AeroGav Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 20 hours ago, Geschosskopf said: I'll go Dream-Chaser before RAPIER when I'm in that sort of mood But usually I'm not, and my airplane tech usually lags WAY behind my rocket tech anywa For me this is the worst of both worlds because you have to be proficient with rockets, gravity turns, staging, and all that, and be able to fly. Would rather do a design with droppable tanks/jet engines under the wings if i can't get the performance i need early game pure ssto. A plane that is carried all the way to space on a chemical rocket is basically a capsule with a lot of dead weight and a tendency to destabilize the aerodynamics of your rocket - why bother at all ? OTOH if you try using a solid launched lower stage with a transition to a low thrust , efficient engine like a terrier or a nerv for the upper, with wings to support the low twr - the gravity turn is a nightmare because the change in twr is so extreme. Also if you maximise the efficiency of the upper stage by adding incidence to the wings , they'll constantly try make your rocket pitch up when going fast in the lower atmosphere. Here's a really poor example , from when i was new to KSP (in the days when rocket engines drained from the nearest tank, you had to mess around locking tanks to not end up unbalanced - ugh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spricigo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 49 minutes ago, Geschosskopf said: There have been a number of polls on spaceplane usage over the years. There is also scads of observational data from just watching the forum, especially "What Did You Do in KSP Today?" and Mission Reports. Also, all the questions from folks who've been playing quite a while but now want help with spaceplanes. So, as I said, whatever people say on the forums. That is not strong enough base for a conclusion. -It may be the case that most players just start to play with spaceplanes after getting more experience and many of those that say "I'm a rocket guy" will be spaceplane enthusiasts in the future. -People may recognize that sometimes a spaceplane is 'the right tool for the job" and use it in those occasions, even if they launch one spaceplane every 50 launch that is enough to make then frequent users. They don't need to go out of their way to use spaceplanes for the cases where -People that try spaceplanes and get satisfied with the result don't create a thread asking for help. -There is a lot of people that play the game without ever accessing the forum. Their play style can be completely different of those that access. The list go on but the point is: you made assumptions and is defending it as facts. And even if those were facts there is no logic link that leads to the conclusion that one should choose between rockets only or spaceplanes only. Between Black and White there a lot of Shades of Gray*. *over 50 easily. 32 minutes ago, AeroGav said: For me this is the worst of both worlds because you have to be proficient with rockets, gravity turns, staging, and all that, and be able to fly. The tricky is to build a plane that can still fly despite all the compromises you made to launch it like a rocket. The best 'shuttle alike' are often terrible as rocket and as plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateisKerbal Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 Anand I started a flame war. Thanks, you already answered my question, please stop fighting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geschosskopf Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Spricigo said: So, as I said, whatever people say on the forums. That is not strong enough base for a conclusion. Well, given that's all the data there is, and all there will ever be, you'll have to take it. Sorry you can't take reality staring you in the face. Look, I don't know what caused you to take ANYTHING I've said as a personal attack, or some slander on your chosen way of playing KSP. I'm not going to apologize because I did nothing wrong, but I'm not going to waste any more time putting up with you, either. There's no denying it takes 20-30 minutes to get a spaceplane to orbit, and that's only after many failures beforehand, each of which took about that long to play out. This compares to 10 minutes to design a rocket and 5 minutes to fly it, and it works the 1st time. Most players find this aspect of spaceplanes a huge turn-off. This is not up for debate. Sorry you're incapable of understanding this simple fact, but that's not my problem. Good day, Sir! NOTE: This in no way decreases my admiration for your work. Edited October 9, 2017 by Geschosskopf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spricigo Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 39 minutes ago, NateisKerbal said: Anand I started a flame war. Thanks, you already answered my question, please stop fighting! Don't worry, unless it starts to look like we'll reach an agreement about the "proper way" to play the game. Arguing about preferences is "business as usual" around there. That said, I hope you can show us an improved craft the better suits your expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spricigo Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 4 hours ago, Geschosskopf said: Look, I don't know what caused you to take ANYTHING I've said as a personal attack, or some slander on your chosen way of playing KSP. I'm double surprised by the fact you think that's my motivation. No, just happens that my experience and perspective is inconsistent with that idea of spaceplanes being super-hard. I can't even feel flattered by that idea of an 'admirable work' of mine. At most I have a bunch of crafts I'm not too ashamed to share. 4 hours ago, Geschosskopf said: There's no denying it takes 20-30 minutes to get a spaceplane to orbit, and that's only after many failures beforehand, each of which took about that long to play out. This compares to 10 minutes to design a rocket and 5 minutes to fly it, and it works the 1st time. Ok. This thing took about a hour to design (including 2 test flights) 600funds/trip, carry 4kerbals. 5min to get to 75x30km, coast for more 7 (at 4x physical warp) and circularize. 12 < 20 Mind you, that's just a regular spaceplane from my hangar, designed months ago. Not something that I assembled to prove a point. Also is an example of what I said earlier, it have several of the 'flaws' you pointed (high tech, limited crew capacity, more time to achieve orbit, ...) but still a good tool for the task I use it for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanamonde Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 OP says his/her question is answered, and this thread stopped being about the original problem a while back. Time to move on, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts