Something doesn't seem right here....

[regex]

You often do have to strut down if you want to secure a payload in a fairing though, since you can't strut from a fairing base.

Add a spacer part above the fairing and strut from that. Best way to do it is to use a part with an attach node the same size as the fairing's to reduce wobbling.

[SAI Peregrinus]

oops, wrong thread.

Edited May 24, 2015 by SAI Peregrinus

[Red Iron Crown]

You know you can install everything but the fuel lines in 6fold, then split the staging right?

I've tried that in the past and had troubles with odd fuel flow, caused I think by placing fuel lines one at a time rather than 2-way symmetry. This was a long time ago, though, perhaps it's been fixed. I've been doing the whole thing with 2-way symmetry for so long that it's likely just as quick for me to continue doing so, and I gain the benefit of being able to use non-identical stages.

[WWEdeadman]

Elaborating on my statement before: Well, having struts have drag is definitely not the problem. The problem is that the drag stays that high on the parent part when the strut is gone after staging. Really, this means never EVER strut from the inside out, but always from the outer part that you're gonna drop, to the center. Also the drag actually might be a little bit over the top, and it is definitely not optimal that the length and positioning of the strut is irrelevant.

[Gargamel]

The biggest problem with this situation: you NEED struts if you use the stock fairings, since the fairing bases' nodes are so weak that rockets keep falling apart under minimal amounts of stress.

I know we don't like the "use a mod" answer for stock issues, but I've always been a fan of Quantum Struts, even with their quirks, but with the stock fairings, I've found that placing them in a few spots on the payload so the struts hit the inside of the fairing, it holds the payload nicely in place. I haven't done any aerodynamic tests with Qstrutted vs non fairing launches, but I know that keeping the payload inside the fairing is a lot more aerodynamic than not.

[Rune]

Hey, this is awesome! Now my constant drive to minimize part count, even when considering struts, actually has a point. Also, I'd imagine struts inside cargo bays wouldn't drag, so I'll keep putting them out of sight.

One other things I would like to see tested... Is it the same structural reinforcement no matter which direction you strut from? It seems to be that it might not be so, and forces travel differently from one part to the other than the other way around.

- - - Updated - - -

You know you can install everything but the fuel lines in 6fold, then split the staging right?

You often do have to strut down if you want to secure a payload in a fairing though, since you can't strut from a fairing base.

Actually, you can. Sink a bit the lower part into the fairing base (one half-move with shift pressed should do), and now you can, with some fancy camera work, strut from the top of the tank, through the fairing base, into the payload. And if I am right, that would also count the strut as inside the fairing and therefore drag-less.

Rune. What parts are massless now?

Edited May 28, 2015 by Rune

[SpaceChipmunk]

Actually, you can. Sink a bit the lower part into the fairing base (one half-move with shift pressed should do), and now you can, with some fancy camera work, strut from the top of the tank, through the fairing base, into the payload. And if I am right, that would also count the strut as inside the fairing and therefore drag-less.

What I tend to do is place a girder between the upper and lower part, strut the two together, then remove the girder and put the fairing in. Then the struts magically reappear clipped through the fairing base when I re-attach the bottom section.

[Majorjim!]

Guys this discovery shouldnt change the way you build. I certainly won't be cutting any detail from my future replicas because if this. The effect is small enough to be easily overcome.

[SpaceChipmunk]

Yeah it can be overcome. But there are times when you might just want to build something very efficient rather than very realistic.

[heng]

Could you shield the strut aerodynamically? i.e. place some more or less aerodynamically formed part right above the starting node?

Assuming it is the drag, of course. If it is the weight, than that's a bug. But we should be able to counter the drag...

If I test this right now, I will be dragged out of the office by my earlobes... so if someone else...? ;-)

[Levelord]

These have been tested to improve aerodynamic flow of the aircraft and significantly improves dV performance:

These are some tests and data mined drag values:

I just did a dump of part drag coefficients in standard configuration as OhioBob described. Note that not all parts are here - some, like the LV-N, are more complex. First number is frontal area, second drag coeff.

• 0.5277259 0.06571814 SEMIDEPLOYED Mk16 Parachute
  
• 0.08583698 0.07227632 Default AV-T1 Winglet
  
• 0.53627 0.09626622 Default Big-S Wing Strake
  
• 9.336478 0.1339481 SEMIDEPLOYED Mk16-XL Parachute
  
• 3.890279 0.1524063 A Communotron 88-88
  
• 1.108058 0.1574683 SEMIDEPLOYED Mk25 Parachute
  
• 0.1469518 0.1860022 neutral Standard Canard
  
• 2.62683 0.1961128 SEMIDEPLOYED Mk2-R Radial-Mount Parachute
  
• 2.515221 0.2005389 A Mk2 Cockpit
  
• 2.515221 0.2005389 B Mk2 Cockpit
  
• 0.134963 0.2096515 neutral Advanced Canard
  
• 0.1532288 0.2128663 Default Wing Strake
  
• 0.02798774 0.2196357 Default Basic Fin
  
• 0.1246012 0.2499593 neutral AV-R8 Winglet
  
• 0.1794599 0.2543047 neutral Tail Fin
  
• 0.4682146 0.2579988 fullDeflectionPos AV-R8 Winglet
  
• 0.3291357 0.2638914 fullDeflectionNeg Advanced Canard
  
• 0.3291357 0.26431 fullDeflectionPos Advanced Canard
  
• 1.263023 0.2716523 Default Mk1 Cockpit
  
• 0.508921 0.272541 fullDeflectionNeg Standard Canard
  
• 0.508921 0.2750442 fullDeflectionPos Standard Canard
  
• 0.8837043 0.2951582 Default Swept Wings
  
• 1.213026 0.3 Default Shock Cone Intake
  
• 0.4682551 0.3134894 fullDeflectionNeg AV-R8 Winglet
  
• 0.1838379 0.3374914 Default Structural Wing Type D
  
• 0.3631556 0.3378715 Default Structural Wing Type A
  
• 2.687976 0.3450436 fullDeflectionNeg Big-S Spaceplane Tail Fin
  
• 2.687976 0.3470565 fullDeflectionPos Big-S Spaceplane Tail Fin
  
• 1.213026 0.3476872 Default Advanced Nose Cone - Type A
  
• 0.1066304 0.3503792 neutral A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S
  
