Better SSTO Spaceplane Challenge (0.23.5+0.24) Fin!

[shufflermuffler]

Javascript is disabled. View full album

This is the PIP Mk1. It has interplanetary capabilities and is made of 200 parts. It is a beautiful craft to fly in the atmosphere. It ends up with about 6000 m/s of Delta V in a 100km orbit.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qliqwb096mh3wnm/PIP%20Mk1.craft?dl=0

*2 atomic motors

*3 jet engines

* Up to 6km/s of deltaV

*Easy to Fly

Edited August 25, 2014 by shufflermuffler

[Wanderfound]

I took O-Doc's Robin 1.0 for a spin in FAR.

It's a fun little plane.

It climbs easily and well.

It is very fast on final ascent; note the Periapsis.

It's light, solid and stable enough to come in fairly hot.

Although possibly I came in a touch too hot. Kept flying, though. Tough little bird.

The one handling flaw obvious was a tendency to develop an oscillating pitch instability at low-altitude supersonic speeds. This can rapidly explode into a disastrous situation if not controlled.

Enjoyable aesthetics. It's a sweet and stylish little sportscar of a plane.

So, what do I think?

It's a fun little plane. I'd happily have one in the shed. It's fast, well balanced, solidly and carefully built. There are nice little touches of quality; for example, the perfectly balanced RCS. The handling issues could probably be resolved by something as simple as reducing the control authority on the front winglets. The pitch authority is rather extreme; precision handling is recommended at low altitude.

As much as I like the Robin, I don't think it will be getting my vote. It is much easier to build this sort of performance into a small pleasure craft then it is to make something that is both high performance and practically useful. As some others have indicated, my vote is most likely to go to an all-rounder that excels in all of its functions.

For a pure sportster to win, it would have to be flawless. The Robin is a lovely little plane, but it isn't quite up to perfection.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86202-Better-SSTO-Spaceplane-Challenge-%280-23-5-0-24%29-Extended?p=1302838&viewfull=1#post1302838

Edited August 23, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Hodo]

Hodo: pics with the reviews?

Unfortunately I did them last night and didn't take pictures. I can redue the flights and take pictures when I get some time. But I figured I would knockout two of the flights last night after work.

So far I can say none of the designs are really bad, just need some fine tuning and some minor work. Each has their merrits.

[DaMichel]

All right. Here is a bit of advertising ... for

X-74 Laythe Wing.

Its handling qualities are presumably unparalleled and with twin RAPIER engines its power is nothing to look down upon! Be it Kerbin or Laythe it will get you to places, let you make a safe landing and bring you back for dinner! Of course it does not carry payload other than a Kerbal and the science gear but everything comes at a price now, does it.

Be amazed by its fascinating capabilities

* VTOL!

* stability!

* easy takeoff and landing - rotates properly at moderate speed

* excellent balance - very little CoM shift even without TAC fuel balancer

* needs only Spaceplane Plus - and ofc FAR which i take as a given for space plane enthusiasts

* proper RCS setup and a conveniently located docking port

* more than enough DV for orbital maneuvering

* many more

You won't be disappointed and if you like it be sure to give it your vote!

---

Among the other craft i tried to test teh Skathi.

Edit: well scratch that ..

The well meant addition of a lander as payload proved to be quite a problem however. The control was initially set to the lander capsule which is mounted opposite to the direction of flight. Hence the controls were messed up and giving control to the probe core didn't change that. (Any way to fix that?)

In high speed flight i noticed lack of roll stability. Also the the RAPIER engines are set to automatic switching which is not ideal according to my knowledge because it will cause asymmetric thrust when the O2 supply runs low.

Edited August 23, 2014 by DaMichel

[Master Tao]

The well meant addition of a lander as payload proved to be quite a problem however. The control was initially set to the lander capsule which is mounted opposite to the direction of flight. Hence the controls were messed up and giving control to the probe core didn't change that. (Any way to fix that?)

In high speed flight i noticed lack of roll stability. Also the the RAPIER engines are set to automatic switching which is not ideal according to my knowledge because it will cause asymmetric thrust when the O2 supply runs low.

Glad to see someone tried Skathi. I included detailed flight instructions in the original post based on my test flights. Unless you're trying to maximize efficiency or land unpowered, you can safely ignore most of them, but Pre-Flight #13* will solve the control orientation problem. If you're unable to set control from the probe core, then you've uncovered a bug, probably in one of your mods (not your mods – I use Kerbal Flight Data all the time).

The roll instability you're seeing is actually a testament to just how stable Skathi really is. In test flights, roll instability only occurred when fuel draining from the forward tank shifted the Center of Mass behind the Center of Lift. Even then, she'll still fly steadily within a narrower range of angles of attack. Shift some fuel from the rear tanks forward – I've flown her to orbit without TAC Fuel Balancer.

