Quick Challenge: Lightest Craft to Orbit [Stock only] New Challenge #5!

[Bloojay]

Lightest Craft to Orbit
Quick Challenge
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What is the lightest craft you can build that is capable of reaching orbit?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rules:
A Periapsis above 70k constitutes as capable of orbit.

No Debug Cheating, though Part Clipping is aloud.

No Kraken Drives or similar methods of propulsion.

No Lithobraking unless a part of the intended design.

Submissions must be comprehensive.
I ask that if you open the resources tab for the screenshots,
And/Or the vessel information if you have KER installed,
I also require (from now on),
a screenshot of the Flight log (f3) at the end of a mission.

All mods Used must be declared

If you don't give your craft a good name I will

Mods:

No Game-Balance altering mods or addons;
Part mods, Re-balance mods, Resize mods, Enviroment altering mods

Auto piloting mods are banned as they limit the skill required to reach orbit.

Some mods are aloud;
If they solve some of the limitations of the UI (take command, IFS, TAC, etc.)

Information readouts like Kerbal Engineer and some of MechJeb are fine

Visual mods are aloud too of course.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Your Crafts weight at launch is your score.
Launch clamps, disposable pods and Kerbals do not count.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Category #1: Unmanned
No Kerbal on board

Scoreboard:

1. @foamyesque with the UltraLightning V2 weighing in at .645t

2. @Teilnehmer with the Malchik weighing in at .77t

3. @Jetski with the Gnome D-915 weighing in at .912t

4. @nickifr with the L.C.T.O. #06 weighing in at 1.26t

5. @cantab with the PLANSat 2 weighing in at exactly 2t

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Category #2: Manned
Get a Single Kerbal to orbit with at least a .5 units of EVA propellant left.
(for rendezvousing)
Note that Kerbals on EVA have around ~550 Δv with max propellant.

Scoreboard:

1. ME with the KerChucker Mk2-2 weighing in at 1.906t
2.@Aetharan with the Strander Mk.1 weighing in at 2.327t
3.
4.
5.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Category #3: Unmanned and Recoverable
No Kerbal on board, must recover at least the orbiters probe.

Scoreboard:

1. @EliteGuy3 with the Plankton 2/39/4 wighing in at 2.333t

2. @KSPNewbie with the SpeedySat Mk4 weighing in at 2.557t

3. @swjr-swis with the MinilOrb1e-UnR weighing in at 3.055t

4.
5.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Category #4: Manned and Recoverable
At least 1 Kerbal on board, must recover at least them and their pods.

Scoreboard:

1. @Aetharan with the Lawndart MK3 weighing in at 2.085t

2. @Nefrums with the Unoriginal Name weighing in at 2.264t

3. @EliteGuy3 with the Plankton 29 weighing in at 2.355t

4. @foamyesque with the MicroLaunch Orbiter 1 weighing in at 2.457t

5. @Martian Emigrant with the  weighing in at 2.705t

6. ME with the Pram 5 weighing in at 2.821t

7. @swjr-swis with the MinilOrb1e weighing in at 3.708t

8. @Crocket with the Beanstalk weighing in at 6.215t

9. @herbal space program with the U-Light MKPO mk1 weighing in at 6.261t

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Category #5: Kerbal Orbital Rescue Unit
Recover a Kerbal from an orbit with a periapsis of at least 70K

Scoreboard:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This thread is mostly a small test for a different challenge I'm planning on launching Soon™
There is likely a terminal weight to these, but I don't think they'll be a problem so long as the crafts are piloted by non-robots, hence the autopilot ban.

I also couldn't help but notice that there is only a single 3 year old thread for the smallest craft to orbit, Shame on you all.

Edited August 1, 2016 by Bloojay

[The Optimist]

That isn't an orbit mate

[Bloojay]

1 minute ago, The Optimist said:

That isn't an orbit mate

It is tho

[The Optimist]

1 minute ago, Bloojay said:

It is tho

what if it's an escape trajectory

[Bloojay]

Just now, The Optimist said:

what if it's an escape trajectory

Then you clearly have a craft capable of orbit

[The Optimist]

4 minutes ago, Bloojay said:

Then you clearly have a craft capable of orbit

What if my craft has no reaction control, gimballing, or reaction wheels?

[Bloojay]

17 minutes ago, The Optimist said:

What if my craft has no reaction control, gimballing, or reaction wheels?

Then why would you submit it in an orbital challenge?

Also if you went strait up you wouldn't have a periapsis, making it impossible if your craft is incapable of turning, unless you rely on gravity turning, in which case it should be able to reach orbit with some launch angle tweaking.

Now stop clogging my thread.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Bloojay

[Slam_Jones]

Logically, if the Periapsis (the lowest point of the orbit) is above 70km, then by definition the Apoapsis (the highest point of the orbit) is above 70km.

