Duna Winged Aircraft Range Challenge

[OJT]

6 hours ago, QF9E said:

I think one could pretty much fly endlessly in the upper atmosphere, by making a craft that has a fairing as its root component, and fully occluding the forward and backward nodes - that way it will not generate any drag when flying prograde. As to how to get it into a 49.9 x 49.9 km orbit: from an orbit just above the atmosphere (I started with a 50.001 km circular orbit) lower PE into the atmosphere. While in the atmosphere, fly with the nose pointing in the normal direction (i.e., sideways on, so that the craft does induce drag) until drag lowers AP to 49.9 km and then turn prograde to cancel all drag.

I tried it (although I cheated my craft into Duna orbit) and completed a full orbit in this way without AP or PE degrading noticeably.

Then it is the matter of whether you are willing to spend multiple hours for a flight and whether you pack enough EC to stay in control of your drone. Remember, no means of EC recharging are allowed, and so high up atmosphere is too thin to rely on control surfaces, so you need reaction wheels to hold prograde

In @18Watt's thread of Kerbin 100 EC Plane Range we also, relatively quickly, devised the means to actually complete the circumnavigation and potentially even multiple circumnavigations. And while it did involve some potentially game-breaking exploits to achieve, to get on the Scoreboard, you still needed to actually fly these missions, and for many of us it was unfeasible. Except for me (humble brag ), but even in my case it took up 6 hours, and that's with 3x phys timewarp

So, if you wanna get record range and willing to potentially leave your PC overnight, then go ahead! 

[linuxgurugamer]

Clarification.  If no propellers, is there any limit to the EC on the plane?

Edited December 28, 2022 by linuxgurugamer

[OJT]

12 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Clarification.  If no propellers, is there any limit to the EC on the plane?

Even with propellers, there is no limit on how much EC you can carry on the Plane. Only limitations are:

1. There must be no means to recharge the Plane once it decouples from its transfer stage and enters atmosphere
2. If your plane does have prop motors, you can only use 100 EC out of your entire charge for powered flight. You can glide for a while, turn on the motors, fly using no more than 100 EC, then turn the motors off and continue to glide without propulsion. Check out @18Watt's Powered submissions for examples

[linuxgurugamer]

Thanks.  I actually don't want to look at existing submissions before I try this

[OJT]

Another quick submission that turned out to be way more successful than I expected

707 kg, Unpowered, Unmanned

Launch Vehicle is more or less unchanged, but nevertheless a bit lighter than my previous LVs, weighing at 61.325 tons

Travel to Duna

Spoiler

I circularized at very low Duna orbit and then disconnected the Plane from the transfer stage. Force of the Decoupler was enough to lower the periapsis just below 50km mark

Spoiler

Starting the tracking as soon as I hit the atmosphere

Spoiler

I flew pointed radial in to lower apoapsis below 50km mark as well. Once that was done, I pointed prograde

Spoiler

First full lap around Duna

Spoiler

Lap 2 to 6

Spoiler

And we still flying at the edge of the atmosphere. Let's see how far we can get

Spoiler

10 full circumnavigations! And we're still going! I only started to noticeably lose speed after my 12th lap around Duna

Spoiler

Gliding towards surface

Spoiler

Final distance of 24478.43 km and, at the time I'm writing this, the absolute Distance record

[18Watt]

Manned (Kerballed), Powered entry:

Here's my Manned, Powered entry.  My strategy of ducking into a 49X49 km Duna orbit is way too easy.  Also, it takes forever to complete that glide.  So I'm going back to a standard ballistic entry.  Yes, I'm still trying to extend my glide, but I no longer care how many laps I can do.  This one is just for fun.  But still qualifies, I hope.

The plane and launch:

Spoiler

The plane is Kerballed (yes the Kerbal is included in the weight shown..).  Plane is $13,226, weighs 1.435 t.

@OJT questioned my launch mass for a previous entry.  Ok- I'll make this one lighter.  I'll also say again that my launch cost is much lower than other entries, even if my launch mass is higher.  Anyway, I cut things back for this launch.  Launch stats include the mass and cost of the plane.  $37,053, 66.82 t.  Yes, that includes the mass of the Kerbal, and a jet-pack.  I'll point out that my first TEN cars didn't cost that much, all added together..

Launch from KSC.

