What's the biggest thing you ever got to orbit on a spaceplane?

[Val]

I seem to have real trouble with Mk3 based SSTOs. The joints don't seem strong enough for the masses of parts involved, at least the way I build things (and I see others are successful so it's likely just me). The most detachable payload I've fit into a spaceplane is ~10t in a Mk2 bay.

Here's a pic to illustrate how well my typical Mk3 SSTO attempt goes:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61004449/KSP/1.0.4/screenshot964.png

There's a reason I make them uncrewed...

That is an awesome pic. And also impressive how you took off before reaching the end of the runway.

My designs usually have so little TWR they can barely keep from plunging into the ocean after running out of runway.

[xebx]

@ Red Iron Crown : do u have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement ? It really helps with big planes and huge rockets, good against Kraken.

My Mk3 plane don't have any strut and didn't show any structural failure during all the flight/testing i've done, including dangerous maneuvers more or less intended at mach 2+.

On your pic, your plane has flipped, is its CoM in front of its CoL ? i suppose it is, it looks well designed.

[Red Iron Crown]

That is an awesome pic. And also impressive how you took off before reaching the end of the runway.

My designs usually have so little TWR they can barely keep from plunging into the ocean after running out of runway.

IME that is usually a control authority/landing gear positioning issue, this plane's TWR is way less than one but takes off quickly if you can get the nose up. I also have some planes like you describe, unable to pitch up until the runway falls away below it. Though I must admit my planes don't approach the margin as closely as yours do.

@ Red Iron Crown : do u have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement ? It really helps with big planes and huge rockets, good against Kraken.

My Mk3 plane don't have any strut and didn't show any structural failure during all the flight/testing i've done, including dangerous maneuvers more or less intended at mach 2+.

In my stockish install I don't use any physics-altering mods, that way I know what to nag Squad about fixing.

On your pic, your plane has flipped, is its CoM in front of its CoL ? i suppose it is, it looks well designed.

That's a bit complicated. The two big wings have a slight positive angle of incidence, which throws off the CoL indicator in the SPH. I added the canards for more pitch authority and found small pitch changes went fine, but if I got far enough away from prograde it would flip out as shown.

Honestly my biggest problem with big SSTOs is the lack of larger engines and intakes; spamming all those Rapiers, tanks, and intakes kills performance for me (seriously, big SSTOs are the only time I see a yellow MET timer any more). Looks like we are finally getting 2.5m air-breathers in 1.1, hopefully they are higher performance than their airliner-like appearance suggests.

[March Unto Torment]

Current record is somewhere around 10 tonnes? I'm not very good with spaceplanes, though.

I'm presently in the process of designing something that should be good for, at minimum, 50 tonnes to LKO, if not well more. That said, I've got some major aerodynamic issues at low altitude, so I've yet to actually get it up there. Still trying to troubleshoot it. I think it needs more power...

[panzer1b]

Ive done some 100 or so ton cargo craft in the past (it was a SSTO at that with no staging), but at such weights its not fun at all to actually do it. Most of my cargo SSTLs (single stage to laythe) can drag around 10-20t there, and can easily do a 2 way trip with light or no cargo. Then i made a star-fighter that could go to laythe, deploy missiles, and vaporize someone while it was at it, and then land, and return to kerbin on fumes.

[Vanamonde]

As of this afternoon:

[GoSlash27]

I seem to have real trouble with Mk3 based SSTOs. The joints don't seem strong enough for the masses of parts involved, at least the way I build things (and I see others are successful so it's likely just me). The most detachable payload I've fit into a spaceplane is ~10t in a Mk2 bay.

Here's a pic to illustrate how well my typical Mk3 SSTO attempt goes:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61004449/KSP/1.0.4/screenshot964.png

There's a reason I make them uncrewed...

RIC,

Some advice: When you're trying to get through Mach 1, you can choose to add thrust or reduce drag. While adding thrust is very "kerbal", it tends to quickly run into diminishing returns. The advantages of reducing drag, OTOH, tend to reinforce themselves. One of the advantages is lighter, simpler, stronger assemblies that are easier to fly.

