Super Heavy Applications Program - The Big One (RO in KSP 1.12)

I discover a lag monster.
Playlist: • Realism Overhaul Sandb...

[@NovaSuperSuper]

god had no hand in the making of this vehicle

[@arandomperson4718]

Nah, it was all man baby! (Or kerbal, in this case)

[@anekdoche7055]

finally, starship heavy

[@amarks5436]

This is a serious return to form, Tyler. can't think of a better way to turn a launch pad into a plume roasted crater.

[@spacextreme1]

Starship with falcon 9 as side boosters

[@Tmccreight25Gaming]

Payload Capacity: *Yes*

[@BradTheAstroman]

Bro is building our thoughts

[@unpluggedlamp1]

suggestion: do shuttle but replace SRBs with falcon 9s and external tank with superheavy

[@dezekpl7485]

LMAO

[@tauantineutrino1021]

this is more like buran/energia with the external tank having engines

[@p.e.k.k.a8029]

At that point you're just launching Superheavy

[@tomiprofi]

if there is no external tank, what does the shuttle supposed to drain fuel from to burn it's engines?

[@Sputnick_00]

Uber-Heavy

[@Blatant-pidgeon2]

super super heavy starship

[@romain5967]

I bet that this will be a reality within a few decades... can't wait to see it. Is it plausible to do a one launch lunar landing with a SH and starship that is a normal cargo starship but with a crew capsule sticking out the top (header tank going somewhere else, maybe some sort of retractable nose cone for reentry?) and a lander in the main cargo bay...??? There's also using it and starship as a commercial transport. What kind of suborbital flight could it do, and with how many passengers? How many nuclear warheads could it carry and deploy :D ? Could any of the spaceplanes that you have designed work with it? They would probably have similar problems to the shuttle but still interesting. It would be quite a capability to have a spaceplane that works with superheavy, I think. Now this next idea is pretty out there and probably not do-able in Kerbal, but what if you put a load of small kick and adjustment stages each with individual satellites, on top of a superheavy, that can all fire off in different directions for slightly different orbits... not sure there would be any point in that what so ever but its a thought that came to me. I guess the point would be many small satellites in one launch, without the need for a starship. How much (if any) mass can SH get into orbit completely by it's self? again thinking about cheap small sats without needing a starship.

[@gustavoevangelistarodrigue8430]

The in-orbit refuel looks better for me.

[@crappystudios5824]

Super duper heavy booster

[@richardbloemenkamp8532]

My view is the following: Combining multiple boosters is a good idea, but boosters should not exceed their designed max speed and should be re-used. New upper stage(s) are needed, adapted in size and weight to the combined capacity of the booster-pack and preferably hydrolox to send as much tonnage to the moon as possible with one launch. The upper stage(s) do not need to be recoverable. Its objective is to bring and land a high tonnage to the moon surface. Astronauts can return to earth with a small vehicle including an Apollo-style capsule that can be a minor part of the payload. 10+ refuelings in orbit of an HLS starship seems to take too much time, to be to complex and too risky. Also there is no good way to bring an HLS starship back from the moon (or moon orbit) to earth (or even to LEO). It would need too much heavy heat shielding if it entered the earth atmosphere with 11 km/s. Any upper stage(s) to send large payloads to the moon surface better be expendable, only the booster or booster-pack is really worth re-using and maybe (part of) a return capsule. Maybe in 50 years after we built a large base on the Moon, we can think of transporting significant payloads from the Moon back to Earth, but apart from some scientifically interesting rocks and minerals I do not see any use to build a big transportation system from the Moon to Earth at this stage and maybe never. Therefore for the moment we only need to bring back astronauts and a few hundred kilos of samples per launch for which a small return vehicle and a capsule suffices.

[@Caborrrl]

A landed HLS fully refueled in moon should have enough Dv be able to return to Earth and slow down to below 9 km/s if in LEO. Also, if we are able to refuel in the moon surface, then nothing stops us from refueling in Moon orbit. We could send a fully fueled HLS to Earth and slow down to LEO.

