The K Prize - 100% reusable spaceplane to orbit and back

[bombo1]

it is able to get to a 90x90 orbit with 5 kerbonauts and 1/4 tank of fuel left. I have no screenshots because I did not want to make a imgur user and no video because my computer did not handle it. but i do have a download http://www./?t87co0ccu7cr6fl

[pa1983]

there are hosting sites that wont require a user. But any way not that hard to register on imageshack or dropbox.

[Spica]

wait, which parts am I using that are not stock?

And if you'd actually looked at the video, you'd see that I'm using v0.20.

The side mounted landing gear are NOT stock, and that nuclear engine is Obviously edited and is no longer stock.

[ihtoit]

the engine is as it came in the Luvodicus pack. I've done nothing to it, and the landing gear is within the rules.

[boolybooly]

Its all been sorted out and explained to mutual satisfaction Spica, please see the latest entry in the gatecrashers list

drewscriver, congratulations on your successful Utilitarial Commendation mission, duly logged, proofs scrutinised with interest, thanks for the screenies!

bombo1 your word is good enough and thanks for making your craft file available, I got the bit about a 90km orbit but you didnt say if you did also land the craft intact, so I am not sure whether it was a complete K Prize mission within the OP rules or not. If it was say so and I will link your post in the guest list.

[ihtoit]

Another Gatecrasher, because I only managed to get it in orbit once: Sienar Fleet Systems TIE/LN starfighter. Stupidly light, scads of linear RCS thrusters on the back of the monoprop tank (alongside the twin ion engines!) that only just between them got the thing into orbit. Maybe a game physics glitch that I managed it, but like I say only the once. Next time I'll try it with null gravity and see if I can't set it in a stable orbit for a restart. Incidentally, it takes off on four Firespitter fighter tail wheels which I somehow managed to set up so they retracted completely inside the wings, and it climbs on a 90 degree roll.

[boolybooly]

Here is another one. An earlier model of Long Ranger III, the Long Ranger II has a vertical landing thruster amidships, was tricky to balance but could achieve a wheels down landing without lithobraking on Minmus and safe return to Kerbin. Oxidiser was vented on final approach to lighten the landing weight.

[bombo1]

it manages to land but you must tap the brakes to stop otherwise it will fall over

[Pirke]

Here is my entry for 21.1: the Shotgun Hawk, 100% stock, 100% reusable single stage to Mun and back, and below is my very first testflight!

It uses 2 jet engines, 2 RAM air, 2 scramjets (simulated by stacking RAM air), and 1 atomic liquid burner. As the name suggests, it has no command pod, but a shotgun chair

To get a kerbal in it, there is this nice rover behind it that pushes the plane onto the runway, after which the pilot steps out and walks over to the plane As a benefit, the rover is a good reminder where the runway is when you're in orbit!

http://imgur.com/a/ZfPZ7#0

I could probably have gone to Minmus as well after leaving Mun orbit with this amount of fuel left... oh well, it was a fun first testflight!

Some small issues were found during testing:

- the casing around the atomic engine doesn't come of well during flight, that was probably the cause of a fuel inbalance... I had to manually pump some fuel around. That, or my fuel lines are not setup correctly.

- landing vertically on Mun with only a rear thruster and torque is tricky (although the torque is plenty enough, after rolling wheels down it will be a hard impact)... I suggest some small RCS thrusters to ease the landing.

- a bit nose down tendency with full fuel, a bit nose up tendency with the landing amount of fuel. Perhaps empty fuel will cause too much nose up effect. More investigation needed.

Why didn't I end up in the opening post Roll of Honour?

[zekes]

I should do this again... finish my debulist flight...

[boolybooly]

Actually Pirke that set of images while very interesting raises a conundrum and I think it confused me into forgetting about it.

The craft actually decouples before take off. Strictly this breaks the letter of the rules. Also the Kerbal chair gives command capability but the Kerbal comes from the decoupled part of the craft. If the craft can fly without the Kerbal then that is not a problem, but if the Kerbal makes the craft flyable then technically it does alter the flight characteristics, but that is unclear. Decoupling is a problem.