Insertion burn from Duna orbit.  I'm keeping the transfer stage, which has a relay antenna on it.  So after the atmospheric insertion burn, I'll burn again to keep the transfer stage (and antenna) out of the atmosphere.

Powered glider entered Duna's atmosphere at 109 deg. 40' E.  (109.7E).  I could have done much better with a slightly higher entry point, but if I was going for distance I would have entered closer to a 49X51 km orbit.

The glide:

Spoiler

Gliding.  I did not get even remotely close to a 49X49 km orbit, so this glide will be much shorter.

[NOT PICTURED]

I started my powered flight at 974 EC, and apparently did not take a screenshot of that.  You'll have to trust me.

In the next screenshot, I'm cruising at 130 m/s, drawing .0216 EC/s.  At that rate, I should be able to do powered fight for 601 km.  However, I got much less distance out of powered flight, due to sloppy flying.  I didn't take enough screenshots to get an accurate reading, but I estimate the powered flight portion carried me an extra 400 km or so.

Next screenshot, I turn off the motors at 874 EC, after using 100 EC in powered mode.  I think all that power came from the motors- I had the probe core in Hibernation mode, and the reaction wheels were off.  The only power drain during the 100 EC powered flight segment was the motors, I think.

Approaching landing.  I wanted to clear that ridge ahead of me and glide down the back slope, but didn't have enough energy to clear it.

Landed.  I time warped to daytime.  Final resting place is not quite all the way around Duna, but still pretty good.  Again, I estimate the 100 EC powered flight carried me an extra 400 km or so.  [Edit-]  When I time warped to daytime, I forgot to turn off the reaction wheels and landing lights, oops!  That's why the battery charge is so much lower that what it was in the previous screenshot..

 

Final Stats:

Category:  Manned, Powered.

Total distance: 1946.392 km.  (Great circle calculation)

Airplane stats, including Kerbal and jetpack (no parachute):  $13,226,  1.435 t.

Launch stats, including plane and Kerbal:  $37,053,  66.820 t.

Note:  Due to the nature of many of the challenges I participate in, I'm more cautious about launch cost than launch mass.  However, @OJT did comment that my launch masses were pretty high.  I would counter that my launch costs were still quite low, but I did see that as an opportunity to reduce my launch mass a little.  I still had a lot more dv than I really needed for the mission, but I'm more than happy with a launch mass under 70 t.  And I put a Kerbal on the surface of Duna (safely, in one piece..) for under $40K.

[camacju]

This challenge as-is is so ripe for exploiting that it's honestly a bit ridiculous. This seems like it's a game of who can get the closest to a 49999.9 x 49999.9 meter orbit and then who is the most patient.

Also I've seen root fairings brought up here, so clearly aero exploits are on the table. I think I'm going to sidestep all the optimization of aero exploits and orbit height at once.

In KSP, two parts can mutually occlude one another. Fairings, cargo bays, and engine plates can all occlude other parts, and by using two fairings or two cargo bays aligned perfectly (and I do mean perfectly; floating point errors are enough to break this), they will also mutually occlude, leaving a craft with drag of exactly zero.

Engine plates are a bit easier, as when the engine plate is "closed" with a part on the bottom node, it will occlude all parts attached to its other nodes. This includes fairings and cargo bays, both of which can occlude the engine plate. This doesn't require precise alignment so it's much more robust, although a bit heavier.

I think you can see where this is going.

I'm too lazy to take this thing to Duna, and it doesn't deserve an actual rocket. So here's a proof of concept where I complete an entire orbit of Duna with exactly zero drag after I decouple the rocket engine. Any change in apoapsis and periapsis is entirely up to floating-point errors, so this truly is only limited by the stability of my computer. If I wanted to really abuse this, I would leave my laptop running for several days and use a macro to quicksave every few hours, so it could persist through crashes.

I don't intend this to be an actual submission. Rather, I want to call attention to the fact that submissions here aren't really in the spirit of winged aircraft range.

I have a few ideas for modifications to the rules:

-Start from a stationary point on Duna's surface. It could be standardized to a certain lat/long, or maybe we could be free to select our favorite mountain peak or something.

-Start the distance meter when altitude crosses X amount from above. This is abuseable with my above video, but you can easily say something like "at least one wing part needs to be producing drag at all times" so our planes have to actually be planes.