• 0.2258113 0.3636769 fullDeflectionNeg Delta-Deluxe Winglet
  
• 1.402586 0.3652771 fullDeflectionNeg FAT-455 Aeroplane Tail Fin
  
• 1.402586 0.3668208 fullDeflectionPos FAT-455 Aeroplane Tail Fin
  
• 0.2258113 0.3676945 fullDeflectionPos Delta-Deluxe Winglet
  
• 1.213026 0.3764403 Default NCS Adapter
  
• 1.997435 0.3834513 neutral Big-S Spaceplane Tail Fin
  
• 0.3032565 0.401173 Default Small Nose Cone
  
• 2.217873 0.4086532 Default Big-S Delta Wing
  
• 0.3032565 0.4088397 Default CH-J3 Fly-By-Wire Avionics Hub
  
• 0.9736729 0.4198655 fullDeflectionNeg Tail Fin
  
• 4.852105 0.4253745 Default C7 Brand Adapter - 2.5m to 1.25m
  
• 11.00077 0.4258759 Default Kerbodyne ADTP-2-3
  
• 10.30376 0.4265045 A Mk3 Cockpit
  
• 10.30376 0.4265045 B Mk3 Cockpit
  
• 1.121219 0.427267 neutral FAT-455 Aeroplane Tail Fin
  
• 0.9736729 0.4304603 fullDeflectionPos Tail Fin
  
• 0.09443884 0.4314213 neutral Delta-Deluxe Winglet
  
• 10.30376 0.4324292 Default Mk3 to Mk2 Adapter
  
• 0.7350084 0.4405829 Default Delta Wing
  
• 0.7350084 0.4405829 Default Swept Wing Type A
  
• 0.3631556 0.4429483 Default Small Delta Wing
  
• 1.218224 0.4454349 Default Ram Air Intake
  
• 1.213026 0.45 Default Circular Intake
  
• 0.6368431 0.4507724 Default Stayputnik Mk. 1
  
• 1.213026 0.45351 Default Advanced Nose Cone - Type B
  
• 0.02942616 0.4732037 Default Vernor Engine
  
• 1.250829 0.4787524 Default Mk1 Command Pod
  
• 0.7533474 0.4844982 Default Swept Wing Type B
  
• 0.6567075 0.4902819 SEMIDEPLOYED Mk12-R Radial-Mount Drogue Chute
  
• 0.7350084 0.4921668 Default Structural Wing Type B
  
• 1.069721 0.4931759 fullDeflectionNeg FAT-445 Aeroplane Control Surface
  
• 0.9157104 0.4955477 Default Mk-55 "Thud" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.069721 0.4970603 fullDeflectionPos FAT-445 Aeroplane Control Surface
  
• 4.852105 0.5017468 Default C7 Brand Adapter Slanted - 2.5m to 1.25m
  
• 0.1905167 0.5056679 Default Wing Connector Type D
  
• 0.7533474 0.507181 Default Wing Connector Type B
  
• 1.144533 0.5080137 fullDeflectionNeg Big-S Elevon 1
  
• 2.575732 0.5080137 fullDeflectionNeg Big-S Elevon 2
  
• 0.7350084 0.5085866 Default Structural Wing Type C
  
• 4.748207 0.5121184 Default FAT-455 Aeroplane Main Wing
  
• 1.144533 0.5130815 fullDeflectionPos Big-S Elevon 1
  
• 2.575732 0.5130815 fullDeflectionPos Big-S Elevon 2
  
• 0.3668213 0.5154183 Default Wing Connector Type A
  
• 0.3668213 0.5154183 Default Wing Connector Type C
  
• 0.3668213 0.5154183 Default Wing Connector Type E
  
• 10.30376 0.5179489 Default Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter
  
• 4.643318 0.5247738 Default Mk1-2 Command Pod
  
• 0.6692767 0.5274513 fullDeflectionNeg Elevon 3
  
• 2.494812 0.52775 Default Mk2 to 1.25m Adapter Long
  
• 0.6692767 0.5310569 fullDeflectionPos Elevon 3
  
• 0.05735444 0.5314106 Default Small Hardpoint
  
• 1.037149 0.5314794 Default Launch Escape System
  
• 4.852105 0.5339531 Default Rockomax Brand Adapter
  
• 0.717287 0.5426252 fullDeflectionNeg Elevon 5
  
• 0.717287 0.5455235 fullDeflectionPos Elevon 5
  
• 0.2953996 0.5474034 fullDeflectionNeg Elevon 4
  
• 0.2953996 0.5506355 fullDeflectionPos Elevon 4
  
• 4.864884 0.5536323 Default 2.5m to Mk2 Adapter
  
• 10.30376 0.5620264 Default Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter Slanted
  
• 1.206113 0.575572 Default M700 Survey Scanner
  
• 0.03627452 0.5768754 Default O-10 "Puff" MonoPropellant Fuel Engine
  
• 2.494812 0.5802755 Default Mk2 to 1.25m Adapter
  
• 0.5332215 0.5823094 fullDeflectionNeg Elevon 2
  
• 0.5332215 0.5853868 fullDeflectionPos Elevon 2
  
• 4.852104 0.585743 Default Protective Rocket Nose Cone Mk7
  
• 0.04734908 0.5881076 Default 24-77 "Twitch" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.04717465 0.614139 Default Place-Anywhere 7 Linear RCS Port
  
