RSS/RO/RP-0 Get to orbit under 40T with the least amount of unlocked nodes

[Maxsimal]

I'd love to see the craft files after this competition is done.

[a_schack]

8 hours ago, Maxsimal said:

I'd love to see the craft files after this competition is done.

I've added my .craft files to my post if you want to have a look.

[Maxsimal]

Thanks..  Just trying to figure out what's wrong with my rocket - I have an XASR-1 (aerobee mod engine) on my upper stage that just - cuts out, after about 10-20 seconds.  Doesn't seem to be a flight test failure, just happens every time.  Hoping one of these shows me what I'm missing

[NathanKell]

@Maxsimal check the F3 log. See what it says.

[Maxsimal]

@NathanKell Thanks, that was it, it was testflight just causing engines to fail and me misunderstanding how the mod's feedback worked.

 

[John FX]

13 hours ago, Maxsimal said:

@NathanKell Thanks, that was it, it was testflight just causing engines to fail and me misunderstanding how the mod's feedback worked.

 

I found that engines become much more reliable if you put a test rig onto the launchpad and just run them until they stop then recover a few times. It`s quicker if you put a few (12 for example) of them attached to one tank. If you point them upside down they thrust the tank into the pad and it won`t fly off.

[Maxsimal]

10 hours ago, John FX said:

I found that engines become much more reliable if you put a test rig onto the launchpad and just run them until they stop then recover a few times. It`s quicker if you put a few (12 for example) of them attached to one tank. If you point them upside down they thrust the tank into the pad and it won`t fly off.

I've done that, it's fun, you have your own test stands that you launch.  And I actually had my aerobee's with TONS of du on them, from using them on sounding rockets - one reason I thought it was definitely not Testflight, since the 'failure' was so reliable, while my aerobees have 600+ second MTBF's.

The thing was that because I was now using them as the last stage in an orbital launch, I had a bigger fuel tank on them than normal since I was ok with a low TWR - but testflight also defines a maximum rated engine life so that the MTBF goes way up after a certain point, and I was hitting that limit.

[John FX]

4 hours ago, Maxsimal said:

I've done that, it's fun, you have your own test stands that you launch.  And I actually had my aerobee's with TONS of du on them, from using them on sounding rockets - one reason I thought it was definitely not Testflight, since the 'failure' was so reliable, while my aerobees have 600+ second MTBF's.

The thing was that because I was now using them as the last stage in an orbital launch, I had a bigger fuel tank on them than normal since I was ok with a low TWR - but testflight also defines a maximum rated engine life so that the MTBF goes way up after a certain point, and I was hitting that limit.

Ah, you mean the maximum rated burn time, I think that`s about 240 seconds for the arobeee IIRC I generally put an extra 10 seconds of fuel over the MRBT

If you right click the part in the VAB and scroll down there is an info section that tells you the MRBT, some variants have more than others.

[a_schack]

4 hours ago, John FX said:

Ah, you mean the maximum rated burn time, I think that`s about 240 seconds for the arobeee IIRC I generally put an extra 10 seconds of fuel over the MRBT

If you right click the part in the VAB and scroll down there is an info section that tells you the MRBT, some variants have more than others.

It used to be a bit above 2 mins iirc, but since the last couple or releases of RO (and moving the TestFlight configs to RO from TestFlight), it's 50 seconds for the WAC Corporal, 65s for the XASR-1 and 70s for the AJ10-27. On top of that, the max reliability of the WAC Corporal is somewhat lower than the other two. Since the AJ10-27 has a bit more burn time but a lot more thrust, you'll get a very, very significant increase in delta-v from using it (despite its slightly lower isp) with the same payload. The XASR-1 is a straight up replacement for the WAC Corporal and is just in every single way better.

Edit: It used to be 125s for the WAC Corporal and 135s for the XASR-1 and the AJ10-27.

Edited March 24, 2016 by a_schack

[Maxsimal]

Nathan just pointed out that I could find it if I scrolled down far enough too - and yeah, right now it's 50, 65, and 70 seconds for the WAC-Corporal, XASR, and AJ10-27.  Ah well - they're light enough to hook up more staging for them - or I could just run time forward to get enough tech to get better light upper stage engines  I think I just min-max my time too much, trying to fight against KCT as if it's a challenge mode rather than just providing a more realistic play experience. 

[Bornholio]

On 3/18/2016 at 6:21 PM, Laie said:

2+1 Vanguard for boosters, 3+1 WAC (in XASR config) for circularization. Craft file resides next to the picture for those who are interested.

Your post is asking for login credentials.  Looks like from the hosted images @ http://ksp.schnobs.de I first mistook this for a malware problem.

 

This challenge should restart with the new RP-0 when paps branch gets merged with master.