Skathi's intended as an introduction to FAR more than anything else, so I left the RAPIERs on automatic switching. She'll handle the switchover without SAS, so that's one less task to manage.

*Yes, I totally made sure that was #13. I placed the probe core and the crew pod before the lander, yet Jeb still stows away.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Master Tao

[DaMichel]

Doh. I get it now. Thanks for the help. I'll try again

Edit: Okay, second try. Reentry at high angles of attack despite stall works great! But landing ... well i guess it is user error, i ran into yaw oscillations at 100m/s with flaps deployed which lead to a "hard" landing (yeah i wasn't following instructions - was too fast ). It is one thing i don't like though. I have the impression that the craft would benefit from a larger vertical stabilizer. I would also configure the controls differently. You basically use the canard flap setting as trim which can confuse pilots that are used the standard trim ALT+WASD controls.

Edited August 23, 2014 by DaMichel

[Wanderfound]

Are all you folks using B9 in your designs aware that the new pack may be out in a few days?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/73621-B9-5-0-pre-release-updates/page49

[WafflesToo]

Are all you folks using B9 in your designs aware that the new pack may be out in a few days?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/73621-B9-5-0-pre-release-updates/page49

Youbetcha! I am looking forward to it with giddy anticipation :squee:

[O-Doc]

I took O-Doc's Robin 1.0 for a spin in FAR.

It's a fun little plane.

...

Cheers for the showcase! It's interesting to see it working in FAR. My craft are all stock so, for them to work in FAR is a bonus. How does she fly in FAR without SAS?

[sumrex]

Aw Man Sooo many candidates in the stable from my lego plane to CADZILLA, to the micro shovel, the paveway bomb, and so on. Anyway the one I will officially enter is the Rum Runner (front row center). Completely stock no FAR. Straight up designed as a sports car for fun and to look better than mod planes at the time.

The Rum Runner

A close second for submission (CADZILLA!!) 4 jets 4 rapiers 4 nukes. Uses spaceplane plus and firespitter mods.

P.S. whittled this baby the FL7 down to 200 parts just in case anyone wants an extra plane as well. If you are new to spaceplanes it is a wonderfully maneuverable plane that you can turn and throw around all day and gets to space in a hurry. mount the payload to the back and let her fly.

Anyway, I included all the ones shown above in the link below should you want to download any of them.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/c4dcdfsgxiat0zp/AACt2kLxhMelowwwlgy6Ogwra?dl=0

Edited August 24, 2014 by sumrex

[Hodo]

Ok now for the next two test flights. No pictures sorry.

Kerbodyne Epinephrine.

Take-off and atmosphere climb to orbit, 9.

There isn't much wrong with the Epinephrine in this aspect, she is a cake walk to get off the ground and fly through the atmosphere, she climbs faster than any of the other craft and has a decent cargo capacity. It is a bit fragile due to the number of wing parts and may fly apart under high Gs. The action setup was my only gripe, it was a bit complex and I would simplify it a bit by changing the setup.

Orbital, 8.

The weakest point so far of this craft, the use of RCS thrusters is generous but several of them burn fuel which is needed for the craft. Making it a bit of a fuel hog.

Re-entry and Landing, 9.

Really re-entry was pretty straight forward and uneventful which is good. It has an excellent glide rate if needed. And a pretty low landing speed that is pretty stable. The only thing I had problems with was the brakes, you have to nurse the brakes due to the front landing gear still having the brakes assigned to it. If that were removed I would have given it a 10.

Overall, 8.67. The Epinephrine is nearly perfect, as good as one as some of my best. Truly a great craft.

Now on to the X-74 Laythe Wing.

Take-off and atmosphere, 9

I would have given this one a 10 but it had a horrible action group setup and actually did not have the VTOL engines setup to turn them off. There is very little to say about this, it was even able to be taken off with the SAS off to take off as a VTOL. Surprisingly well balanced craft.

Orbital, 7.

It is a decent enough handling craft, it does quite well in space, but a bit fuel happy. Not much to say about this craft.

Re-Entry and landing, 9.

Again being a VTOL helps with this. It is able to do quite well in all situations, the action group setup really is the main reason for me not to give this a 10.

Overall 8.33. The X74 could be the best craft I have tested as of yet, but the action group setups are just bad.

[DaMichel]

Nice. I'm glad you like it, Hodo.

But, am i understanding you right in that you say the VTOL engines are not bound to an action group? Because then there is something wrong. They should be bound to AG3. Can you confirm? I just checked and it works as advertised here. (My AG setup starts with AG3 because i hard flaps bound to 1 and 2 and later found that flaps do more harm than good)

Edit: checked the downloaded craft from Dropbox. Seems good.

