Kerbodyne SSTO Division: Omnibus Thread

[Volcanix]

With both of the solid booster planes, I engineered them so that the divergence between CoM and DCoM was <1m. CoL is just off the back of the rearmost of CoM/DCoM. They're perfectly stable, fuelled or empty, and I've taken them both to orbit to make sure they perform (see pics).

This doesn't mean that they're sensible, though. Anyone flying them in FAR with aerodynamic failures on will have to be very careful with their manoeuvring while the rockets are lit if they don't want to tear the wings off. Even flying in a straight line is dangerous if you do it at too low an altitude. I built them just to see if it could be done.

The Munacy needs at least one of the SRBs lit to get off the runway; the Komet (name inspired by the Me163, obviously; the K-syndrome was just a happy coincidence) can take off with just aerospikes and RAPIERs, and you can turn the aerospikes off once you're in the air.

They're both very heavy planes to start with (you'll notice the wings sag a bit when they first hit the runway), but a huge percentage of the mass is solid rocket fuel. Once the boosters are used up, they're actually quite light and nimble.

I'd be interested to see what is the max speed someone can get them to while remaining in atmosphere. See if you can crank them up to high speed and altitude before you light the boosters and let me know how it goes.

I'm gonna do that later.

I'm currently also experimenting around with SSTO's which bring station parts to LKO, but I don't really get it.. *searches another tutorial on youtube*

And yeah, I've already gone through that tutorial in my signature.

I don't always build spaceplanes, but when I do, it takes years to reach the higher atmosphere.

[Wanderfound]

I'm gonna do that later.

I'm currently also experimenting around with SSTO's which bring station parts to LKO, but I don't really get it.. *searches another tutorial on youtube*

And yeah, I've already gone through that tutorial in my signature.

I don't always build spaceplanes, but when I do, it takes years to reach the higher atmosphere.

Looked at the quick piloting guide linked in the first post of this thread? Or had a play with the Goblin? That one can hit a 70 x 70 orbit in about three and a half minutes under FAR...

More practically, the Velociraptor and Velociraptor II are serious cargo planes, and they can make it to orbit in about five minutes if you fly them right. Either of them could have their cargo bays stretched to double length without substantially reducing performance, so long as the wings are adjusted to keep the mass/lift relationship right.

PS: wait till you see what I'm working on. Kerbodyne has an engines division as well...

[Volcanix]

So, after some testing the conclusion:

I flew the Kerbodyne Benchmark and it flies pretty good. Done a flight into orbit with about half the fuel left, sadly, stupid KSP aerodynamics caused it to flip over during reentry..

However, it's a good plane. (or it is just easy enough to fly)

It got to about 1200 m/s until the rapiers switched to rocket mode. Worked well!

I've also tested the Ptertananadado... ehh.. sorry I forgot the name

No matter in which angle I pulled up, 30, 40, 45, more caused it to flip over, it didn't fly upwards. Have I forgotten something? Or am I just stupid?

[Wanderfound]

So, after some testing the conclusion:

I flew the Kerbodyne Benchmark and it flies pretty good. Done a flight into orbit with about half the fuel left, sadly, stupid KSP aerodynamics caused it to flip over during reentry..

However, it's a good plane. (or it is just easy enough to fly)

It got to about 1200 m/s until the rapiers switched to rocket mode. Worked well!

To make it work better: when the RAPIERs switch modes, turn them off. By that time you should be high enough that you can continue accelerating on the turbojet alone (so long as you're flying fairly level). Wait until you stop accelerating, start losing altitude or the turbojet chokes, then turn the RAPIERs back on.

Was it a nose-up flip during reentry? What sort of angle of attack were you using at the time?

Adding some Vernors around the nose will let you recover from a lot of high-altitude whoopsies, BTW.

I've also tested the Ptertananadado... ehh.. sorry I forgot the name

No matter in which angle I pulled up, 30, 40, 45, more caused it to flip over, it didn't fly upwards. Have I forgotten something? Or am I just stupid?

Is this in flight or on takeoff?

Might just be a "designed for FAR" issue. The stock drag model is radically different, and it's particularly punishing on higher part-count planes. Under FAR, it climbs happily at a 30°-50° pitch and shouldn't flip unless you try to climb vertically or use crazy high angles of attack. Try to keep the nose within 15° of the prograde vector.

