Eve and Making History

[sevenperforce]

Anyone have any ideas on what might be achievable with new stock parts as far as Eve ascent vehicles are concerned? Any chance at a workable Eve SSTO?

[Aegolius13]

I don't think the new engines will help.   ASL stats are most important there,  and none of the new engines can beat the Vector/Mammoth. 

You could save some dry mass by using the inflatable airlock instead of a command pod,  but that's probably just a small savings (and still heavier than an unmanned craft).

Edited March 23, 2018 by Aegolius13

[sh1pman]

  On 3/22/2018 at 11:12 PM, sevenperforce said:

Anyone have any ideas on what might be achievable with new stock parts as far as Eve ascent vehicles are concerned? Any chance at a workable Eve SSTO?

Expand  

Eve SSTO was done before.

[Snark]

  On 3/22/2018 at 11:12 PM, sevenperforce said:

Anyone have any ideas on what might be achievable with new stock parts as far as Eve ascent vehicles are concerned?

Expand  

I'm looking forward to building an Eve lander with the new Soyuz conical tanks.  Those things have wickedly low drag, exactly what's needed for an Eve ascent vehicle.

[Aeroboi]

I wonder how aerodynamic The FL-A215 and FL-A151L fuel tank adapters might be. People have typically been using either Mk3 to 2.5m, C7 Brand adapters or Kerbodyne ADTP 2-3- adapters for their Eve ascent vehicles and the new adapters look more Aerodynamic compared to all aforementioned ones.
But I know what seems in KSP isn't always what it actually is  
If it is just a gain on that part then a overall result will be marginal, but it's the only first thing I could think of. 

On the Kerbal wiki there are no stats yet as the aforementioned MH fuel adapter parts apparently haven't gotten their respective pages yet.
Maybe they work a little better as a knife through soup compared to the original adapters we've had so far, although I'm fairly sure they wont contribute to making a SSTO viable without a magic engine.
It's ultimately the engine requirements that anchors you to Eve's Suborbital boundaries so I cannot figure how it would enable SSTO's all of a sudden. But obviously I hope I'm wrong about that because I'm never the skeptic and I want to see.

About these adapter names...

  Reveal hidden contents

The names of those fuel tank adapters are a little complicated to my taste, at least we should already wanna know what "FL" stands for. If it is FL = Fuel then we have to remember A215 and A151L just to specify that specific adapter type. Unless people understand one another when saying the "FL adapter" 
Still, quite aimlessly specified if so since there are 4 varieties of them.
I'm not sure why these names have to be unnecessarily and aimlessly complicated, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Foxster]

  On 3/23/2018 at 12:04 AM, Aegolius13 said:

I don't think the new engines will help.   ASL stats are most important there,  and none of the new engines can beat the Vector/Mammoth. 

You could save some dry mass by using the inflatable airlock instead of a command pod,  but that's probably just a small savings (and still heavier than an unmanned craft).

Expand  

Yup, I couldn't find a new engine better than a Vector for Eve, but I'm still experimenting. 

The airlock does make an excellent little capsule for Eve but it didn't shave huge amounts off this sea-level>orbit craft @ 18.5t...

I played with the pointy tanks but their weird off-centre CoM is awkward. Plus they look more low-drag than they really are because of the part size. 

Edited March 23, 2018 by Foxster

[Aegolius13]

  On 3/23/2018 at 7:46 AM, Foxster said:

Yup, I couldn't find a new engine better than a Vector for Eve, but I'm still experimenting. 

The airlock does make an excellent little capsule for Eve but it didn't shave huge amounts off this sea-level>orbit craft @ 18.5t...

I played with the pointy tanks but their weird off-centre CoM is awkward. Plus they look more low-drag than they really are because of the part size. 

Expand  

Did you play around with the Bobcat at all?  I wonder if it might make a good second stage (after a Vector, perhaps) or work on a radial booster.  Would be nice to have a middle ground option between the Dart and Vector. 

[Foxster]

  On 3/23/2018 at 3:05 PM, Aegolius13 said:

Did you play around with the Bobcat at all?  I wonder if it might make a good second stage (after a Vector, perhaps) or work on a radial booster.  Would be nice to have a middle ground option between the Dart and Vector. 

Expand  

Did a bit but was underwhelmed. I was mostly looking at small craft though. Might be useful with something larger carrying a bigger payload?

It's biggest downside for me is its parts size (draggy) AND you are only getting 400 thrusts for 2t, compared to a Vector with 1000 thrusts for 4t AND the Vector has better Isps AND the Vector gimbals more AND it has a cooler name. What's not to like about the Vector?

Edited March 23, 2018 by Foxster

[sevenperforce]

With the new structural shells, I wonder if the reusable TSTO approach might work, using 5-meter parts, Wolfhounds up top, and a ton of Vectors beneath.

[funk]

  On 3/23/2018 at 6:13 PM, sevenperforce said:

With the new structural shells, I wonder if the reusable TSTO approach might work, using 5-meter parts, Wolfhounds up top, and a ton of Vectors beneath.

Expand  

Do you mean tubes? They don't occlude stuff inside from aero forces. Don't know if it's the same for engine plates and shrouds.

Wolfhounds are ugly, but ok... If you push your first stage above 25km they should be viable. Depends on the mass of the second stage.

My favorite is still Mammoth/Vectors for the first stage and aerospikes for the second. Third stage is more or less just circularization and going home. So with some fiddling, a TSTO should be possible.

[sevenperforce]

  On 3/23/2018 at 7:45 PM, funk said:

Do you mean tubes? They don't occlude stuff inside from aero forces. Don't know if it's the same for engine plates and shrouds.

Wolfhounds are ugly, but ok... If you push your first stage above 25km they should be viable. Depends on the mass of the second stage.

My favorite is still Mammoth/Vectors for the first stage and aerospikes for the second. Third stage is more or less just circularization and going home. So with some fiddling, a TSTO should be possible.

Expand  

I've worked for a while on trying to get a reusable TSTO with ground infrastructure, where your lander flies down and couples with the lower stage and is fueled for liftoff, and the lower stage flies back to the launch site like a Falcon 9.

[funk]

  On 3/23/2018 at 8:13 PM, sevenperforce said:

I've worked for a while on trying to get a reusable TSTO with ground infrastructure, where your lander flies down and couples with the lower stage and is fueled for liftoff, and the lower stage flies back to the launch site like a Falcon 9.

Expand  

Oh, ok didn't read your post exactly enough and missed the most important word... reusable... ehm... just a feeling here, but the extra fuel might be virtually deadly. I think you know best that the energy of the first stage at boost back might be too high to accomplish your goal... Lagrange sends his greetings. But you never know... When I've some time I will test some stuff and see if it's feasible. Interesting for sure. Which "payload" mass would you consider?

Edited March 23, 2018 by funk