Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'challenge'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 251 results

  1. "The future of Kerbality is going to bifurcate in two directions: Either it's going to become multi-planetary, or it's going to remain confined to one planet and eventually there's going to be an extinction event." - Elon Kerman Duna Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge Those baleful words spoken by Elon Kerman at a recent event featuring his latest rocket design inspired the Kerbal Federation to fully support an effort to establish a continuously Kerballed outpost on Duna. In order to accomplish this goal, Elon Kerman has offered an unlimited supply of his company's latest heavy lifter, with some restrictions and requirements. The basic requirement is to land a minimum of 4 kerbals on Duna before Year 5, Day 1, and then to develop and implement the mission architecture for a permanently Kerballed outpost on Duna before Year 10, Day 1. There is already one prototype of the heavy lifter on its way to the VAB and will be ready with payload for launch pad roll-out on Day 40. New lifters will be delivered on a regular, fixed schedule. Excitement is high for this endeavor but in order to keep hardware contractors satisfied, achieving certain mission objectives will benefit the campaign's public opinion and ensure the rocket supplier will continue to provide new lifters beyond Year 10 Day 1. Rules Launch Vehicle The lifter is of your design and must not vary throughout the challenge. This lifter is referred to as the Standard Launch Vehicle (SLV). All mission hardware and all fuel used for interplanetary transfers must be launched using the SLV. The only exception to this rule is for ferrying crew to Low Kerbin Orbit (LKO), which is defined as Apoapsis between 75km - 180km. Ready to launch lifters with installed payloads are prepared based on design and determined by Nominal Payload Mass (NPM). The NPM is the maximum payload that the SLV can deliver to LKO, without using any fuel of the payload itself. A payload may be used to perform final orbital insertion, but payloads cannot be deployed or activated until above 70km. Launch pad SLV roll-out rate is calculated as: NPM * 8 for non-reusable or NPM * 6 for reusable designs. For example, a reusable SLV with a NMP of 30t will have a 180 day delivery cycle. A non-reusable SLV with the same NMP will have a 240 day delivery cycle. In order to qualify as "reusable", recovered launch stages must have comprised of at least 50% of the vehicles original lift-off mass (including payload). Recovery of spent stages can be passive or active but must be demonstrated successfully at least once. There are no fuel transfers from the SLV to payload. Payload fairing is not part of payload mass, unless it leaves LKO. Any part that leaves LKO is NPM. Any type of shuttle can be used to deliver crew to LKO and there is no limit on how many crew shuttle missions can be launched, however only crew may be launched on these missions; no fuel or any other supplies may be transferred on crew launches. Habitation/Life Support Habitation: Any crewed mission exceeding 10 days will require extra habitation space for the crew to work and maintain their senses. This means short trips like launches to LKO, trips between Duna's orbit and surface and brief excursions on Duna's surface do not require any extra space. However, trips between Kerbin and Duna and long-term stays on Duna's surface will require extra habitation space for each crew member. Crewed mining, rescue/contingency missions in Kerbin/Duna/Sol orbit also need habitation space if their missions exceed 10 days. Habitation space is modeled by providing one extra kerbal seat for each kerbal. For example, a long term mission with a crew of four will require a vessel with seats for eight Kerbals. Life Support: Any mission exceeding 10 days will also require life support supplies. Life support supplies can be modeled with stock parts by using the Ore resource. If life support is modeled in this way, supplies (Ore) will need to be included in the SLV launches. None of the Ore that is designated as life support can be utilized for ISRU production and any Ore harvested for ISRU cannot be used as life support. Ore (life support mass) should be jettisoned as it is "consumed". Life support mass for each kerbal is calculated as: 0.04 Ore / day / kerbal. This means for a typical transfer from Kerbin to Duna with four crew will require 45 units of Ore as life support for the journey. Life support includes electrical needs. For stock, any module that lands on Duna or Ike require three days of power to survive the night if using solar power. This is modeled in stock by having a minimum of 2400 EC units on board or using fuel cell/PK-NUK generators with minimum output of 2.2 EC/minute. EVA limitation: The EVA suit has a maximum of one Kerbal day (6 hours) of life support. A Kerbal exceeding that is counted as a fatality. Alternately, any mainstream life support mod can be used to manage life support/EVA limits and electrical needs. For reference, the mass value for Ore equivalence and EC needs are based on "TAC Life Support" values. Mods that render Kerbals "inert" (i.e. "DeepFreeze) as an alternative way to move crew around effectively turn Kerbals into cargo: Crew in this state do not accumulate "Mission Value" points. Crew in this state do not count towards requirements for the "Interplanetary expertise" achievement. Freezer pods (parts that store the Kerbals) do not count towards any Achievement or as Habitation space. Mission end rules All SLV missions that are launched before Year 10 Day 1 count towards achievement points. As long as the SLV/payload is launched before Year 10, Day 1, it is part of the 'implement' step of the primary goal, but that mission must be successful in order to earn the achievement. (Note, there is a handy Duna transfer window on Year 10, Day 20). All Kerbals on the surface of Duna on Year 10, Day 1 must be returned to Kerbin (or be returnable) safely in order to earn their Mission Value points. ('Over-stressed crew' 4 year rule applies) You may "play it out" so that all kerbals are safely recovered, or demonstrate that they can be returned safely, but either way no kerbal may be stranded. Document your 'mission architecture' in a post describing the launch schedule beyond Year 10, Day 1 which will keep the outpost active. Other rules Any nuclear/NERVA engine that is launched cannot enter either Kerbin's or Duna's atmosphere at any time once it has been activated. This means that any vessel with a nuclear engine that has been activated cannot aerobrake or land/disposed of at either Duna or Kerbin. Nuclear propulsion modules are required to use propulsive or gravity assist captures at Duna and Kerbin. (Kerbals are already green enough.) The continuously Kerballed outpost requires a minimum of two kerbals on Duna at all times after the initial landing of four Kerbals. If a Kerbal is left at the outpost alone (for any reason) for more than 10 days, they suffer 'Over-stressed crew' penalty. A Kerbal may be left alone at the Outpost without suffering from "Over-stressed crew" penalty, as long as there is another Kerbal within driving distance. This rule can be ignored once "Contingency Plans" is achieved, permitting the outpost to be remain 'crewed' by one Kerbal. The outpost may be comprised of one or more modules and may be located anywhere on Duna's surface. Not all modules need to be occupied, but there must always be at least one kerbal on Duna after the initial landing. ISRU can be used on Minmus, Duna or Ike or with asteroids. All ISRU missions must be part of the SLV launch schedule. Any balanced mod is acceptable. Please list all part/gameplay mods used. Game difficulty settings: 'Enable Comm Network' ON, 'Re-entry heating' 100%. Advanced settings: 'Part pressure limits' ON, 'Part g-force limits' ON, 'Kerbal g-force limits' ON. External Command Seats do not count towards habitation space and cannot be used for landing or launching on Duna/Ike or for interplanetary transfers. Rescue/contingency missions may ignore this rule, but any crew utilizing a command seat to land on or launch from Duna/Ike will void their score for Mission Value. Over-stressed crew penalty: Crew member resigned from KSC due to stress. Any crew receiving this will suffer a 50% Mission Value penalty. If you look carefully on the EVA suit label, it has the warning "Must be not be used for atmospheric flight!". If a Kerbal is subjected to atmospheric flight (excluding EVA thrusters, jumps, etc.), they suffer 'Over-stressed crew' penalty. Vacuum-only use is fine. Any kerbal fatality for any reason will void that kerbal's Mission Value score. Extraplanetary Launchpad and other extra-Kerbin / orbital construction mods are prohibited. All parts and spacecraft must be launched from Kerbin. Stock alternate launch sites are permitted. "Basic rover": A rover that utilizes external command seat(s). "Pressurized rover": A rover that uses crewed module parts for crew quarters. "Contingency Plans": Complete achievements "Backup plan", "Duna Space Station", "Duna Space Bus", and "Positive uplink". Note that the spacecraft for each achievement must be unique, or for modular designs must remain viable, at all times. Primary Scoring Mission Value: Based on how many Kerbal-days spent on Duna before Year 10 Day 1 (eg. two kerbals on Duna for 100 days equals 200 kerbal days on Duna). Calculated as: ("Kerbal days on Duna before Year 5 Day 1" * 2 ) + "Kerbal Days on Duna from Year 5 Day 1 until Year 10 Day 1". Four-year rule: Crew members need to be recovered on Kerbin within 4 years of being launched or receive the 'Over-stressed crew' penalty. This rule can be ignored once "Contingency Plans" is achieved. Mission Efficiency: Based on how much Mission Value can be earned per launch. Calculated as: Mission Value / total NMP value of all launches. Note, this is not the accumulated payload mass of all launches but simply the NMP of the SLV * number of launches before Year 10 Day 1. Achievement Scoring Note that the spacecraft for each achievement must be unique, or for modular designs must remain viable, at all times. Crew safety (add all that apply): Interplanetary expertise: All crewed interplanetary missions have at least two crew on board. (+1) Backup plan: Duna outpost has a backup ascent system to return all kerbals to Duna orbit separate from the primary Duna ascent module. (+2) Emergency Evac: if the 'Backup plan' ascent system is utilized with any kerbal on board. (+3) *Note any kerbal(s) on board during the Emergency Evac will suffer the 'Over-stressed crew penalty'. Mission robustness (add all that apply): Duna Space Station: Place a space station in orbit around Duna. The space