Jump to content

Kerbodyne SSTO Division: Omnibus Thread


Recommended Posts

I prefer to avoid using FAR, if I'm only landing on Kerbin as a last resort; unless you think it's one of those "you cant play KSP without it" type of mods.

As another spaceplane noob, Wanderfound helped me see the light. IMO if you want to do anything with *planes in KSP you should at the very least grab NEAR. And I have recently moved up to FAR, although I "cheat" and turn off the failures so It is kinda like NEAR still.

It is way better to have planes that fly how you would expect. It takes a little adjustment in how you launch rockets, but it is not a steep learning curve. Plus you actually benefit from the delta-v needed to get into LKO.

The best thing is you can drop in NEAR or FAR, and if you decide you don't like it just pull the folder back out and restart. In the beginning I would put in NEAR for playing with spaceplanes and remove it when i was focusing on launches until I got used to it.

[edit]

If you are landing on kerbin as a last resort, why build a plane in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[edit]

If you are landing on kerbin as a last resort, why build a plane in the first place?

Got a bit bored, and I'm trying to get a functional space shuttle, that looks like a shuttle. Currently, for all my Kerbin/Mun/Minmus personnel movement needs, I rely on one from Horizon Heavy Industries. Found here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/51003-Oops

But between the OOPS, my tug, and needing a dedicated lander to actually return any crew back to Kerbin from my station, I decided to try and merge the shuttle and lander. This also allowed me to mix in starting into spaceplanes, while still staying primarily to the rocket portion of why I started Kerballing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can build something with that basic airframe shape (i.e. a lifting body delta with wingtip vertical stabilisers), sure. What do you want it to be able to do? That image looks like a pure rocket rather than the usual spaceplane jet/rocket hybrid. Is that factor important?

I would mostly use it for fun, but a passenger role would be ideal.

--------------â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€------------------------------------------------------------

The rocket engines are preferred, but if you can't get it to work with rockets, jet engines are fine.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would mostly use it for fun, but a passenger role would be ideal.

--------------â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€------------------------------------------------------------

The rocket engines are preferred, but if you can't get it to work with rockets, jet engines are fine.

Thanks!

Okay; here y'go.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/l8aqlmcae21kxl8/Kerbodyne%20Delta%20Glider.craft?dl=0

I could probably make a pure rocket one work, but it would be very limited in capability and be the sort of thing that has to be flown exactly right to work. But I made what I did do as rocketish as possible:

screenshot158_zpsffbd7944.png

Warm up the RAPIERs (action group 2) first. The airbrakes are tied to the normal brakes; they come on and off together.

screenshot165_zps1a5d112a.jpg

Keep the shock cones closed (action group 5) for the initial ascent. Action group 6 for cockpit lights.

screenshot166_zpsefcd8d00.jpg

The airbrakes will automatically retract when you release the wheel brakes.

screenshot167_zps0b29a9a9.jpg

Which means it's time to start the party. :D

Action group 1 for the Aerospikes.

screenshot168_zpsc99e8e80.jpg

Not hard to get up to speed with this much power.

screenshot169_zps55709ff5.jpg

screenshot170_zps6cf2b8d6.jpg

Throttle back a touch to keep the engines cool at low altitude. You've got plenty of thrust to spare.

screenshot171_zps6cef0dd4.jpg

Easy to get a good climb going.

screenshot172_zps67bad0b4.jpg

Open the shock cones (action group 5 again) once the air starts to thin. Not bothered by time acceleration.

screenshot175_zpsf89ed169.jpg

Once the RAPIERs kick over, close the intakes (action groups 4 and 5) and flatten out. If the handling starts to get squirrely in the thin air, turn on RCS to engage the Vernors. Use action group 0 to disable the Vernors during docking.

You can obviously save a huge amount of fuel if you turn off the Aerospikes immediately after takeoff and rely on the RAPIERs in air breathing mode as much as possible. Even if you use the Aerospikes to rapidly climb to 20,000m, switching to jets and flattening out there, flying with a normal effort to delay the switch to closed cycle until maximum jet mode speed is reached will save a huge amount of fuel.