Also, and I only mention this because it's happened to me once or twice: are you certain that the game hadn't reset your throttle to 50%?

[Volcanix]

My angle of attack... Yeah, that is the problem. I want the rocket to pull up (the prograde marker) so it stops falling. The problem is, if I start the engine trying to stop the fall, it flips over.. Also, another problem, more engine power means I have to pay more attention to my controls..

To the Pt... plane: It was during takeoff. It didn't get much speed and lost altitude. So I pulled up the pitch *SLOWLY* and well... then I lost control.

Yeah, the game didn't reset my throttle. Checked that^^

[Wanderfound]

My angle of attack... Yeah, that is the problem. I want the rocket to pull up (the prograde marker) so it stops falling. The problem is, if I start the engine trying to stop the fall, it flips over.. Also, another problem, more engine power means I have to pay more attention to my controls..

I realise that I'm saying this over and over, but...coming in for reentry with FAR you can glide halfway around the planet and control your descent purely by altering pitch a few degrees above or below the horizontal. I normally leave the engines off all the way from orbit to runway; they only get switched on if I accidentally overshoot and need to turn around. Stock aero planes glide only slightly better than bricks.

What altitude was this, BTW? If you're still up in the stratosphere, there's not a lot of air for the wings to grip on; it gets easier as you descend.

To the Pt... plane: It was during takeoff. It didn't get much speed and lost altitude. So I pulled up the pitch *SLOWLY* and well... then I lost control.

Yeah, the game didn't reset my throttle. Checked that^^

Probably a FAR vs stock issue, by the looks of it. Sorry; nothing I can do about that.

One thing that may help, though: maximise takeoff speed. Keep the brakes on until the engines have spooled up to full power (this takes quite a while; right click and watch if you don't have a Mechjeb data readout or similar) and don't try to pull up until just before the end of the runway. Use the Vernors to help lift the nose when you do, and climb as gradually as you can until you've gained some speed.

BTW: if you've got the brakes on already when you start the engines, the game will automatically keep them on until the engines have spooled up. And I don't know if you use Mechjeb or other informational mods, but with MJ you can set up a custom flight data window that will give you things like climb rate, angle of attack, current thrust, intake air available/required, bearing to target, etc. It's worth having even if you never use an autopilot.

[Volcanix]

What altitude was this, BTW? If you're still up in the stratosphere, there's not a lot of air for the wings to grip on; it gets easier as you descend.

I forgot the altitude, but it was in the mountains near the space center.

And about that brake thing, I always thought it was a bug that when disabling the brakes that the plane doesn't start driving.

Maybe I should download MechJeb. But first I'm gonna continue on building my space station in LKO and send a rover onto mun's surface.

No, not with SSTOs. Even if I would like to <.<

[Wanderfound]

The boys in the engine lab were so happy with all the solid booster orders that they're getting for the Munacy that they asked us if we could feature some of the Kerbodyne liquid engines as well.

Possibly the engineers had been around some other adult-themed liquids immediately before designing this. Enjoy the Kerbodyne Dementia. Exactly as daft as it looks; beware of tearing the landing gear off due to excessive low altitude speed.

I've got some pics of what this looks like with the main engine fired up, but I think it's better that I let you find that out for yourself.

Requires Spaceplane Plus and FAR/NEAR.

Craft file available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/ty2ij83r3d0bb8b/Kerbodyne%20Dementia.craft

Edited August 19, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Angelo Kerman]

Interesting designs! That last one with the big engine makes me wonder what a spaceplane made with 3.75m parts for the body would look like. Probably some big monster space flying cargo plane..

[Wanderfound]

Interesting designs! That last one with the big engine makes me wonder what a spaceplane made with 3.75m parts for the body would look like. Probably some big monster space flying cargo plane..

Nah, if you're gonna put a ridiculously oversized engine on a spaceplane, you want it on the smallest plane possible. It's not like you're going to be using it for anything sensible.

See http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/91229-Kerbodyne-Dementia-Porkjet-Memorial-Edition for some shots of the Dementia in action.

The last three designs were amusing to build, but I'm going back to building practical things now. Got something good in the works; about to take it for a test spin to Minmus.

(edit: just noticed that you were talking about body parts not engines. My bad)

Edited August 22, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Wanderfound]

Okay; got something good for y'all.

