ksp high altitude plane

Thats my problem right now. It may work with stock too, I just don't know. Even better, burn a little more, and you can pop out of the atmosphere for a bit and avoid all that nasty drag stuff. If it's below the cross-hairs, you need a little more AoA. 20 votes, 21 comments. These designs are great for getting around Kerbin quickly, but without going orbital. As I understand, the OP wanted "the most efficient way to fly", and simply needed a bit of help in realizing that that is a hypersonic, high-altitude, high-performance aircraft which is a RAPIER and a little oxidizer away from being an SSTO spaceplane. Have you checked out the wiki yet? As has been said, ISP is nothing to worry about. How do I install mods for Kerbal Space Program 1.1? Personally, I don't enjoy survey contracts on Kerbin. Not only does it conk out at high altitudes, but also it conks out at high speeds, and you need to be able to go fast to fly up high. That will unlock: No, I think it's correct, unless I've got a brain fart going, here. I don't have the numbers handy, but you can expect something like 400m/s at 15km. I don't recall if they model aspect ratio, but either way, the struts are murder and the delta wing has so much more wing that it'll still have more lift. Typically, I watch my Apoapsis as I boost to the high altitude, and there's enough momentum to coast to the peak before completely running out of fuel. If it's above the cross-hairs, you need a little less. I've added more engines, more intakes to no avail. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. Maneuver node plans don't take drag into account, so you'll have to overshoot quite a bit to compensate. My plane has turbojets and lots of fuel, but I am wondering what the optimal way to fly is. (Actually, four ways: but balloons aren't in the stock game) Lifting surfaces are great but they lose effectiveness just as fast with altitude as drag falls. A full suite of flaps on the trailing edges of the main wings give it exceptional low-speed lift, and small hydroplane steps mounted on each side of the fuselage bottom help lift it out of the water (lowering water drag) during takeoff runs. If you want to cover your aircraft with loads of intakes, I'm sure you could easily fly above 35km and reach 2000+ m/s velocity. : : . Since turbos are almost always enough to get you off the ground and up to altitude, I usually just do straight turbojets (with some RAPIERs for SSTO spaceplanes); the minute amount of fuel saved during the ascent isn't worth lugging those superfluous engines around at the hypersonic regime. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top, Not the answer you're looking for? Challenges high-1 A Screenshot of Kerbal Space Program By: miklkit This is the current version. Each stage of the rocket has a delta-v that depends on the stage fuel mass and the engine specific impulse. rev2023.3.3.43278. This thread is quite old. It's also worth noting that this engine has the widest thrust vectoring range of all of the jet engines, with a full 10-degree range in all directions. If released at a speed of 700 or more m/s and an altitude of 20 or more km, the satellite will achieve orbit with its second stage mostly full, leaving it with approximately 1600 m/s of delta-V -- enough to achieve lunar or interplanetary orbits and, on small bodies, landings. The Rapier, for example, works great as a high-altitude engine, precisely because it can go so fast. You are simply running out of atmosphere (i.e. Note that keeping the plane weight low is critical, only carry a very small amount of fuel. Then it is "In Space Low over Mun.". Thanks for the help! It is stable but can not maintain altitude. You do get certain inertial and lever-arm effects, but those aren't really relevant to 'do I have enough lift to stay up'. Been a while since I've flown stock*, but I've heard that, for maximum efficiency, you want one turbojet for every 7.5 tons, and about four ram intakes for each turbojet. That would argue for going as high as possible, as slow as possible, but apart from drag you also have to fight gravity. Secondly don't think of engines working better at different altitudes, think of them working better with different air intake quantities. Simply changing the intakes made it fly completely out of control and impossible to land. Let me share what I know about jet engines, speed, and efficiency. 