SSTO vs Rocket

[Runescope]

So I finally got around to using the Telemachus plugin to generate graphs and thought I'd do a comparison between my standard SSTO and Rocket.

As you can see, there isn't much difference between the two when it comes to flight path and velocity, but the real difference is when you compare fuel consumption and g-force. You can really tell on the g-force graph when my rocket stages

I've come to the conclusion that there are three criteria for getting things to orbit. Fast, Smooth, & Easy. Pick two.

[AletzN1]

what kind of SSTO are you talking about? rockets can be SSTOs, you know.

[TheHengeProphet]

Judging by his graphs, he is using a horizontal take-off SSTO, using jet power in atmosphere.

I do agree, however, that it should be indicated what kind of SSTO you are using, and how these lifters are indeed used! These graphs don't mean nearly as much if we don't know what the craft are capable of delivering to orbit. Is your plotting utility also capable of graphing craft mass?

[Runescope]

You are absolutely right. I should have mentioned that.

The SSTO uses a high altitude jet engine until it can't get enough air, by that time though, my apoapsis is higher than 80km so I coast and then circularize with a couple small rockets on the sides.

The SSTO is actually my SSTMARTK (Single stage to Minmus and return to Kerbin). Though it does have to refuel at the Minmus Kethane base to get back.

The rocket is a simple rocket setup with asparagus staging (that being the most efficient, and therefore the most competitive to the SSTO).