Now you can fly with the technology of tomorrow today.

The Kerbodyne Epinephrine represents the pinnacle of modern-day SSTO multipurpose spaceplane design. Featuring a superbly balanced combination of cutting-edge parts, the Epinephrines's sleek, lifting body airframe and substantial bank of high-performance engines delivers speed more normally associated with specialist interceptor aircraft.

And yet, the Epinephrine is also a capable workhorse, able to deliver substantial loads of cargo to a wide variety of terrain and destination. Low-gravity VTOL capability, substantial fuel capacity, refueling ability and high-efficiency Aerospike propulsion make the Epinephrine the spaceplane of choice for any first-rate space program.

Don’t be fooled into false economy; the Epinephrine remains exceptionally cheap to operate. This is a spacecraft that will more than return your investment, in both practical use and sheer piloting enjoyment.

Kerbodyne. Quality you can fly.

Available at all of the best spaceplane dealerships, prices starting from √102,301. For the discerning pilot.

Kerbodyne Epinephrine tech specs:

* Four RAPIERs, two Aerospikes.

* Very fast: maximum TWR 2.22 wet, 4.36 dry.

* Able to reach orbit with tanks 2/3rds full.

* Radio and ample space for scientific equipment.

* Large cargo bay, right on top of CoM so that it doesn't disturb the flight balance.

* Capable of lifting up to a 20 ton payload.

* Distance between CoM and dCoM is 0.06m.

* Well-balanced RCS: below 0.3kNm of torque in all directions, easily cancelled by SAS.

* Ventral Vernors sufficient for VTOL landings on the Mun or Minmus.

* Nose-mounted Vernors for stall recovery.

* Docking port, illuminated by a spotlight in the secondary cargo bay.

* Two seater, pilot and co-pilot.

* Front tank and drone core battery configured as dedicated emergency reserves; isolated from the fuel system by default. Access through right-click menu.

* Drone core for remote piloting.

* Easy to fly, stable handling.

* Very strong airframe.

* Aesthetics...judge for yourself:

Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4xh410nyk6mjmhr/Kerbodyne%20Epinephrine.craft

Requires Spaceplane Plus and FAR/NEAR.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Volcanix]

Okay; got something good for y'all.

The Kerbodyne Epinephrine:

* Four RAPIERs, two aerospikes.

* Very fast.

* Able to reach orbit with tanks 2/3rds full.

* Large cargo bay, right on top of CoM so that it doesn't disturb the flight balance.

* Distance between CoM and dCoM is 0.06m.

* Near-perfectly balanced RCS.

* Ventral Vernors sufficient for VTOL landings on the Mun or Minmus.

* Docking port, illuminated by a spotlight in the secondary cargo bay.

* Drone core for remote piloting.

* Easy to fly, stable handling.

* Very strong airframe.

* Aesthetics...judge for yourself:

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot459_zpsa098cd2d.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot460_zps0af5ee35.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot461_zps6734e588.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot462_zpsd704bf62.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot463_zpsb162b56d.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot466_zps38c16c1e.png

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah120/craigmotbey/Kerbal/screenshot464_zps2ada3d54.png

Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4xh410nyk6mjmhr/Kerbodyne%20Epinephrine.craft

Requires Spaceplane Plus and FAR/NEAR.

If only I could build SSTO's

Regarding the vernors; they don't thrust in the directions that the normal RCS thrusters thrust in, do they? I'm not really sure, but as I tried docking a SSTO-like "plane".. It wasn't really a plane but never mind..^^ I noticed that having one right and one left is not able to maneuver the ship like it would need to. Do you know what I mean? How do you handle this?

And another thing. dCoM = dryCenterofMass? If so, how do you know it? Empty all the tanks?

[Wanderfound]

If only I could build SSTO's

Regarding the vernors; they don't thrust in the directions that the normal RCS thrusters thrust in, do they? I'm not really sure, but as I tried docking a SSTO-like "plane".. It wasn't really a plane but never mind..^^ I noticed that having one right and one left is not able to maneuver the ship like it would need to. Do you know what I mean? How do you handle this?

And another thing. dCoM = dryCenterofMass? If so, how do you know it? Empty all the tanks?