station must have room for minimum of 3 kerbals (Habitation rule applies). (+1) Duna space bus: Deliver a fully reusable shuttle service to Duna that can ferry at least four crew between Duna's surface and Ike's surface (refueling permitted). (+2) *Provided missions do not exceed 10 days, 'Habitation space' rule does not apply. Deep space transit: Implement a fully reusable crew transfer vehicle that can complete a Kerbin <-> Duna round trip without refueling (either direction). Must be capable of carrying a minimum of 4 crew. (+3) Science value (add all that apply): Deep space laboratory: Duna outpost must include at least one Science Lab module. If 'Duna Space Station' is scored, it must also include a Science Lab module. (+1) Early mission prestige: Safely return at least two kerbals to Kerbin's surface from a Duna mission before Year 5 Day 1. At least one of the crew members must have walked on either Ike or Duna and return a surface sample with them. (+2) Biome diversity: Return surface samples from at least five of Duna's biomes. (+3) *This can be done all at once or separate. If scored, "Early Mission Prestige" sample does not counts toward the five. Advanced mission objectives (add all that apply): Kerbin space station: Using SLV launch(es), place a space station in orbit around Kerbin. The station must support at least 4 kerbals and may be used as a staging platform for crew to and from Duna, although not required. (+1) Positive uplink: Place a minimum of three relay satellites in orbit around Duna and one around Ike. One of the Duna satellites must be in polar orbit. This also requires Advanced game setting 'Require Signal for Control' ON. (+2) Advanced deep space transit: If 'Deep space transit' is scored, it must support a minimum of 5 kerbals and refuel only in Duna SOI (travels from Duna -> Kerbin -> Duna without refueling) (+3) Surface Mobility (add all that apply): At least 50% of the Duna crew have access to a seat in a Basic Rover during their outpost surface mission. (+1) Every crew member has access to a Pressurized Rover seat. (+2) The outpost is land-mobile/Pressurized Rover (Habitation rule applies). (+3) Negative Publicity (add all that apply): "Can we do this?" Less than four crew land on Duna before Year 5 Day 1. (-1) "We will never forget them.." For every kerbal fatality for any reason (-1) each to max of (-5) "Perhaps we should make cookware instead" More than 5 kerbals are lost (deduct ALL but 1 Achievement point) Outpost Success Rating You have taken on a mammoth undertaking and have earned your retirement on the Duna outpost! Adding all Achievement points: 29-30: The outpost delighted the Federation with your exceptional achievement. Your retirement will be luxurious! 26-28: The outpost succeeded...extremely well. You can now retire in elegant estates! 24-27: The outpost succeeded. The Federation is pleased by your efforts. You will live comfortably! 19-23: The outpost was a success. You have met the minimum standards set by the Federation, but your life will not be easy! 14-18: The outpost survived...barely. You will be living in tents. Few supply ships will come your way! 8-13: The outpost failed...The Federation will no longer send supply ships. You are on your own! 1-7: The outpost failed...dismally. The Federation debtors' prison is your new home! "You need to live in a dome initially, but over time you could kerraform Duna ... So it's a fixer-upper of a planet." - Elon Kerman Helpful info and links: Thanks to @Mad Rocket Scientist for this planning spreadsheet. Plug in your SLV's NPM and watch the magic! Thanks to @michal.don for developing these great timelines (.PDF) which present easy to read launch window and transit information. The Alex Moon Launch Window Planner which uses an advanced model of the solar system to produce pork-chop plots. (Mmmm.. pork chops). There are 4 Hohmann transfer windows before Year 10 Day 1. Some notes on this challenge.. This is inspired by and is largely based on this challenge, now long retired. Similar success can be achieved by using larger or smaller NPM lifter designs. It's all about mission execution.. In order to earn maximum Achievement points, sacrifices to Mission Value will be made. Overall leaderboard ranking based on: Achievement score * Mission Efficiency or something similar (may include a balance modifier). "But my SLV is 100% reusable with rapid turn around." It still takes time to build the payload and install it. A reusable SLV with NMP of 65t will have 9 launches. A reusable SLV with NMP of 30t will have 21 launches. There are benefits to using a life support mod over simulating with Ore. For example, they include build aids in the VAB/SPH for determining LS needs. Many also include recyclers, purifiers and greenhouses. If used carefully, these may provide an edge in Mission Value. Mission Report Threads: @michal.don : My take on the "Duna Outpost Mission Architecture" challenge @Kerbolitto : Duna Outpost Mission Architecture, Kerbolitto's stuff @dire : DOMA Arigato, Duna! Completed Entries: Here lists the esteemed, brave and dedicated adventurers who have brought Elon Kerman's dreams to reality... @jinnantonix Mission Value: 157380 NPM: 31 tons (21 launches) Efficiency: 157380 / (31*21) = 249.8 Achievements: 29 Mission Plan: https://imgur.com/a/AjdNjto Video Video Video Video Video Using stock parts plus TAC Life Support, this mission highlights high capacity crew modules with awesome aesthetics. Some of the scenes from the videos and images make my computer's fan kick in just thinking about the part-counts! This appears to be a pretty high bar for the first completed entry and was obviously a big effort not only in playing but designing and even producing videos, which I highly recommend checking out. Death Engineering Mission Value: 62464 NPM: 40 tons (16 launches) Efficiency: 62464 / (40*16) = 97.6 Achievements: 26 Images Images Images Images Images TAC-LS entry using some Near Future modules for outpost parts and all-nuclear interplanetary transfer mechanics.
  2. Rational Resources is designed to operate on the Community Resource Pack or the WBI Classic Stock resources and to strip out the entirely random resource distributions and to apply distribution templates (carefully configured groups of resource distributions) according to the logically expected class and composition of a body. Rational Resources is inspired by Realistic Atmospheres made by @OhioBob and is part of the JNSQ (the planet pack) experience. While this mod is installed, un-configured bodies will have no resources at all. This mod may inflate your ModuleManager cache quite a bit. Notice that the logo image tells the following: Mun has a sizeable portion of MetalOre and Oxygen, but no Water (will be handled by biome specific config) and no Uraninite. Kerbin has a sizeable portion of Rock and Silicates, and there's a display for crust, ocean and atmo. Duna has a sizeable portion of CO2 in crust and atmo (not in legend), MetalOre, RareMetals and Uraninite, but no Minerals or Silicates. This mod enables planet makers to easily assign these distribution templates to their planet packs and skip the headaches of figuring out and writing the individual nodes themselves, and assorting all of their writings into several per-resource config files. Active CRP Resources Surface and Atmosphere Ammonia, CarbonDioxide, ExoticMinerals, Gypsum, LqdHe3, Hydrates, Hydrogen, MetalOre, Methane, Minerals, Nitrogen, Ore, Oxygen, RareMetals, Rock, Silicates, Substrate, Uraninite, Water. Ocean LqdAmmonia, LqdCO2, LqdMethane, LqdNitrogen, LqdOxygen, Water. Star Antimatter, Karborundum, LqdHe3, Hydrogen, LqdDeuterium. The resources above are preferred and used. are patched to display them all. Ocean resources only show non-zero values when the scanner vehicle is splashed. The Star series templates apply resource bands to a narrow and general classification of stars, automatically making them all viable as mining destinations for interstellar vessels. The expected members of this seres are: Yellow; Red Dwarf; Red Giant; Blue Giant. Due to a very nasty bug in stock, any resource bands around a star can only have a a maximum span of somewhere under 2 Gigameters. WBI Classic Stock system support: Rational Resources shows in the WBI play mode switch UI. (Picture needs to be updated) Assigning a template to a planet is as easy as: Current templates ISRU With omnipotent Ore being stripped of its Godhood, the following ISRU chains are proposed and encouraged for use by seasoned modders. Ore abundance is capped to 5% and its presence chance to 80%. It will be inconvenient for most players... but it will still be around. Ore tanks will be changed, at least, to hold the cryogenic input resources. Players may find themselves forced towards using Hydrolox rocketry since the required resources (Ore or Carbon Dioxide) for LiquidFuel may often be scarce meanwhile the requirements for Hydrolox (Hydrates, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Water) can be quite abundant. Compatibility Due to the listed resources and the nature of Rational Resources, compatibility instantly extends between configured planet packs and the following mods: Kerbalism (consumable resources only) TAC Life Support Near Future Tech suite Hydrolox rocketry mods (including BlueDog Design Bureau, Cryogenic Engines, Kerbal Atomics) Potential Methalox rocketry mods Some resources and their distributions are conditionally spared while the rest are removed. Spared resources include ArgonGas, XenonGas, Karbonite and Karborundum (condition: Karbonite's specific placements like the overabundance on Eve are disallowed). Purged resources include Dirt (used by MKS alone but supplanted with more Rock) and any other mod that adds resources (and especially extremely handwaved ones) such as The Gold Standard. But a provision exists to allow such resources to not be purged. If you somehow still have "RealisticResources" please delete that before installing. Requires B9 Part Switch for tank options Requires Community Resource Pack for the resources in the tank options DOWNLOAD :: GitHub :: SpaceDock
  3. Kerbin is dying. After many failed launches and some silly scientist leaving their nuclear spacecraft on all year to see if it ever gets off the ground, the amount of toxic chemicals that have been put into the atmosphere has started killing all life. The Kerbals, finding out about this, have made a plan to move to another planet - or should I say moon? You have been trusted to act out this plan. Main mission: Make a base on Laythe and bring 10 Kerbals there. Bonus 1: Collect surface samples from Tylo before landing on Laythe. Bonus 2: Collect surface samples of all of Jool's moons (excluding Laythe) before landing on Laythe. Bonus 3: Bring 20 Kerbals to Laythe and setup two bases.