• 0.1500185 0.6147928 Default Atmospheric Fluid Spectro-Variometer
  
• 0.2053843 0.6157054 DEPLOYED LT-1 Landing Struts
  
• 0.02300333 0.625335 Default Pegasus I Mobility Enhancer
  
• 0.1241077 0.6268594 Default Illuminator Mk1
  
• 1.213026 0.6305804 Default Aerodynamic Nose Cone
  
• 0.2786326 0.6350702 Default LY-01 Fixed Landing Gear
  
• 0.06662689 0.6387991 Default EAS-4 Strut Connector
  
• 0.4553565 0.6411267 fullDeflectionNeg Elevon 1
  
• 0.2767665 0.6422904 PACKED Mk16 Parachute
  
• 1.213026 0.6429014 Default FL-A10 Adapter
  
• 0.4553565 0.643371 fullDeflectionPos Elevon 1
  
• 0.1995803 0.6497338 Default LY05 Steerable Landing Gear
  
• 0.1962595 0.6617573 Default FTX-2 External Fuel Duct
  
• 5.167493 0.6727995 Default TR-XL Stack Separator
  
• 0.5198182 0.6882359 DEPLOYED LT-2 Landing Strut
  
• 1.072426 0.6885879 Default 'Drill-O-Matic' Mining Excavator
  
• 0.02125349 0.6886963 PACKED Mk12-R Radial-Mount Drogue Chute
  
• 0.08501394 0.6886963 PACKED Mk2-R Radial-Mount Parachute
  
• 0.194697 0.6915513 EXTENDED_B SP-W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.4195596 0.6937078 Default RoveMax Model M1
  
• 1.462059 0.6949234 A Advanced Grabbing Unit
  
• 6.84515 0.709805 Default LFB KR-1x2 "Twin-Boar" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.1418939 0.7119761 Default Structural Pylon
  
• 0.199248 0.7232357 EXTENDED_B SP-L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.4400986 0.7304751 neutral Elevon 5
  
• 1.108058 0.7324356 PACKED Mk16-XL Parachute
  
• 4.411602 0.7370769 Default TVR-1180C Mk1 Stack Tri-Coupler
  
• 0.005583212 0.7377104 Default OX-STAT Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.1580109 0.7471848 Default Illuminator Mk2
  
• 3.373985 0.7576349 RETRACTED LY-99 Large Landing Gear
  
• 0.4336735 0.758192 Default M4435 Narrow-Band Scanner
  
• 0.6089301 0.7589338 DEPLOYED LY-10 Small Landing Gear
  
• 0.5626312 0.7598909 neutral FAT-445 Aeroplane Control Surface
  
• 1.459697 0.7678789 RETRACTED LY-50 Medium Landing Gear
  
• 0.3501737 0.769372 neutral Elevon 3
  
• 0.3512916 0.7699307 neutral Elevon 1
  
• 0.3512916 0.7699307 neutral Elevon 2
  
• 111.1859 0.7713919 Default A potato like rock
  
• 0.5826902 0.772536 RETRACTED LY-10 Small Landing Gear
  
• 0.169239 0.7749686 neutral Elevon 4
  
• 1.108058 0.7803856 PACKED Mk25 Parachute
  
• 0.786228 0.7858429 Default TR-2L Ruggedized Vehicular Wheel
  
• 0.4131348 0.7869799 neutral Big-S Elevon 1
  
• 0.9294317 0.7869799 neutral Big-S Elevon 2
  
• 2.637873 0.7903831 Default Rockomax Brand Decoupler
  
• 1.802065 0.7919737 Default S1 SRB-KD25k "Kickback" Solid Fuel Booster
  
• 1.523956 0.7928757 Default BACC "Thumper" Solid Fuel Booster
  
• 0.07297606 0.7933471 Default EAS-1 External Command Seat
  
• 0.07835191 0.7934652 A Mystery Gooâ„¢ Containment Unit
  
• 0.07835191 0.7934652 B Mystery Gooâ„¢ Containment Unit
  
• 1.525142 0.7947727 Default Engine Nacelle
  
• 6.179663 0.7991401 Default TVR-2160C Mk2 Stack Quad-Coupler
  
• 1.373114 0.7999039 B Advanced Grabbing Unit
  
• 1.213328 0.8002112 B Clamp-O-Tron Shielded Docking Port
  
• 0.7809692 0.8005934 Default ROUND-8 Toroidal Fuel Tank
  
• 1.213026 0.8101062 Default Modular Girder Adapter
  
• 0.1042745 0.8137597 RETRACTED Gigantor XL Solar Array
  
• 2.770018 0.8184504 DEPLOYED LY-99 Large Landing Gear
  
• 1.500829 0.8234898 Default TR-18D Stack Separator
  
• 1.255602 0.8251827 DEPLOYED LY-50 Medium Landing Gear
  
• 0.06829663 0.8252227 RETRACTED LT-1 Landing Struts
  
• 4.019662 0.8257216 Default RoveMax Model XL3
  
• 0.1563825 0.8268632 Default Modular Girder Segment
  
• 0.1563825 0.8268632 Default Modular Girder Segment XL
  
• 1.292107 0.826995 fullDeflectionNeg A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S
  
• 0.1400948 0.8270175 Default TT-70 Radial Decoupler
  
• 0.1028258 0.8320935 Default RoveMax Model S2
  
• 0.4079032 0.8356299 Default Stratus-V Cylindrified Monopropellant Tank
  
• 2.173284 0.8379832 A Clamp-O-Tron Shielded Docking Port
  
• 1.29864 0.8380613 fullDeflectionPos A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S
  
