Jump to content

OJT

Members
  • Posts

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by OJT

  1. This SSTO with very creative name "PLEN GO UP" is gonna go to Minmus Landing was a bit sketchy, but nothing broke Gliding at hypersonic speeds until I reach KSC Approach and landing
  2. Level 2+++ verified! Adding you to the leaderboard
  3. After failing my Altitudinalist attempt, I decided to do the complete opposite of it and reach as low of a Kerbin orbit as I could. I present you... The Anti-Altitudinalist Flying to Orbit. The whole ascent went super smooth After circularizing I carefully adjusted my orbit with RCS thrusters and achieved orbit of 70000.2x70000.3 meters Deorbiting and reentering Flying towards the runway Smooth landing
  4. First thing first: Level 1+ verified! Interesting utilization of inflatable airlocks. Will add you to the hall of fame I never used the newer versions of engines in this challenge (at least I don't think I did?). However, I did have issues with some engines not being able to burn off fuel tanks. Particularly the NERVA: it appears its exhaust is not as hot as in other engines? Even though AFAIK in real life NTR burn their fuel at higher temperatures, but I might be mistaken on that The workaround I found useful is to use a FL-A5 Adapter as sort of a decoupler between stages: it is thin enough to be burned off by NERVAs and Terriers and doesn't add too much mass to the total. I didn't test it with smaller engines like Ant or Spider though From what I know, you need KAL-1000 to properly assign engines to RCS controls, so you might need a workaround for this As this challenge is all about flexing Jeb's ego, he must do all the flying. Which means he will need to return to Kerbin to pilot the second launch if you want to assemble a ship in orbit However, the rules also state that you are allowed to bring other kerbals to your missions which you can use to your advantage. So, for example, if you build an Apollo-style ship you can leave Val in the Orbiter and pilot the Lander with Jeb, so when you return back to orbit you can tell Val to target the Lander's docking port, making docking easier Well, it's your lucky day! I have a topic from a fellow forum user just for you
  5. I was doing a Jool STS-1 Mission, which is part of a STS Challenge thread. One of the mission requirements was to bring along a craft capable of flying on Laythe for exploration. However, as a self-imposed rule I was exclusively using Mk.2 parts, and Mk.2 cargo bays don't have much space in them, so fitting a small jet plane was impossible. Building a helicopter proved to be a good workaround While true, it wasn't the main reason why I built the helicopter. Hell, I didn't even fly it that much: I basically built it strictly to satisfy challenge requirements. However the helicopter itself proved to be working wonderfully, so I was satisfied in the end
  6. I didn't experiment with KAL-1000 much, but I did build this simple helicopter for Jool STS-1 Mission. Fully electric, pontoons for water landings and a single seat KAL-1000 was used to set up the controls for prop angles. I don't have a video of my own, but instead I will share the video of a tutorial I followed to build my helicopter
  7. Appreciate the help mate: this fixed other savefiles. I will try to be more modest in my next attempts
  8. Gonna revive my challenge thread with a Minmus lander Nothing special to say about it really. Lifting stage with Swivels and one Reliant. Lander with NERVA Some screenshots: NERVA doesn't have enough TWR to land on Kerbin, so I ditched the lander and parachuted down The lander, however, miraculously survived: engine was destroyed, but the crew pod was intact. However, it won't qualify for the extra + due to its engine being destroyed Anyone wants to have a crack at this? And before someone asks: KAL-1000 exploits are considered cheating and are not allowed in this challenge
  9. Well, gonna gatecrash this thread with an SSTO that is so OP, it broke my game... How did it all start? I saw that QF9E holds the Altitudinalist Record of this thread, reaching 1 Petameter and returning to Kerbin. I reckoned I could have a crack at it, installed BetterTimeWarp and went into the SPH After a bit of experimenting I ended up with this Simple and straightforward design, RAPIER for atmospheric ascent and offset NERVA for vacuum Ascent was standard, nothing to mention here: RAPIER pushed the plane up to 25ish km and then NERVA was engaged and burned the rest of the way to LKO My plan for this mission was to get some gravity assists to raise Sun apoapsis and then burn at periapsis once it is high enough to save some fuel First up is Eve. The ejection was done in two burns This would be the result of the Eve fly-by Eve fly-by After that I set up a Kerbin fly-by Kerbin fly-by After couple of orbits around the Sun I set up a second Kerbin fly-by This one will be a powered fly-by: I will be engaging the NERVA at Kerbin periapsis to get that extra kick I need Final orbit prognosis: 71,5 Petameters. This would shatter the current record Keyword "would" Here's where things got messy: first sound broke, then the ingame timer capped out at 32-bit integer value, then both Ap and Pe markers disappeared and then the plane couldn't even get close to the Sun no matter how much I played with timewarp settings: velocity would get to around 11 m/s and then swing back to 0 and this went back and forth I thought "yeah this is pretty freaky, but I have a save before Kerbin fly-by, I will just reload". And as I opened my menu to load a save... all of my saves disappeared. I thought "now this is REALLY freaky, I better Ctrl+Alt+Del the game and restart it". And as I did that I saw that all of my gamesaves were gone aswell. My Career save, all of my Sandbox saves, everything got wiped. And even though I wasn't too stressed about it, it was still quite annoying as I had some dope crafts on these saves TLDR: I inadvertedly cosplayed Danny2462 @boolybooly reckon this is good enough for a Gatecrasher?
