The supplementary SStO thread [FAR]

[Captain Sierra]

did they brake due to aerodinamic forces?

Yes, because I use this craft to service my space station in my non-FAR game. It makes orbit just fine without FAR. With FAR, wings come off.

[SoldierHair]

I have an interesting idea.What if i put... a Lucchini on a Clostermann?I could send Lucchini to Duna.

Well, it IS going to be an SSTO, but i don't think you can actually consider it a single stage to another planet.Well, i'm fine with a 'double stage' as long as i actually get to send a plane to Duna.

[Milkshakefiend]

I recently had a KSP clearout and deleted a bunch of screenshots (2 GB! Madness. Must stop pressing F1 all the time) I do however have some screenshots of recent SSTO designs.

Orbital Cargo/Passenger Mk.1 - 'Peregrine' - Named for the speed that it plummets through the atmosphere during re-entry. Make sure those thermal ablative tiles are painted on straight. It has a 2m cargo bay, manipulator arm and carries 4 Kerbals. I use it as a crew/re-supply ship for stations. It's also been used more than once to rescue stricken craft in orbit. I have found this design to be fairly stable, so it gets used regularly.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Orbital Weapon Mk. 1 - 'Mad Fist' - Seats a pilot and weapons officers. Payload of cruise missiles, missile designation 'Rotund Kerbal' - Primarily designed just for grins. It is neither fast nor easy to get into space, but it does just about do it. The reentry sequence is... troublesome. It requires quite a lot of precision and manipulation of flaps at various speeds/altitudes. Not too happy with this design, but it serves no useful purpose so it won't be augmented.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

EDIT:

Yes, because I use this craft to service my space station in my non-FAR game. It makes orbit just fine without FAR. With FAR, wings come off.

I can't quite see, but do you have any control surfaces behind the air intakes on the wings? Generally when I have problems with wings during take-off it is due to excessive pitch control authority so that even with precision mode on upon rotation the wings have too much stress put on them. Also, I'm assuming the control surfaces on the wing tips are used for pitch - the 'lever' action of them being on the ends of the wings means this problem could be exacerbated. I would remove the control surfaces from the wing tips and try placing them closer to the wing root. This should also move them further from the CoM and this means they will also be more effective - you might find you need less control surface than you think. I would experiment with adding horizontal surfaces to your tailfin, and possibly small canards. A last note - I try to design my craft so that I generally require very little control input on takeoff. I use flaps to augment the lift characteristics and gentle control of the throttle to achieve takeoff. This gives a bit more control on landing aswell - landing large crafts at 200m/s is not something I like to do! (Damn it Jim,) I'm an acoustics engineer, not an aerospace engineer, so don't take anything I say as gospel - these are just my findings in my research as an aircraft enthusiast - YMWV!

Edited August 25, 2013 by Milkshakefiend
Additions

[Van Disaster]

I have loads, I've been building FAR spaceplanes for several versions. Most of them look totally unspectacular though.

This one doesnt: made an attempt at a NASA hypersonic airliner study, didn't work particularily well other than looking cool.

Edit: oh, and the 100+ seater one... really have no idea what to do with it

[Radam]

Cool planes, but, how much do they weigh and how much do they carry to orbit? I know its cool building them and flying them, but im guessing sending stuff up is still in the realm of rockets...

[Captain Sierra]

I recently had a KSP clearout and deleted a bunch of screenshots (2 GB! Madness. Must stop pressing F1 all the time) I do however have some screenshots of recent SSTO designs.

Orbital Cargo/Passenger Mk.1 - 'Peregrine' - Named for the speed that it plummets through the atmosphere during re-entry. Make sure those thermal ablative tiles are painted on straight. It has a 2m cargo bay, manipulator arm and carries 4 Kerbals. I use it as a crew/re-supply ship for stations. It's also been used more than once to rescue stricken craft in orbit. I have found this design to be fairly stable, so it gets used regularly.