• 5.34104 0.8409463 Default PPD-12 Cupola Module
  
• 0.1383333 0.8421784 RETRACTED LT-2 Landing Strut
  
• 0.02302167 0.8426529 Default Sepratron I
  
• 2.920341 0.8429655 Default Mk2 Bicoupler
  
• 11.00077 0.8435503 Default TR-38-D
  
• 0.1227822 0.8472515 DEPLOYED LT-05 Micro Landing Strut
  
• 1.491162 0.8475458 Default Mk1 Fuselage - Intake
  
• 0.4079709 0.8480761 Default Stratus-V Roundified Monopropellant Tank
  
• 3.017635 0.8486534 Default Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector
  
• 1.744051 0.8601256 Default TT18-A Launch Stability Enhancer
  
• 5.900002 0.8656932 Default TVR-400L Stack Quad-Adapter
  
• 0.06222124 0.8659472 Default Z-100 Rechargeable Battery Pack
  
• 11.09492 0.8672472 Default Kerbodyne S3-14400 Tank
  
• 0.06201784 0.8677153 Default RV-105 RCS Thruster Block
  
• 0.1066288 0.86804 RETRACTED SP-L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.1066288 0.86804 RETRACTED SP-W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 11.00097 0.8703182 Default Kerbodyne S3-3600 Tank
  
• 11.00077 0.8703601 Default Kerbodyne S3-7200 Tank
  
• 0.002602082 0.8724858 Default 2HOT Thermometer
  
• 1.422248 0.8726512 Default Mk1 Inline Cockpit
  
• 12.46603 0.8735549 Default S3 KS-25x4 "Mammoth" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.02455195 0.8763497 Default LV-1R "Spider" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 3.035019 0.8765234 Default TVR-200 Stack Bi-Coupler
  
• 0.7979784 0.8789322 Default XM-G50 Radial Air Intake
  
• 0.08672652 0.8820359 Default Octagonal Strut
  
• 2.832794 0.8839089 A Mk2 Inline Cockpit
  
• 2.832794 0.8839089 B Mk2 Inline Cockpit
  
• 1.213026 0.8857412 Default Engine Pre-cooler
  
• 1.298492 0.8869943 Default Small Holding Tank
  
• 1.250829 0.890376 Default TR-18A Stack Decoupler
  
• 0.05712634 0.8928639 EXTENDED_B OX-4W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.05803576 0.8956292 RETRACTED OX-4L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.135664 0.9036931 Default PB-X50R Xenon Container
  
• 1.213026 0.9058469 Default Tail Connector B
  
• 1.213026 0.905847 Default Tail Connector A
  
• 0.3579872 0.9071469 Default Fuel Cell Array
  
• 0.5117092 0.9141183 Default Telus-LV Bay Mobility Enhancer
  
• 1.030476 0.91494 Default Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port
  
• 0.01850027 0.9158732 Default PB-NUK Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator
  
• 5.095304 0.9190335 Default AE-FF2 Airstream Protective Shell (2.5m)
  
• 0.3227818 0.9203191 Default Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port Jr.
  
• 1.213026 0.9207465 Default FL-A5 Adapter
  
• 12.97919 0.9226444 EXTENDED_B Gigantor XL Solar Array
  
• 1.213026 0.9240832 Default FL-R25 RCS Fuel Tank
  
• 0.3062892 0.9249389 Default Small Inline Reaction Wheel
  
• 5.2274 0.9270337 Default Rockomax Jumbo-64 Fuel Tank
  
• 0.2518217 0.9304264 EXTENDED_A Gigantor XL Solar Array
  
• 0.05547886 0.9318035 RETRACTED OX-4W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.0190722 0.9318434 Default Double-C Seismic Accelerometer
  
• 5.167493 0.9326634 Default Rockomax X200-8 Fuel Tank
  
• 5.167493 0.9326643 Default Rockomax X200-32 Fuel Tank
  
• 5.167493 0.9326647 Default Rockomax X200-16 Fuel Tank
  
• 1.336596 0.9332057 Default AE-FF1 Airstream Protective Shell (1.25m)
  
• 1.299081 0.9353406 Default CR-7 R.A.P.I.E.R. Engine
  
• 5.02826 0.9356834 Default Large Holding Tank
  
• 1.213026 0.9359285 Clean LV-T30 "Reliant" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.213026 0.9359285 Clean LV-T45 "Swivel" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.225164 0.936101 Fairing LV-T30 "Reliant" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.225164 0.9361377 Fairing LV-T45 "Swivel" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.3032565 0.937167 Default FL-R10 RCS Fuel Tank
  
• 0.09160883 0.9372497 RETRACTED LT-05 Micro Landing Strut
  
• 0.2375867 0.9394995 Default Probodobodyne QBE
  
• 11.28847 0.9395066 Default AE-FF3 Airstream Protective Shell (3.75m)
  
• 1.22379 0.9398503 Default PB-X750 Xenon Container
  
• 4.911672 0.9399109 Default Mk2 Lander Can
  
• 2.20784 0.9474164 Default Mk1 Lander Can
  
• 0.9546443 0.9507048 Default Structural Intake
  
• 4.974336 0.9522132 Default PPD-10 Hitchhiker Storage Container
  
• 0.08041194 0.9525769 B Communotron 88-88
  
• 10.91724 0.9530882 Default Mk3 to 3.75m Adapter
  
• 0.06273968 0.9534463 EXTENDED_B OX-4L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 1.218463 0.9538159 B SC-9001 Science Jr.
  
• 5.049782 0.954417 Default TVR-300L Stack Tri-Adapter
  
• 5.201299 0.9547606 Default Mobile Processing Lab MPL-LG-2
  
• 1.270047 0.9548502 Clean Heat Shield (1.25m)
  
• 4.98264 0.955739 Clean Heat Shield (2.5m)
  
• 4.943268 0.9563304 Default Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port Sr.
  
• 1.179047 0.9564069 Default FL-T200 Fuel Tank
  
• 1.234128 0.9579991 A SC-9001 Science Jr.
  