However, might I make a suggestion:

Change " A Periapsis above 70k constitutes as an orbit. "

to:

" A Periapsis and Apoapsis above 70k constitutes as an orbit. "

That way no one can argue that it isn't an orbit, based on technicality, wording, or otherwise. 

Edited July 8, 2016 by Slam_Jones

[cantab]

Personally I strongly doubt a craft capable of escaping Kerbin yet somehow incapable of making any closed Kerbin orbit at all will top the leaderboard, if such a craft can even be constructed in the first place.

Now, less rules lawyering, more entry!

Here's PLANSat 2, massing 2.000 tonnes on the pad, and making LKO with ease. This is not in the slightest bit honed or optimised, but I think it makes a baseline entry for others to try and beat.

Album: https://flic.kr/s/aHskCUoJK1

 

Edited July 8, 2016 by cantab

[Bloojay]

@cantab thanks for the entry  as the first entry you gain position #1 by default  and set the benchmark at 2t with your craft the PLANSat 2! Im adding it to the leaderboards now 

[Jetski]

.915t to orbit unmanned.  Second attempt, now with staging!  Battery clipped inside.

 

@Bloojay Is there a manned category?

Edited July 9, 2016 by Jetski

[Bloojay]

@Jetski I'm planning on expanding this thread after I get my "Soon™" thread up and running, I'll be adding several more variations. The main thing blocking me right now is i just left on a family vacay for the weekend and am having to format this all on my phone  If I can muster up the motivation or I get bored enough I'll add in a manned category

As for your submission, Nice work! you more than halved PLANSats 2s weight securing yourself the #1 position, however you forgot to give it a name so I'm dubbing it the "Gnome D-915"  I'm adding it the the list now!

[foamyesque]

I built something very similar to Jetski's, but managed to shave a bit of weight off it by deleting the reaction wheel (and shaving fuel in the upper stage). As far as deltaV goes I have more fuel than I need, but I need it for aerodynamic stability. As it is the rocket spins out if you're not very careful.

 

I didn't need to use clipping, though.

 

 

 

[nickifr]

I also made a light rocket able to get into orbit. It has a mass of 1.850t and is named "L.C.T.O. #04" (Light Craft to Orbit, attempt 4). I also had some fuel left in the end so I could proabably have removed a bit of fuel to reduce the mass, but I think it's ok this way.

I also partially clipped the batteries into the craft.

 

[Bloojay]

@foamyesque Nice, you guys keep putting my own experimental designs through there paces, looks like I'ma have to completely redesign again to keep up 

Your submission on the other hand could probably use some more screenshots, but i'll count it as valid. You've now stolen the #1 spot from Jetski!

[Jetski]

6 hours ago, foamyesque said:

I built something very similar to Jetski's, but managed to shave a bit of weight off it by deleting the reaction wheel (and shaving fuel in the upper stage). As far as deltaV goes I have more fuel than I need, but I need it for aerodynamic stability. As it is the rocket spins out if you're not very careful.

 

I didn't need to use clipping, though.

 

 

 

Nicely done!  I had a previous design without the wheel, but I couldn't steer after staging away, so I had an inefficient launch profile. 

[Teilnehmer]

Malchik — unmanned, 0.770 t.

(Manual piloting. MechJeb used for information only)

Edited July 9, 2016 by Teilnehmer

[foamyesque]

4 hours ago, Teilnehmer said:

Malchik — unmanned, 0.770 t.

<snip>

Neato. You made me step up my game, though; I have now managed it on two Oscar-Bs.

 

 

My innovation here was to action-group the crossfeed through the decoupler. This let me get a tank and a half of fuel to the Spark and half a tank to a single Spider engine that I center-mounted on the second stage, while keeping the upper tank as full as possible until needed, for aerodynamic stability. I also moved the battery to the lower stage, since the OKTO2 probe core has just enough juice to get lined up for an orbital burn. If I'd gotten there about ten seconds faster I might even've been able to cut off the burn for a circular orbit, but as you can see I almost-coasted (kept the engine on for steering) for a few seconds because I wanted to get closer to my apoapsis before burning.

 

Launch weight: 0.645t. Might be room to shave it a little still (not sure whether the saving weight by moving to a radial battery is worth the streamlining penalty, might be possible to trim just a bit of fuel), but it's pretty tight IMO.

