Starship on a Shuttle Stack (KSP 1.12 with RO)

Maybe Super Heavy is just overly complicated.
Playlist: • Realism Overhaul Sandb...

[@Hal9023]

I can't believe SpaceX didn't think of this...

[@jef_3006]

This is silly, but fun. On the comment of "whatever hydraulic thing SpaceX would cook up" for separation, I would note the existence of H-II's unpowered mechanical SRB separation system. I replicated it in stock KSP once, and it did work. Oh, and I agree that there is no foam on Superheavy, but there is ice, which is the reason NASA was so heavy on the foam for Shuttle to begin with. I have long wondered about doing a Shuttle with room temperature fuels to avoid all that. Probably hypergolics. No one would've been happy about the toxicity, but Hydrazine can also be used in fuel-rich staged combustion engine, and a big NTO/Aerozine tank would've totally avoided the ice problem.

[@RaizSpace]

As much as I don't like hypergolics, we do need a broader array of larger hypergolic engines in KSP, and especially some with restart capability.

[@debott4538]

This has me thinking. And I am sure no other esteemed rocket pioneer ever thought of this: What if we mounted all the engines at the top and have the tanks hang from the bottom? Might save a lot of weight, no?

[@RaizSpace]

You think you're being clever with the Goddard reference, but how about the payload at the bottom: kzbin.info/www/bejne/navSmaeLe5WagKM Technically, this could also have the tanks below the point where the thrust is applied.

[@debott4538]

@@RaizSpace But seriously, what's the downside? I think I remember that Goddard's rockets were unstable and that thrust vectoring is easier from the bottom. Engine exhaust hitting the vehicle might also be an issue.

[@RaizSpace]

I mean, I think you've covered the downsides.

[@SavvaLevkovich]

🤯

[@griffonatrix]

I don't know if this will work the same with RO parts, but with stock SRBs you can program in a thrust curve using a KAL controller if this isn't goofy enough for you already

[@danimorcos7226]

love you, but you make it very hard to defend you for these ideas!

[@RaizSpace]

I wasn't really looking for defense on this one - this is obviously not one my actual designs, unlike Shinkansen, Ministar-Orion Carrier, Kumo Lander, etc. If you've got an issue with those, we have bigger problems ...

[@debott4538]

No foam to fall of. But what about chunks of ice? Not sure how much water sublimates on Starship.

[@FatovMikhail]

next time will be Energia-Starship I hope

[@cristianshay227]

Wouldn't it make more sense to mount the starship with the heatshield outwards as it doesn't have the rear stabilizer the shuttle had, but loved the video!

[@RaizSpace]

That's possible, though we may have to add a vertical stabilizer ...

[@rebeccarivers4797]

If we learn anything from shuttle, turn the Starship 180 degrees. Ice on the Booster would hit the heat shield and damage it. Rotating it would remove that possibility. I know the mods don’t model ice and damage like that, but still. It would be more accurate. Also you could angle starship so the thrust lines up better with center of mass so it doesn’t induce a rotation when it separates.

[@RaizSpace]

I'll think about rotating it, though I did have a nefarious plan to make Starship look even more like the Shuttle with a vertical stabilizer. This wasn't meant to be a serious thing at all, but maybe I'll relent and not go whole-Shuttle on it.

[@alrightydave]

tbh shuttle ET takes the load of SRB’s so not completely like a drop tank like on my shuttle heavy lift vehicle

[@RaizSpace]

I meant the hydrogen tank on the ET just hangs off - the loads are applied to the intertank, so a much smaller surface area than reinforcing the entire tank as in Energia or SLS.