Best,

-Slashy

[RyanRising]

It was in 0.9, and the SSTO was called "Swan".

http://imgur.com/cIO5MU2

A spaceplane itself (v0.90)

Plus 2 detachable KAS containers.

In 0.9, I used light spaceplanes to ferry crews to OSS 6 and back to Kerbin..

How did you guys manage to make SSTO spaceplanes, in 0.9, when there were no wings? Or jet engines? For that matter, WildLynx, is the OSS 6 a space station? And how did you accomplish that when there wasn't even persistence, or docking ports?

Answering the question presented by the OP, the biggest thing I think I've ever used a space plane to ferry was a little ion probe in 0.90. Definitely not a huge achievement. I can't vote, however, because I'm on a mobile device. :/

[Columbia]

Oh, I disagree. It's not that it's any more of a challenge to lift cargo with spaceplanes, it's just that it makes no sense (at least in my program) to do that. My current tanker carries more fuel than the orange tank and it's certainly not any easier to accomplish that.

Using spaceplanes for cargo means I have to limit the dimensions and mass of the payload to what the spaceplane can handle and any particular spaceplane design wouldn't be used often enough to justify the R&D time.

Shuttling kerbals and transporting fuel, OTOH, is something that I do regularly. If it's not a job that 1) spaceplanes are best at and 2) I'm going to need to do often, I just plain don't design a spaceplane to do that job.

Best,

-Slashy

..Pretty much this.

I don't really find much incentive to build spaceplaes for tasks rockets can accomplish much more easily and flexibly, IMHO.

[Jett_Quasar]

For all of my designs I always shoot for Infinity. As in on-board refueling and the ability to land on almost any planet or moon. I've succeeded in doing that in two different ways:

Launching a starship into LKO on the back of a space plane and then flying it out to well anywhere and then docking them back up and returning to KSP. I've never seen this done before so I had to try it - props to Rune for the space plane launcher that I mangled to get my ship on-board.

The other method is to launch the entire space plane out to Minmus for refueling.

All KSP images have been moved here.

I'm not even sure how to calculate the payload weight for these...

JR

Edited September 28, 2015 by Jolly_Roger

[Val]

IME that is usually a control authority/landing gear positioning issue, this plane's TWR is way less than one but takes off quickly if you can get the nose up. I also have some planes like you describe, unable to pitch up until the runway falls away below it. Though I must admit my planes don't approach the margin as closely as yours do.

My designs are usually able to lift the nose before end of runway. They just don't have enough speed/wing area to gain altitude, until they are out over the ocean.

That's a bit complicated. The two big wings have a slight positive angle of incidence, which throws off the CoL indicator in the SPH. I added the canards for more pitch authority and found small pitch changes went fine, but if I got far enough away from prograde it would flip out as shown.

IME it can be easier to get predictable CoL indicator behavior if you mount ALL wing parts with equal incidence angle. While I do make designs with mixed incidence occasionally, it is very much trial and error to get the CoL right.

Honestly my biggest problem with big SSTOs is the lack of larger engines and intakes; spamming all those Rapiers, tanks, and intakes kills performance for me (seriously, big SSTOs are the only time I see a yellow MET timer any more). Looks like we are finally getting 2.5m air-breathers in 1.1, hopefully they are higher performance than their airliner-like appearance suggests.

Yeah, I'd like to see some bigger engines and intakes, too, to make designs above 120 t take off weight not so engine-spammy.

Though it is possible to make some rather big SSTOs with very limited engine count, as shown by Slashy with his giant tanker with just 4 Rapiers.

I'm also quite proud of my 64 t Chibi Skylon with just 2 Rapiers.

Album + Craft file

Edited September 7, 2015 by Val
Bad formatting

[KerikBalm]

Easy.... look at how much payload it can take to LKO...

The ability to mine or use fuel that you took up to LKO to go to places beyond LKO is irrelevant.

This poll needs a >100 tons option.

^That is 38,086 LF+O... which has a mass of 190.43 tons.