Edited August 24, 2014 by DaMichel

[Wanderfound]

I thought I'd mentioned in the notes, but I might not have: the Vernors are for emergency spin recovery, vectored-thrust aerobatics and low-grav VTOL landings. Any time you're not doing one of those things you should have the Vernors toggled off; balanced conventional monoprop RCS is on hand if desired, but is usually not necessary except for docking.

Thanks for the review, Hodo.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Hodo]

Nice. I'm glad you like it, Hodo.

But, am i understanding you right in that you say the VTOL engines are not bound to an action group? Because then there is something wrong. They should be bound to AG3. Can you confirm? I just checked and it works as advertised here. (My AG setup starts with AG3 because i hard flaps bound to 1 and 2 and later found that flaps do more harm than good)

Edit: checked the downloaded craft from Dropbox. Seems good.

For some reason the first 3 action groups are blank on the downloaded craft for me. Odd. Eitherway it still is an excellent craft.

[Wanderfound]

I'm going to have to change my entry.

Kerbodyne submitted the Epinephrine because our engineers felt that it was the greatest spacecraft that they had ever constructed.

But then they surpassed themselves.

NEW! IMPROVED!

Kerbodyne Migration

Presenting the new release from the Kerbodyne SSTO Division’s Kerbal Transportation Solutions range: the Kerbodyne Migration. Capable of transporting twenty six Kerbals (two crew, four first class passengers, eight business class passengers and twelve economy passengers) in style, speed and comfort (well, in the first class compartment, anyway).

Half a dozen quick, inexpensive trips to the Mun and back and you won't just have a Munar base; you'll have a Munar town. Also available in conversions for use as an infantry transport, paratroop intruder, medium bomber, aerial command and control centre, combined crew/cargo delivery vessel, flexible research explorer or large executive jet.

Kerbodyne. Quality you can fly.

* Action group 1 toggles Aerospikes.

* Action group 2 toggles inner RAPIERs.

* Action group 3 toggles outer RAPIERs.

* Action group 4 toggles RAPIER mode.

* Action group 6 toggles intakes.

* Action group 7 toggles boarding mode.

* Action group 8 toggles docking mode.

* Action group 9 triggers scientific instruments.

* Action group 10 toggles Vernors. Used for low-grav VTOL and emergency recovery. Keep toggled off at other times.

* Conventional RCS remains for your docking needs.

* Providing less legroom in economy class could substantially enhance the carrying capacity.

* Hopefully they'll soon fix the bug that prevents you from loading command chairs with Kerbals in the SPH. In the meantime, walk.

Part Count: 200

Wet mass: 47.947 t

Dry mass: 26.142 t

Price: from √151,496

* Also available: Wanderfound's Custom Edition. Features Mechjeb Flight Instrumentation, TAC-LS supplies and Extended Trim functionality: action group 5 sets trim to current inputs. https://www.dropbox.com/s/gvms9evo7vjtckg/Kerbodyne%20Migration%20Custom%20Comfy.craft?dl=0

Also requires Shimmy's Throne and Kerbpaint for aesthetics.

If you're willing to use such tactics, you can clip infinite life support supplies into the forward bay without using the debug menu. Kinda defeats the point of TAC-LS, though.

The flying instructions are so simple that they could fit on one of Jebediah’s post-it notes.

1. Take off.

2. Set pitch to 20°.

3. Go to space.

Don’t turn on the Aerospikes until the oxygen runs out. Save the Vernors for when you need them: spin recovery and low-grav VTOL landings.

Appreciates attention to roll just after takeoff, but becomes completely stable once up to speed.

110kN of precisely balanced low-grav VTOL capability.

Economy Class.

Switching to docking mode.

Spoilers for descent and landing.

Easy take off.

Simple ascent profile (profile showing here slightly lower than norm for flight testing purposes. 20° recommended for normal use).

Perfect transonic stability. Hands-off piloting with SAS alone after getting up to minimum flight speed.

Enough power for a horizontal ascent: note the low angle of attack and lack of control surface activity.

Accelerates rapidly.

Outer engines shut down to extend air-breathing capability.

Switching to closed-cycle propulsion. Aerospikes activated.

Finally start to see some heating effects. Exceptionally smooth aerodynamics leave the Kerbodyne Migration immune to speeds that would tear lesser craft to shreds.

Getting quite warm now.

Whoops.

(note: shock heating damage inflicted as a deliberate flight testing procedure. Will not occur if customers follow a sane 20° flightpath as instructed. Kerbodyne takes no responsibility for customer losses while flying above Mach 7 in the lower atmosphere)

Still flies perfectly stably.

There go the other ones.

(note: both losses due to temperature, not aerodynamic failure. The Kerbodyne Migration airframe is perfectly solid unless intentionally abused)

Still good.

Mach 8, let’s throttle off and see how we’re doing.

