Maximum Lifter Capability?

[Wijbrandus]

Of course, feel free to experiment and pay attention to how the craft is warping/bending before it falls apart. That can tell you a lot about where and how you need to place your struts.

Once I started doing this, my launch vehicle experimentation and success rates took a huge change for the better.

[RawChicken]

The limit is how much your cmputer can handle..

Are you familiar with aspargu staging and ways of making your rockets more fuel efficient?

[HoY]

Like I said in the previous comment you skipped over, the 100 ton + 500 part count means a payload that's not simply fuel as dead weight. The payload has a part cout too, and wether you want it to or not, it counts as 500+parts on the pad that I was talking about.

This is also based on your speculation that part count won't raise dramatically when you add another 40 tonnes to your payload of your 70 tonne launcher at 150 parts. It will easily double, if you want it to work every time (the reliable part I was talking about) try it for yourself before you decide to attack someone who's spent countless hours building 100t+ lifters

[Nao]

Like I said in the previous comment you skipped over, the 100 ton + 500 part count means a payload that's not simply fuel as dead weight. The payload has a part cout too, and wether you want it to or not, it counts as 500+parts on the pad that I was talking about.

This is also based on your speculation that part count won't raise dramatically when you add another 40 tonnes to your payload of your 70 tonne launcher at 150 parts. It will easily double, if you want it to work every time (the reliable part I was talking about) try it for yourself before you decide to attack someone who's spent countless hours building 100t+ lifters

Hey i already answered that

Your original comment mentioned using a lot of struts and i've seen many overstrutted ships that explode because of that. And since we have lagsbane implemented into the game (physics delta time) so the part count of the payload doesn't really make that much difference except for the RL flight time. I thought you are talking about a 500part launcher which would have a lot of struts. That's why i attacked you (with forum lazors pew pew).

So sorry if you took offense. It's hard to judge people experiance based on several posts, and i like to make daring statements to make others doubt, think and improve.

And on the subject of part count increase with payload mass, in my experience when using docking ports it does rise almost linearly so doubling the payload only doubles the launcher part count .

Also I actually find it harder nowdays to launch a big stack of orange fuel tanks than complicated interstellar ship as it's easier to distribute the load on many parts, but the damn orange buggers explode if sneezed on >_<.

Cheers!

[Payload]

Guys, don't be afraid to use Jet engines as lifters for your first stage. Much greater than 15% mass to orbit is achievable quite easily. Most of what people do is disperse reaction mass all over the planet just so they can say they lifted something heavy.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/27103-best-way-to-add-dv?p=333750&viewfull=1#post333750

31tons to orbit with a 73ton launcher. They don't call me Payload for nothing.

Most recently I have been trying to re-create Apollo, but going with no asparagus staging and no jet engines, I am failing hard. I am almost there. Just a few more tweaks.

[HoY]

The docking port thing looks like a half decent idea, and simple enough to do with EditorTools, but I tent to use at least 6 different action groups on my payloads. That would limit me from doing my 20+stage asparagus slightly lol

Plus mechjeb doesn't know how to stage with action groups "yet"

One question. When one of your stages runs dry due to fuel line placement will the engine stay lit due to the docking port crossfeed? Do you need to disable crossfeed on every port at launch? Might not be a terrible idea for me for lighter launches that use 3-4 stages but that low rarely needs much strutting

[Klajan]

As far as my testing goes this is not the case.

I tryed preplaced docking ports and regular docked docking ports, also disabeling and reenabeling fuel crossfeed, and it did not transfer the fuel automaticly to the other tanks.

I tryed to achive this for my interplanetary ship, but the fuel does not want to flow, so I have to transfer it manualy.

As for the part count, With bigger stages (~800 total parts) I usualy let mechjeb do the job, since I do not enjoy flying with low framerates.

[HoY]

Yeah once I've launched a ship a couple of times by hand I let mechjeb do any further launches for me while I do something else. No harm in that and let's me catch up on everything else KSP makes me neglect!

[Nao]

Docking port (or any other cross feed part like solid booster) starts pumping fuel only when placed in a stack with fuel tank/engine so my docking ports cause no problem. (Actually its interesting that there needs to be one non fuel tank/engine part that's using stacking connection to initiate fuel flow through any other connected parts that have "cross feed" including radial decouplers)

Right now i have my 300t lifter almost completed (currently tested to 274t with 721m/s Dv left in 86x86 orbit)

Launcher part doesn't use any struts, but i think the best design will be by using struts and docking ports at the same time.

It also uses standard decouplers (as they have simmilar "wobble" properities to docking ports) so staging is no longer a problem.

It had 307 parts before i added seperatrons (it was possible but more tricky to fly without them).

The interesting part about strut-docking port connection of payload to launcher is that it's pretty soft one, so even with complicated ships it *shouldn't* cause the payload to explode because of uneven load distribution during launch.

I would test more but since i have old PC, the whole launch takes 15-20min with fuel as payload so it's hard to test even bigger part count ships. Although recently i sent 520part payload with a 200 part 8xMainsail launcher to space with only docking connections between payload and launcher, and it worked well.

There is another problem that mechjeb cannot fly it as the small wobble present resonates with it and gets out of control mid ascent. It's nicely flyable with hand and/or ASAS thou. (even to the point of alt-tabbing and surfing the net between stages )

One more thing is that i think with this design it would be possible to extend the mainsail number to 49, making it possible to get half a million ton kilograms (silly me) into orbit. It's a personal challenge of mine, back from around 0.16? patch. Somebody in this thread made a typo and wanted 500U into orbit. I try to fulfill that order ever since

Edited May 8, 2013 by Nao

[HoY]

Half a million kilograms ? 500 tonnes sounds more reasonable lol

At least I think that's what you meant

So your simply using the docking ports as the strutting, but still using radial decouplers for staging, ok I got it.

Fuel not flowing out of radially mounted docking ports is a surprise tho, since the new radial attachment point and even structural girders cross fuel that way, ah well..

[CobraA1]

the 100 ton + 500 part count means a payload that's not simply fuel as dead weight.

Well, the payload doesn't have to be fuel. My design could certainly use other payloads as well. It just happens to be fuel because that's what I intended it to carry.

The payload has a part cout too, and wether you want it to or not, it counts as 500+parts on the pad that I was talking about.

Yes, I was including payload in my part count - it was for the entire craft. I didn't bother to subtract the payload part count from the launcher part count.