• 10.99105 0.9581243 Clean Heat Shield (3.75m)
  
• 4.83552 0.960785 Default Rockomax Brand Adapter 02
  
• 1.213026 0.9616039 Clean LV-909 "Terrier" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 4.920165 0.9618174 Default ISRU Converter
  
• 0.3032565 0.9619116 Default Oscar-B Fuel Tank
  
• 1.225164 0.9619871 Fairing LV-909 "Terrier" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 A Mk2 Cargo Bay CRG-08
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 B Mk2 Cargo Bay CRG-08
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 A Mk2 Cargo Bay CRG-04
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 B Mk2 Cargo Bay CRG-04
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 A Mk2 Clamp-O-Tron
  
• 2.494907 0.962501 B Mk2 Clamp-O-Tron
  
• 2.00367 0.9627626 Default MK2 Drone Core
  
• 1.213026 0.9634836 Default FL-T800 Fuel Tank
  
• 1.213026 0.9635206 Default FL-T400 Fuel Tank
  
• 1.209465 0.9635211 Default FL-T100 Fuel Tank
  
• 1.435374 0.963743 Fairing Heat Shield (1.25m)
  
• 0.1292328 0.9638181 Default The Not-Rockomax Micronode
  
• 12.44468 0.9640147 Fairing Heat Shield (3.75m)
  
• 1.213026 0.964168 Default Z-1k Rechargeable Battery Bank
  
• 5.323979 0.9645097 Fairing Heat Shield (2.5m)
  
• 11.02835 0.9671375 Fairing Kerbodyne KR-2L+ "Rhino" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 11.02835 0.9671375 Clean Kerbodyne KR-2L+ "Rhino" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.08431777 0.9676359 Default Fuel Cell
  
• 1.397561 0.9707813 Default RC-001S Remote Guidance Unit
  
• 0.3421403 0.9713244 Default Telus Mobility Enhancer
  
• 2.495003 0.9716405 Default Mk2 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Short
  
• 2.495003 0.9716405 Default Mk2 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Short
  
• 2.495003 0.9716405 Default Mk2 Monopropellant Tank
  
• 2.494907 0.9716777 Default Mk2 Rocket Fuel Fuselage
  
• 2.494907 0.9716777 Default Mk2 Liquid Fuel Fuselage
  
• 2.494812 0.9716985 A MK2 Crew Cabin
  
• 2.494812 0.9716985 B MK2 Crew Cabin
  
• 1.09417 0.973163 EXTENDED_A SP-W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 1.119855 0.973442 EXTENDED_A SP-L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 1.275294 0.9736242 Default J-X4 "Whiplash" Turbo Ramjet Engine
  
• 1.341376 0.9752622 A Inline Clamp-O-Tron
  
• 4.873881 0.9755011 Default Z-4K Rechargeable Battery Bank
  
• 0.3032566 0.9770594 Default Z-200 Rechargeable Battery Bank
  
• 0.1078951 0.9788685 Default Hydraulic Detachment Manifold
  
• 0.09692431 0.9788955 Default Surface Scanning Module
  
• 1.368542 0.979327 Default RT-10 "Hammer" Solid Fuel Booster
  
• 0.164711 0.9793838 Default Z-400 Rechargeable Battery
  
• 1.280057 0.9798979 Default Advanced Inline Stabilizer
  
• 5.269597 0.9805592 Default RC-L01 Remote Guidance Unit
  
• 1.0 0.9811638 Default M-1x1 Structural Panel
  
• 4.0 0.9831746 Default M-2x2 Structural Panel
  
• 1.5224 0.9840678 Default Probodobodyne RoveMate
  
• 0.3032565 0.9867921 Fairing 48-7S "Spark" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.3032565 0.9867921 Clean 48-7S "Spark" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.288626 0.987366 Default J-33 "Wheesley" Basic Jet Engine
  
• 4.852096 0.9880731 Fairing RE-M3 "Mainsail" Liquid Engine
  
• 4.852096 0.9880731 Clean RE-M3 "Mainsail" Liquid Engine
  
• 4.852105 0.9889317 Fairing RE-L10 "Poodle" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 4.852105 0.9889317 Clean RE-L10 "Poodle" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.003944054 0.9889904 A Communotron 16
  
• 0.003944054 0.9889904 B Communotron 16
  
• 4.852105 0.9893315 Default TVR-200L Stack Bi-Adapter
  
• 0.05062994 0.9895929 Default TT-38K Radial Decoupler
  
• 1.233268 0.9902019 B Inline Clamp-O-Tron
  
• 0.9842955 0.9916865 EXTENDED_A OX-4W 3x2 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 1.017098 0.9919019 EXTENDED_A OX-4L 1x6 Photovoltaic Panels
  
• 0.3914828 0.9935443 Default Probodobodyne OKTO
  
• 0.2808021 0.9935781 Default Probodobodyne OKTO2
  
• 1.164635 0.993589 Default BZ-52 Radial Attachment Point
  
• 4.852105 0.9939718 Fairing RE-I5 "Skipper" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 4.852105 0.9939718 Clean RE-I5 "Skipper" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 1.322598 0.9949158 Default RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel Booster
  
• 1.203519 0.9951853 Default Mk1 Liquid Fuel Fuselage
  
• 1.203519 0.9951853 Default Structural Fuselage
  
• 0.402149 0.9964361 Default Probodobodyne HECS
  
• 0.0218195 0.9968643 Default GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector
  
• 0.0194956 0.997937 Default PresMat Barometer
  
• 1.353723 0.9985632 A Service Bay (1.25m)
  
• 5.414894 0.9985632 A Service Bay (2.5m)
  
• 1.286295 0.9987032 B Service Bay (1.25m)
  
• 5.145181 0.9987032 B Service Bay (2.5m)
  