Not bad.

I wonder what will happen if we hit the gas again?

Out of gas, maybe the RCS will work.

And that’s it, starting to slow down.

Oops.

I wonder how much RCS we have left?

Requires SP+ and FAR/NEAR. Obviously untroubled by Deadly Reentry. Combines exceptionally well with Shimmy's Throne: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/66220-Bond-Aerotech-Shimmy-s-Throne-1-3-1-F100-jet-engine-Updated-15-AUG-14

Craft file available from https://www.dropbox.com/s/gpwx7x5lyu9yr06/Kerbodyne%20Migration.craft?dl=0

Edited August 26, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Sirine]

@Wanderfound: Perhaps you should just clear your entry thread HERE, so, people will not be confuse.

BTW, OP updated.

[Jett_Quasar]

If you're transporting Kerbals into space you need a Wedgie!

JR

Edited August 15, 2015 by Jolly_Roger

[Wanderfound]

@Wanderfound: Perhaps you should just clear your entry thread HERE, so, people will not be confuse.

BTW, OP updated.

Whoops, forgot that one. Will update to clarify.

[Sirine]

@Jolly_Roger : Part count?

[Jett_Quasar]

My part count is 280, sorry I thought it was 300 or less (must have read it in another challenge) I read the rules again and I guess I'm out. Oh well...

JR

[Sirine]

@Jolly_Roger Well if you read the rules well. It did stated that you can post whatever you want. Breaking the rules is part of the "allowed rules". Your main goal is to get vote from other participants.

[Jett_Quasar]

So I'm back in! Cool. I guess that's what I get for not reading the rules... twice :0

JR

[Jett_Quasar]

So I guess I better get serious about this since there's a picture of my Wedgie on the front page...

So I figure it's got a pretty standard flight profile for a space plane:

1) Generally I like to put the brakes on before I start the engines, especially on heavier space planes because they tend to use up the whole runway - and this one is no exception.

2) Hit space bar to start all the jet engines.

3) Release the brakes and let it run right off the end of the runway.

4) Just before you're about to crash pull up hard.

5) The aircraft will nose up fairly quickly - angle it up to 45 degrees and it will continue to accelerate up to 10Km fairly easily.

6) At about 10 Km drop the nose back down to about 20 degrees.

7) Allow the speed to increase - you'll see re-entry effects starting around 650m/s

8) Continue at 20 degrees until your speed is past 1300 m/s this should be at around 25Km altitude and keep an eye on your intake air.

9) When your intake air drops to less than 80 hit hot key 1 to toggle off your low altitude jet engines (they are the outer ones).

10) What this does is buy you more intake air because there are less engines burning but all the intakes are still open (max altitude in this config is about 30Km).

11) When the intake air drops below about 30 hit hot key 2 to toggle off the remaining jet engines, then hot key 3 to fire up the Aerospike rocket engines.

12) Nose back up to 45 degrees until your apoapsis hits about 75Km then shut down the engines (either with hot key 3 or X).

13) Set your orbital insertion node as you normally would.

14) Fire the Aerospikes for the orbital injection.

This picture shows my 75 by 78 Km orbit with about 900 liquid fuel left - The craft can hold up to 19 Kerbals but I only had 3 in the command pod for this flight.

It's a pretty cool ship, it's big and heavy but it gets the job done.

Oh and props to KandoKris for showing one of my other designs in his review pics (even though it's not entered in this competition)

JR

Edited August 15, 2015 by Jolly_Roger

[DaMichel]

Now i too, flew the Kord TriPower (mun_shuttle).

I agree in most parts with Hodo. It is also quite underpowered for a KSP plane. It took me full 20 min to get into orbit. But then i made it to the Mun and back. Very cool. I like it more than the Skathi

Takeoff wasn't so bad. After one failed attempt i used the VTOL engines for help. Space flight - yeah the misaligned thrust is a problem. I found to have barely enough RCS fuel for the entire trip. I tried to pump fuel to the lower tanks but even then the engine torque at full power is too strong for the RCS thrusters to overcome (hands off). Back at Kerbin i didn't manage a direct reentry from the Mun transfer, using DRE. Got into a 70 km orbit first and then made the approach to KSC. The landing attempt was botched due to the "Collided into runway bug" and i didn't bother to try again (needs a program restart). Until then the approach looked good. The design is relatively easy to slow down, contrary to what the creator says. All the parts sticking out of the craft surely create lots of drag, much more than streamlined designs.

[Wanderfound]

Any chance of a bit more detail on the stock/mod column in the first post listings? I'd like take all the FAR/SP+ planes out for a spin, but I'm not interested in downloading heaps of mods for a testflight, so B9/IR etc are out.

It'd be nice not to have to dig through the thread; others may be in a similar boat.