Cheap Passenger Rocket sstO Challenge

[Spricigo]

 

There are lots of challenges about reaching the outskirts of the Solar system. This one is just about reaching halfway. You know: if you reach the Orbit...

You task, should you accept it, is to build and fly a vehicle form the surface of Kerbin to Orbit using only rocket propulsion without jettisoning hardware carrying passenger. Entries will be ranked by cost per passenger with some bonus.

 

Rules:

• No mods that add parts or change how the ship behave is allowed. Pure aesthetics and informational are allowed. Autopilot mods are allowed but see scoring below.
• Cheats and exploits are not allowed. This include clipping parts to improve performance.
• For the purpose of the challenge a passenger is not required at any point to control the vessel and requires a pressurized crew space (no command seats). Virtual passengers (aka empty crew spaces) can be used to fulfil the challenge.
• Only Liquid Fuel Engines and Solid Fuel Engines are allowed to propel the vehicle until orbit is reached. No Jets.
• No part can be jettisoned before the Craft reach an orbit with periapsis of 70.001m or higher.
• The craft cannot receive external help at any time.

_____________________________

Scoring: 

[Base score]=-[Cost]/[Passengers].

Final Score=([Base Score]*[100-P] *[100-D])/100 000

The values of P and D start at 0, and are increased as follows:

• P +3 Hands on!  For any entry that don't use an auto-pilot.
• P +3 Gentle curve.  For a design that can reach orbit without a single touch in the keys [W] [A] [D]
• D +3 C ya! The craft is not designed to bring the passengers back. They are left with no propulsion and no means to slowdown to a safe landing even if ddeorbited somehow
• D +3 Now what?! Once it reach orbits that is it. no recovery at all, no reaching other celestial bodies

 

The entries must have:

• A craft name (Untiltled Space Craft is not allowed) and a brief description.
• Images of all relevants phases of the flight
• If you craft is composed of multiple identical subassemblies that separate and land to recovery you can make a single land and recovery as demonstration and assume the same result for all similar subassemblies
• Calculated Score with mention of P and D bonus.

Leaderboard:

1. PassengerRocket1 by @swjr-swis carried 64 passenger to orbit and back in a Gentle curve!  for a Hands on!  - 19 score 
2. Rocket McRocketface by @Physics Student carried 112 passenger to orbit and back for a Hands on!  -75 score 
3. Uppity by @qzgy carried 32 passenger to orbit and back for a Hands on!  -79 score 
4. Titled Space Craft by @Sensi carried 16 passengers to orbit for a Hands on! C ya! Now what?!  -375 score 
5. ...

 

My Failed Entry

Felix4T, a rocket that put planes in space

Score -105 Hands On! gentle curve! Disqualified for deploying at 66km with orbit 72x -228km

A relaunch to demonstrate that the premature deployment of the fairing is of little consequence and the vessel is capable of reaching orbit without ditching parts:

 

Spoiler

in any case, I hope that is enough as demonstration that the challenge s possible and the person proposing the challenge put some thought to it

Waiting gor yor attem´pt, I know you can make an intersting ship.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by Spricigo

[Human Person]

Rocket McRocketface: Basically a passenger Airplane, but without wings and it's a rocket.

It broke into pieces during reentry, but all 112 imaginary passengers survived the 36 m/s crash near the space center.

Hands on: I used Mechjeb, but just for information. I also used Trajectories.

 

Cost: 310.200 - 223.738 = 86.462 (Recovery could be much better if reentry had worked)

 

Score=((-86.462/112)*(100-3)*(100-0))/100.000 = -74,88

Edited August 2, 2017 by Physics Student

[Spricigo]

Thank for the entry,  @Physics Student.  

This nice little airplane ( but without wings and a big rocket) is now in the leaderboard

Feel free to reentry after solving the reentry issues.  (pun attempted)  I will gladly update the score.

Notice that I'm rounding the score to the nearest integer in the leaderboard (at least until a tie occur) . 

 

3 hours ago, Physics Student said:

It broke into pieces during reentry, but all 112 imaginary passengers survived the 36 m/s crash near the space center.

... 

Cost: 310.200 - 223.738 = 86.462 (Recovery could be much better if reentry had worked) 

At least is not like my demonstrator where one plane was destroyed (all 4 imaginary occupants miraculously survived without injury). 

Edited August 2, 2017 by Spricigo

[qzgy]

I take "cheap and cheerful" and threw it out the window. Still made an entry

Base - 279985/32 = - 8749.5

Have the hands on thing

(- 8749.5 * 97 *100)/100 = -848704.5

That's terrible.

 

Wait.... Is recovery cost counted?

Cause, if so...