Vernors work like linear RCS ports: they jet straight out only. The Vernors on the underside are for VTOL landings on low-gravity moons; the ones on the nose are to help you recover if you lose control by pitching up too steeply. They're toggled on and off by an action group. You don't want Vernors on while docking; they're too powerful for fine control. There are a pair of linear RCS ports on each facing of the plane, balanced around CoM to avoid imparting spin-torque.

dCoM is dry centre of mass, yes. You can check it by right-clicking and emptying all the tanks, but the easier way is to install the RCS Build Aid mod. As well as helping you balance your RCS ports, it also lets you view Com and dCom at the same time and measures the distance between the two.

[Volcanix]

Vernors work like linear RCS ports: they jet straight out only. The Vernors on the underside are for VTOL landings on low-gravity moons; the ones on the nose are to help you recover if you lose control by pitching up too steeply. They're toggled on and off by an action group. You don't want Vernors on while docking; they're too powerful for fine control. There are a pair of linear RCS ports on each facing of the plane, balanced around CoM to avoid imparting spin-torque.

dCoM is dry centre of mass, yes. You can check it by right-clicking and emptying all the tanks, but the easier way is to install the RCS Build Aid mod. As well as helping you balance your RCS ports, it also lets you view Com and dCom at the same time and measures the distance between the two.

Ah, okay. Another useful mod for information.. My RAM doesn't seem full enough now Thanks.

[Jovus]

I'm having some mild trouble getting the Velociraptor II up to orbit; I can do it, but it likes to bounce around near 15-25k m ASL. Most notably, unlike as advertised with the first craft, it will not climb vertically, and in fact you have to fiddle with the thrust quite severely because it has trouble climbing, but will happily go fast enough at any altitude to tear itself to pieces.

This isn't a complaint about the plane, which is great, but rather to let anyone else who decides to download it and give it a whirl what to expect. (All that said, I'm a spaceplane newbie in the extreme, so it might just be my lack of skill.)

[Wanderfound]

I'm having some mild trouble getting the Velociraptor II up to orbit; I can do it, but it likes to bounce around near 15-25k m ASL. Most notably, unlike as advertised with the first craft, it will not climb vertically, and in fact you have to fiddle with the thrust quite severely because it has trouble climbing, but will happily go fast enough at any altitude to tear itself to pieces.

This isn't a complaint about the plane, which is great, but rather to let anyone else who decides to download it and give it a whirl what to expect. (All that said, I'm a spaceplane newbie in the extreme, so it might just be my lack of skill.)

Hmmn...are you flying with FAR, NEAR or stock aero? Everything here is designed and tested for FAR; I have no idea how they'll perform under stock. And have you read the piloting guide linked in the first post of this thread?

If you check the original release thread (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90344-Kerbodyne-Velociraptor-light-cargo-express-SSTO-for-Spaceplane-Plus-and-FAR) you'll see that it worked for both me and GoldenPSP. The only handling flaw I found with it was a slight tendency for the nose to climb at high speeds and altitudes; this can be compensated for by either switching on the Vernors or just climbing less steeply to begin with.

I'm not arguing with your perceptions, but I would like to identify and hopefully solve the issue for you.

It won't climb vertically like the original model; the removal of the turbojets means that it has less than half of the air-breathing thrust. But as the original had more than twice as much as it needed, it should still work fine. Try climbing at 35-45 degrees until 10,000m, then pull it down to 15-25 degrees and keep it there until the apoapsis gets over 70,000m. Flick the Aerospikes and Vernors on (the Vernor starts toggled on, so all you need to do to activate them is turn on RCS) and close the intakes as soon as the RAPIERs switch modes.

What exactly do you mean by "fiddling with the throttle"? You should be keeping this one at 100% the whole way up unless you're trying to squeeze the last bit of altitude out of the air breathing mode of the RAPIERs. The airframe shouldn't have any trouble so long as you keep if flying straight and try to get over 10,000m before you exceed Mach 2. Keep it smooth; set your pitch and level your wings and then don't touch the controls. It should climb smoothly unless you try to take it too high before building sufficient speed; small-winged streamlined planes like this need a bit of velocity to maintain lift once they get into the thin upper atmosphere; small wings let you go faster, but they also mean that you need to go faster.