SNIP

Orbital Weapon Mk. 1 - 'Mad Fist' - Seats a pilot and weapons officers. Payload of cruise missiles, missile designation 'Rotund Kerbal' - Primarily designed just for grins. It is neither fast nor easy to get into space, but it does just about do it. The reentry sequence is... troublesome. It requires quite a lot of precision and manipulation of flaps at various speeds/altitudes. Not too happy with this design, but it serves no useful purpose so it won't be augmented.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

EDIT:

I can't quite see, but do you have any control surfaces behind the air intakes on the wings? Generally when I have problems with wings during take-off it is due to excessive pitch control authority so that even with precision mode on upon rotation the wings have too much stress put on them. Also, I'm assuming the control surfaces on the wing tips are used for pitch - the 'lever' action of them being on the ends of the wings means this problem could be exacerbated. I would remove the control surfaces from the wing tips and try placing them closer to the wing root. This should also move them further from the CoM and this means they will also be more effective - you might find you need less control surface than you think. I would experiment with adding horizontal surfaces to your tailfin, and possibly small canards. A last note - I try to design my craft so that I generally require very little control input on takeoff. I use flaps to augment the lift characteristics and gentle control of the throttle to achieve takeoff. This gives a bit more control on landing aswell - landing large crafts at 200m/s is not something I like to do! (Damn it Jim,) I'm an acoustics engineer, not an aerospace engineer, so don't take anything I say as gospel - these are just my findings in my research as an aircraft enthusiast - YMWV!

When using FAR, none of the main wing surfaces are set to pitch. I model my controls realistically. All pitch is on the horizontal stabilizer. now, the downward canted tips are given yaw authority. The outer wing control surfaces (and wingtip canards) are set for roll and the inner is set up as flaps. The Orion really needs em to take off properly. Now, it is basically modeled like a real plane.

[SoldierHair]

Cool planes, but, how much do they weigh and how much do they carry to orbit? I know its cool building them and flying them, but im guessing sending stuff up is still in the realm of rockets...

Both my Clostermann and my Sakamoto weight around 70 tons fully loaded and i didn't really tested how much weight they can handle.So far i only brought 10 additional tons to orbit.Lucchini is 14 tons and can't really carry anything.Maybe 1 additional ton, but nothing more.

And i too set my controls realistically.

[Van Disaster]

Cool planes, but, how much do they weigh and how much do they carry to orbit? I know its cool building them and flying them, but im guessing sending stuff up is still in the realm of rockets...

The B9/Munox one really does carry over 100 Kerbals.

Still messing with it, but that's over 90t payload. The limit at this point is the physical size of the bay, because any longer and the plane just turns into a banana - I'm tempted to scale the entire fuselage series up and see what I can do with one that'll take wider loads. For some reason recent Mk4 based planes aren't really working.

I built a long-range version ( slightly shorter ) that was sufficiently heavy to need RATO ( really just needs a longer runway ): spectacular, but the entire plane is pretty pointless.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Van Disaster

[Radam]

I guess I have to partially take back my statement. Nice load, I dont really recognize the fuel tanks, if that is what the plane is holding.

Best Ive come to with B9 was 50t with a cluster of 6 sabre engines, a rocket SSTO, without FAR.

[Van Disaster]

They're NovaPunch 2.5m tanks/engines & random stuff just to make a payload. If you just want to ship fuel you might as well use the fuselage tanks - I replaced the bay with LFO tank parts, put a small cargo bay piece in the middle to hold KAS winches and a telescoping docking port, and it still came out considerably shorter. Pretty convenient as a short-term reusable station given it can still hold 6 crew as well.

I knocked up a KW/B9-SABRE SSTO VTO at some point also, think it managed about 55t with 5 SABRES. Not something for this thread though.

[Milkshakefiend]

When using FAR, none of the main wing surfaces are set to pitch. I model my controls realistically. All pitch is on the horizontal stabilizer. now, the downward canted tips are given yaw authority. The outer wing control surfaces (and wingtip canards) are set for roll and the inner is set up as flaps. The Orion really needs em to take off properly. Now, it is basically modeled like a real plane.