279985-253822 = 26163

-26163/32 = -817.5

-817.5 *97 (the other things cancel out) = -79249

 

I might have to try something else out. I'll be back.

Also, is there a bonus for visiting other bodies. I would assume not....

Edited August 2, 2017 by qzgy

[Spricigo]

Thank for the entry @qzgy 

"cheap and cheerful"  threw out of the window but fun stayed inside. 

Answering your question recovery counts (unless you are aiming for the now what?!)  However I'm the first to admit that the score matter less than making the entry interesting,  (just look at my demonstrator).  Your entry is a interesting one,  regardless of score is not terrible. 

The bonus are,  in part,  intended as little hints about doing it interesting. (just  few thing that I remembered at the time of writing the OP)  Visiting other bodies may be interesting but I intentionally left out. (two reasons : 1.this challenge is just about  getting into orbit.  2 . future plans) 

Since you misread the formula (maybe because my notation was a bit confusing,  I will change it )  there is the correction:

( -817.5*97)/1000 = - 79.249

Quote

I  might have to try something else out. I'll be back.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Spricigo

[Sensi]

My cheap and fully recoverable SSTO rocket :

16 crews.

Expenses : 5233 credits for fuel and oxidizer.

Hands on.

Score : -(5233/16)*97/1000 = -31.725

 

 

Edited August 3, 2017 by Sensi

[Spricigo]

Thanks for the entry,  @Sensi 

I see what you did,  and had to say that name is just unacceptable. Well,  I suppose, given the only name I prohibited, that become an irresistible choice. Cheap and fully recoverable is a good combination. 

Now a real concern: the cost of a less than 100% recovery need to be considered.  So I need to ask for an updated score (or a landing right on the target)  

[Sensi]

/looking for the challenge rules explaining and enforcing "the cost of a less than 100% recovery" mandatory consideration and "landing right on the target".

>Error 404, rules not found.

/using workaround : decoupling a solar panel after reaching orbit and defining Kerbin as "the target".

>Error 409, conflict.
>Error 426, rules upgrade required.

/using workaround : going for the "C ya!" "Now what?!" "Hands on!" bonuses. Using the same space craft and accidentally jettisoning all fuel after reaching orbit. Score = (-[Cost/Passengers]*[100-P]*[100-D])/100 000 = (-[5233/16]*[100-3]*[100-6]/100 000 = -29.821.

>Error 417, expectation failed. Should not get a better score for a lesser achievement. The "D" parameter should be a penalty, not a bonus.
>Error 426, rules upgrade required (D +3 ---> D -3).

/scratching hea-

>Error 429, too many requests.
>EOT

[Spricigo]

Quote

>Error 426, rules upgrade required.

Uhhh, no. You misinterpreted the rules and I clarified it for you. I also think that is a pontual case and an update of the OP is not necessary. 

Cost is what VAB says. (e.g  ) deduced what effectively recovered. You assumption of cost meaning fuel cost only is incorrect and need to be amended for your entry be properly ranked.

2 hours ago, Sensi said:

/looking for the challenge rules explaining and enforcing "the cost of a less than 100% recovery" mandatory consideration and "landing right on the target".

>Error 404, rules not found.

Hey, those kerbals that bring the craft back to KSC also need snacks. Its a hard work t carry a heavy rocket in the back without drooping it and let it be damaged.

I don't know why you supposed was ok to ignore that you actually paid for the parts, or else, why you assume 100% recovery of the parts when you didn't get it. In any case both the demonstrator and the entry by Physics Student acconted for the finalcial loss of imperfect recovery, qzgys used wing to land in the old airfield and get 100% recovery. If you thought is fair to let you use a personal definition of "cost" that cleary put you in advantage, think again.

Quote

/using workaround : going for the "C ya!" "Now what?!" "Hands on!" bonuses. Using the same space craft...

well, so be it, until you provide the effective cost, considering the recovery:

Score = (-[Cost/Passengers]*[100-P]*[100-D])/100 000 = (-[65800/16]*[100-3]*[100-6]/100 000 =-374.97775.

I will even ignore that parachutes prevent the C ya!  , for obvious reasons: 1. Removing it would not result in a lower base score. 2. Intended to change when/if you decide to comply with the request to retify the score calculation. 

 

Quote

>Error 417, expectation failed. Should not get a better score for a lesser achievement. The "D" parameter should be a penalty, not a bonus.

You missed the point of those bonus. That is just my implementation of categories without the need of listing specific rules, keep separate leaderboard or even care if a particular category turn out to be unatractive. In this last case the category will be unpopulated and no one pay much atention to this fact, but if people find the idea instersting and go for it their effort will be recognized.

