• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

42 Excellent

About vyznev

  • Rank
    Curious George

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. vyznev

    Rendezvous with Rama!!!

    Just out of curiosity, what's the Unity limitation that prevents this? Thinking of this as a modding challenge, I suppose the obvious thing to try would be to mod in a tiny planet (using Kopernicus) with no gravity and place a giant cylinder-shaped "anomaly" on one of its poles. I see no obvious reason why this couldn't be used to make a "tubeworld" of some kind (with a small "hub" in the middle), although I'm willing to believe that some limitation of the physics framework could kick in if you try to scale it up to Rama's size.
  2. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    Hmm, not nearly as close as I thought I was. It's been a month since I last worked on that design, so I just flew a test mission and only got up to 4 km. The big problem, besides needing more asparagus, is that the upper stages were way underpowered. Cutting the fuel in each stage by half, I managed to reach 20 km going straight up. Adding two more asparagus stages to the bottom gets it up to just under 40 km. It looks like you may be right about the hundreds of engines after all.
  3. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    I'm pretty sure hundreds of mammoth engines won't be necessary (although the total number of engine bells might get close to a hundred). IME, the biggest issue is that you basically need a bottom stage with a sea-level atmospheric TWR over 10. That's possible with stock parts, but leads to some pretty crazy looking engine clusters: (No, this one doesn't quite make it to orbit at 10G, but it's not too far off. Probably needs a few more asparagus boosters; it's only got two.) BTW, I managed to build a minimalistic stock helicopter that can (just barely) take off and hover at 10G: So electric-powered flight is not out of the question. You'll need a lot of reaction wheels, though. (FWIW, this craft is about 55% reaction wheels by mass.)
  4. vyznev

    Slowest plane in ksp

    If that counts, I suppose something like this is pretty much unbeatable in the first two categories: Further improvements are pretty much up to piloting skill. With careful flying (and tweaking the blade pitch), this thing can take off, hover and land at arbitrarily low speeds (as measured from the center of mass, at least). Feels kind of cheaty, though. (Of course, this won't win the "longest gliding range" contest, at least not without some seriously cheesy "a reaction wheel isn't an engine" rules lawyering.)
  5. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    OK, I was mistaken: chute spam alone is quite sufficient even for a manned capsule. For an actual re-entry, you might want a couple of drogue chutes too, just to make sure the proper chutes can safely deploy.
  6. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    MechJeb's landing guidance includes a landing site map marker that I found very useful for the Falcon Heavy challenge. Although I haven't checked to see if it handles hacked gravity correctly. Otherwise I suggest trial and error. You'll probably have to use either a Soyuz-style landing burn or some kind of a crumple zone to cushion the landing. 5G is doable with just chutes (see my earlier post above), but only barely. Although that's for a manned capsule; landing a probe core should be easier. Still, I'd recommend starting with some drop tests.
  7. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    Sure, here you go.
  8. vyznev

    10g Circumnavigation

    Well, I thought this was worth testing, so I made a propboat. Powered by RTGs and magic reaction wheels, it can skim over Kerbin's unnaturally smooth oceans at the breathtaking speed of nearly 40 m/s. (On land it can go faster, at least briefly. Hitting a bump at high speed is bad, though.) In theory, this means it could circumnavigate Kerbin in about 26 to 27 hours, assuming a perfectly circular equatorial path. Of course, in practice there's a bunch of land on Kerbin's equator that I'd much rather go around, since driving this thing on land at 10G is both tedious and nerve-wracking at the same time. So call it a round 36 hours or so. Oh, and the propeller blows up if you so much as think about trying to physics warp. Needless to say, I will not be trying to actually complete this challenge any time soon, at least not with this vehicle.
  9. vyznev