2/3 (KSP 1.11.2) - YouTube I break out the Mk2 parts and Panther engines to build a better jet that can go higher and faster. Subscribe -. Welcome to the forums. Yes. surface of jool. This lowers their effective "weight"-- for example, a craft flying at 1400 m/s on Kerbin is effectively flying as if gravity were only 2/3 of its actual value. What are the units of measure used in Kerbal Space Program? At 3500m, you have half the drag you'd have at the surface; at 7km, 1/4 the drag, at 10.5km, 1/8 the drag, etc. Mounting a time-limited rescue mission for kerbal inbound to Kerbin. This works, but it's not optimal. In this case lots of fuel is the wrong approach, I can get more than half way around Kerbin on 2 cans of Jet Fuel and a turbojet if I glide most of it. So the faster you go the higher you can fly where there is less drag. Also, jets eat fuel at pounds-per-minute -- if you cover twice as much ground in the same time, your plane will be more efficient. Really. I don't have that cockpit in my career game yet, but maybe it will work with the other one. All other versions are slower and lower and unstable in turns. That's just a guess, though-- perhaps someone more familiar with FAR could weigh in.). But my guess is that these same general principles would probably apply to FAR, and that all that would change would be the numbers involved. So if you replace the turbos with basic jets, you will have more thrust from the ground up, and your vessel will weigh slightly less. How can this new ban on drag possibly be considered constitutional? Will post my results. Trying to do something without the right part is long and difficult path. KSP also tends to have very harsh induced drag if angle of attack gets too high. I got this game so I could over-engineer rockets, so I mostly ignore the airplanes. As long a you can fly faster, the lower density at altitude can be compensated for. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. At this point the plane plummets, but as it goes deeper into the atmosphere, it regains pitch authority, and at 10km it's enough to regain control and turn it around for a safe landing. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. Once it's in the air, it's stable and easy to fly and manages to fly at altitudes between 11k 12k without problems. If not, please explain why, which I know you have no problem doing! Powered by Invision Community, Thanks, I'll go try to stuff a few extra turbojets and intakes on my plane, I was generally under the impression that basic jets were mostly deadweight on high-performance aircraft: [] at hypersonic velocities. In KSP2, you are a rocket scientist who must build and test rockets, spaceships, and planes. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com, Press J to jump to the feed. The Kerbal Space Program subreddit. By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. - "In Space High" means your craft is inside the given Sphere of Influence and above the "Space Border" altitude listed in the Celestial Body Multiplier Matrix. So that means that even if you are inside the atmosphere but still orbital (such as during aerobraking), your science will not count as "Inside the atmosphere", For example, orbiting Kerbin above 250km altitude, your science is counted as "In Space High over Kerbin." Have a plane that ditches its wings and rockets up to 18km once you reach the right point. Thanks for asking this, I've been struggling with the same problem in career mode. Your link has been automatically embedded. You also need to be going very fast to generate adequate lift at high altitudes and unlike the real U-2, you don't need to fear about overspeeding and destroying the plane. Even up there the plane acts squirrely. This is my current best hi alt plane. These are the building blocks of solid spaceplane design!Subscribe! I started by attaching two LV-909 rocket engines to a regular low-atmosphere plane: In this save, I don't have custom action groups yet, so I'm using the RCS control to toggle between jet and rocket modes. AoA built into the wing relative to the plane body is called the angle of incidence, just to help clear up. Things that work at low altitude don't work so well up high and the plane ends up going up and down while slowly losing speed until it can't maintain altitude anymore. Yes, you can get into that range with the high end stuff (whiplash engines and ram or shock cone air intakes). 2022 Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. Make sure we're on the same page with terminology. 1Altitude requirement 2Orbit 3Speed, range, and altitude 4Flight duration 5Flight profiles 5.1Ballistic missiles 5.2Tourist flights 5.3Scientific experiments 5.4Sub-orbital transportation 6Notable uncrewed sub-orbital spaceflights 7Crewed sub-orbital spaceflights 8Future of crewed sub-orbital spaceflight 9See also 10References So, to correct " is below crosshairs", what you need to do is to add a little AoA to the wings. Clear editor. Another approach, which I was managing with some success before I figured out jets, is to build a rocket and catapult yourself towards the measurement point. Using very light "engine rich" planes and "reverse swooping" (building velocity at 10km then gently curving up) you can temporarily get above 20km with Wheesely and Juno. even stranger is that the surface is textured. One problem is i'm running stock on career mode and only have 30 part to spare, so large planes are out of the question. I should perhaps start trying out NEAR to get ready of 0.90, though. Is it correct to use "the" before "materials used in making buildings are"? Make sure you've angled your wings up slightly so that you provide enough lift for a 0 angle of attack at top speed. Pasted as rich text. From my experience using a panther it starts to lose speed after 15-16 kms, a more suitable cruising height is 9-13km. - "In Space Low" means your craft is inside the "Space Border" altitude and in an orbital path. If you