Jump to content

New Runway

Sgt Doomball
 Share

Runway  

32 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think KSP needs a new longer runway. (please explain if you want.)

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      21

Recommended Posts

Sgt Doomball

Sgt Doomball

Posted
Posted

Ok, imagine that you have this plane about the size of a B-52 in KSP. You start takeoff and you reach the end of the runway before you build enough lift. And you know the rest. What I think that KSP needs next is a runway that runs from 2 meters away from the monolith ending 4 meters from the water to 5 meters away from the hills. The runway will be added when a player in science or career mode levels up the main runway to level 2. the Runway will need to be slightly wider than the main runway for space/aircraft that can't fit or for launching 4 or more fighter sized aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tex_NL

Tex_NL

Posted
Posted

Oh poop. Here we go again.

The runway is already unrealisticly long. If your plane can't take off before the end your plane is at fault. Not the runway.

Before you reply: search the forum, search youtube. Not just browse, actually look and read!
First of all this has been discussed to death many times before. And secondly, people have been launching truly gargantuan planes for a long time. If they can do it so can you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MaximumThrust

MaximumThrust

Posted
Posted

It needs a longer runway? I think not. The runway is long enough to any reasonable plane, even with tweakscale. I've made SSTOs capable of delivering 150 ton to LKO, I only encountered problems when trying to go bigger than that. And I never needed to lift more than 100 ton to LKO.

Would be nice to have the option to have a longer runway, or a runway that ends with a slope or a cliff, without using laggy and heavy mods like Kerbal Constructs? Yes, would be fun to have something like this to test some SSTOs with smaller wings and lower TWR. But it's not needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EpicSpaceTroll139

EpicSpaceTroll139

Posted
Posted (edited)

In real life a maxed out B-52H in certain conditions can require a 2.65km takeoff run, which is a little bit longer than the KSC runway. But, that's in real life, with real aerodynamics.

Stock Kerbal aerodynamics allow planes to take off at much lower speeds than in real life, and our jet engines get better TWR as well, so taking off from the KSC runway really shouldn't be a problem.

I mean, I wouldn't reject another runway, but I don't think it's needed, and I feel like it would look like a scar on the face of the planet if made that big. Since Kerbin is 1/10th the radius of Earth, things become noticeable from orbit at a much smaller size.

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EpicSpaceTroll139

EpicSpaceTroll139

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Sgt Doomball said:

Well have ever done pure atmospheric airplanes and did you use solid boosters. That the problem when you are flying something that is like an sr-71 you don't get a long enough runway to generate lift.

And what if you are using FAR.

I happen to work with atmospheric craft quite a lot actually, and rarely have to use solid boosters to take off.

Why should the stock runway be changed to accommodate mod aerodynamics?

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EpicSpaceTroll139

EpicSpaceTroll139

Posted
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Sgt Doomball said:

the rocket was an attempt to start the scramjet engine but it failed and the rocket is ejected after launch

SCRAM = Supersonic Combustion RAMjet.

You have to be going about mach 4 before those engines start producing appreciable thrust, at least if they behave like what they're called. Lets say mach 2 for the scaled down KSP system, although I have no idea what that particular mod sets them to.

Point is, you're not going to get those things running on the runway, whether the runway is as long as you suggest or not.

I would advise ditching that giant rocket cart and adding other jet engines to bring the plane up to high altitude and speed, and possibly some small (1.25m) rocket boosters to give it a kick from there if needed to get to the operating range of the scramjets.

 

Edit: If you're going for an SR-71 remake, I would advise using the stock Whiplash Turboramjet engines, or something similar. They would do much better at approximating the engines the SR-71 had than a scramjet.

 

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
Link to comment
Share on other sites
goduranus

goduranus

Posted
Posted (edited)

The plane's problem is wheels almost behind the  rearmost control surface, resulting in the lack of sufficent lever arm for takeoff rotation, it will not take off regardless of the length of the runway. Try adding some canards at the front.

Edited by goduranus
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EpicSpaceTroll139

EpicSpaceTroll139

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, goduranus said:

The plane's problem is wheels almost behind the  rearmost control surface, resulting in the lack of sufficent lever arm for takeoff rotation, it will not take off regardless of the length of the runway. Try adding some canards at the front.

This too, though I assumed (maybe wrongly) that there are gear some gear more towards the COM on the aircraft itself.

If not, it might be advisable to as mentioned, add canards at the front to lift the nose, or move the rear wheels forward so they are only a short distance behind the center of mass, or a combination of the two. Think of the airplane like a lever, with the rear wheels being the pivot, and the control surfaces being the forces applied to it. You want your control surfaces to have a good moment arm to move that lever with.

I would also advise perhaps removing some fuel from the fuselage tanks as it looks rather heavy, which might be another part of the problem if you found you didn't have enough power with additional jets.

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddiew

eddiew

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Sgt Doomball said:

@goduranus The problem with that is that the engines are very heavy and the plane tips back.

But most planes don't have engines at the back :)  Consider mounting them nearer the middle of the fuselage, like... well anything that isn't a fighter jet, really. Because you're definitely not building a fighter jet :) 

Other solutions include smaller wheels at the tail end, which allow the plane to tip back, but prevent the engines hitting the runway.

Edited by eddiew
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EpicSpaceTroll139

EpicSpaceTroll139

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ok I got your craft flying by reducing the amount of fuel by about half, replacing the rear landing gear setup, and adjusting the wings a little bit to put the COL a little behind the COM.

Km16c7U.jpg

lvQAlcL.jpg

I would recommend adding more wing area though. The craft has to fly at a significant angle of attack just to stay level, adding drag, which seems to keep it from going  supersonic.

Edit: I forgot to mention I also activated pitch to the aeilerons, turning them into elevons .

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139
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.

Guest
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...