Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

Everything posted by camacju

  1. For the record, HoDeok was able to get a craft stable in the "Landed at Jool" state by transferring a craft in the landed state all the way to Jool. Notably, this effect will transfer between crafts - a craft landed on an already-landed Jool platform will also be landed. So you can indeed get surface science from Jool. Likely this is what the OP was thinking about, but it's a pretty niche mechanic and I don't fault everyone here for not knowing about it. Edit: Apparently they were thinking about something else entirely. But the challenge is definitely possible, if a bit tedious.
  2. I use either 0 or 5 degrees because I'm too lazy to install a precise editor
  3. Funny you should say that. If you go into the advanced part lists widget in the VAB and sort by size, you'll see the old Spark and the new Spark. It wasn't removed or changed, just hidden and a completely new part was added. This was to preserve backward compatibility. I've never had a reason to use the old Spark in a mission, but if I ever need to, it's still there.
  4. OndrikB and moar ssto produced a very nice video showcasing a craft like this.
  5. Good catch, I forgot that the Spark took that much of an Isp hit at sea level
  6. Not sure what I want to do next in KSP, but it'll probably involve some Minmus gravity love.
  7. I'm probably being too petty here but I had someone argue that a rocket with 5200 delta-v cannot go to the Mun and back. It was your standard fare of "It takes 3400 m/s to get to orbit" and "you need 800 m/s to land on Mun" etc, etc. But this is what made me want to actually do this mission: So, tac, here you go! Craft in VAB. 5114 vacuum delta-v and 4510 surface delta-v. There's some part clipping and aero trickery going on here, but no sources of free energy. Journey to Mun: Landed on Mun with almost 900 m/s of delta-v remaining. More than enough to get home Return trip: Landed back on Kerbin! Margin looks tight, but as explained above, it's probably more permissive than it seems. Total vacuum delta-v spent is 5114 - 54 = 5060 m/s. (Thanks to @Poppa Wheelie for the correction - 46 m/s as shown in the last screenshot is from sea level). My best estimate for delta-v actually spent (based on Mechjeb's readings) is 2372 + 70 (ascent and circularization) + 2546 - 54 (vacuum dv spent) = 4934 m/s.
  8. Instead of mechjeb trying to maintain a certain speed and altitude, it's probably best to just punch the throttle to max and leave it there for the duration. This ensures that you're as close as possible to the far right end of the engine's mach curve, so you get the most speed for the least thrust. Also you'll fly higher which translates to lower thrust. Actually, this isn't quite true. On my jet engine endurance mission, I ended up flying so high that the Rapier started to flame out at full throttle, so I had to throttle back. This still led to improved efficiency however, as I could still operate at the Rapier's limit. However, one possible improvement would be to have wings in cargo bays, so I could take off and then reduce lift for cruising.
  9. Here's my Class 2 entry - 14236 m: On runway. A Kerbal has unreasonably high drag so that's why I included the fairing - I can actually get better height with the extra mass. I tried to balance this craft but for some reason a command seat's center of mass changes when a Kerbal is in it, and this change isn't reflected in the VAB. This means that Kerbal Engineer's thrust torque readout doesn't work either, so I had to do this with pure trial and error. Mite burns out 14236 meter max height I rearranged the staging on the fly so a single staging event deploys both the fairing and parachute. Chute deployed Landed
  10. This same style of gravity assist is useful for capturing around any body where your encounter velocity is greater than escape velocity and aerobraking isn't possible. This includes: -Moho -Gilly -Mun and Minmus -Ike -Dres -Bop and Pol -Eeloo Vall and Tylo aren't on this list because with proper use of gravity assists, it's possible to encounter them already on an elliptical orbit, so additional deep space maneuvers won't help. Edit: It turns out that I hadn't reexamined my assumptions about Mun in a while, it's likely that you don't need deep space maneuvers. But they certainly help.
  11. I feel like the reason for the RS-25s was that they were upgraded to produce slightly more power, but their "rated power" remained the same?
  12. Well this does actually exist at a smaller level, for example the space shuttle would lift off running at 104% thrust on the RS-25s and if I remember correctly they could go to 110%
  13. It seems like you have just discovered that you can basically cheat using the kal controller so you're spamming as many challenges as possible with it. You seem to have missed the "challenge" part of challenges
  14. This isn't a difficult or fun challenge, I was expecting an actual low mass grand tour challenge. Excluding eve is quite a bit of a cop out in grand tours because it's the hardest planet to take off from. Also allowing kal exploits makes the entire thing trivial, as you've probably already concluded.