  4. Original challenge by @keptin First thread of this challenge by @Mjp1050 Kerbal Express Airlines is in need of updating its aging fleet of regional jets and turboprops. It's a big client, operating at hundreds of airports around Kerbin, and that means big fleet sales. Does your aircraft company offer the right kind of aircraft for the job? Kerbal Express wants profitable aircraft. They're looking for aircraft that meet or exceed their requirements for fuel efficiency, speed, range, passenger load, ease of training, and cost of maintenance, for the right price that gives them the best return on investment. They also want a design that's flexible, offering variations of the same design for a variety of different routes. The Rules: KSP version 1.3/1.4 compatible Stock parts + Airplane Plus + Kerbal Aircraft Expansion (optional - and no, we can't include some other mod you suggest, sorry. If we did that it would be hideously complicated) Making History Expansion is NOT allowed, due to it not being freely available to everyone. TweakScale is allowed, just please don't ruin the spirit of the challenge with it. The Mk1 and Mk2 Crew Cabins count as 8 Passengers Mk3 Passenger Module and Size 2 Crew Cabin count as 24 Passengers Small aircraft must have at least 1 pilot in a cockpit, and medium-large at least 2 pilots. Command seats can be used, but you must build a cabin around them. No rocket engines. Aircraft engines only. You don't have to use propeller engines in the Turboprop category, nor do you have to use jets for the Jet categories. Electric propellers are allowed providing the power comes from fuel cells. Minor clipping is allowed, within reason. A rolling runway takeoff is required. Takeoff & Landing speed of no more than 80 m/s on land , or 120 m/s on water. Your aircraft must stay intact. [No drop tanks, etc.] Model variants may only have minor differences between them to be considered. 15,000m altitude limit, unless in the Supersonic category Aircraft must stay in the atmosphere Mach 1 speed limit (343 m/s), unless in the Supersonic or Jumbo Jet category What is a variant? To improve your design's competitiveness, your company can submit a variant of the same design (See Wants section below). A variant is built on the same model platform with minor changes in design to give it, say, extra range, or extra passenger room. This is most commonly achieved by adding fuel tanks or lengthening the cabin, sometimes with minor changes to wing and emmpanage design. To qualify as a variant, it must generally have the same structural layout, meaning engines, gear, and lift surfaces must be in roughly the same location & design. Basically, if you make it too different, it will be considered a separate model/submission. What Kerbal Express Air Wants, By Category: For all categories, Range will be calculated by fuel capacity / burn rate * speed / 1000m at the recommended cruising speed & altitude. Seaplane Must be able to land on and take off from water and land Range of at least 600km Cruising Speed of at least 110 m/s 16+ Passengers Turboprop Range of at least 800km Cruising Speed of at least 130 m/s 24+ Passengers Small Regional Jet Range of at least 1000km Cruising Speed of at least 220 m/s 40+ Passengers Small Hopper Range of at least 400km Cruising Speed of at least 180 m/s 56+ Passengers See 'Hopper Information' below. Medium Regional Jet Range of at least 1500km Cruising Speed of at least 240 m/s 72+ Passengers Supersonic Jet Range of at least 1500km Cruising Speed of at least 330 m/s 40+ Passengers Hopper Range of at least 400km Cruising Speed of at least 210 m/s 104+ Passengers Jumbo Jet Range of at least 4000km 152+ Passengers Takeoff speed can be higher that 80 m/s Super Jumbo Range of at least 4000km 800+ Passengers Takeoff speed can be higher that 80 m/s Hopper information: Hoppers are a class added more recently than other classes, a hopper is judged very differently. A hopper is an aircraft designed to be very compact to save space in big inner cities, where land can be absurdly expensive, while ferrying passengers out of the city. (hence a short range is okay, range above 400km is largely unnecessary for hoppers.) Climb rate should also be maximized, to clear skyscrapers. Judging Criteria: Every submission that meets the requirements will be ranked with feedback from Kerbal Express Jet test pilots, but how well it ranks depends on: (Note, this is elaborated on later) How well it meets or exceeds the category requirements Cost of Aircraft Fuel Efficiency at recommended cruising speed & altitude Ease of maintenance; fewer parts and fewer engines are preferred Passenger comfort How to Submit. Your post must include the following: The name of your aircraft company and model names for the designs you're submitting. Please clarify what category you're entering the plane in. At least one screenshot or very large bold text or something in your submissions. This is so we can more easily see it is a submission, we don't want to accidentally skip yours. A link to your craft files in your submission post. No PMing me. The price of your aircraft times 1,000. (If $23,555 in-game, submit as $23,555,000. This is just for fun to make prices more realistic.) The recommended cruising speed and altitude for your aircraft. This is the speed and altitude you've fine-tuned your designs for, ensuring the best balance of speed, range, and fuel efficiency. It's also what the test pilots will be testing your aircraft at for judging. (Optional, but will help in review) Pitch your aircraft to the Kerbal Express Airlines executives, selling them on why it should be purchased for their fleet. Include any notable features (even if fictional). ========================================================================== The Judges: @panzerknoef @neistridlar @CrazyJebGuy @NightshineRecorralis @no_intelligence (Judge of last thread) @1Revenger1 (Judge of last thread) @Mjp1050 (OP of last thread) Challenge Submissions Seaplane @ImmaStegosaurus!'s Ka-24 - A very high performing, albeit pricey, seaplane. @Samwise Potato's SF-A232 "Lupin" - Deceptively powerful and high-performing, and can take off and land from just about anywhere. The Lupin has all the qualities we're looking for in a seaplane. NEW THREAD ADDITIONS TO LEADER BOARD: @Wanderfound's Kerbski - It's a fast, and fairly good flying boat, but it costs a fair bit. @TaRebelSheep's Kessna T-170 - It's very small, but safe and very easy to fly, and it's cheap. The cockpit seats two, so it's an ideal training aircraft. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI K-38\52 - A safe, fast float-plane that flies well, is comfortable and cheap, and it has a very long range. @CrazyJebGuy's K-61\a - A cheaper version of the K-38\52, carries more passengers, but the new passengers have an unpleasant ride. @Haruspex's K57D Tern - The seaplane variant of the successful land Tern, but it's a bit of a let down, being much more expensive, slower and now with a short range. It sacrificed all the things we liked about previous Tern planes, so that it could take off and land on water. @Andetch's ADX Type G - It needs a huge runway to take off, and on landing it can easily kill half the passengers, so it's limited to sea only, where it is average, which is not good enough to justify only being able to land on water. @NightshineRecorralis's Sea Dragon Series - Very large seaplanes, the small ones fly fairly well but when they expanded it they didn't add engines, so the larger ones perform badly. It's a prime example of expanding a plane done wrong. @NightshineRecorralis's Sea Newt Series - It's high maintenance and uncomfortable, ruling it out for economy and luxury routes, and the pontoons fall off, but once they do it makes a great land plane, and so we bought some of the cargo variant. @hoioh's Skikull - It looks very old, and it's very slow.But it is very comfortable, and it makes a good short range island hopper. @Blasty McBlastblast's BS-16 Splashy - It's really pretty average, excepting the range and price. It's quite cheap, but the range does not meet the 600km requirement. @Samwise Potato's SF-A116 Tulip - It's tiny and very cute, it looks almost silly, but trust us - it is not a silly choice for a seaplane to buy. @no_intelligence's Kerijew K-100 - Looks 80 years old. None the less, lives up to our standards well, except it costs a small fortune. @CrazyJebGuy's Skots Long - It's just a Skots Medium but we told you it can land on water. That's the only difference. Turboprop @Eidahlil's Dusty Turboprop - A dirt cheap but surprisingly fast design, and it gets the job done. @ImmaStegosaurus!'s Ka-12 series - Inefficient and insanely unreliable. Not recommended unless the engines are replaced. @no_intelligence's Kombarder 300 series - Very hardy, and can take off and land on just about any surface. @GDJ's AVRO Prop-Star - Very solidly built, comfortable, with a surprisingly long range. @AeroGav's "Fulmar" Turboprop - An aircraft with some puzzling design choices, but ultimately a wonderful turboprop with a long range and easy takeoffs and landings. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI Turbo-XL Classic - Offers good performance and a very appealing exterior. This plane is also quite large for a turboprop. @panzerknoef's Bx-1/2 "Shoebox" series - Very inexpensive and they do get the job done, but you'd better be a good pilot because the Shoebox lacks functional windows in the cockpit. NEW THREAD ADDITIONS TO LEADER BOARD: @Blasty McBlastblast's BS-32 (and 24) Regional - Well rounded aircraft, in almost every way. @panzerknoef's CL-2-RRE - A fairly standard turboprop. Slow, but climbs and accelerated very fast. Perfect for short haul smaller routes. @CrazyJebGuy's PAT Postman and Stubs - Very cheap, very fast, and uncomfortable. @TheFlyingKerman's Kerbus K-220 - A dirt cheap but very capable turboprop, can even take off from water. It would make a solid fleet workhorse. Improved off of K-210. @Spudmeist3r's SSRJ-1001 - Engineer one: "Hey, you know how they buy good planes?" Engineer 2: "Yeah?" Engineer 1: "What if we made it not like that?" @Joseph Kerman's WCT IH-1 - A tiny plane, performs like heaven, climbs and flies and turns like a dream. Unfortunately has an abominable range of just 250km! @JosephKerman's WCT BJ-1 - Very small, very fast and with a very, very long range. A bit uncomfortable though. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI TurboXL Classic C - A cheaper Turbo-XL Classic, a bit slower but it has fixed a few issues and has a range of just 760km. @HamnavoePer's CNRE-458 - The drop-tanks are a novel idea, but it doesn't seem like the tech is quite there yet, and it's too slow. @TheFlyingKerman's Kerbus K-210 - At only $10 mill it is very cheap, it is very versatile and can act as a flying boat, while cruising at 300m/s. Unfortunately it has very poor cockpit visibilty. @HamnavoePer's Isometric I (+ Bush) - It's meant to operate off of bad airfields and rural areas in the wilderness, and would be really good for this, if it didn't tail strike so often. @NightshineRecorralis's Canberra P - A cheap, speedy plane. Unfortunately it is a bit tough to fly, and it has a short range. @Andetch's Chalduro - It's got an insanely long range, but it is very difficult to fly. Would recommend if your pilots are very skilled. @TaRebelSheep's AEG-5s Asymmetrical Flyer - Utterly bizarre, and has odd handling, but it's actually a decent turboprop. @TheEpicSquared's ISRJ-32b - A really good plane, fast maneuverable comfortable with no faults we could see! Even a bit cheap. @MiffedStarfish's F-Tech CAL- 4 - It's really not very good.... Except for comfort, which will provide good advertising material. @HamnavoePer's Keinheim Passenger Transport - Mediocre turboprop, but it can do stunts! Small Regional Jet @AeroGav's Screechcraft Starcraft - A very fast plane with exceptional range, but features sub-par maneuverability. Also pulls double duty as a supersonic jet. @tsgaerospace's SP-32-1 "Arrow" - An absolute delight to fly, and quite reasonably priced. The Arrow has all the qualities we're looking for in a small regional jet. @dundun92's URJ-101 - A well-priced, 4-dimensional aircraft that defies all known laws of physics. @TheEpicSquared's ISRJ-32 - Offers wonderful performance, but at the expense of Kerbal comfort. @aerodis's AerLeeker 3.6 - Offers a comfortable and smooth ride, but is quite expensive. @Cabbink's Alice - We're not entirely sure what this is supposed to be, but it does make for a very versatile, if expensive small regional jet. @AeroGav's Screechcraft Starcraft NEO - Unique in looks and above average in all other categories. The Starcraft NEO has all the qualities we're looking for in a small regional jet. @no_intelligence's Kombarder 400 series - Offers a neo-futuristic aesthetic and wonderful performance all around. Except on landings: it bounces. NEW THREAD ADDITIONS TO LEADER BOARD: @Thor Wotansen's Nomad - This aircraft is a decent regional jet, but it can also land and take off near enough anywhere, even the sea. @kerbinorbiter's Kerbair K-32-200 - It is uncomfortable and expensive, but it has a range that would put most Jumbo jets to shame! @valens's EK-4e Teal - A fairly long ranged, inexpensive machine, it's a solid choice for a small regional jet. @HolidayTheLeek's AC-H1 Island Hopper - Very very expensive, very slow, and it is powered with a nuclear reactor. But it has a practically unlimited range. @Haruspex's K57A Tern - " A fast, fuel efficient, and reasonably priced design. What's not to like? The comfort, a bit." @TaRebelSheep's B3 Lance - High capacity, long range, very comfortable aircraft for an average price. It's a strong contender certainly. @CrazyJebGuy's Skots Small - Jack of all trades, master of none, and it's expensive. Also looks like it was built 80 years ago. @NightshineRecorralis's Dash Series - They maneuver very nicely and are comfortable, just really good planes; unfortunately they are a bit pricey. @kerbinorbiter's Kerbair K-32 - Really good range and comfort, bit above average price, but let down by poor handling. @sdj64's Bluejay 32 - A pretty typical, but very practical design, for a fair price. Would recommend. @1Revenger1's SPP-1a/b Phoenix - A really odd plane. Two cockpits, both mounted on top in a weird way, and wings that are normal until they extend all the way back. Very poor maneuverability, but it has a crazy long range. @alric8's Cathiogac 2.- A classy, yet ordinary and cheap aircraft. Bit slow. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI Kalcing - Capable of going up to 322m/s with a great range saves this from being just another mediocre SRJ. @Steel Starling's SI-R-1 Puddlejumper - Outdated, but there is one model which can produce it's own fuel. @shdwlrd's Monarc P4 - Expensive but classy with a very long range. Medium Regional Jet @SuicidalInsanity's IA-720 - Offers an innovative design at a reasonable price. The IA-720 has all the qualities that we're looking for in a medium regional jet. @logman's Kerman Dove - Unreliable and very unsafe: it's not uncommon for the rear cabins to be destroyed on landing. Avoid this plane. @logman's Kerman Stingray - Very solidly built, reliable, and handles wonderfully. Hampered only by its large price tag. @ImmaStegosaurus!'s Ka-62 - Sturdy and reliable, but suffers from a large price tag and low fuel efficiency. Its exterior is reminiscent of designs from 50 years ago, too. @Bombstar10's Universal Transport Mark One Civilian (UT-1B) - AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA NEW THREAD ADDITIONS TO LEADER BOARD: @Blasty McBlastblast's BS-72 Medium - A bit expensive, but powerful fast and comfortable. @Gaarst's Kerbalespace C-1K - An expensive, but reliable and luxurious passenger liner. @kerbinorbiter's Kerbair K-20 - It's comfortable, but it's slow, and it's quite cheap. Would recommend. @CrazyJebGuy's Skots Medium - Uncomfortable, but turns well and has a long range. Expensive though. @FleshJeb's Klonkorde - It's a pretty good plane, very long and sleek, but it's not extremely cheap. It is though, very pleasant to fly in. @panzerknoef's Lassen - A pretty standard medium regional, it can take off from small runways and flies pretty well. @NightshineRecorralis's Olympus 100 Series - Nice looking, well built aircraft, but it comes at a steep price. @sdj64's Goosewing 80 - A modern looking design, a dream to fly, but it's not so good at passenger comfort. @no_intelligence's Kombardier 200 - Cheap to maintain, long range and good fuel economy are nice, but don't outweigh the fact flying it is a suicide mission. Supersonic Jet @AeroGav's Screechcraft Starcraft - A fast plane with exceptional range, but features sub-par maneuverability. Also pulls double duty as a small regional jet. @Bob_Saget54's SAI Concorde Mark II - Very fast with a long range, but suffers from an inferior airframe and high maintenance costs. @TheEpicSquared's ISSJ-40 - Blindingly fast, inexpensive, and high-performing, but sacrifices some Kerbal comfort. @shdwlrd's Hope series - Very fun to fly, and is just plain cool to look at, but suffers from a high fuel consumption. @reachmac's Karvo 370 - Handles well, but requires a larger runway than most airports currently have. Not recommended unless the buyer is absolutely sure the airports can support it. @Laie's Sonic - This thing can basically fly itself, it's that stable in the air. Maintenance costs are high, though. @sevenperforce's Transcendent Spirit - Insanely difficult to control, and the landing gear is insufficient for such a large aircraft. Not recommended. @Eidahlil's Potato - Understandably difficult to fly, but offers good Kerbal comfort at a low price and enough range to circumnavigate the planet. NEW THREAD ADDITIONS TO LEADER BOARD: @HamnavoePer's Zoomer - It deserves the name. A compact, fast and reliable jet, done on the cheap. And it can circumnavigate Kerbin twice on one tank of fuel. @panzerknoef's Dotsero - A very cheap Supersonic, it's competent, and very cheap. Many seaplanes cost over double the price of a Dotsero. @MostExcellent's 2707 - A well rounded versatile supersonic jet, we like this. You couldn't go far wrong with these. @CrazyJebGuy's Skots Speedmaster - A fast, long ranged, but very uncomfortable, expensive, over-engineered, and very inefficient design. @HamnavoePer's Delta II - It's a great plane, but it's absurdly expensive, and not the best at passenger comfort. @SpacePigeon's Rapid 1-100 and 1-200 - Flies very low, by supersonic standards, even floatplane standards! Would not recommend for flying over populated areas. @NightshineRecorralis's Pegasus - A decent supersonic, but it climbs very slowly. Although when up there, it's a long ranged luxurious liner. @panzerknoef's Lassen B - It was a decent medium regional jet, but then they made it into a high capacity, long range fuel efficient SST and we like it! @53miner53's 18537 Tech SupersonicJet1 - BOOM, WHIZZZ, AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH! THUNK! @Jimbimbibble's Daxworks Lightning Cruiser - A well made plane, exactly what a luxury supersonic jet should be. Fast, and reasonably comfortable. @Im The One's TOHC SST-1 - A flying pancake, it's very uncomfortable but it's a nice airshow plane. @TheFlyingKerman's Kerbus K-350 - A very cheap, very fast and comfortable plane, it's a solid workhorse. We would absolutely recommend it. @Samwise Potato's SF-S240 Marigold - It's got a crazy long range, and is pretty well rounded. Would recommend. Good workhorse. @notsodeadjeb's PBY Katalina - It's a supersonic, INCREDIBLY long ranged float plane. Unfortunately costs a few pretty pennies. @qzgy's Kramer - SSTP-34 Benirshke - Long ranged, really good plane, sadly very expensive. Also they somehow managed to create a randomly powerful pitch control. @AtomicSnails's FF-Shockcone - A decent SST, it's very versatile and can fill a fair few different roles. @Samwise Potato's SF-J240 - A supersonic powered by wheeslies? What magic is this? Good magic, that's what. @panzerknoef's Arenal - A practical well balanced aircraft. But what does it look like? The only picture has it covered in sight obscuring flames. @no_intelligence's Kupolev KU-100 - Decent plane, comfortable but a bit slower than most of its supersonic competition. @Magzimum's MAD TF-3a Swift - It's cheap, has spectacular range and great mileage. @TaRebelSheep's Trifekta Aeronautics F45T-W4 - Expensive to buy and operate, but comfy safe and fast. Only worth considering for 1st class flights. Jumbo Jet @Andetch's Day Fury - It's very fast an maneuverable, but with a range that is easily exceeded by seaplanes, and it takes off at very high speed. @NightshineRecorralis's Challenger Seaplane - A bit lacking at everything except being a HUGE FLYING BOAT. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI Skots Mouse - Somebody added wings and a few jet engines to a ship, and it's cheap. @NildimensionalString's Winter Tech Humpback Superheavy Passenger Airliner - It's expensive, slow, short ranged, will probably explode and it's obvious why the original company who designed it went bankrupt. @sh1pman's Keladi Corporation Albatross II - It has very long range, and is generally pretty good, but it comes with a steep price tag. @Cols's A797 - It's slow, handles poorly, it climbs slowly and has a very short range, but it's dirt cheap, so we bought 3. @AeroGav's Screehcraft Grande Dumbo - A wonderful plane, it's luxurious, flies like a dream, but it's expensive. @CrazyJebGuy's GAI GP-1a - This jumbo carries cargo too - apart from that it just looks odd and is otherwise fairly normal. @Andetch's X Series Night Fury - It's a really big fighter jet with passenger cabins, and a short range by Jumbo standards. @no_intelligence's Koeing 747-100 Super - Hard to fly, very short range and expensive, but with comfort and luxury straight out of the golden age of air travel. @Not sure's B-1337 Swift Moon - A very unpleasant, loud airplane. It costs a lot of money. @NightshineRecorralis's Olympus 250 - A fat version of the 100, carries more passengers but with a shorter range and it can tail-strike if you aren't careful. @macktruck6666's L-1011 Jumbo Jet - It's very expensive and doesn't perform well, but it does have luxury seating! @Kneves's WH-04 - A short ranged, very hard to fly thing, it needs a tremendously big runway too and we will not buy any. @Bombstar10's Grizzly ST - 3 Civilian - It costs an arm, leg 4 fingers and a left toe, for a plane that is guaranteed to explode, it is slow and uncomfortable and is absolutely, undoubtedly the worst plane we have tested. So far. Yours could beat it and be King Krap. @TaRebelSheep's Trifecta Aeronautics C5 "RePurpose" - Only 140 seats, but there's a lot of space in the cargo bay to pull a Skots Economy, so it's a jumbo anyway. @CrazyJebGuy's Skots Ratt - It's slow, but fairly good at all the other stuff, except price. Super Jumbo @NightshineRecorralis's Colossus - It's flipping massive, 1152 passengers, gets off the runway like a turbo-prop, flies like a cruise ship. @CrazyJebGuy's Sky Titanic - A wonderful idea on paper, but in turns the wings fall off and everybody dies. Other @CrazyJebGuy's GAI Cool Corporate Jet - Not sure to have a meeting or an air show? Now you can have both at once! Wunderwaffe* @qzgy's Kramer Starmachine - No windows, supersonic jumbo and passenger cabins are upside down. Please someone review that plane I made by super-gluing one of Niestridlar's jets to one of my own. It's the very epitome of this section. @Steel Starling's SI-R-1 Puddlejumper Scout - It can produce it's own fuel. Isn't that nifty? *Not really but this is for special planes that remind me of some of the mad German stuff; this section is for weird and wonderful things that may or may not work. How your Plane will be judged This information is only accurate for my reviews, it is however pretty close likely to other reviewers. We will not modify your plane in any way, except action groups sometimes and in flight controls. (Such as changing the braking slider on a landing gear) To get a good review from me, your plane should have most of these qualities: -Be cheap, at least per passenger -Fly well -Be reasonably fast -Have a long range -Be a comfortable plane to fly in (I explain this in detail later) -Be reasonably fuel efficient -Not hit the tail on the ground during takeoff/landing -Be safe (important), doesn't need to be overly good at it, just needs to not spin itself out of the sky or have the wings fall off or something With comfort, three things are taken into account, noise, vibrations and views. Noise is essentially how close an engine is to the cabins. Vibrations is affected by structure a bit more, but distance is important too. An engine mounted directly to the back of a cabin is very bad for vibrations, or if it is mounted on side. If there is a lot of parts in between them, vibrations are probably not an issue. Views are less important, we don't deduct marks for them, but if it's good it will help a craft's review. This thread was started because OP of previous thread went away, and we needed to update this. Any and all suggestions to improve this challenge are welcome.
  5. This is the Kerbin SOI escape challenge, the only goal being to escape Kerbin's SOI as fast as possible. This can be done any way you wish as long as you don't use any mods (other than visual and readout ones.) In this challenge you may use any cheat you wish except the 'set orbit / altitude' and 'infinite propellant' cheats. You may use any other cheat you wish. To calculate your time add the current flight time to the time to your Kerbin escape. This will be how the challenge is scored. There are 2 categories, conventional engines and other. Happy launching! Leaderboard (Conventional engines) #1: #2: #3: #4: #5: Leaderboard (Other) #1: #2: #3: #4: #5:
  6. Since my newest project in career mode is paused until release of Breaking ground dlc i starts a Kerpollo run in a new science safe: Paused Career project: Link to Kerpollo challenge thread: Before starting a new game I installed a fresh KSP 1.7. to a new folder and installed some mods for convenience in mission planning and engineering: [x] Science! Continued (xScienceContinued 5.22) AntennaHelper (AntennaHelper 1.0.6) ClickThrough Blocker (ClickThroughBlocker 0.1.7.1) Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.10.0.0) Kerbal Engineer Redux (KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.6.0) MechJeb2 (MechJeb 2.8.3.0) Module Manager (ModuleManager 4.0.2) Precise Node (PreciseNode 1.2.10.2) Toolbar (Toolbar 1.7.17.15) Toolbar Controller (ToolbarController 1:0.1.6.20) Transfer Window Planner (TransferWindowPlanner v1.6.3.0) TriggerAu Flags (TriggerAu-Flags v2.9.3.0) After this preperations I started a new science game and did the usual rolling around the KSC. Finally I ended with a rocket to bring Jeb and Bob to space: https://imgur.com/a/27UPAvz Next goal: Go for mun or minmus, maybe combined with solar science
  7. GOAL: Build an asymmetrical aircraft that can take off and land horizontally. Use at least 10 parts and do not use any parts more than once. RULES: 1. You may not use any part more than once. This means no symmetry--no matched pairs of wings. A right and a left lifting surface count as the same part. That goes for landing gear as well. 2. No reaction wheels or fly-by-wire. Internal SAS only, and bonus kudos if you can fly it with SAS off. 3. The plane must takeoff and land horizontally. No VTOL. 4. Anything else goes. All mods that do not alter physics are fine. 5. Keep in mind the spirit of the challenge. I cannot foresee every loophole. Be clever and innovative, but remember, this is about creating something unique using your building skill to achieve it. 6. Post photos, or if you can, video. 7. Impress your friends with this collector's item badge. The plane below does not technically follow the rules, since it uses some of the same parts more than once, but you get the idea of what is possible... It's on KerbalX if you are interested. https://kerbalx.com/Klapaucius/Pablo-Cubist-Dadaist-aircraft Also, check out @ZobrAz's FrankenPlane, which inspired me in my ventures into asymmetry in the first place. https://kerbalx.com/ZobrAz/abomination-Friday-13-FrankenPlane The video below that is some old footage of the Blohm & Voss BV 141, a German asymmetrical plane from WWII.
  8. CURRENT PARTICIPANTS: @KerbalKore @ @ @ PROLOGUE: BRIEF: Players must collaborate with one another in order to construct a massive colony ship with enough space and fuel to colonize another world. Each ship may be built solo or with a maximum of 3 people (see rules) The ships must be built by sharing the craft files and sub-assemblies with each other. Ships must be given a name and one of the builders then must head off into the void and get into orbit of their destination in order to complete the challenge. The Ships may be launched from Kerbin and assembled from orbit, or constructed in orbit using Extraplanetary Launchpads. The most ambitious successful mission wins. RULES: SHIP BUILDING CRITERIA: HOW POINTS ARE AWARDED: Recommended mods for the challenge (Stock is fine): This challenge is highly experimental and I would appreciate any feedback given. CURRENT SHIPS: NAME: CCS "Noah" PHOTO: TYPE: Cryo ship DEVELOPERS: @KerbalKore CREW CAPACITY: N/a DESTINATION: Nara (planet 9 of JNSQ system overhaul) MODS: restock, restock+, EPL, KSPIE, BDB, Tantares, and all Nertea's stuff. PROGRESS: Planning stage
  9. Hello, and welcome to... The Speedrun Challenge. This challenge is all about speed(duh). The aim is to get within the SOI of every object as fast as you physically can. Cheating(ex. ladder drive, cheat menu, hyperedit, etc.) is not allowed. Some mods are allowed and some are required. Allowed: RSS and RSSExpanded packs(for challenge) Gameslinx's Planet Overhaul and any other reasonable solar system mod is allowed. Before Kerbin, After Kerbin, Beyond Home, New Horizons, Whirligig World and GPP are the only system replacements allowed. Required: OPM(for outer planets) Kerbol Origins(if it works) Kerbol Plus(if it works) Odysseus Planet Pack(if it works) Kronkus Cyran Sentar Boris Urania(if it works) That's it for now! Scoreboard will be made when I have screenshot or video evidence for 1+ people.