It would be within the rules to spawn a separate craft for Kerbal transfer before take off. So it just seems pedantic to disqualify the craft because of that, but there is blatantly a decouple event happening, but that just seems pedantic etc etc. Clearly a "Hofstadter-Moebius loop" which confused me to the point where it was easier to pretend your post didnt exist than work out the right course of action.

Rules

1. The craft may not lose any parts in flight, no decoupling allowed.

Crew transfers are permitted providing they do not alter flight characteristics of the K-Prize craft.

Sorry...! Unfortunately I dont have a reset button.

So you decoupled but I am being pedantic and conflicted. So do you want to go on the gatecrashers list? Or do you want to do it without decoupling and use a craft with a lightweight satellite command pod or something....

[Cupcake...]

Yep, back again I'm afraid.... Took a new Mk 2 version of the Scythe to Minmus and back, I made sure I followed all the rules this time! The only thing is, when I landed it was on one of the VTOL pads rather than the runway (the parking fees are cheaper), am I still eligible for a Pilot Precision award?

Cupcake... Edited August 24, 2013 by Cupcake...

[boolybooly]

I think so Cupcake, cant get more precise than that and a helipad is definitely one of the KSP runways, very nice video, accomplished piloting and innovative and effective craft design. Liked your personalised flag and cool use of an IVA mod. Hats off to you! And thanks for sharing it.

Edited August 24, 2013 by boolybooly

[Cupcake...]

I think so Cupcake, cant get more precise than that, very nice video, accomplished piloting and innovative and effective craft design. Liked your personalised flag and cool use of an IVA mod. Hats off to you! And thanks for sharing it.

My pleasure, I'll look forward to taking part again in the future. Keep up the good work!

Cupcake...

[Spartwo]

Do SSTO rockets count?EDITnevermind submitting now.

It's on a decaying orbit at the moment(after burning retrograde to land).

Edited August 25, 2013 by Spartwo

[pa1983]

Been some time since I posted but It have taken some time to develop the Falcon XIII Galaxy STOL further since every new feature and capability adds to the complexity of altering and balancing it. But FINALLY after endless hours spent on refining it in to the New B sub version Aka, Falcon XIIIB Galaxy STOL its finally ready. It has a tad bit more fuel, two airospikes removed and a seventh NV-1 was added to reduce the need to fight gravity to save weight and fuel. New undercarriage, new and improved stabilizer, new cargo-bay floor and many many other changes that it took to balance the craft close to perfection and make it capable of taking 36+ tons to Duna.

It was trimmed down on redundant part but part count is probably as high or a bit higher still since that budget had to be spent else where to make it perfect.

So its a tad bit heavier but better balanced and overall a lot more capable and easier to fly then the first version. It pays of to not aim to high but rather perfect at a later stage then try to get it all right the first time.

I went to Duna with a benchmark payload and landed not fare away from my Old Duna base that could not be resupply with jumbo tanks sens 0.21 but now with my 3:e Jumbo tank test delivery and with the final touches done to the B variant it seems perfectly capable of being a good Falcon X Jumbo replacement. The old Jumbo still has the tonnage advantage due to more engines and fewer parts but it cant land on Duna any more with almost twice the landing speed requirements.

The Falcon XIIIB Galaxy STOL had a takeoff tonnage of 204.95 tons and landed back at KSC just fine. I could have saved a lot more fuel if I had reentred earlier and didn't need to fly 1/4 around Kerbin but it only shows that its more then capable of the the task it was made for. Laythe is next. Only a test will prove if thats possible.

I also think its one of my more beautiful crafts with its almost concord like style and long fuselage and narrow wing span. Requires proper balance but once I trimmed it in SPH it flies very stable and can even do 180 turns and loops fully loaded so its built to take abuse with in reason tough.

She is all stock like all my other crafts.

Craft file is available here.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27196441/SSTOs.zip

If you want to even try it out you MUST sett Delta Physics time to 0.03 at least, preferably edit settings.cfg and set it to 0.01 to have a chance of decent frame rates on a fast i5 or better cpu. But it is a CPU killer thats the down side. Lets hope we get bigger wings or something soon so part count can be at least halved.