  15. I think you might want to try using Tylo to reduce your speed, which will set up a better Laythe assist. It's like using Kerbin and Eve to get to Jool - you need to go inward first. If you use Tylo to reduce speed and Laythe to increase speed, you'll end up winding up your Laythe relative velocity until you can escape direct to Kerbin.
  16. With proper application of gravity assists, you might actually be able to reach Kerbin without the need for a refueling mission. You're orbiting Vall at ~800 m/s in a circular orbit so escape velocity is approximately 1130 m/s, so you need 330 m/s to escape. (The true number will be a good amount less than this because Vall has a sphere of influence, so you don't actually need to be on a hyperbolic trajectory to escape Vall). KER says you have 417 m/s so this is pretty reasonable. Edit: I put a test craft into Vall orbit and got a pretty nice Laythe encounter for only 270 m/s. From there I can encounter Tylo and then simply chain gravity assists until I'm home.
  17. Very nicely done! This seems like it was more of a puzzle than anything else - figuring out what to do with the limited parts and resources.
  18. Ok, great. My plan is to make a single giant launch with a small ssto, a bunch of modular fuel tanks, and a refueling vessel. Then launch the tanks one at a time into LKO, launch the ssto into LKO, and refuel it. I should get over 6K delta-v when I'm done
  19. I'm sorry but nobody is going to create a new completely stock install just to do this challenge, these mods don't change parts or physics at all so disallowing them is pretty unreasonable
  20. I have a mildly funny idea for this. Just for clarification, there are the guidelines I'm following: -Only one aerospike engine is allowed for propulsion -The mission must be a single launch and must not interact with any other launch Would any stock mission that satisfies these two constraints be allowed?
  21. Ok, I blatantly ripped off OJT's submission, except for optimizing the flight profile and drag characteristics. Craft in VAB Liftoff. Note the 2050 LF capacity Once I get sufficient speed, the shock cone is now able to feed two rapiers, so the other intakes are dropped Using body lift to pull up apoapsis (L/D is actually not that bad) Running out the last of the rapiers Rapiers detached Circularizing 6783 m/s remaining Shock cone actually doesn't have enough static suction for more than one rapier launched vertically, you need more intakes (basically what I did)
  22. Actually, funny enough, the Nerv's Isp is just high enough that with a Nerv+Vector craft optimised for payload fraction it's beneficial to burn the Nerv right off the pad. Isp increases really quickly as you launch, and the extra thrust makes up for the Isp reduction.
  23. Yeah I know how root fairing works. I was suggesting something as follows: -Place nose cones on the front and back nodes of the fairing (both nodes will be almost fully occluded - if you look at the WDrg values in your fairing, you'll see 0.49 WDrg value for your rear node, which is not optimal. Note that your fairing has 0.14 OccA for both nodes instead of zero) -Place the engine on an interstage node of the fairing to occlude more area (Interstage nodes count for node occlusion) -Place octagonal struts on interstage nodes to occlude the rest of the area As is, you're not fully occluding the frontal and rear area of the fairing, while also eating the mass penalty from using the 1K battery bank (It's 40 kg, while the nose cone is only 30 kg). For future reference, the octagonal strut is the single best part in terms of occlusion area per mass (at least for 0.625m and 1.25m parts), but you can't fit enough on the interstage nodes to fully occlude a fairing, so the aerodynamic nose cone is necessary (as it's the best 1.25m part for occlusion area per mass).
  24. I suspect a single motor design will inherently be better for this, because it allows your electricity usage to go just a little bit lower without rounding down to zero. Apparently, if a motor is consuming less than 0.001 u/s, KSP simply thinks it's not consuming any power at all, despite still outputting torque. So in my earlier aborted attempt, I had two motors each consuming 1.04 mu/s, just above the threshold. The craft could actually still fly on slightly lower throttle, but KSP would just set electricity consumption to exactly zero. Meanwhile @OJT has one motor drawing 1.57 mu/s, which is significantly lower total power draw, and can likely go even lower. Have you tried using fewer blades? I found that two blades per prop worked just fine - the blades need to each contribute more thrust, but you will have lower mass and drag to make up for it. Also you don't need the 1K battery pack - the 1.25m aerodynamic nose cone works just fine to occlude and you save mass by using that plus a Z-100 battery.
  25. I actually forgot that I posted this thread! I recently did exactly that, and took an Aeris to Laythe and back. But I haven't found the motivation to edit the video yet.
  • Create New...