[@richardmcguffie105]

Just make a reusable Monument launcher at this point, at least it would be less laggy hahaha thanks for the cool video +1

[@topsecret1837]

I’ve pandered this idea for a while: A normal Starship launch to orbit, but then a lone Superheavy with SL-flyable RVacs (probably using a temporary stiffener ring like they already do, but staging off after a point) clustered with RCenters, with three gimbaled RVacs in center that remain on for latter half of burn; and a fairing on top of the HSR for the initial boost stage. It reaches orbit, gets refueled, and connects itself to the then-refueled starship, boosts it to near-escape trajectory, then recaptures itself to a low perigee where it then burns back to LEO. It can then repeat the third-boosting mission or use the same method to deorbit itself enough to be recovered like a normal booster.

[@topsecret1837]

To clarify: by third boosting I mean acting as a refueled third stage to the initial two stages; where a then-refueled starship would be then a fourth. It acts as a free method of additional delta v for reaching outer planets which would otherwise compromise the ship’s payload to them.

[@orionbarnes1733]

Now cover the outside in falcon heavies

[@Easy-Eight]

So you're going to lift a battleship into orbit?

[@brandonfigueroa7399]

Can you do two launches and do orbital refueling. in theory two launches could fill up one ship in orbit.

[@marcusrauch4223]

About the 6 booster non-reusable configuration, what about the chines where the COPV tanks are in?

[@dallor09]

have you tried replacing the core stage of SLS with superheavy? I think that might be kinda fun

[@LlamatheLlama6]

Would it be possible to convert SH to a Wet workshop? Similar to your SLS Wet workshop, although I'm not quite sure how you would get a empty SH into orbit. Preferably not with the rocket shown in the video for in game and real life sake. I doubt it would have enough DV, but maybe stretching the tanks more than V3, adding Raptor 3's and R-vacs might just give it enough DV to get into orbit without a payload, or Starship. It could also act as a refueling depot.

[@RaizSpace]

I mean, it's possible to eventually turn any stage you can bring to orbit into a workshop (that is, a crewed station) if you take the time. The problem is that the dry mass of Super Heavy is quite high compared to that of the SLS core, but it's not that much larger in terms of space it provides (9 meter diameter vs 8.4 meter diameter) because it's built to carry a very heavy thing on top, a much heavier propellant load in the middle, and much more thrust at the bottom. So, it's just better to use the SLS core for the purpose.

[@brandonfigueroa7399]

Can you do a starship derived jupiter III

[@bernhardschmid9222]

You could slap Superheavys on the Monument Rocket core

[@RaizSpace]

Look, I don't want to fry my computer.

[@ericpopcorn6607]

Can you make the tiny one. Effectively a Falcon 1 but sized for raptor.

[@RaizSpace]

Well, if I do that normally it wouldn't be interesting, so I'll have to try something strange with it, but I don't know if the strange thing will even be close - I'll have to see.

[@ericpopcorn6607]

@ could go full OTRAG and cluster 33 of them.

[@ericpopcorn6607]

Starship has adopted the many small engine approach why not the many small tanks too.

[@texasfossilguy]

Somethings wrong with this whole thing because 4 of them should give you at least 2x the normal lift.

[@debott4538]

1.5 TWR is fine. The core booster is only nine engines. So the four outer boosters almost carry the entire stack.

[@runnygames9027]

Could you put a dropbox of all your mods please? The fourm is dead, and i can't for the life of me get Ckan to work and all the RO and RSS mods are basically lost due to fourm being dead lol

[@RaizSpace]

My mods (as in, the ones I made) are all on Github: github.com/tylerraiz?tab=repositories As for all the ones I use, I can't possibly fit all of them in Dropbox - I can't even fit all the ones I've made myself into Dropbox.

[@Akotski-ys9rr]

12600k is a pretty mid range CPU these days

[@halberdier25]

Can you vertically stagger six of the boosters so three are half a meter higher than the other three?

[@RaizSpace]

I thought of that and the grid fins still clip into the adjacent bodies.

[@nottrevorallen]

hmm

[@s4098429]

For performance; couldn’t you mod an engine that is the sum of the 30 or so raptors. The big list of engines the pc has to calculate is a burden, when these engines clusters act like a single engine for simulation’s sake.

[@RaizSpace]

Yeah, I've done that plenty of times (including in the video for Nov. 1st), but this is PEKKA's mod and there's also the consideration of shutting off certain sets of engines.