What altitude were you at when you started having trouble, what speed were you doing at the time, and what pitch were you climbing at? Did you have the SAS on? You should with my designs, because I fly with it on and design the planes accordingly. And did you use any of the FAR flight assistance toggles? They're sometimes helpful, but they often cause more problems than they solve.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Wanderfound

[goldenpsp]

Dang,

I stream for the first time tonight and actually get followers. Now I'm getting quoted in threads.

First, I will say Wanderfound has a great knack for excellent spaceplanes. They are extremely well designed and better balanced than anything I have been able to make on my own.

That being said, it does by no means make them easy to fly. They are extreme high performance designs and IMO have a small margin for error. I have humbled myself plenty learning to fly them

Just because for example, a Bugatti Veyron is an amazingly engineered supercar. It does not make it easy to drive. And plenty of people have learned that the hard way

[Wanderfound]

BTW, guys: I have been getting feedback from multiple sources that my planes aren't quite as easy to fly as I think they are. Obviously there's a bit of an over-familiarity problem on my part. I'm good at designing planes that suit my preferences, but it looks like I need to learn how to make them more friendly for a general audience.

I would very much like to have a genuinely easy to fly design to point beginner pilots towards. Think you could help me with that? You can be my market research / customer satisfaction team. In return, I could probably give you some design tips if we work on the designs together. Maybe even come up with your own planes and then swap 'em back and forwards between us for polishing.

Want to grab whichever one of the designs here you think is currently the closest to a good trainer, and then let me know what about it needs altering to make it easier? Think we should keep it stock, or go ahead and use the soon-to-be-stock SP+ bits?

[Jovus]

-snipping out advice on how to fly the Velociraptor II-

Well, at first I tried to fly it like how you recommend the Velociraptor I, which obviously didn't work. After that point I pointed the nose up ~50 degrees until around 10k, at which point I pulled back to ~25 degrees. The reason I had a bit of trouble was because after about the 10k altitude mark the prograde vector begins to drop away from the nose, so while I was pointed around 25, it was pointed around 10. Which meant I had to be very careful not to get enough Q to rip myself apart before climbing to about 22k (at which point I was able to throw the nose up a bit more). It may indeed have been the case that I climbed too fast: at about 12k I was doing something like 500 m/s.

All this is without the aerospikes turned on, and with SAS. (I fly everything with SAS, and use FAR exclusively, and never use the flight assistance toggles at all since they invariably cause me to crash in interesting ways.)

-asking for feedback on more flyable planes-

I'd have to say your Benchmark is an extremely flyable plane. I haven't tried the Scattershot because the first time I took the Benchmark out I got to space no problem. The only thing I might change (and this is definitely just a 'might') is that it has an impressive amount of pitch authority, even at extremely high speeds in the lower atmosphere. Also, I'm not sure the spoilers actually work on it; they might be assigned wrongly in the .craft file you released.

[Wanderfound]

Well, at first I tried to fly it like how you recommend the Velociraptor I, which obviously didn't work. After that point I pointed the nose up ~50 degrees until around 10k, at which point I pulled back to ~25 degrees. The reason I had a bit of trouble was because after about the 10k altitude mark the prograde vector begins to drop away from the nose, so while I was pointed around 25, it was pointed around 10. Which meant I had to be very careful not to get enough Q to rip myself apart before climbing to about 22k (at which point I was able to throw the nose up a bit more). It may indeed have been the case that I climbed too fast: at about 12k I was doing something like 500 m/s.

All this is without the aerospikes turned on, and with SAS. (I fly everything with SAS, and use FAR exclusively, and never use the flight assistance toggles at all since they invariably cause me to crash in interesting ways.)

I'd have to say your Benchmark is an extremely flyable plane. I haven't tried the Scattershot because the first time I took the Benchmark out I got to space no problem. The only thing I might change (and this is definitely just a 'might') is that it has an impressive amount of pitch authority, even at extremely high speeds in the lower atmosphere. Also, I'm not sure the spoilers actually work on it; they might be assigned wrongly in the .craft file you released.

Next time, drop the nose on the Velociraptor 2 and build speed. So long as prograde is above the horizon you're all good, and as you go faster your climb rate will increase. Aerospikes off and SAS on is right. Imagine a doubling additive sequence; 1,3,6,10,15. At about those altitudes in thousands of metres, start winding it up as fast as you can (full throttle all way, "wind up" by pitching down) until you get to the next Mach number. Mach 1 not below 1,000m, wait for 3,000m before getting too close to Mach 2, etc.