  10. Lower the RPM of your motors. You can go to great lengths with adjusting motor RPM and prop angles. The endurance prop planes I've built were running their motors as low as 60 RPM, generating good thrust through adjusting prop angles and flying comfortably at 3x phys time warp. And that's on Kerbin, mind you: with Eve's souposphere you might go even lower if you want to
  11. @Pouicpouic @Jack Joseph Kerman I honestly can't comperehend how fast the two of you going through this, let alone that you judge the celestial bodies on how fun they are to drive on I always found rovers in KSP especially frustrating. Wheels are prone to random failures while encountering seemingly minor bumps, motors in them are quite limited in terms of speed they can achieve (which makes the previous issue even more frustrating), behaviour under phys time warp is unstable. But above all else, the wheel do not behave even remotely close to reality. One moment they barely get any traction with the surface and then all of a sudden the wheels randomly generate tons of grip during sharp turning. I saw better car dynamics on mobile racing games for God's sake, surely it should've been easy for the devs to get it right? Because sailing in comparison works wonderfully, and sailing has nothing to do with rocket science! (well, so far at least) This is especially annoying for me because I'm a massive car nerd and automotive engineering student and I would absolutely love to build rovers and drive them around. But the issues I mentioned above do not make it viable for me to build rovers altogether: I only had sent couple of unmanned rovers on Duna and one each on Moho and Eeloo and the rest of the time I stuck to rockets/planes/helicopters because they are much more reliable. I tried to build a rover not too long ago for 100 EC Challenge (which, coincidentally, is also hosted by 18Watt) and, even though I achieved decent results, I would rather kick myself in the berries than drive that thing again You lads (and whoever dared to do this challenge) have my utmost respect
  12. I know it would not count as pure Stock entry, but I suggest installing Scatterer: in addition to fancy scatter effects (duh) it also adds waves to seas and oceans, vastly changing the sailing experience. Whether for better or worse is up to you to decide, but it definitely adds a twist
  13. This is probably one of the weirdest crafts I've ever built Two RAPIERs and one Dawn. I think you can kinda see where this is going Ascent profile wasn't as steep as in my previous entry: superlow TWR of Dawn meant that I needed to get quite high so that I have enough free margin to raise my periapsis. At the same time, rocket engines didn't provide the necessary push for long enough. That's where RAPIERs come through: They burn in Airbreathing Mode for the first 25 km and then switch to Closed Cycle to get that extra push I need. Oxidizer amount in the tanks was accordingly reduced in VAB so that I don't carry too much unused oxidizer into orbit. After using the last of liquid fuel, I jettison the RAPIERs and burn the rest of the way with Dawn. And yes, it was a long burn: 0.05 TWR certainly wasn't doing me many favors Achieving stable orbit with 13057 m/s dV to spare TL;DR: Ion engine OP, plz nerf On a serious note though, I basically strapped this monstrosity together in 15 minutes without putting too much thought into its design and I already more than doubled camacju's numbers. I think it would be fair to either ban ion propulsion altogether or put ion engine submissions into separate category @sevenperforce
  14. Like I said, I didn't think about the design too hard. I basically went "haha roket go vroom" and slapped up some fuel tanks and RAPIERs together. And despite achieving my goal of reaching orbit and having pretty decent dV numbers in LKO, there's lots of room for optimization. For one, 4 RAPIERs provided way more TWR than I would need. Reducing amount of RAPIERs would save me lots of dry mass and still comfortably get me to orbit with roughly similar flight profile As for the fairing, it is to protect the Command pod: due to accelerating quickly through lower atmosphere (another downside of having too many RAPIERs ) the nose cone overheated and exploded during my first attempt, so I put a small fairing to shield the payload from heating