-Disallow fairings, cargo bays, and engine plates. This is the lazy solution and it'll still degenerate the challenge into who can get the closest to space without actually being in it.

[18Watt]

4 minutes ago, camacju said:

This challenge as-is is so ripe for exploiting that it's honestly a bit ridiculous.

I wondered if you'd check in!  How are ya @camacju?

 

[camacju]

Just now, 18Watt said:

I wondered if you'd check in!

I actually had a serious submission in the works (very similar to OJT's most recent one) before I saw the message about root fairings, so I never finished it.

2 minutes ago, 18Watt said:

How are ya @camacju?

I've been well. Doing some games other than KSP, but still playing. Right now in KSP I'm working on a tour of Lt_Duckweed's Quack Pack.

[OJT]

18 minutes ago, camacju said:

This challenge as-is is so ripe for exploiting that it's honestly a bit ridiculous. This seems like it's a game of who can get the closest to a 49999.9 x 49999.9 meter orbit and then who is the most patient.

Also I've seen root fairings brought up here, so clearly aero exploits are on the table. I think I'm going to sidestep all the optimization of aero exploits and orbit height at once.

In KSP, two parts can mutually occlude one another. Fairings, cargo bays, and engine plates can all occlude other parts, and by using two fairings or two cargo bays aligned perfectly (and I do mean perfectly; floating point errors are enough to break this), they will also mutually occlude, leaving a craft with drag of exactly zero.

Engine plates are a bit easier, as when the engine plate is "closed" with a part on the bottom node, it will occlude all parts attached to its other nodes. This includes fairings and cargo bays, both of which can occlude the engine plate. This doesn't require precise alignment so it's much more robust, although a bit heavier.

I think you can see where this is going.

I'm too lazy to take this thing to Duna, and it doesn't deserve an actual rocket. So here's a proof of concept where I complete an entire orbit of Duna with exactly zero drag after I decouple the rocket engine. Any change in apoapsis and periapsis is entirely up to floating-point errors, so this truly is only limited by the stability of my computer. If I wanted to really abuse this, I would leave my laptop running for several days and use a macro to quicksave every few hours, so it could persist through crashes.

I don't intend this to be an actual submission. Rather, I want to call attention to the fact that submissions here aren't really in the spirit of winged aircraft range.

I have a few ideas for modifications to the rules:

-Start from a stationary point on Duna's surface. It could be standardized to a certain lat/long, or maybe we could be free to select our favorite mountain peak or something.

-Start the distance meter when altitude crosses X amount from above. This is abuseable with my above video, but you can easily say something like "at least one wing part needs to be producing drag at all times" so our planes have to actually be planes.

-Disallow fairings, cargo bays, and engine plates. This is the lazy solution and it'll still degenerate the challenge into who can get the closest to space without actually being in it.

Well, the challenge thread is called "Winged Aircraft Range", so it is implied that the Plane, by default, must have wings. And I did place restrictions on how much you can clip wings: significant part clipping can be done only for fuselage optimizations, so you can make a very streamlined Fuselage, but there's still stuff that will generate drag like wings and (in case of powered submissions) propellers

And the distance is NOT the "be all end all" metric of this challenge. If you can make a plane that can do multiple laps of Duna - that's fine! But I am interested in creativity and variety. Your plane may not be able to glide far, but it might be able to sit 10 Kerbals inside and softly land on the surface. Or it might have intricate wing folding mechanism so that it fits inside the cargo bay. Hell, your Launch Vehicle doesn't even have to be a rocket: you can just as easily make an SSTO that will deliver the Plane and its transfer stage to LKO and then return back. I intentionally left the rules somewhat loose to allow for experimentation. Think of this as a similar challenge thread to K-Prize: it also has some rules, but otherwise allows for a lot of variety

With that being said, what you've shown on the video IS very ridiculous. I guess I should write explicitly in the rules that the Plane must have wing parts, so that there's no confusion

43 minutes ago, 18Watt said:

Manned (Kerballed), Powered entry:

Here's my Manned, Powered entry.  My strategy of ducking into a 49X49 km Duna orbit is way too easy.  Also, it takes forever to complete that glide.  So I'm going back to a standard ballistic entry.  Yes, I'm still trying to extend my glide, but I no longer care how many laps I can do.  This one is just for fun.  But still qualifies, I hope.