Hmm. I am fresh out of ideas then! If you want someone else to test/tinker with it, I'd be happy to.

[SoldierHair]

New design: Charlotte Yeager.I used a whole new engine design style for this one.

This is how the engines look like.I used Tail Connectors put them like that.

[gompasta]

Looks similar to my Yeager, except with a wider wingspan.

This is obviously outfitted for speed, and equipped with Lazor afterburners to represent the Speed Boost ability.

I have been trying to re-outfit it for SSTO flight, with mixed results, mostly ending in an explosion of some sort.

[asmi]

I have an interesting idea.What if i put... a Lucchini on a Clostermann?I could send Lucchini to Duna.

Well, it IS going to be an SSTO, but i don't think you can actually consider it a single stage to another planet.Well, i'm fine with a 'double stage' as long as i actually get to send a plane to Duna.

If your plane gets into orbit and have enough residual dV for deorbit, chances are that once refueled on orbit it will have enough dV to make it to Duna. Typical SSTOs have 1500 m/s dV or more, which is enough for interplanetary burn and Duna braking burn after some aerobraking (allthough that would be one hell of aerobraking!).

Ideal aerobraking would be to dive around 18-20 km (so aerodynamic forces wouldn't tear vessel apart), but turn vessel bottom-first to completely stall all wings and control surfaces - remember that when stalled they generate maximum drag and minimum to no lift - in Orbiter it's usually called "pancaking atmosphere". Once out of atmosphere and if not captured yet, use engines just enough to barely get captured, and then lower orbit's apoapsis by multiple subsequent aerobraking passes, each time making sure your periapsis stays safe.

[gompasta]

Well i guess Yeager is an SSTKE(Kerbin Escape)

I was just messing around with the afterburners and managed to throw myself out of kerbin, purely on the afterburner jets. Those things are overpowered.

Of course i now have no control. Looks like ill be rescuing the pilot. Lets start designing Litvyak!

Edited August 26, 2013 by gompasta

[SoldierHair]

I am sure Clostermann can do that too^.

[Van Disaster]

If your plane gets into orbit and have enough residual dV for deorbit, chances are that once refueled on orbit it will have enough dV to make it to Duna. Typical SSTOs have 1500 m/s dV or more, which is enough for interplanetary burn and Duna braking burn after some aerobraking (allthough that would be one hell of aerobraking!).

Ideal aerobraking would be to dive around 18-20 km (so aerodynamic forces wouldn't tear vessel apart), but turn vessel bottom-first to completely stall all wings and control surfaces - remember that when stalled they generate maximum drag and minimum to no lift - in Orbiter it's usually called "pancaking atmosphere". Once out of atmosphere and if not captured yet, use engines just enough to barely get captured, and then lower orbit's apoapsis by multiple subsequent aerobraking passes, each time making sure your periapsis stays safe.

1500 dV is a bit much with FAR - if you're just being an orbital delivery vehicle you only need maybe 1k rocket dV to be safe. The latest FAR seems to have attached the airbrakes to the handbrake, so you could just use those instead without killing your fingers if you want controlled braking passes rather than attempting a deliberate stall ( although yes, I'd probably use a high stalled orbit for aerocapture at least ). KSP's atmospheres are quite compact vertically, I don't enjoy stalling much :S

[thescientist]

Hmmmmm...I've not seen a lot of stock-part plane... Great thread idea, however!

[Van Disaster]

Hmmmmm...I've not seen a lot of stock-part plane... Great thread idea, however!

Why would you bother? they're practically useless and if they're any size they look like someone went down the local DIY & bought some random offcuts. For the sake of it, this is apparently stock other than wheels, and has a fair bit of range:

This is my old pre-B9 shuttle using firesplitter cabin parts.

And slightly more moddy, this lot - the big deltas have horrible numbers of parts just to stay rigid & weren't any fun.

p-wings would cut the partcount down for those by 2/3ds at least, there's absolutely no reason to make wings out of tens of parts like that anymore.

