How to get to other bases on Kerbin.

[Lemurs of Kerbin]

So, recently in KSP, I have been trying to get to the other bases on Kerbin e.g. Baikerbanur/KSC2 or Nye Island (Excluding the old airfield). I have tried using stock planes (one case I used a modified Aeris 4A), but i can barely get to 2/3 of the way to Baikerbanur. I've tried using rockets, but they always land way off target. I need some ideas on what to build to reach these bases. Heres a map

Edited February 10, 2017 by Lemurs of Kerbin

[Tex_NL]

Go high, go fast.
At higher altitudes engines use less fuel.

And do not bring items/resources you do not need. Strip the cockpit from monoprop and definitely remove all oxidizer if you're using only jet engines.

[Leafbaron]

I would suggest building a plane with either whiplashes or panthers and lots of fuel. These engines can operate efficiently from 16-20km at speeds of 1100 m/s or greater. should be able to get there with no problems. 

[Spricigo]

I would go with a suborbital spaceplane, probably 2 stages: fist with SRBs, second with Jets.

Also would iterate the design to be able to launch it with minimal control input and reliably reach the target area.

[Tex_NL]

40 minutes ago, Leafbaron said:

... with either whiplashes or panthers and lots of fuel.

Panther in dry mode; yes. In wet mode absolutely not. 'Wet' Panthers are indeed very powerful but also ferociously thirsty.
I would suggest the Whiplash. Once it gets up to speed and altitude no airbreathing engine can defeat it.

[Gaarst]

 What Tex_NL said: go fast and high. This plane can go around the planet in a bit over an hour, and has enough fuel to make it to Kerbaikonur and back without the drop-tanks. Replace the cabins by fuel tanks or structural fuselage if you need even greater range.

[Leafbaron]

thanks @Tex_NL I meant to include that in my response. 

[Tex_NL]

On roughly 2/3rd its fuel this little speed demon can get to Nye Island, which is about half way across the planet.

As you can see @Lemurs of Kerbin. It is not really that hard to reach those places. But you do have to know how.
Keep trying, keep experimenting. And most of all: keep failing. As long as you understand WHY you failed there is no better teacher than failure.

Edited February 10, 2017 by Tex_NL

[DerekL1963]

Solar powered airships.
 

[Lemurs of Kerbin]

Ok. Thx 4 the info. BTW Tex_NL, how fast can it go?

Edited February 10, 2017 by Lemurs of Kerbin

[Tex_NL]

10 minutes ago, Lemurs of Kerbin said:

Ok. Thx 4 the info. BTW Tex_NL, how fast can it go?

Depending on altitude (20-22km) about 1200m/s.

[Lemurs of Kerbin]

ok.

[dangerhamster]

Airship Airship Airship!

All the home comforts including a cafeteria, plus the remote excursion module. Solar powered with enough EC onboard to cruise through the night.

Total cost of trip? Err zero.

[nascarlaser1]

Why go with airplanes, when you can go in a big fat rover!

 

or an even better* idea, if you are good with precision landings, build a space station with a bunch of 1 or 2 man lander pods (don't need much, just the command pod and a few parachutes. The landing legs aren't need on Kerbin) and then just fire off the little pods and retro burn till you hit the atmosphere, and let your self fall onto your target!

 

* by better, I mean "fun". My idea is MUCH harder.

[Mr. Me]

The KF5 is great for reaching far bases, as it can get to Baikerbanur in about 15-20 minutes cruising at 20km.

[bewing]

Gotta disagree with Tex_NL a little bit. A well-designed (low drag, MK1-based) plane with a panther in wet mode can easily circumnavigate Kerbin. But it takes a while.

[Spacetraindriver]

I was able to get to Balkinour (idk how to seek it) with what was it called, the stock Osprey?

[Lemurs of Kerbin]

I tried once with a modded Osprey, but it went down 2/3 of the way to Baikerbanur

Edited February 13, 2017 by Lemurs of Kerbin

[Lemurs of Kerbin]

On 2/10/2017 at 3:13 PM, nascarlaser1 said:

Why go with airplanes, when you can go in a big fat rover!

 

or an even better* idea, if you are good with precision landings, build a space station with a bunch of 1 or 2 man lander pods (don't need much, just the command pod and a few parachutes. The landing legs aren't need on Kerbin) and then just fire off the little pods and retro burn till you hit the atmosphere, and let your self fall onto your target!

 

* by better, I mean "fun". My idea is MUCH harder.

A rover would take too long. And plus, the only route is through the north polar ice cap. And the command pods are harder to control once in the atmosphere. And the odds of being off target are large.

[KerikBalm]

On 2/10/2017 at 6:43 PM, Tex_NL said:

Panther in dry mode; yes. In wet mode absolutely not. 'Wet' Panthers are indeed very powerful but also ferociously thirsty.
I would suggest the Whiplash. Once it gets up to speed and altitude no airbreathing engine can defeat it.

I'm going to have to contest both these points, and they are related.

#1) The "wet" panthers are no more thirsty than the Turboramjets - they both have the same static thrust, and they both have the same Isp. Their thrust curves are also very similar below mach 2

They are like a Whiplash with more thrust vectoring, less mass, and a much lower maximum speed.

The main difference is the efficiency gain of suborbital trajectories - after all, once you get to orbit, you can cover "infinite" distance over the ground. Turboramjets get you higher and faster. The faster you go, the less lift the wings need to generate, so you can go higher, and ultimately you have less losses to atmospheric drag.

With the panther, you'll be stuck lower and slower, and you'll spend more fuel fighting atmospheric drag.

- Which brings us to point #2)

"the Whiplash. Once it gets up to speed and altitude no airbreathing engine can defeat it."

I'm not so sure about this. I'll grant you that I do like the whiplash for suborbital space-planes - but that's mainly for a number of perks.

* The Isp of 4000 vs 3200 is nice once you arrive in the vicinity of the target and want to loiter/search a bit.

* The better static TWR is nice for takeoff and maneuvering over the target area.

* The alternator is nice for electric charge generation.

However, the Rapier will get your plane higher and faster - which can lead to significant reductions in atmospheric losses. You spend more fuel per unit dV, but you don't need to "buy" as much dV because you should have less dV losses to atmospheric drag when travelling along a higher and faster suborbital trajectory. This may make up for the lower Isp but I don't have solid numbers. Just one dash to maximum speed may very well send your plane halfway across kerbin by the time it bleeds off speed again (assuming you maintain a modest AoA after reaching apoapsis)

For the same reasons that you recommend the whiplash over the wet panther despite both engines having the same Isp and static thrust (and very similar thrusts below mach 2), the rapier deserves consideration here despite using 25% more fuel per unit (kN*s) of thrust.

Edited February 14, 2017 by KerikBalm