VTOL: Liquid vs. Jet fuel

[LittleItaly]

I am currently constructing my first VTOL and am wondering about the advantages of liquid versus jet fuel. Currently, my Manta Mk IV plane has four Aerospikes; two for vertical and two for horizontal. I made an earlier model using jet fuel, but I found the tanks placed vertically for the vertical engines looked unsightly and inefficient. After many (many) tests and failures, I am beginning to wonder if jet fuel was the way to go. Any thoughts or tips for an overly ambitious pilot?

Thanks!

[Tw1]

There is one advantage to jet fuel, it's more efficient, as you don't need to bring oxidiser of your own.

The disadvantage is they don't work outside the atmosphere.

Jets also lag behind the throttle, while rockets change thrust instantly, as you've probably noticed.

Another disadvantage is that there are far fewer stock jet engines in the game, so they can be less convenient than using rocket VTOL thrust.

Perhaps you could try using jet engines on radial attachment points, or cubic struts with fuel provided via fuel lines, rather than putting them directly on the fuel tanks.

[Coneshot]

Jets are very efficient and run a long time but are hard to control in a VTOL due to long wind up times while changing thrust levels. Rockets are easier to control and respond quickly, but burn fuel faster..

IMHO anyway..

Coneshot

[Coneshot]

There is one advantage to jet fuel, it's more efficient, as you don't need to bring oxidiser of your own.

The disadvantage is they don't work outside the atmosphere.

Jets also lag behind the throttle, while rockets change thrust instantly, as you've probably noticed.

Another disadvantage is that there are far fewer stock jet engines in the game, so they can be less convenient than using rocket VTOL thrust.

Perhaps you could try using jet engines on radial attachment points, or cubic struts with fuel provided via fuel lines, rather than putting them directly on the fuel tanks.

aw crap I type too slow lol

[astropapi1]

Jets also use liquid fuel, there's no real difference.

You can use any tank you want with Jet engines, but they won't consume the oxidizer in it.

As for your VTOL ops... I've never designed a successful one, but a single aerospike just below the CoM should do the trick.

[Tw1]

Any VTOL I've attempted can't be flown without ASAS. The most success I've had is with my starfighter, which only works in Munar gravity.

[Geschosskopf]

Liquid fuel is liquid fuel. It's just that some parts call it "jet fuel" to distinguish that the tank has ONLY liquid fuel in it, without any oxidizer. So instead of looking at the name of the part, look at the resources it contains. All of them say "liquid fuel", even if the part name is "jet fuel".

For any air-breathing airplane, jet or prop, you really only want to use tanks that contain only liquid fuel. If a tank contains both liquid fuel and oxidizer, the oxidizer is useless weight you will not burn AND it means the tank has less liquid fuel in it than a liquid fuel-only tank of the same size.

[bsalis]

What kind of a VTOL? What are you planning to do with it?

Any typical rocket is a VTOL by nature.

If you're building an SSTO Spaceplane, you can just take one that works. Then put legs on the back, and chutes at the front, and then it's a VTOL too. You can land and take off vertically on Kerbin or an airless body, using jets and/or rockets as needed.