  15. Something I threw together in couple of minutes. Central stage with NERVA and 4 RAPIER engines on side. Elevons for control, no aerodynamic surfaces. RAPIERS are mounted on Structural Fuselages: these are not fuel tanks Launch. RAPIERs take couple of seconds to spool up NERVA gets decent performance numbers in higher atmosphere, but its low thrust means that I need to be going at considerable speed at first to not lose too much vertical speed once I jettison the RAPIERs. I figured that crucial factor would be to get as much prograde speed as early as possible. RAPIERs can generate thrust all the way to 25 kilometers, so ascent profile was quite aggressive to utilize them to the fullest. Infact, I think I kinda overkilled with RAPIERs since I didn't even go at full throttle due to immense TWR and fear of overheating After jettisoning the RAPIERs, NERVA safely completes the rest of the climb and inserts into low Kerbin Orbit 5547 m/s of deltaV in what is essentially an oversized pencil
  16. @Artienia It was a long journey, but it is finally finished! STS-5T and STS-6T mission reports below STS-5T Shuttle-Apollo STS-6T Booster Recovery There were a lot of submissions throughout the history of STS threads, but I might very well be the first one to complete all missions on Commander rank with Mk.2 based Shuttles. I wonder if I can get a special badge with Mk.2 Orbiter on it instead of Mk.3 one like I asked earlier in this thread?
  17. Test Pilots Series: STS-6T Final mission in the STS Challenge thread, and it is an unusual one. In this mission you must make a recoverable version of the booster that can safely land or splashdown on Kerbin. Booster must be "dumb" one, as in it must have no probe cores or any other means of controlling it after it detaches from the Orbiter. What's the unusual part? Booster must be recovered manually: whether it is a boat, a helicopter or any other method, I must fetch the landed/splashdowned booster and bring it to Spaceplane Hangar in KSC First we will be doing the launch. I will be using the same Launcher configuration as in STS-2T, which itself was a functional equivalent to Kerbin STS-1 Launcher. Only difference is that the Orbiter has a probe core that I can use to control the ship, but the recoverable booster part will be still uncontrolled To make recoveries for me easier, I will be taking more vertical approach compared to other launches. The Orbiter still has enough fuel to enter orbit by itself, which will be demonstrated, so the real launch is, while less efficient, is still possible with this profile After emptying the Booster, it is detached from the Orbiter. I put parachute activation on the same stage as decoupling so they will deploy by themselves when booster slows down in lower thicker atmosphere. Orbiter in the meanwhile turns on its engine and reaches (slightly elliptical) orbit Switching back to Booster. As you can see parachutes are engaged and it has no means of controlling it. After entry parachutes are deployed and it splashed down not too far from KSC Time to bring it back. After some testing I ended up with this rather unusual boat. Made out of Mk.2 fuselage parts, has winglets as aerofoils and Goliaths for propulsion And here's a surprise: it flies! Not very stable mind you, but stable enough to quickly reach the Booster 120ish km away Here's the Booster! Time to land. Except that Recovery Craft doesn't glide well at low speeds, so it has parachutes to slowdown and gently splashdown Part of the reason I chose Goliaths is their reverse thrust capability. This allowed me to reverse towards the Booster and grab it with the grabber arm Time for a slow swim towards KSC: it took me about half an hour with 4x phys time warp Slowly approaching shore and driving out of the water. My initial plan was that I could use one Vector on the booster briefly to power through steep slope. Recovery Craft even has some Oxidizer for this purpose. But thrust of two Goliaths proved to be sufficient, so help from Booster was unnecessary Driving towards Spaceplane Hangar Booster is returned to KSC! And this, finally, at last, concludes the STS Challenge! I completed all of the missions using Mk.2 fuselage parts for my Orbiters, all on Commander ranks and all with Stock parts. But this might not be the end of my STS shenanigans. If I come up with something interesting that adheres to STS Challenge rules (or if there will be new additions to STS Challenge thread) I will be posting it here