  10. Welcome to the KSP Original Design Competition, brought to you by @Servo and @HB Stratos! The Idea Servo came up with a challenge for his own to build an original design for each jet fighter generation. I was inspired by this and in collaboration with Servo we made background information/guoverment contract for each jet plane generation. The Contracts 1. Generation 2. Generation 3. Generation 4. Generation 4.5. Generation 5. Generation 6. Generation Transport Aircraft form various times Few rules Part clipping is allowed Craft File Editing is allowed Stock craft only No Making History Expansion How to win I can´t really say there will be a definite winner, but I will probably make a video on my YouTube channel featuring the 3-5 best aircrafts of each generation. How to submit your Planes You are allowed to submit as may planes as you want, but just one is also fine Template for submitting stuff, coupy this and replace with content to contribute. [contact no. xy] [generation] [author(s)] [craft name] [description] [pictures (max 3)] [Download link (if possible KerbalX)] HB Stratos over and out
  11. The KSP is developing a new extremely lightweight SSTO design. They need your help to create one! (I know this is probably a common challenge but it would be nice to revive it) Rules: 1. The SSTO can take off from the runway or the launchpad, but not from anywhere else (this will be noted in your entry) 2. The SSTO can be manned or unmanned (there will be two leaderboards for this) 3. The score is solely based on mass (the size of the craft doesn't matter) 4. No Kraken drives, use of eva packs (this counts as a second stage) or other cheaty methods 5. The apoapsis and periapsis of the orbit must be above the Karman line 6. The SSTO doesn't have to be able to deorbit and land itself 7. If it wasn't already extremely obvious, it is a Kerbin SSTO 8. As evidence, you must have a video or screenshots of key events in the mission with fuel gauges left visible (leave the UI on) 9. If there's anything you think I should add to the rules tell me (criticism and feedback will be greatly appreciated) Smallest Manned SSTO Smallest Unmanned SSTO 1. TheFlyingKerman (3.687t) 1. TheFlyingKerman (0.985t) 2. Vyznev (3.984t) 2. 3. 3. 4. 4. I will start to design a craft of my own soon!
  12. using only rover wheels get into orbit around any body, secondary thrusters can be used to keep the craft on the ground longer but not to increase the craft's acceleration directly. the tiers are: easy: use rover wheels on a moon to get into orbit around a planet medium: use rover wheels on a planet or moon with atmosphere to get into orbit hard: use rover wheels to generate enough speed to get into orbit around the sun good luck to all, this challenge may be impossible.
  13. Your mission is simple create the smallest plane possible. 1. The lower the score the better. 2. Add width, length, and height to get your score. 3. Only Jet engines are allowed 4. Part clipping is allowed, as long as You do not go overboard. Here is my submission to kick things off. Leaderboard Name Score Rank Rocket in my pocket 3.7 1 KingDomino111 4.5 2 Klapaucius 7.4 3 Lapis 11 4
  14. Hello! I'm Johnster Space Program who created the DLMAB challenge, and I'm rebooting the reboot of the eve rocks challenge! Older 0.90 Thread [CLOSED]: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/86265-the-eve-rocks-challenge-v090-only/ Old v1.2.x Thread [CLOSED]: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/156505-eve-rocks-challenge-12xrebooted/ In An Alternate Universe, JFK Said: I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this century is out, of landing a kerbal on eve's surface, and returning them safely to planet kerbin. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to kerbkind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. But we must do it, we can not fail this task, for if we do, we will never win... This is how the challenge will go: Your challenge is to land on eve, collect a surface sample, and return back to kerbin. Landing on eve is easy, but returning is a whole other challenge! You will have to build very large rockets if you are going to return from eve! Scoring is based on how quickly you complete the mission, how much the total mission costs, and how much the total rocket weighs in tons. There will be varying levels you can do, starting from level 1 and moving your way up in difficulty. For those that complete it in any level, you will get this badge: (Its an updated version of the original badge, made by Ziv) These are the levels (in order): Level 1 (I Did It!): Land on the surface of eve, collect a surface sample, and return and land back on kerbin safely. Level 2 (Back For Seconds): Land on eve 's surface, but at a surface altitude of 2500m or less, collect 2 surface samples, and return back to kerbin Level 3 (Eve AND Gilly): Land and collect a sample from eve, then land on Gilly and collect a surface sample, then return back to kerbin safely Level 4 (Ore From Eve): Land on eve and collect 25 ore with mining equipment and then return to kerbin safely, surface sample optional Level 5 (The Ultimate Challenge): Land in eve's oceans, collect a sample, then collect a sample from the surface, and return to kerbin safely, gilly sample optional The Rules: No Cheating (Mod Menu, Infinite Fuel, Etc.) Must Provide Video or Photographic Evidence of Completion No Seats, Must Have Kerbals Onboard In A Pod Multiple Launches For Refueling Allowed (Images or Video Of Each Launch) Docking Allowed (You can leave a orbiter in eve orbit, and have a separate eve lander that redocks) No Mods Except Mechjeb, KER Allowed Must Be Stock KSP 1.6.x, KSP 1.7 or higher and MH Allowed Cost And Weight Of Rocket Includes Cost and Weight of All Rockets Used Combined In Challenge ISRU allowed Scoring: Level 1 Complete: +300 points Level 2 Complete: +550 points Level 3 Complete: +825 points Level 4 Complete: +1250 points Level 5 Complete: +1500 points Rocket Weighs 0-500 Tons: +250 points, Rocket Weighs 500-1000 Tons: +175 Points, Rocket Weighs 1000-2000 Tons: +100 points, Rocket Weighs 2500+ Tons: +50 points Rocket Costs 0 - 250k funds: +250 points, Rocket Costs 250 - 500k funds: +175 points, Rocket Costs 500k - 1 million funds: +100 points, Rocket Costs 2 million+ funds: +75 points Mission Completed in under 300 days: +250 points, Mission completed in 300-400 days: +125 points, Mission completed in 500+ Days: +25 points ISRU Used: +225 points, ISRU not used: +325 points Participants: @K3rb0dyn3 @Aeroboi @GRS @purpleivan Leaderboards: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. To everyone that does the challenge, have fun! And if you have any questions ask me. Edit 42219: Updated For 1.7 KSP Update
  15. This challenge is pretty simple. Build a plane powered only by J-20 Juno Basic Jet Engines, and try and get it to the fastest speed possible. There is a manned (or kerballed) leaderboard-- I'll put you on the applicable one depending on your craft. Rules: 1. No cheats, e.g infinite fuel or hacking gravity. 2. Only Juno engines are allowed, e.g no rocket engines. 3. Stock parts only, however I'll allow a KER chip if you're playing in career. 4. Your attempt must be made on Kerbin, but I'll allow planet packs like GPP if the home planet is identical to Kerbin in gravity and atmosphere. 5. Have fun!!! There's no real scoring system for this, just submit a screenshot of your aircraft at maximum speed and I'll put you on the leaderboard---make sure I can see the velocity readout though!!! Here's my entry-- the 'Junissile' to kick things off: On the runway---it has no landing gear to save weight. I reached 330 m/s, so almost mach 1. But I'm sure you guys can do much better--good luck Probe: 1. @TheFlyingKerman 820 m/s 2. @qzgy 814 m/s 4. @Thorn_Ike 817 m/s 5. @neistridlar 813 m/s 6. @ZLM-Master 811 m/s 7. @panzerknoef 811 m/s 8. @faketuxedo 765 m/s 9. @lapis 757 m/s 10. @Vanamonde 745 m/s 11. @Dark Lion 711 m/s 12. @Gman_builder 519 m/s Manned: 1. @swjr-swis 820 m/s 2. @neistridlar 818 m/s 3. @Servo 813 m/s 4. @Andetch 801 m/s 5. @Lisias 797 m/s 6. @Val 777 m/s 7. @GDJ 765 m/s 8. @ZLM-Master 762 m/s 9. @GDJ 743 m/s 10. @FunThomas 719 m/s 11. @Aetharan 630 m/s 12. @Klapaucius 570 m/s 13. @tonimark 340 m/s 14. @RealKerbal3x 330 m/s
  16. after I saw sky vagrant's X craft video I thought it would be cool to have a challenge based on the idea of taking a toy or model of some sort and making a ksp craft based on it. whoever makes the best recreation of one of the three lego's below by the end of may, wins the challenge
  17. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2182158-moons-can-have-moons-and-they-are-called-moonmoons/ We all know about moonmoons. I think the article puts it best: "moons can have moons, and they're called moonmoons." This challenge is simple. Capture an asteroid, and give a moon a moon. It doesn't matter which moon in KSP is moon'd. Entrants will be sorted by mass of the completed moon. You're welcome to stitch asteroids together, too. Bonus points for far away moons. Winners get the badge below! If you want to make a better one, please do; I'm not very good at GIMP. ENTRANTS: KingDominoIII - 884 tonnes Sky Vagrant - 415 tonnes Johnster_Space_Program - 143 tonnes SecondChance - 114 tonnes
  18. I’ve never tried but, can anyone make a rover that can JUMP THE DRES CANYON? I’m new here, so I’ll consider it another challenge. Please try at home, and send me videos. Even if you fail. I like explosions.
