1.0.5, harder to make spaceplanes?

[herbal space program]

What I was trying to say is that achieving a 6000 SSTO is a game breaker. It makes any other design choice a mistake. Which I think is the opposite of what the game is about at his very core: problem solving. If you agree on this, you see that a 6000 SSTO solve all the problems the game throw at you. So it is game over, end of the game. And a game like KSP should not have a end. Of course all of that is my opinion and once again I agree with everything you said: frustration, etc.

I don’t want to belabor this too much, because what’s done is done, but honestly I don’t think having the very outside of the envelope for SSTOs being 6km/s of low TWR dV on LKO actually breaks the game. That SSTO may be able to reach any SOI in the game from Kerbin, but I don’t think it can even land on Moho, much less return from there, and it certainly can’t land on Tylo at all. Vall may or may not be possible, and Dres and Mun are doable but painfully. Not sure about Duna, but I guess that’s moot now. It also takes forever to make orbit, has an annoyingly low TWR, and has no docking port, no lights, no science capability, no ISRU, no comms, no cargo capacity, and room for only one Kerbal. It also flies pretty poorly. In fact, except for the one application of trying to land on and return from as many bodies as possible on one tank of gas, I’d say it’s actually a pretty lousy design choice! Anyway, the new air is the new air. I don’t know if the devs actually meant to nerf SSTOs with this complex update to the drag model, but that’s apparently the way it worked out. So much for my big plans. I imagine that when 1.1 comes out with the new physics engine, everything will change yet again, so I think I’m done trying to optimize SSTO’s until at least then. When they do finally settle on a model for their air, I for one hope it’s closer to 1.0.4 than this is.

[panzer1b]

I don’t want to belabor this too much, because what’s done is done, but honestly I don’t think having the very outside of the envelope for SSTOs being 6km/s of low TWR dV on LKO actually breaks the game. That SSTO may be able to reach any SOI in the game from Kerbin, but I don’t think it can even land on Moho, much less return from there, and it certainly can’t land on Tylo at all. Vall may or may not be possible, and Dres and Mun are doable but painfully. Not sure about Duna, but I guess that’s moot now. It also takes forever to make orbit, has an annoyingly low TWR, and has no docking port, no lights, no science capability, no ISRU, no comms, no cargo capacity, and room for only one Kerbal. It also flies pretty poorly. In fact, except for the one application of trying to land on and return from as many bodies as possible on one tank of gas, I’d say it’s actually a pretty lousy design choice! Anyway, the new air is the new air. I don’t know if the devs actually meant to nerf SSTOs with this complex update to the drag model, but that’s apparently the way it worked out. So much for my big plans. I imagine that when 1.1 comes out with the new physics engine, everything will change yet again, so I think I’m done trying to optimize SSTO’s until at least then. When they do finally settle on a model for their air, I for one hope it’s closer to 1.0.4 than this is.

Im of the same opinion, one, im kinda annoyed that most of my sci-fiy craft have been suffering with every update. Ok, i understand that SSTOs donw work in reality, and you aint gonna take one to jupiter (unless the government gives us the intergalactic UFOs they keep at area-51 ). But why cant those of us that arent obsessed with reality to have our sci-fy and or fun craft back?

1.0.4, was at least in my opinion pretty good for everyone. The heat stopped you from doing stupid stuff liek coming in straight at the center of kerbin from 30km/s speeds, but it did not really impose excessive limits, and allowed most designs to work reasonably well under most conditions. it was just perfect, you wouldnt really fry if you were careful about the ascent, and you could reach reasonable but not orbital velocities on jets (1600m/s could be done with very sleek designs, high TWR, and patience). As much as i loved the 0.90 jets, even i agree that getting to a 500km AP was complete bull without any space engines. Heat in 1.0.4 was just perfect, it felt balanced, challenging, but not annoying or excessively limiting for any particular design.

As for the new drag, it seems to ONLY punish SSTO or spaceplane builds. At lower speeds and altitudes, i have experienced FAR LESS drag, and its easier to get even badly designed planes to supersonic or even hypersonic near seal level. As for rockets, most of teh time you just dont spend much time at those altitudes anyways (and most of teh time you have enough TWR that you just dont care about the somewhat higher drag). The only craft that needs to spend alot of time around 20-40km are spaceplanes as that is the region where you are doing most of your accelerating to orbital speeds, especially if you have lowish TWR. In 1.0.4, you could both get up to a higher speed before you needed to burn very inefficient rockets, and well, now you just cannot go the same speeds, so its ~150 or so less practical dV if you dont even count the losses you will take to drag as you slowly try to push through the atmo (which seems to have cut around 1.5K dV if not more from some extremely low TWR vessels that were like 30t pushed by a single nuke).