• 10.33763 0.9995237 A Mk3 Passenger Module
  
• 10.33763 0.9995237 B Mk3 Passenger Module
  
• 1.562124 0.9999235 B Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-100
  
• 1.562122 0.9999235 B Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-50
  
• 1.562122 0.9999235 B Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-25
  
• 1.539374 0.9999771 A Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-100
  
• 1.539374 0.9999771 A Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-50
  
• 1.539374 0.9999771 A Mk3 Cargo Bay CRG-25
  
• 0.3032565 1.0 Default IX-6315 "Dawn" Electric Propulsion System
  
• 1.219507 1.0 Default T-1 Toroidal "Aerospike" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 0.06776706 1.0 Default LV-1 "Ant" Liquid Fuel Engine
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Long
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Short
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Long
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Short
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage
  
• 10.30376 1.0 Default Mk3 Monopropellant Tank
  
• 4.852105 1.0 Default FL-R1 RCS Fuel Tank
  
• 0.3032565 1.0 Default PB-X150 Xenon Container
  
• 0.02103621 1.0 Default M-Beam 200 I-Beam
  
• 0.02103621 1.0 Default M-Beam 200 I-Beam Pocket Edition
  
• 0.1215936 1.0 Default M-Beam 650 I-Beam
  
• 0.01524941 1.0 Default Cubic Octagonal Strut
  
• 0.3032565 1.0 Default TR-2C Stack Separator
  
• 0.3032565 1.0 Default TR-2V Stack Decoupler
  
• 12.2298 1.698923 DEPLOYED Mk25 Parachute
  
• 8.060574 3.852072 DEPLOYED Mk12-R Radial-Mount Drogue Chute
  
• 52.80032 8.565606 DEPLOYED Mk16 Parachute
  
• 114.9405 12.0685 DEPLOYED Mk16-XL Parachute
  
• 32.24229 27.92752 DEPLOYED Mk2-R Radial-Mount Parachute
  

Small Nose Cone

Frontal Area: 0.3032565

Drag Coefficient: 0.401173

Small Nosecone is attached to aft connection point of RAPIER engine

Firing the engines up. Nosecone does not overheat and does not obstruct thrust from the engine.

RAPIER with rear nosecone has a performance increase over the other with no rear nosecone.

Conclusion: Rear nosecones help improve aerodynamic performance by reducing rear drag. Nosecones are recommended for all exposed rear ends of aircraft. (Especially for those with exposed attachment points.)

Shock Cone intake

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3

VS.

Advanced Nose Cone - Type A

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3476872 //Has 0.0476872 more drag than Shock Cone Intake.

Left is the Shock Cone, right is the Type A

Spooling up engines for launch

Shock Cone beats the Type A by a mile.

Conclusion: Other tests not shown, but have been tested with other nosecones. Tested against Aerodynamic Nosecone, Advanced Nosecone - Type B, Tail Connectors Type A/B and various other intakes. The Shock Cone outperforms all other nosecones, outcome is the same being opened or closed to collecting air. Shock Cones are recommended for all leading edges of SSTOs, planes and rockets to minimize drag as much as possible regardless of air breathing engine use.

I've compiled all the knowledge I've gained from extensive testing of the aerodynamics systems to come up with a mere 16-tonne SSTM (Single Stage to Mun) craft that carries 4 Kerbals. It's from the knowledge to reduce struts to avoid drag, shock nose cones being the very best nose cone to reduce drag (it has the lowest drag coefficient of any nose cone and also has the lowest weight), smaller cones on the RAPIER engines to which I will trademark with the name RAPIERSPIKE engine.

Over 1000m dV at a 76km orbit. Shock Cones are used to reduce drag an all leading edges of the craft. Minimal strut usage; Only 3 struts in total holding craft together. Craft is deliberately made with little to no clipping to demonstrate proof of concept of cumulative drag reduction techniques. The craft runs on only liquid fuel, 2 RAPIER engines and a NERVA engine.

Demonstrating the RAPIERSPIKE engines which has significantly reduced drag compared to naked RAPIERs.

Craft File: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=01081702413893749625

Edited May 28, 2015 by Levelord

[SpaceChipmunk]

Great piece of work Levelord. Not only technically, but the aesthetics of it as well. That's some fine looking craft right there!

[Majorjim!]

Yeah it can be overcome. But there are times when you might just want to build something very efficient rather than very realistic.

Ah yes, in this case this info is very usefull.

[Geschosskopf]

Good job, Levelord! Thanks for taking the time and effort.

[Red Iron Crown]

What parts are massless now?

All parts have mass now. Parts with "physicsSignificance=1" in their configs now have their mass added to the first physicsful parent part instead of being ignored.

[Concentric]

Hm. That's much, much, much more drag than I thought... perhaps removing a few struts from my most recent lifter (or its payload) will get higher-drag payloads to orbit without using the payload tank.

Also, I like the RapierSpike and its accompanying plane, good job on that build.

[Rune]

These have been tested to improve aerodynamic flow of the aircraft and significantly improves dV performance:

These are some tests and data mined drag values:

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/images/thumb/0/08/Standard_Nosecone.png/60px-Standard_Nosecone.png Small Nose Cone

Frontal Area: 0.3032565

Drag Coefficient: 0.401173

Small Nosecone is attached to aft connection point of RAPIER engine

http://i.imgur.com/niAAXw6.jpg

Firing the engines up. Nosecone does not overheat and does not obstruct thrust from the engine.

http://i.imgur.com/hRV80Vw.jpg

RAPIER with rear nosecone has a performance increase over the other with no rear nosecone.

http://i.imgur.com/gP4TuXX.jpg

Conclusion: Rear nosecones help improve aerodynamic performance by reducing rear drag. Nosecones are recommended for all exposed rear ends of aircraft. (Especially for those with exposed attachment points.)

