carazvan

I'll take a look and see if there's anything I missed from the suggestions you had pa1983 but from your build videos is where I initially tried the V shaped wing. I guess I should also clarify, The flexing of the wings is most severe on takeoff so when moving at some speed > 100kph. The wings don't flex much till then but on application of input they flex like crazy and usually hit the runway. Looking at your designs I think it might have something to do with control surfaces as a ratio of total wing lift generating ability. Well time to try all suggestions, watch more videos and I'll let you know how it pans out. Thanks for the input pa1983 and allmhuran

Hello fellow kerbengineers I've been looking over the past days at creating larger SSTOs and I always seem to hit the following limitation that I've not seen for others: Large wings that seem to always drop at the tips. I've tried structural beams down the middle of the wing, stacking multiple wings pieces, V shape (side-on look) with struts at tips but all seem to have the same tendency to drop. I can fix this with lots of Struts from the fuselage but I'm just wondering how has everyone who's built large SSTOs managed to avoid doing this since I never see struts on most large SSTOs.

Check out this challenge and search for the "Utilitarian Commendation" : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/11214-The-K-Prize-100-reusable-spaceplane-to-orbit-and-back If you're interested just for getting stuff to orbit you can check out the Bee SSTO in my signature

I've done it with the 'Lander' version of my Ant SSTO. Full imgur album available in this mission report Craft files available in the Ant SSTO presentation (check signature)

Only way I've found is to simply engage brakes and power up to full throttle ... still takes a while but it allows you to also check fuel flow.

I think rather than going and trying to figure out how to add a new engine type or new gameplay mechanic we should first and foremost look at what a new star system could bring to gameplay and why we'd want it. The main one I'd see is having new and interesting planets and configurations ... but therein comes a problem again ... creating new planets and moons isn't easy if we want them to be high quality. The suggestion I'd make is that instead of trying to figure out new star systems and wormhole drives or FTL drives with ridiculous deltaV we could have an option to start in the 'default' Kerbol system or start in a pseudo-random system By pseudo-random I mean a system where we have all the planets we know with slight variations in their characteristics (Imagine a Duna with 0.5x gravity) and then also vary what orbits around what body. Namely maybe start with Kerbin orbiting a Gas giant (Have more than one Jool type planet), have crazy orbit 'captured' planets. All these orbits could be saved directly in the persistence file (wouldn't take much just normal orbit data + SOI Range) and be generatable with a seed that can be shared if weird/fun systems are found.

thanks saik0 will try landing later today and see how it goes there but it looks decent and only 500m altitude should help P.S. didn't see the way to change this post to answered but maybe a moderator can help there

Good video sir. I was laughing thoroughly during this video thought from the 5th minute onwards ... why? ... take a look at the Ant SSTO I've been using for a bit now: Except for a few different choices for fuel routing and positions .. it's similar ... guess we all gravitate towards the same things with SSTOs once we start getting into them

In my attempt to build large payload SSTOs I've found that there are really 3 different stages you should consider as far as engines go: 1) atmosphere jet ascent 2) rocket ascent 3) circularization For most smaller SSTOs you can usually combine the engines for one or more of the stages but for a large SSTO you really need to have them individual. The suggestions that I can offer are: - use 1 turbojet / 10t .. the more air intakes the better but this is a matter of choice. Think 2-3 would be minimum to get correct benefit out of jets up to at least 15-20k - use NERVAs for circularization. There is no reason once you have the Ap above the athmosphere to look for large TWR but rather look to efficiency. You do need to ensure you have enough TWR to get your orbit circular so I'd say having 1 NERVA / 40t should be enough

I've been trying to land my latest SSTO on Duna but I'm having problems since the nice flat lakes are gone and every landing I've tried I can get close (land on ground going about 50-80) ... and then I hit a small bump and go flying off at angles to high to correct before coming back down. Does anyone have a good landing spot for the new Duna landscape they'd like to share? Note: I'm asking about normal horizontal spaceplane landings not vertical

The 20t version turned into a 25t payload SSTO but here it is the Bee pSSTO (25t) with 34.2% payload fraction: Sample dropoff to LKO and back to KSC here: link to Bee pSSTO presentation Jeb has made it in his Ant SSTO to Mars orbit but keeps having dreams of touching down on a bumpy Duna surface and crashing when going over a hill ... all these nightmares are making him debate a vertical landing on Duna but we shall see ...

* I didn't turn on any part clipping and the only slight overlap exists on the forward air intakes between themselves and the tank in some small ammount <- I'll try to see if removing any overlap for the air intakes will affect the sudden yaw * One of the tested versions for the 20t was strutted to high heaven with over half the part count being struts but still exhibited the same sudden yaw <- I'll do another test to see if struts limit the problem to any degree * I thought that the fuel flow was symmetric but I'll run another test as that would explain why the yaw happens around when I reach 20k

After much tweeking and adding/moving of parts /air intakes the 20t Bee turned into a 25t payload ship. Don't be worried if the SAS controlled surfaces go crazy under 500m because it does keep heading but you just have to fight it a little for initial turn. Also if anyone can figure out where the right yaw is coming in this aircraft or the SSTO Ant I'd appreciate the input. Currently my only option was to add more reaction wheels to counteract the weird effect that happens only when I climb to around 20k altitude.

