SSTOs! Post your pictures here~

[smartech]

Happy New Year everyone.

Today I'd like to share Tough Bird Special Edition: now able to visit Laythe and Duna on the same trip. As usual it is stock physics and 0.25 parts.

This is based on my previous effort here:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/33312-Showcase-SSTO-s!-Post-your-pictures-here?p=1626216&viewfull=1#post1626216

It's now opened a new category: SSLDRRV (Single Stage Laythe and Duna Roving Return Vehicle). It basically means it is capable of performing the trip Kerbin-Laythe-Duna-Kerbin in a single stage.

There are some differences from the previous design:

* the delta-v on rocket power is up to 6.7km/s to accommodate the takeoff from Duna, the payload is down to just 10 kerbals to maintain the needed mass fraction.

* overall, along with its jet engines, the craft now expels nearly 20km/s delta-v.

* there are more wings in the front part

* hard to see in the pictures, but there are extra vernor engines in the rear in order to stabilize the craft after bouncing off the surface of Duna after the initial parachute drop.

The landing on Duna itself brings several challenges. Because of the thin atmosphere, the craft can only land in the lowlands, no more than around 600m ASL in order to limit the descent on parachutes to 21m/s and the takeoff speed to 35m/s. Of course given enough time, it can go pretty much anywhere on the planet as it can rove around freely when landed. The landing at such a speed becomes problematic as it creates a large bounce back in the air, and that's where the extra vernors come handy. I set Mechjeb to maintain surface horizontal shortly before the touch-down, and it uses the vernors and the momentum wheels (which by themselves are too slow) to righten the craft back wheels down after the bounce.

For a takeoff at 600m ASL on Duna, I first accelerate using the roving wheels to 20m/s, then engage the rockets to push further to 35m/s which should be enough to lift the nose off. The takeoff speed is not particularly high, but because of the weight of the craft at this point, it is difficult to attain it quickly. Given how the surface of Duna is riddled with small hills, high takeoff (or landing) speed is a real killer for any spaceplane.

Down on the surface it has 2.7km/s delta-v. At this point of the trip, the craft has 0.56 TWR before takeoff and it climbs to 0.72 right after orbit circularization. Yes, a craft with TWR less than 0.72 can make it all the way up to orbit! After around 15 minutes of ascent while pitched up 25 degrees, after burning through 1.9km/s, it attains 45x45 low orbit with 850m/s left for the trip back to Kerbin.

Pictures from Duna ascent here:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited January 2, 2015 by smartech

[Mesklin]

I want download.

Seriously though, all the interplanetary SSTOs I've seen are a pain to fly, at least for me. That looks rather simple.

Here is download file and short video , only 20 minutes:

[Van Disaster]

Much neater & marginally more efficient ( and still easy to fly too ).

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7539/15951099990_eaa2c87262_b.jpg

So my instincts were telling me that maybe people saying that particular engine combo was best for that size craft - and that RAPIERs are terrible - weren't entirely corrent, so I literally just pulled the engines off & stuck a RAPIER on the back without any reworking of wings or anything, and flew the same profile.

I'm not terribly happy with the RAPIERs for a different reason - they wouldn't work without the precooler which B9 provides with it's SABREs so really on a craft this size they'd be a complete non-starter, but they're there in the game and they do work . If I was going to do a lot of vacuum flying I'd go with a jet-nuke combo, but for orbiters, why not.

[vitekc45c]

Olny SSTO that ive ever managed to build (aside from NASA engine cluster + OKTO combo)

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Rune]

So my instincts were telling me that maybe people saying that particular engine combo was best for that size craft - and that RAPIERs are terrible - weren't entirely corrent, so I literally just pulled the engines off & stuck a RAPIER on the back without any reworking of wings or anything, and flew the same profile.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7571/15985937707_0d8042f819_b.jpg

I'm not terribly happy with the RAPIERs for a different reason - they wouldn't work without the precooler which B9 provides with it's SABREs so really on a craft this size they'd be a complete non-starter, but they're there in the game and they do work . If I was going to do a lot of vacuum flying I'd go with a jet-nuke combo, but for orbiters, why not.