As herbal said, im also not too happy that every single update seems to break most of my craft. Pure space vessels aside (those just might need a redesign of the lifter at best), every atmospheric craft has needed to be rebuilt, some from ground up, to work at all in the new aero. Im not usually one to complain as i tend to just adapt and develop new methods to achieve the same things i had before, but this whole cycle of every update does major, and i mean major tweaks to the aerodynamics is getting a little annoying.

I actually think ill take a break from SSTOs and focus on other craft. SSTOs were for me a real challenge and alot of fun, but until teh aero is one, somewhat consistent, and 2, arguably fun and balanced, i thing ill finish redesigning my latest good SSTO, and then just use it sparingly in combat since it was never particularly good at that anyways, given only 2 missiles that were mounted internally, and highish part counts too.

Edited November 12, 2015 by panzer1b

[Streetwind]

Streetwind,

According to my tech tree .cfg for 1.05, hypersonic flight is a tech level 7 node, which means that the Whiplash hasn't moved. Did that change with the silent update?

Best,

-Slashy

Depends on how you're counting - whether you consider the 'Start' node tier 0 or tier 1.

The upper tier aircraft progression goes Supersonic Flight -> High Altitude Flight -> Hypersonic Flight -> Aerospace Tech. That's the same between both versions - I compared my old 1.0.4 save against my freshly downloaded 1.0.5 instance. The Whiplash used to be in High Altitude Flight, but it no longer is, it moved up one into Hypersonic Flight.

You can also see this on the KSP wiki, which has not yet been updated for 1.0.5 (as of the time of this writing). That page counts 'Start' as tier 1, and therefore High Altitude Flight as 7, and Hypersonic Flight as 8. So I stuck to that terminology.

[KerikBalm]

Just an update... that big SSTO I posted 2 pages ago... I can get it to orbit... but I can't get it down without overheating the FAT-455 wings, or doing a large retroburn which of course means i need to reserve fuel for aid retroburn, and thus the payload fraction is reduced.

I've got plans for a redesign that will get rid of parts with <2000C heat tolerance... but I'm now afraid of what Eve will be like

[GoSlash27]

Streetwind,

Yeah, you're right. The Whiplash has been pushed from TL7 to TL8 and the Panther is now introduced at TL6.

The good news is the Panther still works for spaceplanes. The bad news is you're stuck with fairly crappy intake options. The plain old nacelle should be the best option for feeding the Panther. You'll need more LF&O to deal with the lower switchover speed/ altitude, but it's still workable.

On the bright side, you will get the best intakes when you finally pick up the Whiplash.

Best,

-Slashy

[Kokanee]

#SQUADsWarOnSSTOs

[Pthigrivi]

Jeez guys. Its not that hard. Adapt!

[Kokanee]

Jeez guys. Its not that hard. Adapt!

Okay Neville Chamberlain

[tewpie]

6000m/s dv sstos are still more than feasible

[Red Iron Crown]

Okay Neville Chamberlain

Be hyperbolic about Squad's "War on SSTOs" if you must (ridiculous though it is), but please don't disparage other users this way.

[luizopiloto]

They Fixed body lift.... SSTOs will perform like in 1.0.4 again...

[Choctofliatrio]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they fixed body lift in a less-announced patch. So, yay?

[herbal space program]

Jeez guys. Its not that hard. Adapt!

I really liked the way the air was in 1.0.4, and I think it’s quite OK, in fact I think it’s important, for me to say so here. How else are the devs going to decide upon their final physics model except through feedback from this community of dedicated players? Every voice in this community should be heard, for their own good as much as anybody else’s. After all, they’re making a game that they want to be fun for as many people as possible. If you think this new air is awesome, then by all means you should express that opinion. But just telling people they should adapt is basically dismissing and invalidating their opinions. It’s a game, it’s not reality. Nobody’s opinion of what it’s like to play it is therefore any more valid than anybody else’s. I think everybody here should remember that.

- - - Updated - - -

They Fixed body lift.... SSTOs will perform like in 1.0.4 again...

TThe loss of body lift was only part of the issue. The main thing is they thickened the 20-40km band of the atmosphere such that a lot of SSTOs trying to make orbit with low TWR RAPIER-nuke configurations can’t do it anymore without shipping quite a bit more oxidizer. That considerably lowers the maximum range of SSTOs in general. Probably not an issue so many people have concerns about, but it affected my play significantly.