[Bloojay]

@nickifr nice work breaking the 2t mark  you're craft got you the #4 spot when it was submitted and then it was moved down to #5
(you submitted it while I was responding to Foamys submission which is why I didn't respond to it then)

@Teilnehmer I dig your SSTO, certainly the smallest SSTO I've ever seen so I bet you now hold that record, you got to be #1 for a while before the next dude showed everyone up

@foamyesque Son of a kerbal I can't believe I didn't think to ditch the battery  Well you're currently the raining champ at #1 again, also you gave it a bland name so I'm dubbing it the "UltraLighting V2"

 

[nickifr]

I improved the rocket I submitted before (L.C.T.O. #04): I replaced the first stage with a jet engine that brings me up to about 10.000m and kept the upper stage for reaching orbit from that point. It worked out quite well, even though the fuel of the upper stage nearly ran out while reaching orbit. I could proabably have removed some fuel from the first stage, though.

I call this rocket the "L.C.T.O. #06" (Yes, the name is not very creative but I think it's ok) and it has a mass of 1.260t.

 

[cantab]

Nice. I'd been experimenting with the Juno myself but so far not reaped any rewards.

I suspect foamyesque is close to the minimum mass attainable.

[Bloojay]

@nickifr Nice progress! I've updated the list with your new craft. As for the name, meh good nuff'

@Jetski I've added a few more categories for everyone to mess around with, though I think we're all gunning for the main event  (I know I am)

 

3 hours ago, cantab said:

I suspect foamyesque is close to the minimum mass attainable.

*Maniacal Laugh*

Tonight.
Probably.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

Here is my submission (sorry don't know how to do the album + imgur is going all beta version) https://imgur.com/a/8LPHG

Truth be told, it is heavily inspired by Turbopumped's YT videos, but hey, whatever works right

edit: ack, plus it's all shuffled now...

Also, done in 1.05 + I used Take Command to insert the Kerbal into the command seat

This is my first challenge submission if you can't tell

Edited July 10, 2016 by Waxing_Kibbous

[Bloojay]

@Waxing_Kibbous You're album appears to cut the images in half for me, I don't know if its stemming from my client, your upload, or imgur funny business but I don't think I can except it in its current state , you also might need to add more screenshots, I only see 4 and that's not really enough to justify a mission of that complexity. I dig the Hatch-based Shock Absorber System though!

 

17 hours ago, Bloojay said:

*Maniacal Laugh*

Tonight.

Oh to be young and naive again *nostalgic sigh*
I've discovered I'm a crap ballistic pilot.
Kerbal Engineer - "Naw fu'get about it you got plenty of delta V, making orbit shuld be a breeze, hell you might make it to minmus" *runs out with a mere suborbital hop*

 

@foamyesque Here's my design(s), take it and run with it:

My whole goal was to Make it to orbit using a single Oscar-B tank. It utilizes a jet engine for its Isp in atmo, draining between 3 and 5 units of liquid fuel to get my around 15K. I drained its oxidizer counter-part to save weight, though i couldn't drain it accurately enough so I installed TAC Fuel balancer to use its editing tool to accurately get 18.6 units of oxidizer.
I also tried every other Jet engine in the name of just getting to orbit but oddly enough the Juno was the best option all around, and the lightest.

The larger Hecs probe is there because the small reaction wheels would bug on me causing my craft to violently vibrate, and reaction wheels are vital to this design so my only option was a probe with built in reaction wheels.
All and all it weighs only .05t more than my previous 'Flat Hecs probe / T-100 Battman / Small reaction wheels' setup
The Orbital insertion engines are Ants due to the superior Isp in vacuum, plus I don't need the gimbling of the Spiders due to the reactions wheels in the probe,
the juno also provides electricity until Meco, and the built in battery lasts quit a bit longer than the smaller probe.

This alternate version shows the Juno is attached via the Seperator on top, with some offset magic. The whole point of this method was to get the Intake above the probe for better aerodynamics.
However the separator often falls and sticks to the probe after separation, a tedious problem easily fixed by rolling.
I eventually ditched this more compact design in favor of the previous iteration, it seems more trouble than its worth and the bonus aerodynamics didn't feel all that significant,
as well as the seperator weighing more than a standard decoupler.

 

I expect results on my desk by Wednesday afternoon. 

 

Also: SOMEBODY WAKE UP @Turbo pumped HE'S 4 DAYS LATE!!!

[foamyesque]

I did some experimenting, but with ships this small, the aerodynamic drag of even a single small intake just wrecks the ascent speed profile. You can't get going fast enough, high enough, for the remaining fuel to power a rocket to orbit, as far as I have been able to find out.

For similar reasons, downgrading from a Spark to a Twitch is troublesome; the deltaV is about the same (somewhat lower, due to the lower Isp, despite the lower mass), but it actually has considerably more drag, so it doesn't get anywhere near as high or fast on the same fuel. It's unfortunate, because the Twitch's larger vectoring range provides much better control, but I haven't yet been able to get through the jettison without having an aerodynamic-induced tumble due to not being high enough.