Eeloo SSTO

[Mk3 Maniac]

Dear Everyone,

I am wondering how to get to eeloo, I have made SSTOs that can make it to orbit with 6,900 meters a second in orbit, some with even over 7,000. The problem is landing, some of these crafts weigh around 350 or 400 tons, some 300 ton SSTOs have 3 nervas. The crafts I have created can't land on the Mun, what should I do to guarantee that the next SSTO I make will land on Eeloo. But another question I have is do I have to sacrifice delta V to land on Eeloo? Also I if you are wondering why I am using Mk3 parts, there is two reasons, the first reason is the mk3 cargo bay, it can carry rovers with wheels with decent wheels that are not made of space tooth picks or scraps from bouncy houses, the second reason is in my name, I LOVE THE MK3 PARTS, they hold lots of fuel and are just generally big, also making Mk3 SSTOs are easier for me than mk2 or mk1 sstos.  

Here is the SSTO

Craft File:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3I_z4W2q1AGSjVIZEgxbjBrQ1U/view?usp=sharing

Sincerely, Mk3 Maniac

 

Edited June 11, 2017 by Mk3 Maniac
Not Specific

[Kyle Worden]

Can't say I've made a SSTO to Eeloo, however, an alternate solution may be to create a SSTO with a drill/ISRU. Land on Minmus, refuel, then make your maneuver for Eeloo. This should save on craft size, since you are eliminating the orbital insertion DV that your craft would normally have.

[Mk3 Maniac]

12 hours ago, shadoxfilms said:

Can't say I've made a SSTO to Eeloo, however, an alternate solution may be to create a SSTO with a drill/ISRU. Land on Minmus, refuel, then make your maneuver for Eeloo. This should save on craft size, since you are eliminating the orbital insertion DV that your craft would normally have.

Dear Shadoxfilms

I actually Prefer to go on a slightly realistic approach and not use a IRSU.

And to everyone else I also like to use a Mk3 SSTO because they can carry small rovers.

Sincerely, Mk3 Maniac.

Edited June 9, 2017 by Mk3 Maniac

[qzgy]

You could downsive perhaps. There was this video from Bradley Whistance

Uses Ion engines instead of NERVs

[Pecan]

23 hours ago, Mk3 Maniac said:

Dear Everyone,

I am wondering how to get to eeloo, I have made SSTOs that can make it to orbit with 6,900 meters a second in orbit, some with even over 7,000. The problem is landing, some of these crafts weigh around 350 or 400 tons, some 300 ton SSTOs have 3 nervas. The crafts I have created can't land on the Mun, what should I do to guarantee that the next SSTO I make will land on Eeloo. But another question I have is do I have to sacrifice delta V to land on Eeloo?

Sincerely, Mk3 Maniac

Single Stage To Orbit.
So, you launch from Eeloo into orbit and ... I don't understand what Mun has to do with anything.

Edited June 9, 2017 by Pecan

[bewing]

It's a question of having enough TWR to land on an airless body -- the Mun is for comparison purposes.

[Aegolius13]

You've hit the nail on the head already - TWR and delta v are an inherent tradeoff.  If you add more nukes to increase TWR, your delta v will always go down due to additional dry mass.   

Since the Mun and Eeloo are pretty close in terms of gravity,  using the Mun as a testbed makes sense.   But are you simulating all the fuel you'll burn getting to Eeloo?  That will make your ship lighter and increase TWR.  

As far as ways to improve,  you're already using the most efficient engines outside of ions.  The major option is probably to lose any possible dry mass.  A pic would help diagnose if there's anything you can cut down on.  

One other thing you may want to look at is using gravity assists to save delta v on your trip.   This might allow you to carry less fuel or more nukes,  and thus improve TWR.  But they'll probably take a very long time. 

Edited June 10, 2017 by Aegolius13

[Mk3 Maniac]

Dear Aegolius13

I updated my question with a craft file and Pictures!

Sincerely, Mk3 Maniac

[Spricigo]

On 08/06/2017 at 11:22 PM, Mk3 Maniac said:

And to everyone else I also like to use a Mk3 SSTO because they can carry small rovers.

Just notice this bit. 

A small rover can also be carried on a 2,5m service bay,  MK2 cargo bay or 1,25m fairing.* Also there is the option to taxing around in the spaceplane itself. 

Anyways,  personal taste is as acceptable as any other motive to your design choices. But, since you asked for help, be clear about your design goals.  Someone may waste a lot of work to give you a insatisfactory craft otherwise. 