Edited November 13, 2015 by herbal space program

[iospace]

Honestly, the more I play with it, the more I understand what needs to be done to counter-act the changes. I got one of my single-engine SSTOs with 800 LF and 440 LOX into a 96x96km orbit with more than enough LOX to deorbit, and it's a 1.0.4 design only using stock parts and FAR. No fuel or LOX additions. All I changed? The throttle. Still followed my old flight path, just adjusted the throttle at key points.

Somehow managed to get it back through the atmosphere in one piece on the return trip, only to bungle the landing. Going to test it some more tomorrow.

[panzer1b]

TThe loss of body lift was only part of the issue. The main thing is they thickened the 20-40km band of the atmosphere such that a lot of SSTOs trying to make orbit with low TWR RAPIER-nuke configurations can’t do it anymore without shipping quite a bit more oxidizer. That considerably lowers the maximum range of SSTOs in general. Probably not an issue so many people have concerns about, but it affected my play significantly.

The only way ive found to effectively not fry and or fail to make orbit is to maximize speed to redlining the heat bar around 5km, and then slowly angle up to ~30 degrees, ejecting at at a minimum of 1300m/s before lighting nuckes/rapier rocket. This will get me above 40km before i start to really burn to orbital speeds, so it makes it possible to do, but that apprach is unbelieveable less efficient then the old 1650m/s at 20km and then light nuke and slowly speed up to orbital while climbing really slowly.

Honestly, the more I play with it, the more I understand what needs to be done to counter-act the changes. I got one of my single-engine SSTOs with 800 LF and 440 LOX into a 96x96km orbit with more than enough LOX to deorbit, and it's a 1.0.4 design only using stock parts and FAR. No fuel or LOX additions. All I changed? The throttle. Still followed my old flight path, just adjusted the throttle at key points.

Somehow managed to get it back through the atmosphere in one piece on the return trip, only to bungle the landing. Going to test it some more tomorrow.

If the goal of your SSTO is orbit, then the only thing 1.0.5 changes if that you get somewhat worse payload fractions. To tell you the truth, getting a SSTO to LKO and back is not that difficult, and this update doesnt really kill or even affect pure LKO craft too much really. Really most of the people complaining (myself included) were building some truly impressive range vessels (like above 6000dV, heck, someone made one with over 9000 dV if i recall correctly using ions). That said, most of the old rapier+nuke designs are majorly screwed over since you just cannot use the nuke alone to get into orbit. Im not saying some good designs cant be done, but for now, a craft that had OVER 6000dV in 1.0.4 (with some minor tweaks to make it actually get into LKO in the 1st place), gets at a maximum ~4500 dV. Im not saying that isnt acceptable, yeah, it is enough for most things i use the craft for, but honestly, i see no reason why it shouldnt get the previous performance, which was already on the edge of what was possible.

And finally, why do so many people on here insist on bashing people who play the game differently on in a way that might not be akin to real life possibilities? Personally, i see absolutely nothing fun in recreating reality in KSP, yes, i do enjoy a challenge, but if i want to relive reality ill just step away from the computer . Long range SSTOs are something ive always enjoyed making, even if they would never exist in real life or whatever. If you gusy insist on everything realistic, go download RO, personally, its a boring mod since all it does is make getting anywhere harder, less fun, and it makes everything tedious. Its not a bad mod, but its not for me. So guys, if you are so strongly against SSTOs being capable of doing long range, or against SSTO in general as its "unrealistic", then noone is forcing you to make SSTOs or cram 20 tons of fuel in one so it can do a laythe roundtrip. That said, i see no reason those of us that enjoy such a concept (and myself build more sci-fy then anything else in KSP), to be deprived of the ability to do so. Yeah, i know thats kinda opinionated, but im just as free to play how i want as anyone else, and what i do honestly feel, is that the new changes in 1.0.5 to heat and drag make the game LESS FUN overall for the way i play it, im not gonna go as far as to revert to 1.0.4, or start editing physics.cfg files, ill adapt as many will, but i still think the cganges to the aeor have made the game worse overall for any spaceplane or SSTO style builds, especially long range ones, and it doesnt make any other designs actually perform any better.

Edited November 13, 2015 by panzer1b

[Pthigrivi]

No you're right Panzer, everybody plays differently and that's part of what's killer about KSP. I really like that heatshields and radiators now matter, but I can see how making that happen meant making heat harder on everything that wasn't a heatshield, which puts us where we are now. Im not sure it was even done to promote realism (though it moved a bit in that direction) as much as it was to emphasize the trade-offs between different re-entry strategies. In the end I think the changes were pretty minor and I happen to really like the spot they've landed, it does suck that it happens to have hit you guys disproportionately.

