily without diving, and over 1200m/s at 20km on air-breathing engines! When all else fails, eject! Launching a VTOL ISRU assembly (11t) is really pushing the limits and also eating into some of the fuel of the payload. Now I have a fully reusable Minmus mining architecture tough. I've not wasted a single thing since launching my new sandbox game! Going to Laythe with this craft is next! Download Action keys: 0 Eject the cockpit 1 Toggle rapier's 2 Toggle jet engines 3 Swich rapiers to rocket mode 4 Toggle VTOL engines 5 Toggle 'bomb bays' 6 Toggle 2 of 4 rapiers 7 Decouple payload (all the docking ports at the same time) 8 Extend flaps 9 Retract flaps

I totally agree. The solution could be to decrease the thermal conduction between parts, so the heat becomes much more localized to where it is generated. That would be much more realistic.

Also, what I do, is shut down intakes that I consider 'belonging' to an engine together with the engine. To prevent air-hogging; for example if I have a spaceplane with both turbojets and RAPIERS, when shutting down the turbojets the RAPIERS don't have access to the turbojets air-intakes. As in reality you also can't really suddenly reroute air from one engine to another. (I know it gives less performance in the end but it seems only fair).