The only bad part about RAPIERS is their turbojet mode TWR, really. You end up either taking up much more rocket thrust (and therefore, weight) than you really need, but if you pair them up with turbojets in a 1-1 ration, they are excellent engines for SSTOing stuff. In fact, only by going nuclear/ion or with an extremely efficient design can you improve on the payload ratio. Of course they are inherently limited in range due to going chemical, but you don't really want to take the airbreathing stuff beyond LKO. My old Nodachi managed a 33% pure payload ratio to LKO with 25% of GLOW being fuel, using four RAPIERs and four turbojets and nothing else. And the payload was 36mT, so I would say almost a bare minmum in takeoff weight and expense.

Rune. Besides, they are dirt simple to use, and part friendly. What's not to love?

[Sufficient Anonymity]

Apologies that it's a nighttime shot (there's an explanation over in You Will Not Go To Space Today), but this is the S2, my late-career light cargo SSTO (the S1 is a crew shuttle, the S3 is a heavy cargo SSTO; all are drone controlled).

Edited January 2, 2015 by SufficientAnonymity

[Hodo]

So my instincts were telling me that maybe people saying that particular engine combo was best for that size craft - and that RAPIERs are terrible - weren't entirely corrent, so I literally just pulled the engines off & stuck a RAPIER on the back without any reworking of wings or anything, and flew the same profile.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7571/15985937707_0d8042f819_b.jpg

I'm not terribly happy with the RAPIERs for a different reason - they wouldn't work without the precooler which B9 provides with it's SABREs so really on a craft this size they'd be a complete non-starter, but they're there in the game and they do work . If I was going to do a lot of vacuum flying I'd go with a jet-nuke combo, but for orbiters, why not.

You must be using DRE with FAR, and you are mistaken about the B9 Precoolers. They are not completely functional. They work some but not that much. Take a look at this craft here.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

It is using 4 RAPIERs and has no overheat problems. And I am running FAR and DRE.

On smaller craft with an engine that size you may want to cut your throttle to about 90-95%, so you dont over cook it.

[Van Disaster]

You must be using DRE with FAR, and you are mistaken about the B9 Precoolers. They are not completely functional. They work some but not that much. Take a look at this craft here.

I meant the real ones wouldn't work in open cycle mode without a precooler in the way the stock ones do - I'm not too happy the B9 ones do either ( unless you run KSPI ) but at least they have a precooler model, and given the almost laughable ease they ( the B9 ones, even FAR-nerfed ) bring to spaceplane construction I do at least make sure there's a precooler on them, even if I use a different intake.

RAPIER seems to perform in better in FAR in open cycle than the stock jets from experiment - given I've hardly used them I haven't checked FAR's patches for any performance changes for them specifically, but FAR leans on the pure jets really hard. Advice was that jets were preferable even with FAR, which didn't seem at all right.

Edit: FAR's MM cfgs do fiddle with the RAPIER too, and that is a rather more sensible balance. Airbreathing rockets *should* run out of puff at a higher speed than turbojets. I do wonder if they shouldn't give the same thrust in each mode though, I haven't looked at the details of anything except the Scimitar which is a multimode jet rather than a rocket.

Edited January 2, 2015 by Van Disaster

[Frank_G]

Just finished and uploaded the latest version of my X-series SSTO spaceplanes, the X3-DS Explorer Nano-SSTO.

The craftfile and detailed description is available in my Spacecraft Exchange thread.

[MartGonzo]

Nothing spectacular but this is the most efficient SSTO I've built so far, it can almost get into orbit on jets

(and yes it uses part clipping, if that makes me a heretic, so be it )

I think what really made the difference was the angled intakes that get better air flow at higher pitch, that and the editor gizmo's that are so useful for fine tuning the center of lift

[Rune]

I see you independently re-developed my Turbo-RAPIERs... been using that combo since 0.24 or so, it's awesome. And with the new gizmos, it uses no extra parts and it is very simple to use as you say!

Rune. Which reminds me I shouldn't use them... old habits!

[Nik_601]

Just finished and uploaded the latest version of my X-series SSTO spaceplanes, the X3-DS Explorer Nano-SSTO.

The craftfile and detailed description is available in my Spacecraft Exchange thread.

http://i.imgur.com/shY6WZy.png

Nice SSTO! You obviously were inspired by Ranger from Interstellar, weren't you?)

I also like very much your RCS ports

[Frank_G]

Thank you!

Actually the goal of the creation process was to just make it small enough while delivering enough punch and a good control profile.