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/images/thumb/2/24/Shock_Cone_Intake.png/59px-Shock_Cone_Intake.png Shock Cone intake

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3

VS.

http://i.imgur.com/rE6Q4ths.pngAdvanced Nose Cone - Type A

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3476872 //Has 0.0476872 more drag than Shock Cone Intake.

Left is the Shock Cone, right is the Type A

http://i.imgur.com/KGeM7YZ.jpg

Spooling up engines for launch

http://i.imgur.com/63gwRv5.jpg

Shock Cone beats the Type A by a mile.

http://i.imgur.com/NWKrZIY.jpg

Conclusion: Other tests not shown, but have been tested with other nosecones. Tested against Aerodynamic Nosecone, Advanced Nosecone - Type B, Tail Connectors Type A/B and various other intakes. The Shock Cone outperforms all other nosecones, outcome is the same being opened or closed to collecting air. Shock Cones are recommended for all leading edges of SSTOs, planes and rockets to minimize drag as much as possible regardless of air breathing engine use.

I've compiled all the knowledge I've gained from extensive testing of the aerodynamics systems to come up with a mere 16-tonne SSTM (Single Stage to Mun) craft that carries 4 Kerbals. It's from the knowledge to reduce struts to avoid drag, shock nose cones being the very best nose cone to reduce drag (it has the lowest drag coefficient of any nose cone and also has the lowest weight), smaller cones on the RAPIER engines to which I will trademark with the name RAPIERSPIKE engine.

Over 1000m dV at a 76km orbit. Shock Cones are used to reduce drag an all leading edges of the craft. Minimal strut usage; Only 3 struts in total holding craft together. Craft is deliberately made with little to no clipping to demonstrate proof of concept of cumulative drag reduction techniques. The craft runs on only liquid fuel, 2 RAPIER engines and a NERVA engine.

http://i.imgur.com/6jog30K.png

Demonstrating the RAPIERSPIKE engines which has significantly reduced drag compared to naked RAPIERs.

http://i.imgur.com/WJ7TXry.jpg

Craft File: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=01081702413893749625

I've got to say, that SSTO? Numbers aside (and therefore the kind of nosecones and intakes), it follows all my usual design considerations. Not only to minimize drag, but also to improve aesthetics and reduce part count. The 1.02 aerodynamics just validated me. I was actually circling around the rear attachment point on RAPIERs, but with a twist: it's a great place to stick intakes to, and then move them around with gizmos so they don't show. I suspect you kill many birds with that "cheaty" stone.

All parts have mass now. Parts with "physicsSignificance=1" in their configs now have their mass added to the first physicsful parent part instead of being ignored.

Thanks for letting me know!

Rune. Thanks for taking the time to do this!

[RogueMason]

That 'RAPIERSPIKE' engine... I think it just saved my Ranger program

I've just launched a bare-bones Ranger testing these engines out and it actually got into orbit unlike all the other Rangers I'd tried under the new aero model.

I'm genuinely gobsmacked. It even had enough fuel to de-orbit. Granted, it was an absolutely tiny amount of fuel, but it was fuel.

It even managed to reach the runway again, completely intact from both bouts of heating it endured.

All that's left now is to tweak the design so that I can get as much out of it as possible. More fuel, airbrakes, that sort of stuff. I know it'll never be as good as any of the Rangers from 0.90, but it's something

Great work!

[Levelord]

I have some design recommendations for you if you'd like

You may want to remove the Default Structural Intake, it has a drag coefficient of 0.9507048. Compared to the Shock Cone's drag coefficient of 0.3.

A single structural intake generates more than 3 times the drag as a shock cone. With your craft having 4 of them, it's generating 12 times more drag. 2 Shock cones are adequate enough for your RAPIERs to bring the craft into orbit.

Also consider changing the Default Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port (Drag coefficient 0.91494) For a Clamp-O-Tron Shielded Docking Port (Drag coefficient 0.8379832). Or better yet, an inline docking port since it benefits from avoiding drag and comes with in built RCS fuel too.

It might also be beneficial to only have 1 probe core instead of 2 to save on weight.

[Rune]

Never give up, never surrender, RogueMason.

In other news, I have experimentally tested that:

a)intakes do care about their final orientation using gizmos.

b)intakes do not care about their initial orientation before using gizmos.

c)intakes pull less air (or the air they pull doesn't get increased with velocity) if they are not facing the airstream.

d)either intakes crate less drag facing backwards, or they don't decrease the drag of the node they cap if they are moved to face inwards. That one is awaiting further experimental testing involving nosecones and rocket mode. I think it's the former, but it could go both ways. In any case, the difference is minuscule.

My conclusion? The back of RAPIERs in my designs is going to be capped with a shock cone 100% of the time from now on. It even looks awesome.

Rune. And I'll only use the cheaty "hide even more intakes inside" when the occasion merits it.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Rune

[mikeb30165]

These have been tested to improve aerodynamic flow of the aircraft and significantly improves dV performance:

These are some tests and data mined drag values:

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/images/thumb/0/08/Standard_Nosecone.png/60px-Standard_Nosecone.png Small Nose Cone

Frontal Area: 0.3032565

Drag Coefficient: 0.401173

Small Nosecone is attached to aft connection point of RAPIER engine

http://i.imgur.com/niAAXw6.jpg

Firing the engines up. Nosecone does not overheat and does not obstruct thrust from the engine.

http://i.imgur.com/hRV80Vw.jpg

RAPIER with rear nosecone has a performance increase over the other with no rear nosecone.

http://i.imgur.com/gP4TuXX.jpg

Conclusion: Rear nosecones help improve aerodynamic performance by reducing rear drag. Nosecones are recommended for all exposed rear ends of aircraft. (Especially for those with exposed attachment points.)