The plane and launch:

  Reveal hidden contents

The plane is Kerballed (yes the Kerbal is included in the weight shown..).  Plane is $13,226, weighs 1.435 t.

@OJT questioned my launch mass for a previous entry.  Ok- I'll make this one lighter.  I'll also say again that my launch cost is much lower than other entries, even if my launch mass is higher.  Anyway, I cut things back for this launch.  Launch stats include the mass and cost of the plane.  $37,053, 66.82 t.  Yes, that includes the mass of the Kerbal, and a jet-pack.  I'll point out that my first TEN cars didn't cost that much, all added together..

Launch from KSC.

Insertion burn from Duna orbit.  I'm keeping the transfer stage, which has a relay antenna on it.  So after the atmospheric insertion burn, I'll burn again to keep the transfer stage (and antenna) out of the atmosphere.

Powered glider entered Duna's atmosphere at 109 deg. 40' E.  (109.7E).  I could have done much better with a slightly higher entry point, but if I was going for distance I would have entered closer to a 49X51 km orbit.

The glide:

  Reveal hidden contents

Gliding.  I did not get even remotely close to a 49X49 km orbit, so this glide will be much shorter.

[NOT PICTURED]

I started my powered flight at 974 EC, and apparently did not take a screenshot of that.  You'll have to trust me.

In the next screenshot, I'm cruising at 130 m/s, drawing .0216 EC/s.  At that rate, I should be able to do powered fight for 601 km.  However, I got much less distance out of powered flight, due to sloppy flying.  I didn't take enough screenshots to get an accurate reading, but I estimate the powered flight portion carried me an extra 400 km or so.

Next screenshot, I turn off the motors at 874 EC, after using 100 EC in powered mode.  I think all that power came from the motors- I had the probe core in Hibernation mode, and the reaction wheels were off.  The only power drain during the 100 EC powered flight segment was the motors, I think.

Approaching landing.  I wanted to clear that ridge ahead of me and glide down the back slope, but didn't have enough energy to clear it.

Landed.  I time warped to daytime.  Final resting place is not quite all the way around Duna, but still pretty good.  Again, I estimate the 100 EC powered flight carried me an extra 400 km or so.  [Edit-]  When I time warped to daytime, I forgot to turn off the reaction wheels and landing lights, oops!  That's why the battery charge is so much lower that what it was in the previous screenshot..

 

Final Stats:

Category:  Manned, Powered.

Total distance: 1946.392 km.  (Great circle calculation)

Airplane stats, including Kerbal and jetpack (no parachute):  $13,226,  1.435 t.

Launch stats, including plane and Kerbal:  $37,053,  66.820 t.

Note:  Due to the nature of many of the challenges I participate in, I'm more cautious about launch cost than launch mass.  However, @OJT did comment that my launch masses were pretty high.  I would counter that my launch costs were still quite low, but I did see that as an opportunity to reduce my launch mass a little.  I still had a lot more dv than I really needed for the mission, but I'm more than happy with a launch mass under 70 t.  And I put a Kerbal on the surface of Duna (safely, in one piece..) for under $40K.

Looks nice, will add it on the board 

[linuxgurugamer]

On 12/22/2022 at 8:36 PM, OJT said:

Speaking of mods: Mods that affect gameplay (physics changes or new parts) are not allowed. Information mods like KER and graphics mods are allowed

are autopilots allowed?

[18Watt]

14 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

are autopilots allowed?

I used one.  

If you use one set up for Kerbin's atmosphere, you might get frustrated using it in Duna's thin atmosphere.  The one I use allows adjustment of the PID configuration, but I didn't want to dig into that.  I found the autopilot I use capable of holding a constant pitch attitude, and that's about it.  Even basic roll control (wing leveler) did not perform well at all.

Using reaction wheels will help greatly, but I didn't want to use the reaction wheels due to their EC draw.

[linuxgurugamer]

Hmmm,  I was working on a submission, but after seeing some of the other submissions, not going to bother.  The glider I built has hinges so that it can fold up nicely inside the fairing, which is what my impression of this challenge was.  but then I see submissions with multiple wings on top of each other.  I know that KSP allows this to work, and that the rules seem to allow it, but it just seems to me that the spirit of the challenge is being ignored, which was to create a plane which can be collapsed inside a fairing and then opened up to glide in all it's glory.