enter the Mun's SOI, it immediately counts as "In Space High over Mun" until you get below 60km Mun altitude. There's basically three ways to do that: lifting surfaces, thrust, and orbiting. This causes the body of your plane to generate additional drag. Any of my search term words; All of my search term words; Find results in. Can't remember where I saw/read about it - Scott Manley maybe? at the very least, you'd need the panther, that'll get you over 16k easily, well to 25k. That's sub-optimal, because having the fuselage pitched like that means it'll have more drag than it otherwise would have. This is the first version. In the game, players direct a nascent space program, staffed and crewed by green humanoid aliens known as "Kerbals". I tried building a plane but can't climb higher than about 11,000m (I don't have many plane parts yet, though). 2022 Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Here's my example of dealing with the situation. I don't have that other stuff yet. Do plugins for Kerbal Space Program work on unix? Powered by Invision Community. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one. In the main KSP settings menu you should set the default throttle to 1.0 (technically the above mechjeb setting winds up restoring the default throttle, so it needs to be 1.0) In the attitude adjustment menu make sure you are using the "better controller" Whack the 45 degree phase margin button Whack the restore all other defaults button To get higher with the low tech jet engines, you need rocket assist. i recently used a single whiplash plane and was able to maintain a stable 21-22k meter altitude. The most efficient way is, of course, to make a high altitude (or space) plane. Highest and fastest possible is best. It is boosted into space by a launch vehicle, then re-enters Earth's atmosphere and lands as a spaceplane. It may take some practice to hit your target area this way, because you'll be picking up additional horizontal speed, and thus it's possible to under or overshoot. You can post now and register later. The drag differential is because your long-wing layout is using a bunch of struts, and the reason your delta-wing has a higher ceiling is because it has more wing area to provide lift. Your answer got me in the right direction, though I ended up with a different design (see my own answer). All rights reserved. I recommend using a solid rocket booster (or 2 or 5) to you get you the altitude and then launch a small rocket powered plane. - Spamming airintakes didn't help. Evidence. Anyway thanks in advance. - but they were talking about having two intakes/engine. Keep in mind that wheesley engine's performance decreases significantly as the altitude increases. There are no requirements as far as size or power are concerned, as the AI Pilot is capable of flying pretty much anything - from tiny scout planes to oversized freight craft. This page was last edited on 22 December 2019, at 20:54. Are you using Stock or NEAR/FAR? What are the minimum altitudes for each warp level? So now to come to an end: from my experience I'd say for a medium sized aircraft it is best to fly between 12-13 km. Or is it the same for all celestial bodies? Your engine burns the same amount of jetfuel per second regardless of how high or fast you are! That's because wings need to have some AoA to the airstream in order to generate much lift. Should i add a larger wing area for higher lift? All the information you could want to know about science, including the altitudes for each celestial body, and what altitudes a given experiment works on are available at: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Science. You can halve the drag by climbing a bit less than 3500m. But. It was meant for low altitude flight. Knowing how to design these types of planes make jumping in to SSTO design very easy as there are only a few minor changes that need to be made.Music Credits:1st Song: \"Elephants\" - YouTube Audio Library2nd Song: \"Hot Heat\" - YouTube Audio Library3rd Song: \"Echoes\" - Kasbo - https://soundcloud.com/k-sboWhat game is this? High altitude flight is efficient because the air is thinner, and therefore aircraft experience less parasitic drag. Remember that you need to have intakes somewhere in line with the engine to function at that altitude. The longest flight got them down to a little more than half full. Thank you, I was able to reach up to 24km altitude with this design. Cheers again fellas. Information Changelog Stats air) that high up. This is particularly useful for pairs of engines, since this makes it possible to keep the thrust equal when activating the afterburners. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. The other thing to bear in mind is that tuning the AoA (angle of attack) of your wings makes a difference. In my case, it brought me to 20km up at a 45-degree angle, but it is probably not optimal. Stack Exchange network consists of 181 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.. Visit Stack Exchange Unfortunately I won't be able to test it today, but @SaintWacko's proposal sounds promising. What altitude and speed should I go?

Car Accident Grant Line Road Tracy, Ca, Articles K