^That last one was carrying 107 tons of fuel in the payload, with fuel to spare in the SSTO, then you need to add the structure/tank mass, then there was the LV-N cluster that I detached that could probably count as payload mass too (I detached it for a challenge) - since I found the payload mass didn't really change much if I added LV-Ns to circularize, or used rapiers

Obviously, the one carrying 2 orange tanks and 2 large grey tanks (the half size orange tanks) had a payload mass equal to 3x orange tanks, ie 108 tons... it also had a lot of fuel left over in orbit,

The one I use most now (the first pics) seems to have a payload capacity of about 120-125 tons, depending on payload dimensions...

Although I've never actually seen just how much payload mass I could stick in it - I'm getting that figure by looking at spare fuel mass + payload mass.

However, I do not even launch it with full tanks, so first I need to find its maximum takeoff weight, and see how payload shape and mass affect its maximum airbreathing speed.

I've never failed to make orbit with it yet - after the design process where it would often fail to get off the runway, or be unstable at some point in the flight, or a structural failure....

Lets say I've never failed to get to orbit due to insufficient dV, despite carrying payloads that sometimes exceed 100 tons.

Edited September 7, 2015 by KerikBalm

[r4pt0r]

I never look at information windows, so IDK what any of my spaceplane payloads have weighed

[dom700]

My current design is able to take 2 tons into a 75x80 orbit. At least it is cheap, and I just want to exchange experiments/crew and bring spare parts with it

[Alpha188]

163 tons to orbit (aka the 163t KW Rocketry fuel tank) BUT with a Mk 4 system spaceplane. So I think this doesn't count.

[Brainlord Mesomorph]

163 tons to orbit (aka the 163t KW Rocketry fuel tank) BUT with a Mk 4 system spaceplane. So I think this doesn't count.

Yeah, I should have said "stock" and "1.0"

[BagelRabbit]

The biggest thing I ever got to orbit with a cargo spaceplane weighed about a ton. Given, I've only ever made one cargo SSTO, and it was designed with cuteness first and functionality second.

Still, though, I kinda liked the little guy. (1.0 broke it for obvious reasons. Alas.)

-Upsilon

[moogoob]

I've just barely gotten a spaceplane to orbit. No payload, just the spaceplane.

[richfiles]

Regarding space planes and large payloads... anyone ever consider designing a split plane?

Basically, have a nose and a tail that decouple from the payload, which wouldn't need to sit inside any fuselage, cause it'd BE the fuselage. The trick to the design, is that the nose and tail, and possibly wings would need to all feature probe cores, RCS, and docking ports, and be able to reassemble in space, and be balanced enough to make a landing. I don't know if I've ever seen that type of deign before. At worst, you maybe have a few separators or decouplers and fairing bases that get discarded in orbit. I'd trust a decoupler mated up against a docking port, with some struts for stability, more than loose docking ports. With less mass on the decent, hopefully just the docking ports hold up.

Sadly, I can not try this, as my KSP is on an external drive, and my computer's USB 3 driver is derped at the moment...

Edited September 7, 2015 by richfiles

[GoSlash27]

Val,

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Val again.

I like the Skylon!

Best,

-Slashy

[Val]

Val,

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Val again.

I like the Skylon!

Best,

-Slashy

Thanks

I get the same message trying to rep your Rapier Cheat Sheet

[Val]

The biggest thing I ever got to orbit with a cargo spaceplane weighed about a ton. Given, I've only ever made one cargo SSTO, and it was designed with cuteness first and functionality second.

Still, though, I kinda liked the little guy. (1.0 broke it for obvious reasons. Alas.)

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

http://i.imgur.com/HN2bE6m.jpg

-Upsilon

Couldn't help myself. Had to make a 1.0.4 version of that cute thing.

It's not quite as compact as your old one. And it lacks RCS and probably can't carry more than a couple ton of cargo.

Maybe you can make something useful out of it? Hope you like it.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Vallius]

My optimism! Haven't gotten around to unlocking Rapier engines yet.

[Starhawk]

I managed to successfully (almost perfect - all the kerbals survived, anyway) orbit my prototype Mk3 spaceplane carrying a full orange tank.

Ugliest damn thing.

Happy landings!

[jmp470]

After a long frustrating design phase, I was able to get a SSTO to space and orbit today. I'm in a science career and don't even have half the science trees unlocked. It was something I could not stop trying to do. I want to Build the GI Joe Night Raven, with a modular ship on top for exploring the stars.

I think that would be awesome!