  18. Test Pilot Series: STS-5T This mission will be the Shuttle-Apollo crossover: a Shuttle will carry the Command module for three and Munar lander for two kerbals to Mun. There, Apollo will undock and complete its mission of landing on the Mun and returning. Shuttle in the meanwhile will return to Kerbin through free return trajectory, perform direct entry into atmosphere and land on the runway I will be using Duna-spec Orbiter again due to its sizeable cargo bay, generous deltaV and best reentry capabilities of all the Shuttles I designed for these challenges. Apollo Stack is pictured below: Mun Lander is made out of two Mk.1 command pods (therefore two seats), Command module is made out of one Mk.1 command pod and one Mk.1 passenger bay (therefore 3 seats). Launch Setting up a free return trajectory maneuver and performing the burn After entering Mun SOI, Apollo undocks from the Orbiter and enters low Mun orbit. Due to initial periapsis being quite high, Apollo first performs a radial correction and then does a retrograde burn, entering a 13x15km orbit After parking Apollo in orbit, I switch back to Orbiter. It does one small correction burn (as is allowed by the challenge requirements) on way to Kerbin. After hard, but safe entry Orbiter descends and lands on KSC runway After this, I switch to Apollo again to commence the landing Planting a flag and posing for a photo Launching from Mun. I timed my ascent really well so I only needed to make a small correction after achieving orbit to encounter the Command module After docking both crafts, I transfer the kerbals and what little fuel there was left in Lander into the Command module. Then, I span my ship around and undocked the Lander during the spin so the craft is deorbited without fuel usage. After this Command module burns towards Kerbin Entry into atmosphere. Shortly before that I decouple the S/P module and turn retrograde After slowing down the parachutes are deployed and Command module softly lands in Grasslands region And with this, only one mission in STS Challenge remains! Mun flag location is below
  19. Test Pilot Series: STS-4T In this mission, we must perform maintenance on a Skylab station using two separate Shuttles. Here are mission objectives for each shuttle (direct quote from challenge thread) The first shuttle mission will: Rendezvous with Skylab Bring a docking adapter for all the future missions - the docking ports do not have enough clearance for a shuttle Remove and deorbit the solar/comms array (detachable via docking port jr.) Disconnect, load into a cargo bay and land the hab module (detachable via docking port sr.) Dock a rocket stage to Skylab, which will boost the station into an at least 200 km/200 km orbit The second shuttle mission will: Rendezvous and dock with skylab (which is now in a 200 km/200 km orbit) Bring a new habitation module Bring a new solar/comms module Bring crew of at least 3 to Skylab Both Shuttles must return to Kerbin afterwards The Skylab station is provided by the challenge and can be either launched to orbit using a rocket or placed there through Cheat Menu. Either way, its Pe and Ap values must be between 80 and 90 km and inclination must be between 50 and 52 degrees. I opted for Cheat Menu placement (Inclination is in lower left corner) Time to check out the Shuttle I will be using. Uses similar concept as Fuel Pod Orbiter. Payload will be placed in the middle. The Orbiter on the screenshot is the first one, the second one has additional passenger bay to carry Kerbals to Skylab (I forgot to take snaps of it in SPH) Here's payload for first mission: nuclear rocket stage, docking port adapter and Assembly Drone that will be doing the maintenance work Launch to orbit Encounter with Skylab Orbiter is "parked" not far from Skylab and Assembly Drone gets to work. First it docks the Rocket Stage with the assistance of the Docking Adapter It then docks the Adapter itself to one of the side ports and attaches to Hab Module afterwards Now that the Adapter is ready, Orbiter can be docked to Skylab Assembly Drone then carries the Hab Module to the Orbiter Solar/Comms array is detached, Assembly Drone docks to it and performs a retrograde burn with RCS thrusters. After that, Solar/Comms array is left behind to deorbit and Assembly Drone burns back to Skylab and docks to it. It will stay docked to Skylab until the second Shuttle arrives First Shuttle returns to KSC runway with the Hab Module Skylab in the meanwhile is boosted to 200x200km orbit Second Shuttle's payload: new Hab Module and modified Solar/Comms array: it has a probe core and RCS capability for maneuvering Launch of second Orbiter Approaching Skylab and docking to it First goes the new Solar/Comms array Now Assembly Drone grabs the new Hab Module and docks it to Skylab By this point Assembly Drone fulfilled its task. It grabs the truss structure that was used to hold the payload of second Shuttle and deorbits with RCS thrusters 3 Kerbals board the Skylab one by one Shuttle undocks and descends towards KSC And this concludes the mission! Final screenshot showing 3 Kerbals inside Skylab and its orbit parameters in KER window