You want a single stage spaceplane,  capable of land and return from Eeloo.

 But what else? How many Kerbals? Are command seats ok? Which science experiments?  Capable of visiting how many biomes?  Those are questions you need to answer to help us to help you. 

 

*1,25m service bay?  I don't know.  Someone up to the challenge? 

[Mk3 Maniac]

11 hours ago, Spricigo said:

Anyways,  personal taste is as acceptable as any other motive to your design choices. But, since you asked for help, be clear about your design goals.  Someone may waste a lot of work to give you a insatisfactory craft otherwise.

Dear Spricigo

I have updated my question with these thoughts in mind.

Sincerely Mk3 Maniac

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

Mk3 Maniac,  if you want to just go to Eeloo and back in a single stage without mining, you can use ion engines for the transfers, and nuclear engines for Kerbin orbit circularisation and R.A.P.I.E.Rs for kerbin ascent, that is for a small Mk.1 SSTO. That was done in Hypnautical's youtube video "SSTO to Laythe and Back Twice Without Refueling"

Link: Video

Bottle Rocketeer 500

[Aegolius13]

On 6/10/2017 at 8:17 PM, Mk3 Maniac said:

Dear Aegolius13

I updated my question with a craft file and Pictures!

Sincerely, Mk3 Maniac

I played around a little with the plane.  Nice design!  Think it's bigger than any plane I've gotten to orbit.  I don't see a lot of changes to up your range, but here are a few.  The general idea was to try to lose a little dry weight, lose a couple Rapiers, and add at least one nuke. 

-You might be able to lose those precoolers (or replace with liquid fuel fuselages), especially if you can cut down on the number of Rapiers by a little, and/or put a shock cone on the front of the plane.    Despite the part description, the precooler is just an intake and does not do anything useful if you have enough air from elsewhere. Shock cones can feed a fairly ridiculous number of engines.  They might sputter a bit until you hit 10 m/s or so on the runway, but you should be good from there.

-Those Big S elevons near your middle engine clusters are not doing a lot to help you pitch.  They work like levers, so when they're near the center of mass, you get very little leverage.  One thing you could try is to leave just one set of elevons there (as far outside as possible), set them for roll control only, and then beef up the number or size of control surfaces you have at the forward and back ends of the plane.  This might allow you get the same control authority but for lower part count, mass or drag.  

-Similarly, the canards you have on the front could potentially go further forward, which would give them better leverage.

-I believe those Mk3 engines mounts have a reputation for being draggy, and a bit heavy.  And I know those 1.25 bicouplers are quite draggy.  There lots of potential ways to set up the engines, but I was thinking maybe use the 2.5m quad-adapters behind some Mk 3 to 2.5m adapters) on the side nacelles, holding 4 Rapiers each, and a similar 2.5 m quad-adapter on the very back (replacing the the 2.5 to 1.25m adapter fuel tank) for 4 nukes.  

-Those Mk 1 fuselages you have your landing gear attached to are probably adding drag without a significant benefit.  I would either get rid of them, and mount the landing gear on the wings, or put engines at the back (e.g., if you need a place to stash 2 more Rapiers or nukes).

-That tilted cockpit at the front looks awesome, but is adding more drag than if you had it inline, i.e. at the very front behind your nosecone.

-The shielded docking port is a relatively draggy nosecone. If you don't need to dock with it, or need the extreme temp tolerance, you could replace with an NCS adapter + small nose cone, a shock cone, or a pointy fairing that you never deploy.  Those can all do at least 2400 degrees, I believe.  

Making all those changes, I tried taking off with 10 Rapiers (all amidships) and 4 nukes at the back.  I did not quite have enough power, but it was close, and I think I added some extra rocket fuel with additional adapter tanks.  Hopefully you should need less LFO with a slightly lighter / mores streamlined design.  

 

EDIT: one more thing I forgot to mention: rotating the tips of your wings up a few degrees (aka wing incidence) can save you a little drag in flight, and make it easier to take off.  

All that said, you're probably not going to see a dramatic boost in TWR or delta-v.  Your design is already pretty darn efficient; it's just that an Eeloo and back mission with no refueling is so far that it's pressing the mathematical limits of what you can do with these engines.  As mentioned, ions or fancy gravity assist maneuvers could help, but this looks like a real toughie.  

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by Aegolius13