Flying straight.... in space...!

[tek_604]

Why do you call nuclear engines cheaty? <snip>

EDIT: Just reread my thing and I sound a bit rude, sorry. But I really want to know why you think they are cheaty

I was aware of NERVA, although I must admit I didn't know how long they'd run them for until 5 minutes ago Anyway, I guess I think they're cheaty because they were never flown in real life. At some point, I will use them, but as my manned program hasn't started yet (waiting for flag planting in .20!)... Once Kerbals land on the Mun, and assuming the Kerbal Space Administration isn't gutted when the politicians get changed, and decide to build a shuttle...

(oh, and I didn't read it as rude. Maybe in a different forum I might have done, but this community seems to be one of the friendliest I have encountered for a while)

Might I suggest a change in your upper stage as well? Instead of having two engines and two tanks separated by a decoupler, use one LV909 engine on an FLT400 tank, and have two FLT200 tanks on radial decouplers outside of it with the fuel piped into it. This way you save the 0.5 tonnes from the extra engine, still get the same overall fuel and stage time but a more stable platform and more deltaV out of them

Not a bad idea! I did play with a similar design with tanks on radial decouplers and fuel lines (if memory serves, its the Explorer III class), but I've never flown it yet. Oh! Yes I did. Moho Shot III. Its now in a wonky solar orbit Should fly it again though.

[J.Random]

You built a wibbly wobbly space adult toy?!? With KSP? You're my idol!

Nah, all credits for this design go to some redditer. But this is rather unforgettable cannot-be-unseen-able "thing", so yeah, it came to my mind instantly when I've seen those toroids.

[Chruschtschow]

how did you get those results? they're totally wrong.

Really? Then someone has to update the wiki. I can show you my calculation:

mass of fuel / mass of tank = (mass of full tank - mass of empty tank) / mass of empty tank

An example:

Rockomax Jumbo 64 Fuel Tank 36t full, 4t empty.

(36t - 4t)/4t = 32t / 4t = 8

There is 8 times as much mass of fuel as its own mass. This calculation really doesn't look like rocket science...

[Francesco]

Really? Then someone has to update the wiki. I can show you my calculation:

mass of fuel / mass of tank = (mass of full tank - mass of empty tank) / mass of empty tank

An example:

Rockomax Jumbo 64 Fuel Tank 36t full, 4t empty.

(36t - 4t)/4t = 32t / 4t = 8

There is 8 times as much mass of fuel as its own mass. This calculation really doesn't look like rocket science...

sorry, I read quickly and thought you were talking about fuel content / total mass.

in that case, the two smaller tanks are a little worse than all the others, but not so much.

but yes, your math is correct, those two have a high empty weight: it's weird.