Flying at low altitude craft with high TWR that is so. However for high pitch maneuvers with lower TWR you start feeling that it takes a while to lock into position. From 0.21.1 it does really lock into position after a bit but you need to give it about 5-10* extra vs where you want it to stop (aka if you want to pitch up 20* climb it initially to 30*)

Mission to the Mun and back with Ant SSTO in v0.21 here (Minmus, Duna coming soon also) 5t & 10t Payload to LKO with Bee pSSTO in v0.21 here

This will be a series of missions showing off a single SSTO Ant (Lander) going to every body it can visit with refueling happening only on the KSC tarmac. All craft files can be found at the Ant SSTO presentation Chapter 1 - To the Mun and back Chapter 2 - To Minmus and back to be continued? ...

Ant SSTO Series - High deltaV once in orbit >3500 Bee pSSTO Series - Payload SSTOs 5t,10t available so far Links to both in my signature

acceleration represents the instanteneous change in velocity (aka the result of the current forces applied to the craft). For KSP this is usually measured in the TWR (Thrust to Weight Ratio) since you need a possible accelaration over 9.8 m/s^2 (TWR above 1) to lift off Kerbin deltaV represents to the total change in velocity over the life of the craft. (so you could have a craft with a 1m/s^2 accelaration burning for 400 seconds getting the same deltav as a craft with a 400m/s^2 acceleration burning for 1 second) <- (note that this refers to vacuum as on a planet you have gravity and an atmosphere to worry about)

Besides stupid mistakes like >45* angles vs heading I've only had 2 stability issues so far: -in my 20t SSTO once I hit about 20k altitude it start drifting/rolling right for some reason (hence the delay in bringing it out) -if you engage the air intakes and are in full reentry (over 1500m/s) and move more than 20* vs heading you'll find yourself in trouble

I deleted the albums from the 0.20 Post of the Ant SSTO since Duna and the Mun have changed but will be redoing the missions shortly in v0.21 once I'm done tweeking my payload SSTOs

Here's an album of Bee pSSTO adventures: Bee pSSTO Mission List **currently empty but any Bee pSSTO missions will be linked to here** Contribution/Suggestions **currently empty but any thoughts are appreciated**

Presentation Introducing the Bee pSSTO series. Simple yet effective SSTOs capable of carrying large payloads to LKO with low part count and high payload fractions: pSSTO Bee (5t) - 98 part count, 25.2% payload fraction pSSTO Bee (10t) (13.5t)- 140 part count, 37.6% payload fraction *retested with higher payload pSSTO Bee (25t) - 236 part count, 34.2% payload fraction *the weights and fractions presented simply represent what I've tested and taken to orbit the max of the ships might be a little higher **While there are awesome posts of large cargo SSTO's by people like pa1983 (also known as C4Virus: link here) those SSTO's have over ~1k parts which makes them unusable for most computers without messing with the physics engine Action Groups pSSTO Bee (5t,10t) 1- toggle turbojet engines 2- toggle rocket engines 3- toggle air intakes (all) 4- toggle ladders (all) 0- toggle payload docking/detachment pSSTO Bee (25t) 1- toggle turbojet engines 2- toggle rocket engines (ascent) 3- toggle NERVA engines (circularization) 4- toggle forward air intakes 5- toggle rear air intakes 6- toggle ladders (all) 0- toggle payload docking/detachment Ascent profile suggestion The simplest/most effective way I've found to get these spaceplanes to orbit is to level off at 22.5k altitude and as you reach terminal velocity pitch up to climb higher. On reaching 30k and going 1600+m/s switch to rocket engines on a 45* climb (As long as your Ap keeps increasing you should be ok even if your speed drops a little until you get above 35-40k) *for pSSTO Bee (25t) you can switch over to rocket engines at 30k & 1500m/s+ and you should switch to NERVAs only at 50k Known Problems When coming in for a landing with the Bee pSSTO (25t) only use the rear air intakes (action group 5) as otherwise the extra forward drag can cause your craft to lose control if more than 15-20* from curent velocity vector Download pSSTO Bee (5t) pSSTO Bee (10t) pSSTO Bee (25t) Other similar payload SSTO Designs antbin U-Haul LT - ~370 parts, 40t payload, 30.5% payload fraction

Heavy is a relative term ... if you're building a 100t rocket sure no problem .. if you're building a small stage or SSTO there's another 5% weight for no reason. Yes more reaction wheels help ... but let me put it this way: - if the forum changed tomorrow to where you could only write 10 words per post .. sure you could still do what you need with 10 posts ... but that's not how it's suppose to work

There are more than a few weird things still happening with the new SAS but it's usable now for spaceplanes since 0.21.1 and it's incredibly useful for planes in low Kerbin altitude (had much fun with this). I think the fun it adds to the last part will likely protrude it from being changed back too much but I hope that we can get some fixes or indeed a mod that adds just the old SAS lock to heading option back(if you have enough torque/control obv) since this is needed for low TWR ships that do long burns and for reducing the amount of input control for climbing SSTOs (the current system also sometimes introduces slow rolls but I've yet to really determine what causes that so more testing is needed)

Must've changed with 0.21.1 cause it didn't have a text showing torque before but you are correct now it also has torque .. probably they forgot to also update the mass.