  19. Hello, and welcome to the munar base collaboration challenge, where we as a community will be working together to build a mun base under restrictions, like a budget! (Inspired by the Kerbin Collaborative Space Station Challenge by @Ultimate Steve) The Beginning Its been about 50 years since KASA has first went and landed on the mun. KASA hasn't been back since then, and people are urging them to return. KASA has given us a total budget of 1.75 million kilofunds (AKA 1,750,000 funds) to build a mun base that will deliver crews and tourists to and from the base. The base will be called Munbase One. In this challenge, the participants will help construct the base using existing rockets to launch each part they have created and landers. We will be sharing and passing around a savefile that I have created to accomplish this. LKO is a 100km orbit. The Rules No Cheating, No savefile editing, No controlling other people's parts, only your ones, Everyone must work together, You Must Use An Existing Rocket For Launches, No Creating New Ones, You Can Do Simulation/Test Launches Before The Actual Launch That Costs Funds For "No Cost In The Budget", You Must Use Stock KSP, No MH The Launch Vehicles/Rockets There are 6 launch vehicles to choose from. You must use one of them for launching, not make a new one. You cannot change fairing size, unless you want to pay an extra 12,500 funds. Rocket 1 - Ares IIB Cost: 17.1k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 3.5 tons. Flies Once Every: 25 days. Ares IIB is NOT Kerbal Rated (Meaning Kerbals Cannot Fly On It) Rocket 2 - KLS Cost: 103k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 20 tons. Flies Once Every: 100 days. KLS IS Kerbal Rated (Meaning Kerbals Can Fly On It) Rocket 3 - Katurn III Cost: 52k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 12 tons, but can be pushed to 13.5 tons. Flies Once Every: 60 days. Katurn III IS Kerbal Rated (Meaning Kerbals Can Fly On It) Rocket 4 - MV12 Cost: 24k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 5 tons. Flies Once Every: 35 days. MV12 Is NOT Kerbal Rated (Meaning Kerbals Cannot Fly On It) Rocket 5 - Kova VT6 Cost: 67k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 16.5 tons. Flies Once Every: 72 days. Kova VT6 Is NOT Kerbal Rated Rocket 6 - Ares IIC Cost: 25k. Tons To LKO/TLI: 8 tons. Flies Once Every: 40 days. Ares IIC IS Kerbal Rated Participation and Launch Plan Everyone that participates will each build their own separate part for the base. The parts will also be launched in order, one at a time. We also have to decide where on the mun is the base place to build the base, once we agree on the best spot on the mun to build it, then we can start construction. We also have to not go over budget, or the challenge is lost. Restrictions These are the restrictions for everyone that participates: Here is the current launch plan, if you want to launch a part that someone else hasn't chosen, tell me in a post below. Participants: @Johnster_Space_Program @Rocket_man1234 @Bill the Kerbal @Ultimate Steve @VA7NFH The Launchers (All 6 Rockets .craft files): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eYiKDHjDFTGyF-UsH-T1Got8aJB4b8ME/view?usp=sharing Mun Base Plan Spreadsheet (Add To It!): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10E4nOUEnGMonw6QJEy7B7FKFzueSDRLnwy4RXsGcD38/edit?usp=sharing To Everyone That Participates, Good Luck!
  20. NASA recently landed its InSight probe on Mars to study its interior. Tagging along behind are two CubeSats intended to record InSight during its landing sequence, and to act as a relay while the already-in-place Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is out of position. So, onto the challenge! This is my first time running one, so please let me know if anything seems unclear or whatever. Leaderboard Stock Parts Rank 1 @Xurkitree 57 points bonuses: +20 for lowest mass (2345 kg), +20 for lowest cost (24,775), +7 for science @Johnster_Space_Program 40 points bonus: +20 for lowest dV usage (3425 m/s) @PrvDancer85 10 points (console) @Mopoii 10 points @Kerbolitto 50 points (gatecrasher!) 10 points for Rank 1 0 points for not meeting Rank 2 or 3 requirements 40 points for a single launch manned base Rank 2 @RogerC 111 points bonuses: +40 for lowest mass (108 t) +40 for lowest cost (82,534) +1 for Ike flyby @Ultimate Steve 30 points Rank 3 @Will-ferret 106 points (console) bonuses: +1 for Ike flyby, +45 for full mission recovery @Death Engineering 89 points bonuses: +29 for flybys of Ike, Dres, Jool, and Tylo @The Aziz 60 points Rank 4 Modded Rank 1 Rank 2 @sturmhauke 30 points @Willer Kerman 30 points Rank 3 @Kerbiter 61 points bonuses: +1 for Ike flyby Rank 4 @dire 528.4 points, qualified by concurrent DOMA mission bonuses: +80 for lowest mass (678 t) +80 for lowest cost (685 k) +268.4 for science Allowed Mods And Other Rules Your submission should include screenshots or video demonstrating each important phase (launch, transfers, landing, science transmission, flybys, etc.). For Rank 2 and up, you must use CommNet at the default settings. Part of the challenge at higher ranks is to demonstrate the ability to build a network. Note that at Rank 1, you still need an antenna capable of transmitting science data back to Kerbin, even if CommNet is disabled. To earn a rank badge, you must meet the requirements of that rank and all the ranks below it (except where noted). So if you want that Rank 4 badge, you also have to fulfill Ranks 1, 2, and 3. Please note whether your entry uses stock or modded parts. No FTL or other super advanced or exploit-based propulsion (kraken drives etc.). No HyperEdit or other cheats for anything related to scoring (ok for testing or additional infrastructure unrelated to mission objectives). Autopilot and other flight assistant mods (MechJeb, Throttle Controlled Avionics, etc.) are ok, but it must be possible to fly all craft manually. The intentionally terrible VTOL craft in the TCA intro video would not be allowed, for instance. Planet packs should not alter the stock planets' parameters, for scoring purposes. If you are really enthusiastic about GPP or whatever, maybe we can work something out, but I'm not really familiar with those. Other mods allowed, as long as it's not too outlandish. No refueling. ISRU is allowed if you are attempting some sort of Jeb madness (see below). If you are playing for bonus science points, you may not use labs, contracts, difficulty settings, or other means to multiply the science gathered. Only default points from experiment + body + situation count. Primary Objective (Rank 1) Build an unmanned lander capable of reaching Duna's surface. The lander must include a thermometer, seismic accelerometer, and negative gravioli detector. It must also include sufficient solar panels and antennas to transmit its data back to Kerbin. The lander must be launched into LKO with a rocket, and then use a transfer stage to get to Duna. Secondary Objective (Rank 2) Meet Rank 1, plus the following changes: The lander only needs enough antenna power to reach Duna orbit. Build two identical mini-satellites, with sufficient relay antennas and solar power to extend the comm network to the landing site. These mini-sats must be launched together with the lander, as a single payload. Once reaching LKO, the lander and mini-sats must all travel independently to Duna. The mini-sats' trajectories should be arranged such that they perform a flyby of Duna at the correct time and place for the lander to transmit its initial data to one or both satellites. Bonus Objectives (Rank 3) Meet Ranks 1 and 2, plus the following changes: Duna Reconnaissance Orbiter: Before the main mission, launch a Duna Reconnaissance Orbiter satellite. This represents an earlier mission that InSight is taking advantage of. The DRO must be launched on a separate rocket and reach Duna orbit ahead of the lander, and have sufficient solar power and relay antennas to extend the comm network to the landing site. It must also carry one or more experiments suitable for unmanned orbital science (your choice). Mini-sat Extension: Extend the mission of the two mini-sats. Put experiments on them and collect more science, and/or flyby additional bodies. Jeb's Objectives (Rank 4) Meet Ranks 1, 2, and 3 (at least the DRO option), plus the following changes: Do something insane. Build a Duna colony, send 100 kerbals, use an SSTA, I dunno. Impress me. But whatever you do, you may not use any additional launches; you have to piggyback on the main mission launch or the DRO launch. Additional Objectives (Unranked) Retrieve the lander and/or mini-sats at the end of the mission. They can return under their own power, or you can launch a recovery mission, at your discretion. Compete on science, mass, cost, and dV usage. See the scoring list for details. Scoring Most scores are based solely on the entry's individual performance. Some are competitive scores, and can only be earned by one entry per category. These will be marked. +10 points for Primary Objective +20 points for Secondary Objective +30 points for DRO objective +40 points for each feat of awesome insanity successfully completed (involvement of Jeb optional but recommended) +10 points for tiebreakers in case of similar feats from separate entries (competitive, granted up to one entry per similar feat) For additional flybys of mini-sats (must still reach Duna in time for Secondary Objective) scores loosely based on flyby dV as calculated by Alex Moon's Launch Window Planner +1 point for Ike +7 points for Mun or Minmus (+8 for both) +9 points for Dres +11 points for Eve +1 point for Gilly +14 points for Jool +5 points per each Joolian moon +15 points for Eeloo +20 points for Moho Additional Bonus Scoring +15 points for safe retrieval of lander on Kerbin +15 points for safe retrieval of mini-sat on Kerbin (+30 for both) +(total science gathered / 20) points (please include a screenshot of starting and ending science points) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total launch mass (competitive, granted to one entry per category) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total mission cost (competitive, granted to one entry per category) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total mission dV used (please include screenshots of KER, MechJeb, or similar to demonstrate dV used) (competitive, granted to one entry per category) Badges full size:
  21. Hello, I am Johnster Space Program and today I present to you my new challenge, lowest mass to duna and back! The challenge requires you to go to duna and back (easy enough) but with the lowest mass rocket possible! This is my first time making a challenge like this, so if I should change anything, tell me. Requirements/Rules: - All Participants Must Show Either Photo or Video (YouTube) Evidence (Including VAB Total Vessel Weight) - No Mods Allowed (Except for KER) - Maximum Vessel Weight Is 150 tons - Refueling IS Allowed, As Long As Total Refueler and Other Rocket Mass is 150 tons or less combined - Due to Request, Command Seats Are Now Allowed! - Only VAB and SPH, but you must somehow launch your SPH Vehicle on The Launchpad, Not Runway. Wings Are Allowed - Pods and Chairs Have Separate Winner Categories Now - No Cheating (No Cheat Menu, Infinite Fuel, Etc.) How Scoring Works: - For Every 1 Ton Less Than 150 Tons: +5 points - Getting To Duna and Back: +150 points - Lowest Mass Contender: +25 points - Ike Landing Bonus: +40 points Participants (In Order): @mrhexed @Aeroboi @Mythical Donuts @Kergarin @Johnster_Space_Program @GRS @Martian Emigrant @astrobond @herbal space program @sevenperforce @jinnantonix @A Random Kerbonaut Winners for Command Pods (Highest To Lowest Points): @Kergarin: 5.8 tons: 936 Points @IncongruousGoat: 11.6 tons: 842 Points Winners for Command Seats (Highest To Lowest Points): @astrobond: 3.95 tons: 948 Points @GRS: 26.2 tons: 929 Points For Everyone That Has Successfully Completed The Challenge And Is A Winner, You Will Be Awarded This Badge By Me: Have Fun, And Good Luck!
