Hodo

For the most part everyone has given you good answers. But your problem is several fold. While Stock KSP does not model many things that would help you, it does do one thing well now, that is if it does not have enough lift it will not fly. You can over come this by making it more powerful, adding engines or different engines that have more kick. Using the old adage if you make it go fast enough it will fly. Or you can follow the school of thought, MORE WINGS! Either works in stock KSP quite well. But for a better more fulfilling SSTO and aircraft experience, I would download FAR. It improves on the aerodynamic features and functions of the game and makes the air respond like air.

Considering Kerbin is roughly 1/3rd the size of Earth... 20km is a little under 1/3rd of the way to space. So about 60km equivalent on Earth. I am not sure what Modern fighter, flies at 190kft but I doubt there is one.

I recent had problems landing craft also, but I use FAR, and found that the landing gear are VERY touchy now. So I found if I do a much softer landing it works way better. Less than 7m/s decent speed on most craft. But I also had to adjust the stiffness and damper settings on them. Brakes are still a problem so I use drag chutes...

So I have done some early tests in FAR with a way more simplified version of your Havoc. And it looks promising, still have a few dozen more hours of testing before it becomes fully functional but the first flight with just a pair of engines and the same basic setup minus the tail, found it was a bit twitchy and a handful but manageable. I think if I were to use "Nipirk" engine designs I may make a competent heavy utility helicopter.

I think my favorite craft is the Havoc. I need a medium/heavy lift helicopter and may borrow the theory behind it and refine it into something that works in my FAR install.

Ultimately it depends on the application. The X-15 as he said was a rocket plane and used rcs thrusters for control, making it more of a manned missile than a true plane. The SR-71 is a good example of a true high supersonic aircraft design. The thing is your lift moves back on the wing the faster you go, until a certain point then it will no longer provide the same lift as previous speeds. I found some of my most successful high speed aircraft have been cranked delta wing designs. I have lately been experimenting with a delta wing design with a variable geometry cranked wing end section. That lets me set the wing to a more conventional cranked arrow design for lower speeds and for high speeds closer to a true delta. This is based off of an old Russian design for the Su-17. I have high hopes for this design and expectations. I imagine it will do everything I need it to do, and still meet all of my mission requirements for new military aircraft designs.

It works in FAR, I have tried it. It is what I usually use on the nose of some of my high speed interceptors, and SSTOs.

I know a few of us did some testing a while back with the shock spike on the front of some super sonic aircraft designs. It actually works in FAR quite well, but there is a fine balance in the setup of it. FAR is by far, no pun intended, the best aerodynamic model for a game like this I have ever messed with.

I know that I had this discussion with Farrem4 before in the FAR thread. He said since the voxel addition it updates with the voxels and the FAR drag calculations. I am not sure how fast it does this but I imagine it is pretty fast, because if you drop drop tanks from the craft it will change the drag numbers. And if you setup the aircraft so the CoL is close to the CoM on the craft at subsonic flight and it is twitchy at low speeds, you sweep the wings back it actually becomes a different flight profile. I have tested this on a few craft I have made with the variable geometry wings. I may do more testing tonight or this weekend.

@kcs123 I like the work on that craft, but it seems a bit overly complex for a small craft. I may mess around with the concept a bit when I get some time and see if I can find a "happy" medium. This version of KSP I am trying to stay mostly stock parts. Just IR, MJ, KER, BDArmory and FAR. I may download TAC Fuel balancer again because that was just useful.

I would use a pair of sepetrons aimed to push the carrier away from the craft. Down is the easiest.

@Van Disaster I had a system like that once, I found if you placed the carrier craft that gets you to altitude under the space plane you can clear it pretty easily. That or you place it on either side but then you run into flex issues.

I have a rotation cycle for pilots and crews. I start at the top of the pilot list and work down.

IR rotatron hinges. They have a 99m/s impact rating which makes them quite strong, and when mated with increased wing strength of the wings from the stock 1.0 to 1.3 for the wings that move, actually reduces the flex on the wings. They still flex and it has a g-force limit of about 8-9gs before they will snap. But this isnt a fighter craft but a test SSTO. I modeled it after the Northrop Switchblade...

So testing out a "switchblade" variable geometry wing design SSTO... and it actually works QUITE well. SP-170 Switchblade. Even managed to put it into a spin thanks to my own fat fingures and recovered quite easily.

I love your setup, it is closer to the actual setup that the Russian designers used with the Mig-23. Granted they used their pistons at the leading edge of the wing, and it would push the wing back then pull forward. May have to try your setup. But the current system I am using isnt that wobbly, I am able to pull 8-10g turns at 5km alt with over 100kpa of pressure and the wings stay on... so I am pretty impressed. But I am sure your system is far stronger. I think someone did, but they used some "krakken" tech back in the day.

Not that hard to replicate with the right mods. Sorry Castille7 for hijacking there for a second. And I like your second version WAY better than your first.

You are actually wrong in this assessment of that aircraft. The F-14 was actually VERY nimble and more than capable of turning with much smaller fighters, like the A-4 Skyhawk. This was the benefit of the variable geometry wing design.

Ok not having time to do the SSTO re-entry yet... but managed to take 30min and get some pics of my F-305 fighter, with variable geometry wings. Did I mention it is FAST at low altitude.

Sounds odd, because most of my craft can handle a bit shallower AoA and still come in just fine when down to 30km or less. But I also sit at 40-50km for about half the globe before I start the final decent. It burns off quite a bit of speed when I maintain a slow decent. If I get time tonight I will try and post pics or get a recording and upload it of one of my flights to orbit and back on one of my newer craft.

Are you using any type of airbrakes? And what is your AoA on decent, and the rate of decent. Because it sounds like you are not able to scrub the speed fast enough before you overheat. This is more of an approach error than a design error. I really need to record one of my re-entry flights to give an example.

On your de-orbital burn what altitude do you set your PE at? Mine is usually 5km above the ground about 100km east of the KSC.

The delta wings is the problem with your landing speeds. Not sure how stock KSP handles the aerodynamics but it is why you are having problems on take off and landing speeds. The F-14 has variable geometry wings so it can swing the wings to a straight position to reduce the landing speed and increase low speed stability, and sweep them back for high speeds.

@kcs123 Honestly the easiest re-entry profile is the simplest. I use the shuttle re-entry profile. I try to keep the nose up to about 15-20deg AoA. And a rate of decent of around 100-200m/s at max. By the time I hit 30km I am usually doing mach 6.0 or less. And 20km my goal is less than mach 3.5. This is easy with most of my craft with airbrakes or spoilers in the design. I usually have one on a smaller aircraft, and two on larger aircraft and on my heavies they get 3 pair of air brakes. But this monster also returned with its cargo inside of it.

The thing is I think your wings have to much sweep for them and the overall design is short. While it is a medium weight craft in my books, you have a good take off speed 120-140m/s. That is pretty usual for most modern aircraft. My larger SSTOs have a take off speed of 150-180m/s. The wing designs on most of my previous version aircraft followed this style of cranked arrow delta. It worked quite well for what I needed it to do.