I would reconsider if a new category was added which would be  planes which don't exploit the inevitable loopholes which occur

[OJT]

23 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Hmmm,  I was working on a submission, but after seeing some of the other submissions, not going to bother.  The glider I built has hinges so that it can fold up nicely inside the fairing, which is what my impression of this challenge was.  but then I see submissions with multiple wings on top of each other.  I know that KSP allows this to work, and that the rules seem to allow it, but it just seems to me that the spirit of the challenge is being ignored, which was to create a plane which can be collapsed inside a fairing and then opened up to glide in all it's glory.

I would reconsider if a new category was added which would be  planes which don't exploit the inevitable loopholes which occur

My first two submissions did have foldable wings, so by all means if you have something interesting brewing - share it!

[linuxgurugamer]

One thing I didn't notice with some of the earlier unmanned submissions was the comm satellites and how they got there.

If I do a submission, it's going to include those as well :-)

 

LGG

[18Watt]

4 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

One thing I didn't notice with some of the earlier unmanned submissions was the comm satellites and how they got there.

I don’t think that was specified in the challenge, and I’m pretty sure you won’t have any problems getting a few relay sats into position.  But for others, here’s how I did it.

In every save I have, the first thing I do at every CB is dump a bunch of relay sats into orbit before I try doing things on the surface, or where I might need to use a weak antenna- like going into an atmosphere at high speed.

Of course, the save I’m using for this challenge only had one relay sat in position, not enough.  I personally enjoy building delivery vehicles which can drop multiple relay sats in one launch.  I ended up with 6 relay sats around Duna, which I felt was overkill.  You know where this is going, even with 6 relay sats in orbit I still managed to lose com signal for a few minutes on one entry.

So to add additional relay sats I started placing a relay antenna on my transfer stage.  After getting a trajectory into the atmosphere, I drop the glider, and the transfer stage then does another short burn to keep it’s PE above the atmosphere.  Doing that I then end up with another relay sat in orbit every time I bring another vehicle to Duna.  I think I’m up to 9 or 10 sats in orbit now.  Honestly, 6 should be plenty, but losing coms during an entry almost ruined my day, so I now go for overkill.

I also considered bringing a bunch of sats with the plane delivery vessel.  However, that would make the delivery vessel bigger and more complicated, which I did not want to bother with.  That’s a possibility though.

The short answer to your question:  I used separate launches to deliver the relay sats.  I did not try to bring them with the plane in a single launch.

Edit- I spent a lot of time and DV placing sats in polar orbits, offset by about 20-40 degrees.  I now think that was a waste of time.  My gliders all entered on equatorial paths, so there was no need for polar coverage.  I would have been better off just leaving all the sats in roughly equatorial orbits.

Edit 2-  To use the transfer stage as a relay sat, it will need a probe core, reaction wheels (some probe cores have those), and electric.  Obviously it has an antenna too.  Since we’re using 3.75 m fairings the additional mass of that stuff is insignificant.

[linuxgurugamer]

42 minutes ago, 18Watt said:

I don’t think that was specified in the challenge, and I’m pretty sure you won’t have any problems getting a few relay sats into position.  But for others, here’s how I did it.

In the construction rules:

On 12/22/2022 at 8:36 PM, OJT said:

• If the Plane is Unmanned, your save file must have CommNet enabled like on Normal difficulty. Don't forget to put an antenna on the Plane and couple of relays around Duna beforehand 

 

44 minutes ago, 18Watt said:

So to add additional relay sats I started placing a relay antenna on my transfer stage.

This is a great idea!!

[18Watt]

@linuxgurugamer, I though you meant how did I get the sats in position, not wether they’re required or not.  I feel a little silly now..

I think my point is that you don’t need to bring a bunch of relay sats in one launch with your plane- you can deliver those with separate launches.  I forgot that there is a game setting where probes will work even without a com signal.  I never play that way, even in sandbox.  But I actually enjoy peppering the solar system with satellites, not everyone does…

[linuxgurugamer]

30 minutes ago, 18Watt said:

@linuxgurugamer, I though you meant how did I get the sats in position, not wether they’re required or not.  I feel a little silly now..