  20. I did another mission. STS-3T Cassini-Huygens report below Link to the mission report And guys @sturmhauke @Artienia, I understand that life might get in the way. And I don't want to get annoying or be perceived as annoying. But at this point I have 9 unreviewed submissions and you both said that you would go through the backlog last week, but alas I am still awaiting my badges. I really hope that all my submissions get reviewed soon
  21. Test Pilot Series: STS-3T This mission is noticeably different from other STS missions: vast majority of this mission we will not be controlling the shuttle! Instead, what we need to do is to "recreate" the Cassini-Huygens mission: we must build an orbiter probe and a lander and then send it to explore the Joolian system This mission has very strict requirements, both in terms of payload design and mission profile. Here's the excrept from the STS thread The transfer stage must consist of solid rocket boosters only, and must separate after a single burn in LKO The Cassini probe must be at least 1,5 tons, the Huygens lander must be at least 1 ton The Cassini-Huygens spacecraft + the transfer stage must fit into the long MK3 cargo bay The Cassini spacecraft and Huygens lander must enter Jool's SOI before separating from each other The Cassini probe has to flyby at least four of Jool's moons and finish its mission by entering Jool's atmosphere, where it will meet its fiery end The Huygens lander will land on Laythe The only fuel tanks allowed on the spacecraft and the lander are: a single R-12 "Doughnut" for the Cassini probe and a single "Oskar-B" fuel tank for the Huygens lander Let's check the payload. First up is the Cassini orbiter. Weighs exactly 1.5 tons and has only one Doughnut fuel tank. Parameters can be seen on KER readouts Here is the Huygens lander. Exactly 1 ton and only one Oskar-B tank. Although I did drain it a bit to get the 1 ton weight Here's the stack with the SRB transfer stage. Orbiter and lander are connected to one another with a stack separator. 8 Shrimp boosters and 1 Hammer booster, and everything fits inside one long Mk.3 cargo bay, as required Time to launch this beast to Low Kerbin Orbit As you can notice, the stack doesn't fit into Mk.2 bay (well, duh), so I flew up with doors open and the stack itself mounted at a small angle. And yes, this IS the Orbiter from Duna series: among the Orbiters I had this one seemed most suitable for the mission ahead Detaching the stack from the Orbiter My transfer stage had exactly 2142 m/s of dV. So I setup the Jool maneuver in such a way that it would require exactly 2142 m/s dV to execute and then proceed with the burn. And even though Hammer booster burns through its fuel faster than the Shrimp boosters, it is still a single stage as all SRBs were engaged at the same time After the burn, the Stack detaches from SRB transfer stage and flies towards Jool Orbiter in the meanwhile does the deorbit burn, descends towards KSC and lands on the runway, easy peasy Stack performs a correction burn with Huygens' engine to set up a Laythe fly-by After reaching Jool SOI, Cassini and Huygens separate Both Cassini and Huygens perform small correction maneuvers each: Cassini sets up the Tylo fly-by and Huygens puts its periapsis into Laythe atmosphere for entry First fly-by of four: Laythe. Even though it is not required by the mission and this is a Sandbox save, I perform science experiments and send them back to Kerbin Huygens entry. I did one small radial correction before that because I thought that I would reenter too fast and risk burning up Huygens survives the entry and deploys the parachute By some absolute miracle, I actually landed on land. Not only that, I landed on a shore very close to the ocean. To say I got lucky with the landing would be an understatement. Huygens also performed some experiments and quickly sent it to Kerbin before Cassini was out of reach Returning to Cassini: it flies towards Tylo and performs the 2nd fly-by out of 4 moons required After the Tylo fly-by, I plotted and executed a maneuver to set up Vall fly-by. This maneuver would also raise the apoapsis high enough to reach Pol orbit 3rd fly-by out of 4: Vall. Fly-by occured during