Bringing control surfaces and lift to the front is quite difficult at that scale, so every design looked somewhat like the ranger with its small airfoils and the lifting body area at the front. However, i like the ranger design very much, so there sure was some influence but not the goal to make it actually look like the ranger. Such a great movie that is...

The RCS thrusters evolved from the lack of space to place them on the sides. The first designs had the RCS Block and the one pointing upwards mounted next to each other, but the new construction gizmos soon made me think about pulling the single one into the block. I think, i will use this design more often now.

[RedDwarfIV]

I was saddened to note that without a Tier 3 R&D site, I wouldn't have any of the Mk IV spaceplane parts. And getting the money for it was proving troublesome.

BUT THEN I DECIDED I DIDN'T CARE!

The result being the following spacecraft, with the only Mk IV parts being the cockpit, tail adaptor, and a weird 2-metre tank which has sponson mounts.

Requires a lot of faffing around with shutting down all engines so you can manually activate/deactivate them, since I only had Tier 2 Spaceplane Hangar (so no custom action groups.)

GONNA TAKE IT TO LAYTHE

[Sufficient Anonymity]

Presenting the S4 Gunship, packing a pair of HEKV void-combat missiles and two fully gimballed 30mm chain guns. A flight crew of two are safely housed in rear-mounted cockpit, and a further six can be carried in the mid-mounted crew tank, for any rapid deployment needs.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Lots of B9, plus the optional B9 Mk1 inline cockpit, BahmutoD's Armory and Adjustable Gear, Infernal Robotics, MechJeb and Bac9's new procedural wings.

Craft file

EDIT:

You'll need FAR. Also, it helps if you stow the middle (ie the adjustable) gear and instead use the rearmost ones for landing. Don't try taking off on them though; they're way too far from the centre of mass.

Action groups:

1 - toggle engine modes and intakes

2 - toggle window shields

3 - arm weapons systems, toggle chain guns and weapons bay doors

4 - cycle through weapons

5 - fire

o/p - raise/lower chain guns

ABORT - toggle air brakes

[Captain Sierra]

-awesomeness snip-

Ah OPT plane pack, how I love thee. I think you just inspired me to redownload that and try making something again.

[soulreaver1981]

cool cargobay guns......but.

i would flip the cargobay and put the under the plane.

nice for ground fire you now

[RedDwarfIV]

Ah OPT plane pack, how I love thee. I think you just inspired me to redownload that and try making something again.

Good to be of service!

[Sufficient Anonymity]

cool cargobay guns......but.

i would flip the cargobay and put the under the plane.

nice for ground fire you now

Heatshielding is on the wrong side then - I should have included an underside shot - pretty much everything is tucked in out the way of the rigors of reentry heating.

EDIT:

For those asking why the bay is on top...

EDIT THE SECOND:

Look what I found - https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/2hp3al/b9_bomb_bay_reskin/ - the current version is more for orbital combat, but I'm going to have to build a ground attack version now, aren't I?

Edited January 5, 2015 by SufficientAnonymity
Someone call for some fire support?

[vladd148]

Heatshielding is on the wrong side then - I should have included an underside shot - pretty much everything is tucked in out the way of the rigors of reentry heating.

EDIT:

For those asking why the bay is on top...

http://i.imgur.com/8vnhInK.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/hr9fx4P.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/TR2PgVd.jpg

EDIT THE SECOND:

Look what I found - https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/2hp3al/b9_bomb_bay_reskin/ - the current version is more for orbital combat, but I'm going to have to build a ground attack version now, aren't I?

What wings are those?

[blowfish]

What wings are those?

these

10char

[Wanderfound]

This one was a lot of fun to flight test...

Kerbodyne Aero R. The space-going sportster for tomorrow's best pilot.

Flight test at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Aero%20R/story

Alternate format at http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/slideshow/Kerbal/Beta/Kerbodyne%20Showroom/Aero%20R

Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/mdo73c4wovjjt68/Kerbodyne%20Aero%20R.craft?dl=0

[Scrat]

My science SSTO: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/106360-Cheap-Tech-Level-5-Science-SSTO-Spaceplane

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Van Disaster]

Took a bit more effort than expected, especially when I found the RF docking port didn't want to dock with stock ones...

[vladd148]

these

10char

I think I just had a kerbgasm. Thank you very much good sir.