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/images/thumb/2/24/Shock_Cone_Intake.png/59px-Shock_Cone_Intake.png Shock Cone intake

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3

VS.

http://i.imgur.com/rE6Q4ths.pngAdvanced Nose Cone - Type A

Frontal Area: 1.213026

Drag Coefficient: 0.3476872 //Has 0.0476872 more drag than Shock Cone Intake.

Left is the Shock Cone, right is the Type A

http://i.imgur.com/KGeM7YZ.jpg

Spooling up engines for launch

http://i.imgur.com/63gwRv5.jpg

Shock Cone beats the Type A by a mile.

http://i.imgur.com/NWKrZIY.jpg

Conclusion: Other tests not shown, but have been tested with other nosecones. Tested against Aerodynamic Nosecone, Advanced Nosecone - Type B, Tail Connectors Type A/B and various other intakes. The Shock Cone outperforms all other nosecones, outcome is the same being opened or closed to collecting air. Shock Cones are recommended for all leading edges of SSTOs, planes and rockets to minimize drag as much as possible regardless of air breathing engine use.

I've compiled all the knowledge I've gained from extensive testing of the aerodynamics systems to come up with a mere 16-tonne SSTM (Single Stage to Mun) craft that carries 4 Kerbals. It's from the knowledge to reduce struts to avoid drag, shock nose cones being the very best nose cone to reduce drag (it has the lowest drag coefficient of any nose cone and also has the lowest weight), smaller cones on the RAPIER engines to which I will trademark with the name RAPIERSPIKE engine.

Over 1000m dV at a 76km orbit. Shock Cones are used to reduce drag an all leading edges of the craft. Minimal strut usage; Only 3 struts in total holding craft together. Craft is deliberately made with little to no clipping to demonstrate proof of concept of cumulative drag reduction techniques. The craft runs on only liquid fuel, 2 RAPIER engines and a NERVA engine.

http://i.imgur.com/6jog30K.png

Demonstrating the RAPIERSPIKE engines which has significantly reduced drag compared to naked RAPIERs.

http://i.imgur.com/WJ7TXry.jpg

Craft File: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=01081702413893749625

Bloody 'ell! Definately going to try out your RAPIERSPIKE's, Levelord - great work mate!

[Levelord]

I made a mock up of the Ranger by eyeballing the design (awesome aesthetic design btw), and managed to get it to a 71km apoapsis with almost 500m/s dV. The modifications help, but it may also be ascent profile differences that needs to be taken into consideration too. I did a flat 25 degree pitch the whole way to orbit. (It had a very high TwR)

I've also tried Rune's suggestion of adding shock cones as the spike instead. Had some extra dV, but it might be due to variations in my ascent profile and the fact that it reached an Ap of 75km instead of the usual 70km.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Levelord

[Eleven]

EDIT: Mystery solved on page 3

Dang what kind of windows 3.1 computer are you viewing the forums on? Your answer was in post #23, that's not even half way down the first page for those of us who have set our forums settings correctly

Glad you figured it out though, now go change your forums settings to show 50 replies per page

[heng]

...?!?!?!?

Ok, I tried the following:

create two rockets

- same weight (science jr. with no drag vs. 4x struts with drag)

as expected, the science jr. rose more swiftly and higher and better and more beatifully... you get the picture.

now i tried hiding the struts ander different more or less aerodynamically shaped parts.

the strange things happened with "Small Hard Point"

i attached four Small Hard Points to each rocket, so the weight and aerodynamic properties should only differ for the four struts on the one.

the struts were going out from under the hard points.

SUCCESS! i thought, when the strutted rocket actually launched faster(!!!) than the one with the science jr. ballast.

but then - within a few hundred meters - the science jr. caught up and overtook the strutted rocket.

... indeed...

anyone any idea???

setup

struts under the hard point

start, RCS on, full throttle

SUCCESS!.... i thought

but then it changed.

thoroughly clueless and out of time... if anyone has any idea, enlighten us!

[Levelord]

Dang what kind of windows 3.1 computer are you viewing the forums on? Your answer was in post #23, that's not even half way down the first page for those of us who have set our forums settings correctly

Glad you figured it out though, now go change your forums settings to show 50 replies per page

*Shrug* I'm using the forum's default settings on the number of posts to show per page...

- - - Updated - - -

...?!?!?!?

Ok, I tried the following:

create two rockets

- same weight (science jr. with no drag vs. 4x struts with drag)

as expected, the science jr. rose more swiftly and higher and better and more beatifully... you get the picture.

now i tried hiding the struts ander different more or less aerodynamically shaped parts.

the strange things happened with "Small Hard Point"

i attached four Small Hard Points to each rocket, so the weight and aerodynamic properties should only differ for the four struts on the one.

the struts were going out from under the hard points.

SUCCESS! i thought, when the strutted rocket actually launched faster(!!!) than the one with the science jr. ballast.

but then - within a few hundred meters - the science jr. caught up and overtook the strutted rocket.

... indeed...

anyone any idea???

setup

http://www11.pic-upload.de/28.05.15/lzw2a9nlff32.jpg

struts under the hard point

http://www11.pic-upload.de/28.05.15/wtnrb3ah6pay.jpg

start, RCS on, full throttle

http://www11.pic-upload.de/28.05.15/b1aixow5fpi.jpg

SUCCESS!.... i thought

http://www11.pic-upload.de/28.05.15/xewjvpwbmko.jpg

but then it changed.

http://www11.pic-upload.de/28.05.15/eqql5ryfcxbq.jpg

thoroughly clueless and out of time... if anyone has any idea, enlighten us!

I believe at lower speeds where drag is less of an issue, the lighter craft travels faster.

When you get closer and over the sound barrier, the drag becomes significant enough to overcome the weight advantage and slows you down more than a craft that has less drag. This is why I now optimize my craft for drag, it might change again in 1.0.3 though... *groan*