I think my point is that you don’t need to bring a bunch of relay sats in one launch with your plane- you can deliver those with separate launches.  I forgot that there is a game setting where probes will work even without a com signal.  I never play that way, even in sandbox.  But I actually enjoy peppering the solar system with satellites, not everyone does…

Well, I'm working on an  all-in-one entry, with relay sats and a plane all bundled together.  IMHO,   since the requirements specifically state to have sats in orbit, that implies that you need to get them there; otherwise why bother needing the relay sats.  In a sandbox game, you can send over hundreds of relay sats before the flight, which would kind of make the requirement for the sats irrelevant .

So I'll do it all in one.  Unmanned for now, but may take a stab at a manned version later.  Of course, since no life support, the manned requirement essentially means that the passengers need to survive.  Now, add a life support requirement and it becomes very challenging

[OJT]

16 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

One thing I didn't notice with some of the earlier unmanned submissions was the comm satellites and how they got there

9 hours ago, 18Watt said:

I think my point is that you don’t need to bring a bunch of relay sats in one launch with your plane- you can deliver those with separate launches.  I forgot that there is a game setting where probes will work even without a com signal.  I never play that way, even in sandbox.

As @linuxgurugamer already pointed out, it does say in the challenge rules to not forget relay sats if you're doing an Unmanned submission. However, it is only a friendly reminder to put some in the orbit so you don't lose control of your Unmanned Drone once you leave Kerbin. Satellites are not necessarily required to be launched on the same rocket as the Plane or at the same timeframe as the Plane. If you choose to do so - that's absolutely fine, but there's no strict requirement: you can easily send the relays way in advance or use the relays that have already been placed near Duna earlier on unrelated missions

8 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Of course, since no life support, the manned requirement essentially means that the passengers need to survive.  Now, add a life support requirement and it becomes very challenging

I see a lot of discussion being raised about whether this rule should be adjusted or that category should be added

As I previously said, the "looseness" of the challenge rules serve a purpose of opening the challenge to wider audience (even if the Challenges & Mission Ideas section of the forum seemed kind of dead lately: is everyone waiting for KSP2? ). Adding too many categories would clutter up the challenge and only allowing foldable wings would block the players who don't have Breaking Ground DLC components. I somewhat took inspiration from K-Prize challenge thread where rules were very loose (even looser than the ones in this challenge thread) and it allowed for players of different levels of skill and creativity to take part in it and send submissions

Of course, if you have any suggestions - I'm open to hear them. But I personally think that the current rules are pretty much as good as they need to be

Speaking of K-Prize inspirations: I guess I could add custom markings on notable submissions? Like "Furthest Distance Flown" or "Biggest Plane Wing Span" or in similar vein

[linuxgurugamer]

@OJT  I didn't mean to stir up any controversy over the rules.  Sorry about that.

Anyway, I'll be doing a New Year's Eve stream on Twitch this evening.  Part of the stream will be the (hopefully) the finalization of the vessel and the full attempt to do this.  

Fireworks included, bring your own popcorn

 

LGG

[kerbalboi]

got a pretty good try, managed to circumnavigate duna before stalling and crashing

[OJT]

12 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

I didn't mean to stir up any controversy over the rules.  Sorry about that.

No worries! If you have any uncertainties - ask away

4 hours ago, kerbalboi said:

got a pretty good try, managed to circumnavigate duna before stalling and crashing

Hey, looks like a nice craft. However, for the future, I am going to need more information. Pictures of the entire launch stack, of the Plane separating and entering atmosphere, proof of distance travelled and I also need Plane mass and Launch Stack mass. Check other submissions in this thread to get an idea of what is required

[kerbalboi]

7 hours ago, OJT said:

No worries! If you have any uncertainties - ask away

Hey, looks like a nice craft. However, for the future, I am going to need more information. Pictures of the entire launch stack, of the Plane separating and entering atmosphere, proof of distance travelled and I also need Plane mass and Launch Stack mass. Check other submissions in this thread to get an idea of what is required

no problem, i took a bunch of pics for just that, just haven't got to uploading it to imgur yet

[kerbalboi]

7 hours ago, OJT said:

No worries! If you have any uncertainties - ask away

Hey, looks like a nice craft. However, for the future, I am going to need more information. Pictures of the entire launch stack, of the Plane separating and entering atmosphere, proof of distance travelled and I also need Plane mass and Launch Stack mass. Check other submissions in this thread to get an idea of what is required

https://imgur.com/a/QRSW86Y