I'm deliberately flying as inefficiently as possible in this demonstration flight, just to show that it can be done when desired.

screenshot177_zps3096e1cc.jpg

Up to speed quickly when you've got 700kN pushing you.

screenshot178_zps405fe326.jpg

Tiny circularisation burn.

screenshot180_zps4d4f7052.jpg

Open up in orbit (action groups 7 and 8). The cockpit battery is locked off as emergency reserve; right click to reactivate it. Just enough cargo capacity for a minimalist Fine Print satellite.

screenshot181_zps686afd4b.jpg

Toggle airbrakes during reentry with the normal brake controls (B).

screenshot189_zps7cc5e11e.jpg

And fire up the RAPIERs in jet mode when it's time to fly home.

screenshot190_zpsf1f21a7d.jpg

Lovely and stable until the air runs out. Kick in the stabilising Vernors when it does.

screenshot191_zps160264b0.jpg

screenshot192_zpse3774f99.jpg

BTW, if you don't like the four-engine thing, the same basic airframe would work with the lateral tanks and engines removed and the central Aerospikes replaced with RAPIERs.

Edited by Wanderfound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Needs flame decals. Flames make it go faster. It's scientifically proven.

And a shark mouth painted on the nose. Most engineers agree that shark mouths are critical to the advancement of spaceplane technology.

@Wanderfound: This thread has turned into much more than just sharing your craft, your advice and insight about how you build and balance planes is very helpful. Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another spaceplane noob, Wanderfound helped me see the light. IMO if you want to do anything with *planes in KSP you should at the very least grab NEAR. And I have recently moved up to FAR, although I "cheat" and turn off the failures so It is kinda like NEAR still.

It is way better to have planes that fly how you would expect. It takes a little adjustment in how you launch rockets, but it is not a steep learning curve. Plus you actually benefit from the delta-v needed to get into LKO.

The best thing is you can drop in NEAR or FAR, and if you decide you don't like it just pull the folder back out and restart. In the beginning I would put in NEAR for playing with spaceplanes and remove it when i was focusing on launches until I got used to it.

[edit]

If you are landing on kerbin as a last resort, why build a plane in the first place?

I've avoided NEAR and FAR because I am only dabbling in space planes. I wouldn't have bothered at all, except that I was moving toward reusable boosters than leave from orbit and it would have been odd not to want a reusable SSTO.

If I were to install NEAR, what exactly would it do for me? Would anything I have now stop working?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were to install NEAR, what exactly would it do for me? Would anything I have now stop working?

Quite likely. The stock atmosphere is soup, and the stock drag model is based entirely on weight. It does not benefit you, for instance, to put nosecones on your rockets as it just adds weight, and the stock model ignores the aerodynamic shape. Both NEAR and FAR change the models to something more realistic.

Whether you want to really depends a lot on why you play and what motivates you. If you want something more realistic, or if you want to do anything more than fly a plane once then go back to rockets, it's probably a step to at least try. Wanderfound has a whole series of planes to help you get used to things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And a shark mouth painted on the nose. Most engineers agree that shark mouths are critical to the advancement of spaceplane technology.

We really need a better Kerbpaint replacement. Maybe not quite as much as the sort of thing that comes with car games these days, but something of that ilk.

@Wanderfound: This thread has turned into much more than just sharing your craft, your advice and insight about how you build and balance planes is very helpful. Well done.

I'd been thinking about doing some vid streams demonstrating the build process from start to finish, but I haven't had any luck finding free vidcap software that my computer can handle. Might try to do it with just static screenshots and a post here instead.

Edited by Wanderfound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd been thinking about doing some vid streams demonstrating the build process from start to finish, but I haven't had any luck finding free vidcap software that my computer can handle. Might try to do it with just static screenshots and a post here instead.

I had the same problem. At least one that isn't going to water mark the heck out of everything or lag the frak out of my computer.

Honestly Imgur albums also do a pretty good job of letting you setup a tutorial album, and with a bit of photoshop you can highlight and add illustrations to key points you are trying to get across.

I remember doing a tutorial album a while ago in the FAR thread on how to build a multipart wing that can handle high G maneuvers and not look like it was slapped together with spars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All my planes landed fine on the grass around the runway at KSC. I generally find any "grasslands" to be suitable, though I haven't tried the extensively.

I also have enough parachutes so I can land that way (in case my craft can't make it to a good landing place or something goes wrong).