    Micro-Engineering Challenge

    Enbedding imgur albums has been broken for ages, AFAIK. It says it's going to appear "when the post is submitted", but it never does. Embedding individual images from imgur works fine, though. Also, I know I'm nitpicking, but "every celestial body in the game" technically includes Jool and Kerbol, but they don't have a surface to land on. You might want to exclude those. More seriously, you might want to consider defining the goalposts of this challenge a bit more concretely, so that it's easier to tell what counts as a valid solution and what doesn't. I mean, making the MicroShuttle was fun, and some of your new challenge goals look like they could be fun to try too, but trying to chase a moving target gets frustrating after a while. If you're not sure what level of challenge would be best, you can always create multiple tiers and maybe offer bonus points and/or honorary mentions for folks who go above and beyond what you've asked for. Or if that seems like taking it too seriously, just set a few basic requirements and say that anything that meets those is fine. Also, your first post above looks kind of hard to read now, since it seems to have the old and the new challenge rules mixed together. While I can't speak for everybody, my impression has been that most people who are looking to try a challenge really want to see two things written clearly and easily visible: 1) what's required for a minimum valid entry, and 2) how are entries ranked, i.e. what (if anything) makes one better than another? If those things aren't clearly visible, either people will just skip the challenge or they'll post something that doesn't actually meet the requirements.
  10. Hmm, what about replacing the tank with a linear RCS port? A smaller radius should give a higher rotor RPM for the same wheel speed. You might need to reduce the number of drive wheels to make them fit, but that should be OK as long as the shaft is reasonably solidly built. I'd also try the TR-2L wheels, and maybe plane landing gear. (I may have to install KSP on this laptop just to give this a try myself.)
  11. Anyway, a bit more seriously, I see at least three possible ways to attempt this, each with their own advantages and drawbacks: Put the solar panels on the engines, as suggested above. Probably not very practical for giant panels and high-power engines, but a couple of small OX-STAT panels on the propeller blades or on the hub should be able to power a single reaction wheel. You could periodically stop the engines and reattach them to the main craft (with docking ports or a Klaw) to transfer power. With enough engines on your plane, you could even safely do that one engine at a time while using the rest to maintain your speed. The main downside is that this would require a lot of manual micromanagement, unless you used something like KOS to automate it. There's an alternative stock rotor design that uses rover (or plane) wheels on the main vessel to power the rotor. Here's a couple of examples from an old thread. These do seem to have some reliability issues with the wheels glitching and/or popping, but if you could solve them, they might be ideal for your purposes. I'm not sure how to best control the drive wheels on a plane, though, with the rotor axis presumably pointing lengthwise. I guess you could try mounting the wheels at, say, a 45 degree angle to the propeller axis and just driving forward/back (remember to bind those to some other keys than the default W/S, or you'll have a nasty surprise) to spin the propellers. Or if you used just one powered wheel per rotor and left the rest unpowered, you might be able to use the translate up/left/down/right controls (I/J/K/L by default) to make them spin. This may require some experimental work.
  12. Put the solar panels on the propeller blades?
  13. vyznev

    Micro-Engineering Challenge

    Well, I decided to see how far the probe could go in one trip. So I went to Jool (with a Laythe fly-by). And then to Eeloo. And back to Jool again, just for a gravity assist to Dres. And then to Duna (with several Ike fly-bys), and finally to Eve with a Kerbin fly-by along the way. Didn't quite have the delta-v to get to Moho and complete the grand tour in one go, although with a bit more planning and optimizing the transfers it might have been possible. Or I guess I could've just brought another tank of xenon. Still, not bad for a 6,010 kg launch mass. Lotsa pix to prove it happened: Ps. I figured I should fly a Moho mission, just to demonstrate that the probe can do it. So here goes:
  14. vyznev

    Micro-Engineering Challenge

    Well, I made this thing: It's a reusable SSTSO (single stage to suborbital; probably could make it all the way to orbit with more careful flying) spaceplane carrying a tiny ion probe that should have enough delta-v to get from LKO to anywhere, and probably even visit several planets in one mission. I haven't actually tested that yet, though. It's only got 200 units of charge and two 1x6 solar panels, so maneuvers may require patience and, especially for capture burns, careful planning. Still, it should be enough, although I guess sticking on a couple of extra radial batteries just for good measure wouldn't hurt the delta-v too much. Batteries are really quite surprisingly lightweight in KSP. (Just to be clear, I'm not claiming to have completed the challenge yet, since I've only flown this thing up to LKO. Just wanted to post a work-in-progress update.) Update: OK, so I decided to go back to the SPH and add some more xenon and batteries to my probe. It now weighs 793 kg (out of a total mass at launch of just a hair over 6 tonnes) and has over 8.5 km/s of delta-v. I still haven't flown it beyond LKO, but now I'm sure that it's got enough delta-v to go anywhere. Here's the craft file, if you want to try it out.
  15. vyznev

    Micro-Engineering Challenge

    OK, so by "reusable 100%" you just mean that any parts I stage off must be able to return to Kerbin? Or just achieve stable orbit? Or do you just mean that the design must be reusable? Also, what counts as "big parts"? I assume any Tiny, Small or Mk1 parts are OK to use? What about Mk2? The Mk2 cargo bay would be awful convenient to have, since the only payload container in any smaller size class is the 1.25m service bay, which isn't really even big enough for an ion engine and a decoupler. Basically, trying to squeeze a functional probe into one of those becomes an exercise in creative part clipping. Or I suppose I could use a payload fairing instead, if those count as reusable. And are all radial parts OK, even things like Gigantor solar panels or Thud engines? Oh, and what's with the "stable orbit" requirement? I assume it means I can't use a direct suborbital-to-escape ascent trajectory, but I'm not sure why that would need to be disallowed. If you can escape the SOI, boosting your periapsis into space is trivial.