Jump to content

Early Career Mode SSTO Attempt (Challenge?)


Recommended Posts

A story to conclude my night.

So this is my current tech tree:


And this is my space plane, designed with whatever parts I can use. (Mods included are KW Rocketry and Heat Resistant Parts):


Based on my current funds and lack of SPH/Runway upgrades, the following events took place (in chronological order):




I brushed against the pathway upon lift off, taking out my rocket engine^^^^


Turning around because career mode+no reverts^^^^^


Tried to screenshot the abort sequence, but you can see things didn't quite work out. ^^^^

I couldn't pass up on how pleased with my design I was. At least I saved Jeb. :cool: Anyone else had any luck with early career space planes? Is it even possible?

EDIT: I meant space planes, not SSTO. Oops.

Edited by jondugger123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a picture of one of my early career SSTOs:


Very easy to fly and get into orbit.

So to answer your question: Yes, early career SSTOs are easily possible.

Ah, I guess I've misinterpreted SSTO's. I think SSTO and space planes come to mind. My main objective was to get a space plane into orbit, then. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my low tech SSTO, horizontal takeoff and landing, without science it has ~400 m/s dV on orbit (can be used as rescue ship). Abort system equipped, in case of water landing or rapid unplanned disassembling.



That is definitely thinking outside of the box, had used plenty of rocket SSTO before but they have always been vtol tail landers.

After 1.0 its harder to hit the spaceport

How does it reenter and land?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The confusion mostly comes from the fact that Kerbin's atmosphere (also the gravity does start at 9.81m/s^2 but is reduced more quickly I believe) allows a vertically launched rocket to be an SSTO whereas the only "plausible" (using that term very loosely) design in real life (for Earth at least) is a horizontally launched spacecraft that makes use of the higher efficiency of jet engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jet spaceplanes are really inefficient (read vanishingly difficult) until you have the Whiplash. Even then there's a legitimate argument that rockets are generally less troublesome and perhaps cheaper.

The problem is the Wheesley just doesn't have the performance for carrying rocket motors to speeds and altitudes high enough to make significant fuel savings over a vertical launch. All-rocket spaceplanes are an alternative, but again, you'd probably use less fuel by leaving the wings behind and making a vertical launch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...