The KSC runway paddock is a special case; because it's part of KSC rather than the surrounding terrain, it's billiard-table flat. Anywhere else will have at least some bumps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

been trying my hand at spaceplanes, and while I'm not quite ready to start installing FAR/NEAR, or other mods to get a more realistic play, I think it's still worth putting in my request for what I am trying to build.

Recently started toying with ExtraPlanetary Launchpads, and looking at some of my existing craft, some of which I've gotten from here. One of which is perfect for replacement by the Economic Boom release.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/51003-Oops Horizon Heavy Industries O.O.P.S. [On Orbit Personnel Shuttle], could be easily replaced by a space plane, to fill the same role, of being able to pickup and move Kerbals around, but also give me a potentially good "lander" to boot. It comes with 350 energy, 40 units of mono, and 169 & 207 of LiF and Oxide respectively.

http://i.imgur.com/L7Bfbe5.png

I'm looking to get some feedback as to my design thoughts, from the master. It's intended to be built in space, operate primarily in space as a shuttle, and ability to land on Kerbin. Subsequent takeoff from Kerbin is classed secondary in importance. RCS thrust is very well balanced so far, although I have yet to actually try and fly it yet.

BTW, what you've got looks okay, although we'd need to see CoL to judge. In stock, you want CoL overlapping CoM but not in front of it.

The pure Aerospike propulsion would make it difficult to reach orbit before running short of fuel. RAPIERs would make it a lot easier. I'd recommend adding a docking port for orbital refuelling (unless that piece behind the passenger cabin is one?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay folks; I've put together a little slideshow tutorial. It goes all the way through the construction of a spaceplane, to taking it to orbit, bringing it through reentry and landing back at KSC. There are just under 200 slides, but they're all JPEGs so it shouldn't be too bandwidth hungry.

I deliberately left the mistakes and revisions in the sequence in order to give people an idea of how the process works.

The link is to a slideshow, that should have captions visible if I've done it right. Let me know if I haven't.

http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Tutorials/Hangar%20to%20Landing/story

(edited to fix caption visibility)

Edited by Wanderfound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fabulous tutorial, Wanderfound, rep++. Very informative, and showing how you fine-tune the stability is insightful. I prefer your slideshow presentation to a video, makes it easier to look at your readouts and think about what you're doing.

Two (small) things I did notice:

In slide 16 you use Editor Extensions to disable radial attachment, this is no longer necessary in 0.25 as the Alt key disables it in stock.

When installing landing gear (slide 70 and a few more), I have found it makes things easier to grab the root part and rotate the plane on its back, this leads to a clearer view and less camera-wrestling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fabulous tutorial, Wanderfound, rep++. Very informative, and showing how you fine-tune the stability is insightful. I prefer your slideshow presentation to a video, makes it easier to look at your readouts and think about what you're doing.

Two (small) things I did notice:

In slide 16 you use Editor Extensions to disable radial attachment, this is no longer necessary in 0.25 as the Alt key disables it in stock.

When installing landing gear (slide 70 and a few more), I have found it makes things easier to grab the root part and rotate the plane on its back, this leads to a clearer view and less camera-wrestling.

Old habits die hard. :)

I do the plane-flip thing for VTOLs, but I usually don't bother for landing gear. It is a good trick.

Edited by Wanderfound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wanderfound, how do you get the new Swept Wings to behave? I can't for the life of me seems to get elevons to attach so that the plane of the elevon matches the plane of the wing.

The swept elevons always appear off angle and flipped, they need to be rotated in two dimensions before attaching. Part Angle Display is very good for getting them right; I can usually get them close with 90°/5° rotations, but getting them perfect requires some 1° fine tuning.

As for being slightly off plane...that's just a matter of mousefiddling. Pulling them away from the wing a bit might help. And always attach control surfaces with the wing flat and add dihedral afterwards.

Edited by Wanderfound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice collection. I'm starting to equate "nose mounted advanced canards" with "designed by Wanderfound". :)

I dont know why but i never liked the look of those things (perhaps just not a style i like, but still). Still, all my sstos use frontal canards, just 90% of those have the canards flipped and inside the plane with nothing stuck out.

Anyways, not bad planes, i guess like me, youve found a nice variety of uses for MK2 parts, which are imo one of the best things in the recent update, very very useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...