Here are all the pics of the flight.

Edited August 26, 2013 by pa1983

[glacierre]

Been some time since I posted but It have taken some time to develop the Falcon XIII Galaxy STOL further since every new feature and capability adds to the complexity of altering and balancing it. But FINALLY after endless hours spent on refining it in to the New B sub version Aka, Falcon XIIIB Galaxy STOL its finally ready.

Brutal does not even begin to define it.

[astropapi1]

Pa1983, if you ever consider using mods, try PWings. It's a procedural wing that can be stretched or shortened for hundreds of diferent things. It would reduce the llaaaaggggg insanely.

[Pirke]

Actually Pirke that set of images while very interesting raises a conundrum and I think it confused me into forgetting about it.

The craft actually decouples before take off. Strictly this breaks the letter of the rules. Also the Kerbal chair gives command capability but the Kerbal comes from the decoupled part of the craft. If the craft can fly without the Kerbal then that is not a problem, but if the Kerbal makes the craft flyable then technically it does alter the flight characteristics, but that is unclear. Decoupling is a problem.

It would be within the rules to spawn a separate craft for Kerbal transfer before take off. So it just seems pedantic to disqualify the craft because of that, but there is blatantly a decouple event happening, but that just seems pedantic etc etc. Clearly a "Hofstadter-Moebius loop" which confused me to the point where it was easier to pretend your post didnt exist than work out the right course of action.

Sorry...! Unfortunately I dont have a reset button.

So you decoupled but I am being pedantic and conflicted. So do you want to go on the gatecrashers list? Or do you want to do it without decoupling and use a craft with a lightweight satellite command pod or something....

The decoupling was only added to provide a Kerbal without having to spawn a different vehicle... and decoupling doesn't happen "in flight" but on the runway

I thought a shotgun chair was more fun than a regular cockpit. It flies perfectly with a cockpit and can get to the Mun+Minmus and back, but then the name "Shotgun Hawk" would be a bit silly

[Radam]

Pa1983, your PC is too good that it is bad. a 1385 parts! How do you fly with this? Im having 5 seconds per frame when im on the runway. Not mentioning what would happen if I lit the engines...

[pa1983]

Physics Delta set to 0.01 in settings.cfg. run my i7 3930k @ 4Ghz. Been plying around with it a 4.4Ghz but no real difference.

A stock i7 3770k was just as fast, can turbo to 3.9ghz. I would recomend an i5, 3570k or the new 4670k as the ultimate ksp cpu. No need for many cores or hyper threading so an i5 is optimal.

But still I get less then smooth frame rates. Have not messured but probebly 20-25fps @ 0.275x real time. Playable but its slow.

[polle]

Well, this is my creation of which I never thought that it will take off, but it turnt out it is very easy to control and maybe a very good transporter for longtime missions.

This is my first SPH that actually reached the 70km mark and above, I still not managed an orbit arround Kerbin, but i work on it.

I have arround 12 versions of this and for the K-Prize this is the Turbo only - reached the 70km but i did not managed to land after 3 trys and thats it.

The Turbo only has almost no stall and can turn 90 degree pretty easy and fast (without any rcs). Its still controllable in mach 3 but i dont like to add more intakes.

It has very good aerodynamic characteristics, i actually managed a 2500m climb with 2 ion propulusion (0.01 TWR).

Well next version is a real SSTO

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Inspiration:

[Radam]

Do rotating wings produce lift? Like a helicopter, I know its been done but I cant replicate even with damned robotics free spinning washer...

Well not swept wings anyway

Edited August 27, 2013 by Radam

[boolybooly]

Pirke I agree that a shotgun chair is fun, but seriously I have thought about it and decided that dropping a pod is permissable because it is like dropping payload and the rule which said that crew transfer should not alter flight characteristics was redundant and in this case obstructive so I deleted it.

It seems reasonable that you can crew craft with Kerbals from dropped pods. So congratulations on your successful K Prize mission.

pa1983, thanks for your mission screenies for another awesome STOL Duna drop.

Edited August 27, 2013 by boolybooly

[Spartwo]

Did I make the cut?