[iospace]

If the goal of your SSTO is orbit, then the only thing 1.0.5 changes if that you get somewhat worse payload fractions. To tell you the truth, getting a SSTO to LKO and back is not that difficult, and this update doesnt really kill or even affect pure LKO craft too much really. Really most of the people complaining (myself included) were building some truly impressive range vessels (like above 6000dV, heck, someone made one with over 9000 dV if i recall correctly using ions). That said, most of the old rapier+nuke designs are majorly screwed over since you just cannot use the nuke alone to get into orbit. Im not saying some good designs cant be done, but for now, a craft that had OVER 6000dV in 1.0.4 (with some minor tweaks to make it actually get into LKO in the 1st place), gets at a maximum ~4500 dV. Im not saying that isnt acceptable, yeah, it is enough for most things i use the craft for, but honestly, i see no reason why it shouldnt get the previous performance, which was already on the edge of what was possible.

Here's the thing though, I had never gotten that specific SSTO into that high of an orbit with that much dV left, even in 1.0.4's heat mechanics. It had always been around 80x80km, if not lower. That SSTO isn't even designed to carry things or visit other worlds, it's a challenge to see how little fuel I need to get into orbit and how high of an orbit.

Then again, FAR aerodynamics are different from stock, so take what I say with a grain of salt if you don't use FAR.

[herbal space program]

Here's the thing though, I had never gotten that specific SSTO into that high of an orbit with that much dV left, even in 1.0.4's heat mechanics. It had always been around 80x80km, if not lower. That SSTO isn't even designed to carry things or visit other worlds, it's a challenge to see how little fuel I need to get into orbit and how high of an orbit.

Then again, FAR aerodynamics are different from stock, so take what I say with a grain of salt if you don't use FAR.

I don’t really know how FAR interacts with the physics model in stock, but I’m pretty sure using it would make the transition different for you than for those working in pure stock. Looking at the changelog, my impression is that the higher drag in the upper reaches of the atmo is not because they actually increased its density up there, but because they’re modeling turbulence, etc. differently now, and that produces more drag in thin air and less in thick air. I haven’t actually checked this by taking up a barometer though. Also, if you are orbiting your ship with a relatively high TWR, like >= 0.5, then the new air really isn’t going to hurt you that much because you can blow through it without losing much steam. It’s really just the fine art of nudging a heavy, fuel-laden ship into orbit with a low TWR nuke engine that has suffered a grievous blow. These long-range designs were optimized to ship as little oxidizer as possible and make as much of the transition from air breathing to orbit as possible on the nukes. The way the air was in 1.0.4, their biggest hurdle was breaking the sound barrier. Now their biggest problem is their inability to push apoapsis up and out in the 30-40 km altitude zone against the increased drag. This can be straightforwardly fixed by shipping more oxidizer and/or less LF, but of course that way you end up losing quite a bit of range. That takes a number of really cool things one might have accomplished in 1.0.4 with fancy flying and good planning off the table. IMO these things were way too easy in 0.90, but in 1.0.4 I think they struck just the right balance of what was technically possible and what it took to achieve those things, making for some really rewarding challenges. Now the bar for those has been raised out of reach, which I guess some people regard as a good thing but it makes me sad.

[tewpie]

This was going to be my stock payload challenge entry, I modified it to to carry LF instead of ore, and added two LV-Ns. The LF is carried inside the cargo bay, and the LV-Ns aren't even being used at all because I'm lazy and didn't want to find a different ascent profile/fuel balance. So there's plenty of room for improvement.

22400 LF, 179.52t = 7600dv in 105x105 orbit

Can we stop the crying now?

[tseitsei]

This was going to be my stock payload challenge entry, I modified it to to carry LF instead of ore, and added two LV-Ns. The LF is carried inside the cargo bay, and the LV-Ns aren't even being used at all because I'm lazy and didn't want to find a different ascent profile/fuel balance. So there's plenty of room for improvement.

http://i.imgur.com/3VHFvcv.png

22400 LF, 179.52t = 7600dv in 105x105 orbit

Can we stop the crying now?

Best post of the thread.

Instead of crying and complaining people could and should be finding new ways of doing stuff. That's what makes ksp fun. Finding new efficient ways to do stuff that is hard to do.

This guy just made a spaceplane with 1.6kdv more dv than you guys just said would be impossible. So maybe time to stop crying and start designing and testing?

[Pecan]

...If the goal of your SSTO is orbit...

And finally, why do so many people on here insist on bashing people who play the game differently...

Well, yeah, the "TO" part means To Orbit, it's not hard to understand.