Of course, with things like the Goblin and original Velociraptor, you can ignore this and just point at the sky.

The later planes are better performing than the earlier ones, but part of that is due to the advantage given by Porkjet's lifting body fuselages. I use spoilers for downforce and drag after landing; I rarely use them in flight. They're linked to the brake button.

I did have some reports of the Benchmark spinning out on reentry. Was it wobbly in yaw on the way down?

Part of the reason for the chunky pitch authority is that when FAR nerfed the engines a lot of my old high-drag planes started to dive at altitude. I got into the habit of stacking on as many canards and moving winglets as possible. I hate struggling for height.

With most of 'em, it's easy to turn down the pitch authority up front or remove a pair of canards and shuffle wings about. I encourage customisation.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Volcanix]

Next time, drop the nose on the Velociraptor 2 and build speed. So long as prograde is above the horizon you're all good, and as you go faster your climb rate will increase. Aerospikes off and SAS on is right. Imagine a doubling additive sequence; 1,3,6,10,15. At about those altitudes in thousands of metres, start winding it up as fast as you (full throttle all way, "wind up" by pitching down) until you get to the next Mach number. Mach 1 not below 1,000m, wait for 3,000m before getting too close to Mach 2, etc.

Of course, with things like the Goblin and original Velociraptor, you can ignore this and just point at the sky.

The later planes are better performing than the earlier ones, but part of that is due to the advantage given by Porkjet's lifting body fuselages. I use spoilers for downforce and drag after landing; I rarely use them in flight. They're linked to the brake button.

I did have some reports of the Benchmark spinning out on reentry. Was it wobbly in yaw on the way down?

Part of the reason for the chunky pitch authority is that when FAR nerfed the engines a lot of my old high-drag planes started to dive at altitude. I got into the habit of stacking on as many canards and moving winglets as possible. I hate struggling for height.

With most of 'em, it's easy to turn down the pitch authority up front or remove a pair of canards and shuffle wings about. I encourage customisation.

Yeah, the Benchmark is a really good plane. I think it's easy to fly because it adjusts the prograde marker quickly in the direction where you are pointing because the engine has a lot of power. I think that's what makes them easy to fly.

I can maybe help you with the market-research thing or whatever you meant to say. I think it would be a good idea to integrate the parts of Spaceplane+ because they 1. look pretty good and 2. are going to be implemented soon. I'm not quite sure if we - well, if I could help you with it I'd say we but don't rely on me, I've got a lot of things to do but I can still help - should use FAR/NEAR, I think it would be better if you would build a trainer for FAR and stock (optimized for each one). I hope I understood correctly what you said, sorry I'm not the best at english

Edited August 22, 2014 by Volcanix
spelling mistake

[Jovus]

I did have some reports of the Benchmark spinning out on reentry. Was it wobbly in yaw on the way down?

Maybe a little? Maybe? But nothing that you can't just pull back - it has pretty amazing yaw authority, too.

Then again, maybe my practice of intentionally pointing normal to the surface until around 45k altitude on re-entry is strange? I find it helps me slow down really quickly, and at those altitudes your Q doesn't build up enough to tear you apart for behaving like a Newtonian wing.

ETA: Don't think I'm complaining about the Velociraptor II, either. It's a great plane as well. I even managed to get it to space after accidentally ripping off the Aerospikes on takeoff, then come back and land.

[goldenpsp]

Well, at first I tried to fly it like how you recommend the Velociraptor I, which obviously didn't work.

So I take it then that you missed the part that said the Velociraptor 2 is not as fast in the atmosphere as the 1? Cause I took that to clearly mean you can't pull up and climb as fast.

[Jovus]

Yes, I missed that at first. Or rather, I caught it when I downloaded the craft file, but it was a small while between the download and the flight. However, my reported experiences were after sorting that out.

[Wanderfound]

Just uninstalled FAR to take the Benchmark up and down with stock aero.

I don't understand how anyone could have had trouble with it. Just don't let the nose get too far from prograde, flatten out to build speed between 20,000 and 30,000m, shut off the RAPIERs when they switch modes and turn them back on when the turbojet chokes. Reentry was similarly uncomplicated.

Didn't touch the yaw or roll controls once.