Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

507 Excellent


About jinnantonix

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Pretending to be at work

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The original Lunex Program was only to the moon and back. No need for spin gravity. But if they had decided to go to Mars, I am sure it would have been considered. Here is another entry, this time I reprised my Duna Lunex 3 Pilot, First Class entry, getting the rules right this time. (I hope).
  2. @JacobJHC here is my proposed mod list. Any objections? USI-LS Kerbal Planetary Base System SSTU Labs SpaceY Heavy Lifters NearFuture Electrical Tweakscale Kerbal Atomics MechJeb Kerbal Engineer Kerbal Alarm Clock Trajectories Edit: Adding Kerbal Atomics.
  3. My previous attempt at this challenge was in Sandbox mode, so no issues with the cost of hiring Kerbals. Have I misunderstood a requirement? Because if it is mandatory to do this in Career mode, then that is definitely beyond my ability to commit to game time.
  4. I am loving this challenge so much, I decided to have another go at the Duna challenge. Below is my Duna Lunex 1 Pilot, First Class entry. It occurred to me that since Lunex was developed for for a Moon/Mun mission, the cramped confines of the shuttle craft would only be adequate to sustain the astronauts for a few days. However a longer mission to Mars/Duna would be intolerable, so more space and more supplies would be needed. I also think creating spin gravity would assist (and would also be very cool). So I redesigned my craft and the mission to suit.
  5. Looking forward to it. Will definitely have another go if I think its feasible to complete.
  6. Such good advice, I decided to take it! I reran the mission with a slightly lighter Munar Lander. This time I made sure I got 100% recovery at the KSC for both craft, and what a difference it makes to the score! Total cost in the SPH =65,398, with 63,958 and 1,219 recovered, leaving a total of 221 Although I worked hard at optimising both the craft and the flight, I still feel there is room for improvement (I may run this again). Notes: The Kerbin launch to a suborbital trajectory is definitely more efficient that using the Rapier closed cycle mode to ge
  7. Wow, thanks for the tips, appreciate your experience. I might do this mission again taking your advice.
  8. My second attempt in the re-usable category: Two stage craft: First stage using only an airbreathing engine achieves a high speed suborbital trajectory, reaching an altitude of about 75km. A lightweight lunar lander is launched at Apoapsis, burns to LKO and completes the mission with Jeb planting a flag on the Mun and returning to the KSC. The launch vehicle re-enters the atmosphere, reverses direction SpaceX style, and lands at the KSC. Total cost in the SPH =65,436, with 62,708 and 1,211 recovered, leaving a total of 1,517
  9. My entry in the Command Chair category. Total 2094 funds. Stage 1: Thumper with exploding fins. Fairing and decoupler. 5 parts. Stage 2: Command chair, Spark engine, 3x baguette tanks and adapter plate as a heat shield. 6 parts.
  10. @camacju - looks to me like your Kerbal is exposed during re-entry - how do you stop Val from exploding? Is she hiding behind the battery? Also, I thought Mechjeb was not allowed, as it affects gameplay. @ManEatingApe Am I wrong about that?
  11. I would like to see that. My Jool 5 "expendable" low cost entry (the only one so far) is documented here: I am not sure, but I believe there are no restrictions on mining (AFAIK), including no rules around mining for fuel on the launch pad, and so a re-suable entry could potentially be zero or negative cost. Agreed, and I am working on the larger lander for that option, need to add another fuel tank at least. I think the new lander will also be suitable for a command chair entry.
  12. Here is my entry in re-usable category: Kerbal Space Program El Cheapo Mission to the Mun. Two stage craft: First stage uses Rapier engines to achieve LKO, then a lightweight lunar lander (with no reaction wheel or electrics, gimbals only!) completes the mission with Jeb planting a flag on the Mun and returning to the KSC. Total cost in the SPH =43,631, with 41,434 and 988 recovered, leaving a total of 1,209 With the changed rules, I don't think it is possible to beat the previous score on the leader board, but I had some fun with this anyway.
  13. Well that changes things somewhat . My idea was, like camacju's designs, to use a suborbital air-breather first stage and parachutes - but that is no longer viable. So my design will be as follows: Stage 1: Lightweight Kerbin to orbit SSTO, with stage 2 as payload dropped in KLO, land at KSC Stage 2: KLO to Mun and back to KSC - ultra lightweight command chair craft. Gimbals only. Propulsive landing. I did some calcs around a Stage 2 being Apollo style leaving fuel tanks in Mun orbit or free return trajectory, but the extra weight of the docking ports plus the fuel costs
  14. @ManEatingApe I am working on a craft for the re-usable category. It is a two stage craft with a command chair, and both sections land on Kerbin intact. If I use a parachute, is that included in the recovered cost? Same for if I stage a fairing, do I also include the cost of the fairing in my score? Can I land anywhere on Kerbin, and get 100% recovered cost?
  15. Thanks. This record is beatable, I am sure with some tweaking I could do another lap. But 14 laps? I had no problem attaching the wings to the fuel tanks inside the fairing, and then using the slide and rotation tool to position/configure accurately.
  • Create New...