[asmi]

1500 dV is a bit much with FAR - if you're just being an orbital delivery vehicle you only need maybe 1k rocket dV to be safe. The latest FAR seems to have attached the airbrakes to the handbrake, so you could just use those instead without killing your fingers if you want controlled braking passes rather than attempting a deliberate stall ( although yes, I'd probably use a high stalled orbit for aerocapture at least ). KSP's atmospheres are quite compact vertically, I don't enjoy stalling much :S

Most of my SSTOs have around 1k dV when they are fully loaded, but if launched with empty cargohold, dV is usually in excess of 1.5k.

As for aerobrakes, if you're talking about B9 airbrake, it's way too overpowered IMHO for it's size, so I don't use them. I always stall my planes during reentry as it allows to decelerate significantly while still in high atmosphere, which gives me assurance that I won't over-G nor burn up once I go deeper in atmosphere. There is nothing tricky in doing that once you do that few times and get a "feel" for it. Just make sure to pack enough RCS to be able to recover from stall when time is right.

And remember that both real-life spaceplanes (Shuttle and Buran) used that technique for reentry.

[asmi]

Hmmmmm...I've not seen a lot of stock-part plane... Great thread idea, however!

I've stopped using and deleted all wing parts the moment we've got procedural wings as they offer unparalleled flexibility in designs while still looking very good and without any clipping-through and other tricks commonly used for stock designs.

[Van Disaster]

Most of my SSTOs have around 1k dV when they are fully loaded, but if launched with empty cargohold, dV is usually in excess of 1.5k.

As for aerobrakes, if you're talking about B9 airbrake, it's way too overpowered IMHO for it's size, so I don't use them. I always stall my planes during reentry as it allows to decelerate significantly while still in high atmosphere, which gives me assurance that I won't over-G nor burn up once I go deeper in atmosphere. There is nothing tricky in doing that once you do that few times and get a "feel" for it. Just make sure to pack enough RCS to be able to recover from stall when time is right.

And remember that both real-life spaceplanes (Shuttle and Buran) used that technique for reentry.

No, you can make airbrakes out of any control surface: I use them for kerbin re-entry when the plane is a little unstable until it's slowed, by making sure CoD is well back. I burn for re-entry from a 100km-ish orbit almost half an orbit before landing - more from 150km where my orbital infrastructure lives - so I'm basically just gliding down anyway. If I'm re-entering from elsewhere - which is admittedly pretty rare, usually just Kerbin's moons - then I'll usually do some high-atmo passes until I'm in controlled LKO, and then do the usual gentle descent. I've had a few re-entries where the plane has stalled all the way down to 20-odd km and at that point gone into an unrecoverable out of control manoever, so I'm rather wary still.

Shuttle & Buran were both aerodynamic bricks; I'd hate to think what you'd need to strap on to one to get it to take off horizontally like ours . I have to fight most of mine to stay pitched up that high. Anyway I pulled out my current crew shuttle to see how it does with a high AoA re-entry.

[asmi]

Shuttle & Buran were both aerodynamic bricks; I'd hate to think what you'd need to strap on to one to get it to take off horizontally like ours . I have to fight most of mine to stay pitched up that high.

I'm not sure about space shuttle, but Buran airframe was able to take off just fine when fitted with jet engines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK-GLI

Infact that's how they were "debugging" landing autopilot to the point that it actually landed itself completely autonomously on the first flight.

Anyway I pulled out my current crew shuttle to see how it does with a high AoA re-entry.

Try that and see what happens Just make sure you have really high AoA - to the point the plane would stay that way with little to no input.

[Van Disaster]

Interesting - I wonder how space capable that Buran test airframe would have been with the right parts installed ( and if it'd still be able to take off with jets then... ). The Shuttle's glide ratio was terrible - 4ish/1 at landing, worse higher up.

As expected my canard+trapezoid shuttle ( below ) didn't make the transition from stalled re-entry to unstalled successfully; was possibly a bit too high AoA though. I'd have to redesign it to be a bit more inherently stable, I think.

[Hodo]

Here is a couple of mine using FAR and B9.