I made a SSTO rocket, a SSTO spaceplane and a couple of staged rockets yesterday. They worked as advertised so my question has to be why do so many people on here insist on ranting when someone moves their cheese?

While I can sympathise that the constant changes can be a pain, no program can be all things to all people and with KSP particularly, it wouldn't be fun if it was easy.

You, in particular, must know you're pushing what's possible in KSP (well done!) and life on the edge is always risky.

[herbal space program]

Best post of the thread.

Instead of crying and complaining people could and should be finding new ways of doing stuff. That's what makes ksp fun. Finding new efficient ways to do stuff that is hard to do.

This guy just made a spaceplane with 1.6kdv more dv than you guys just said would be impossible. So maybe time to stop crying and start designing and testing?

Why is it that you don't feel others are entitled to express their opinions? Does this thread need your policing? All you are doing is antagonizing people with this type of comment.

[panzer1b]

Well, yeah, the "TO" part means To Orbit, it's not hard to understand.

I made a SSTO rocket, a SSTO spaceplane and a couple of staged rockets yesterday. They worked as advertised so my question has to be why do so many people on here insist on ranting when someone moves their cheese?

While I can sympathise that the constant changes can be a pain, no program can be all things to all people and with KSP particularly, it wouldn't be fun if it was easy.

You, in particular, must know you're pushing what's possible in KSP (well done!) and life on the edge is always risky.

Why do people keep obsessing that the term SSTO means orbit and only to orbit? Yeah maybee im not using the term correctly, but i use the name SSTO for any single stage aircraft styled build, and i dont specify if its to orbit or to orbit and much farther out.

Guess i need to start using the term SSTDD, single stage to desired destination.....

And sorry if im sounding negative over the last few days, but 1.0.5 is really the first update that seems to affect every single thing i enjoy in KSP in a negative way. One, most of my SSTDDs are severely nerfed if not broken, and 2, armor is destroyed with the new engine thrust damage. Given that the majority of what i liked doing in KSP was military based, i think you can all understand why having armor destroyed (or well maybee not 100% destroyed but like SSTDDs severely limited) is not making me very happy. Really the only positive thing that came out of the update are bugfixes (at least in my eyes)

Edited November 13, 2015 by panzer1b

[herbal space program]

This was going to be my stock payload challenge entry, I modified it to to carry LF instead of ore, and added two LV-Ns. The LF is carried inside the cargo bay, and the LV-Ns aren't even being used at all because I'm lazy and didn't want to find a different ascent profile/fuel balance. So there's plenty of room for improvement.

http://i.imgur.com/3VHFvcv.png

22400 LF, 179.52t = 7600dv in 105x105 orbit

Can we stop the crying now?

That plane is not exactly useable for anything beyond what you did with it there, but I’ll admit that before saying the sorts of dV we got 1.0.4 aren’t possible, I should have investigated the Mk3 parts more. Of course that plane probably would have had 9km/s in the old aero system. Nonetheless, if I mentally put 4 more nukes on that plane to make it have a somewhat flyable TWR of 0.2 instead of a preposterous 0.067, hold my nose at the flagrant abuse of the cargo bay, put an actual Kerbal-containing cockpit on it, andgive it some solar panels, some reaction wheels, and some rcs, I expect you’ll end up with somewhere close to 6km/s on orbit with that monster. Still no landing legs though, so forget about any airless bodies with more gravity than Minmus. Anyway, I will now experiment with Mk3 some more before I pronounce the things I wanted to do before impossible. And thank you for at least offering something constructive to go with your "quit whining!".

[GoSlash27]

Why do people keep obsessing that the term SSTO means orbit and only to orbit? Yeah maybee im not using the term correctly, but i use the name SSTO for any single stage aircraft styled build, and i dont specify if its to orbit or to orbit and much farther out.

Guess i need to start using the term SSTDD, single stage to desired destination.....

And sorry if im sounding negative over the last few days, but 1.0.5 is really the first update that seems to affect every single thing i enjoy in KSP in a negative way. One, most of my SSTDDs are severely nerfed if not broken, and 2, armor is destroyed with the new engine thrust damage. Given that the majority of what i liked doing in KSP was military based, i think you can all understand why having armor destroyed (or well maybee not 100% destroyed but like SSTDDs severely limited) is not making me very happy. Really the only positive thing that came out of the update are bugfixes (at least in my eyes)

Panzer1b,

As you are no doubt aware, this sort of thing happens every time KSP is updated. In response, we collaborate and work out the new rules.

We did it with the death of intake spamming, unified lift/ drag ratios, and exaggerated heat effects. We'll overcome this just like we always do.

We'll adapt.

Best,

-Slashy