  22. Welcome to the first annual KSC Car and Air show. This is a special contest for builders of cars, trucks, planes, and other wacky stuff. It is a community driven air show where KSP players can upload their craft here to be a part of this event. After all the slots are full, I will set up all the stuff in a save file, and then I will announce the winners of each category. I will also share the save file with everyone else, so they can find all the craft in one place. Have fun! Uploading guidlines: PLEASE INCLUDE A CRAFT FILE!! Also, please include screenshots, a good description, and the category of entry. (Cars/trucks/small aircraft/large aircraft/crazy wacky stuff) No more than 1 entry per category per user. STOCK ONLY! (Ven's stock revamp and BDarmory are allowed, as well as Airplane plus, KAX, Tweakscale, SXT.) DEADLINE: THERE IS NO DEADLINE! HA HA HAHA!! Open slots: Light Aircraft: 0 SLOTS OPEN. SUBMISSION IS CLOSED. Heavy aircraft: 0 SLOTS OPEN. SUBMISSION IS CLOSED. Cars: 3 slots open. Trucks: 4 slots open. Wacky stuff: 5 slots open. Sponsors: Thanks to our sponsors, Forests Inc., And Bullseye LLC. ALL RIGHTS GO TO SQUAD for the images. Current entries: "Heavy Aircraft:" Haruspex. (Condor) Thor_Wotansen. (Borr) drtricky. (ABH-17 Rapture) ShadowWolf56. (Boeing 737) Skylon. (SB-1 Dragonfly) EpicSpaceTroll139. (Airbus A380) DarkLion. (Batwing-SSTO) Draconiator. (KTR-10NP) DunDun92. (KC-1 Transport) ImmaStegosaurus. (AN-12E) "Light Aircraft:" Triop. (F-20 TigerShark) NotAnAimbot. (F-2F) LazySoUseHyperedit. (Cessna) TheEpicSquared. (AF-1) GDJ (Kraken-MK1-Disarmed) DunDun92. (F-10 Striker) Mumbro Kerman. (F-16C-50 Fighting Falcon) Draconiator. (Kerbtrolite-K-1) PaperAviator. (MIG-21) Draconiator. (IHNCWTNT) (I have no clue what to name this) "Cars:" Azimech. (Charger RT-31) tgaerospace. (TSG Zelion) qzgy. (BAC-Mono type 5) 53Miner53. (Formula-Solar-Stock) GDJ. (Avro-G-Prix Special) Dark Lion. (Kustom-Krazer) doggonemess. https://kerbalx.com/LevAerospace/M8-SpyRover-II-ORV(M8-Spy-Rover-II-ORV) "Trucks/tanks/trains:" KenjiKrafts. (10-15-Hllensturm-HDMT---32) Qzgy. (Mallard V3) NotAnAimbot. (Wolverine-2A1) EpicSpaceTroll139. (Oskar-Mayer-Wiener-Mobile) 53Miner53. (Deora-II) Ozelui. (Cargo-mate tractor) (Exo-Trailer) "Wacky stuff:" PaperAviator. (Canada Goose) EpicSpaceTroll139. (E-50A - Triton) DarkLion. (Bo) HB Stratos (BAC-Concorde) Andetech. (ADX-FJC Flying Car)
  23. From here on, I think I’ll make KSP challenges every Saturday. this week’s challenge: build a seaplane, BUT, it also is a submarine! Bronze: make a seaplane Silver: make a submarine seaplane gold: on Laythe. Good luck, Fly safe!
  24. Welcome to the... KSP Stock Prop Design Challenge! The aim of this challenge is to create the coolest looking stock prop designs you can! Your plane will be judged mostly on appearance and as such, speed and performance won't be judged very harshly; as long as it flies, and flies well enough it's okay (though good performance is always good to have). The goal of this challenge is to create a plane that fits both the requirements and aesthetics of what a contract of your choice says. The contracts will range from 1920s-30s biplanes to post WW2 superprops. There will be no definitive winner to this challenge, but aircraft I especially enjoy will have a spot on this original post. Please lay out your submission like this: [Contact No. XY][Generation (biplane, ww2 etc)][Manufacturer name/author(s)][Craft name][Description][Pictures (max 3)][Download link (preferably on KerbalX)] Guidelines/Rules 1) Unless otherwise stated in the contract, the plane must fly only with stock propellers. 2) The Design MUST be original and NOT a replica. 3) Stock designs only. DLC is not allowed. 4) Part clipping/craft file editing is allowed. ----- The Idea The idea for this challenge was blatantly ripped off HB Stratos' and Servo's Original Jet Fighter challenge. If you've stumbled here but aren't a fan, or don't know how to make props, visit their challenge instead: Major thanks to HB Stratos for letting me actually make this challenge even it's literally the same thing. ----- The Contracts Biplane Era ----- WW2 Era ----- Postwar Era --- Hall of Fame! @Jon144's fantastic K4F Scimitar is on the list because of it's superb performance; the best so far! While not as detailed as some of the other props, it's fast, and maneuverable enough to compensate. Good job! --- @erasmusguy's HF-108 fantastically detailed. It doesn't quite fit a category, but looks superb. I appreciate the detail added to it; especially the little men/RCS tanks. Well done. --- @Phantomic's P-45 bolt just looks like a plane straight from WW2. It has nice clean lines and isn't a bad flier either. Fits the contract almost perfectly. Great work! ----
  25. Welcome to the Kerbal Bracket Challenge! A New Challenge By Johnster Space Program! In the kerbal bracket challenge, 8 users will be competing to be the champion in a series of challenges for each round! In a bracket style chart. But first, the rules! Rules: 1. No cheating (No SFS Editing, No Mod Menu, Etc.) 2. Time Must Be Set To Kerbin Time! 3. No Mods (Except KER) 4. You MUST show Video (YT) or Photographic Evidence 5. Weight In Tons of Craft For Rounds 1 and 2 Must Be 150t or Under 6. Command Seats ARE Allowed Point Scoring (For Round 3) - Best Design: +10 points - Fastest Time From Launch To Docking: +40 points - Every Crew Member Onboard After 1: +25 points - Every 1000 Funds Less Than 150000 in cost (including launcher): + 20 points Timeline: Time To Complete Round 1 - 1 week Time To Complete Round 2 - 6 days Time To Complete Round 3 - 5 days Ok Now That We Got That Out of the way, lets move on to the challenge! So, Before The Competition Can Begin, I Need 8 Users To Participate (Once I Have 8, anyone else wanting to join will have to wait until the first competition ends) Also, the challenge is to see who can complete each challenge in the fastest time possible (in kerbin time like rescuing a kerbal) or in some cases, the most impressive! Competition 1 (Users Participating): @Johnster_Space_Program, @Mythical Donuts, @bayesian_acolyte, @Aeroboi, @GRS Here is what the bracket currently looks like (3 spots for R1 left): And these are the badges you can get depending on how far you get: And last of all, the winner badge: To everyone that participates, good luck! Here is each round and what you will have to do, specified (some will require using a .sfs file that I have created): Round 1 - Jeb's Munar Rescue Oh no, looks like jeb got himself stuck on the mun! You need to rescue him, but in the quickest time possible! Rescue him and bring him back to kerbin in 5 days or less... Objectives: 1. Get to the mun. 2. Land and rescue jeb. 3. Bring jeb back to kerbin safetly as fast as possible. Round 2 - Minmus Express Johnster, Max, and Jim Kerman want you to bring them to minmus and back, but in the quickest possible time. Make their trip an express to minmus and back. Objectives: 1. Have Johnster, Max and Jim Kerman Onboard. 2. Bring Them To Minmus, Into Low Minmus Orbit. 3. After bringing them to Minmus orbit, bring them back to kerbin as fast as possible! Round 3 - A Module For A Station Kerbals have recently put a station in kerbin orbit and need one more piece docked. You will launch and dock your custom built piece to the station, make it as impressive as you can! Objectives: 1. Must Have A Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port 2. Must Dock With Kerbin Station 3. Must have RCS and SAS Control, And Liquid Fuel Winner - TBA