the Joolian eclipse so I couldn't snap screenshots in good lighting, so I added another snap from map view to show the fly-by happening Before the Vall fly-by I also plotted a maneuver for Pol encounter. This maneuver would happen several orbits around Jool later Lots of days later, Cassini reaches Pol, completing the fly-by of 4 different moons as required by mission objective Now is the time to send Cassini into Jool to finish off the mission. I plot a maneuver to get a Tylo fly-by that will sling the Probe into the gas giant Flying into Jool and hitting its atmosphere pretty much vertically After some explosions I found out that Power and Propulsion section of the Cassini survived this extreme reentry. Although I couldn't control it because probe core exploded, I still took the time to enjoy a fantastic sunrise. This is actually the first time ever I dived into Jool But not even Power and Propulsion section can survive Jool's lower layers. After reaching -250 meters altitude the rest of the Cassini got annihilated, reaching its final objective and concluding this amazingly fun mission
  22. Huh, fairing aerodynamics are even weirder than I thought I will try your suggestions when I get free time, currently busy with exams
  23. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I tested out various fan blade configurations, from 2 biggest fan blades to 16 smallest ones. I personally found the 8 small fan blades to give me the best balance in terms of speed generated and EC used to get to that speed And my craft DOES have a nose cone. I placed it in the rear of the fairing to fully occlude that node and then offset it inside the fairing. 1K battery in the meanwhile is placed up front to fully occlude the front node of the fairing. With this, I get a fully occluded fairing base and everything else generating zero drag. Which in turn gives me very streamlined fuselage (by base KSP standards at least). As for the engine, it is placed on the front node of the battery and turned around facing backwards (I included the screenshots of the setup and drag parameters below) And the mass savings don't really give much advantage, at least in my personal experience. 1K battery back is only 40 kilos heavier than the Z-100 battery, but the drag benefits far outweigh (pun not intended) the lesser mass. This is also the reason why I stuck with the wing configuration that I had: it might be heavier, but with it the plane maintains stable level flight with pretty much no corrections applied by the control surfaces. Other variations I tested out were either too twitchy with control surfaces (therefore losing prograde speed) or just outright unstable. And seeing how well the 2000km entry worked, I decided to go with the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle and left wings as they were. With that being said, there are small gains that can be still achieved with careful adjustment of wing and fuselage AoA, but I didn't go as far as to test that out, because simply offsetting the fan blades inwards already more than doubled the range from my previous entry
  24. Reviving the thread... with first completed circumnavigation! Plane like in previous entry, but with slight drag adjustments and offset fan blades. I didn't offset them far though, enough to make them look aesthetically pleasant EC charge proof Flying first eastward towards the peninsula. I found out through testing that, if you keep RPMs low and fly the plane as stable as possible, you can reliably fly with phys timewarp engaged. The whole flight was done with 3x time warp (with occasional boosts to 4x) From that point, I was following the geodesic Returning to peninsula checkpoint Catching the transit of Minmus across the Sun Passing between two islands for the second time Out of charge, gliding down Splashdown Coordinates of splashdown and all the checkpoint flags Calculating distance (using the website from previous entries for some of these): From KSC to Checkpoint 1 at peninsula - 369.16 km One full circumnavigation - 3769.9 km (I assume the equatorial circumference despite not traveling along the equator, since KSP doesn't simulate planetary flattening) From Checkpoint 1 to water passage between islands near Checkpoint 2 - 639.9 km From water passage to splashdown site - 144 km And the total distance is... 4922.96 km Even with 3x time warp, the flight took up almost 6 hours. Without it, it'd take up 17 hours. Managing a stable flight with phys warp is the only reason I decided to go ahead with the flight
×
×
  • Create New...