[Sensi]

3 hours ago, Spricigo said:

I don't know why you supposed was ok to ignore that you actually paid for the parts, or else, why you assume 100% recovery of the parts when you didn't get it. In any case both the demonstrator and the entry by Physics Student acconted for the finalcial loss of imperfect recovery, qzgys used wing to land in the old airfield and get 100% recovery. If you thought is fair to let you use a personal definition of "cost" that cleary put you in advantage, think again.

My understood definition of cost was that as the space craft landed intact, with 100% of its paid parts, the cost of the mission was only fuel and oxidizer as the parts were recovered in full.

Do you mean that my mistake was not taking a screenshot showing that I clicked the "Recover vessel" button once landed? Or is it because the space craft didn't land on a runway or a launch pad?

Anyway, It may be that your rules aren't complete enough and don't quite follow the suggestion of the "what are we trying to do?" section of the challenge submission guide. Instead of insinuating things like my supposed unfairness, you should clarify what you mean by recovery, costs and a few other things too, so what happens here won't hopefully happen again to other contestants.

Whatever. I'm happy my SSTO operated as designed and brought the crew back safely to Kerbin near KSC. Dismiss my entry if you want, no big deal.

Fly safe.

Edit: as for the format of my previous post : it was meant to be humorous. I was at work and had a few problems with a client's website. Many http errors ensued. After that, I took a break and came here to see what was going on with my entry 

Edited August 3, 2017 by Sensi

[Human Person]

16 minutes ago, Sensi said:

My understood definition of cost was that as the space craft landed intact, with 100% of its paid parts, the cost of the mission was only fuel and oxidizer as the parts were recovered in full.

That's true only if you land on the runway. The further away you are from KSC, the greater is the recovery penalty. You can see the exact recovery value in the window that pops up after you recovered the vessel. In my case, it was pretty close to KSC and 96,9%

Spoiler

Simply subtract that from the overall cost in the VAB/SPH and you have an exact and unarguable number.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Physics Student

[Spricigo]

 

21 minutes ago, Physics Student said:

32 minutes ago, Sensi said:

My understood definition of cost was that as the space craft landed intact, with 100% of its paid parts, the cost of the mission was only fuel and oxidizer as the parts were recovered in full.

 

That's true if you land on the runway. The further away you are from KSC, the greater is the recovery penalty. You can see the exact recovery value in the window that pops up after you recovered the vessel. Simply subtract that from the overall cost in the VAB/SPH and you have an exact and unarguable number.

^THis

On the top of the mission summary , parts tab, you will see something like this:

And on the bottom you will see a message like that: 

 

Quote

Whatever. I'm happy my SSTO operated as designed and brought the crew back safely to Kerbin near KSC.

And I'm happy that you applied it to this challenge. Now I just need a rectified score to place your craft where it belongs in the leaderboard. 

As you may or may not had noticed,  your entry was placed on the top of the leaderboard, waiting for the score. And I guess there was people wondering how to remove it from there (even with a score a few points worse), please don't make their job easier and less fun.

 

[Spricigo]

1 hour ago, Physics Student said:

That's true only if you land on the runway.

Well, technically...100% recovery can be obtained in both runaway (KSC and old airfield) and both launchpads (KSC and KSC2). AFAIK the helipads on top of VAB and Mission Control don't offer 100% recovery, (IMHO unfortunately)

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by Spricigo

[swjr-swis]

Here's my attempt, PassengerRocket1:

 

Base score: -(65350-52289)=-13061/64=204.078125

- Hands on (pure stock, no autopilot mods)

- Gentle curve (entire flight is done without manual steering)

Final score: (-204.078125*94*100)/100000=-19.18

 

Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/PassengerRocket1

 

[tseitsei89]

Are you sure the formula shouldnt be

Base score * (100-P)* (100+D) / 100000 ?

Since now just abandoning the passangers in orbit gives you a better score because of the C'ya modifier  and that seems weird to me...

Edited August 4, 2017 by tseitsei89

[Spricigo]

Thanks for the entry, @swjr-swis

It not only perform well,  it also looks very nice. I really enjoyed the cabins in radial stacks around the big fuel tanks. 

3 hours ago, tseitsei89 said:

Are you sure the formula shouldnt be

Base score * (100-P)* (100+D) / 100000 ?

Since now just abandoning the passangers in orbit gives you a better score and that seems weird to me...

The formula is correct,  those are really intended to be bonuses. But consider a few things:

1 . Recovery will probably make much more difference that a meager 6% bonus. 

2. You may look at the bonus not as a reward for doing something ,  but as an aid for people in trouble to make the craft recoverable.  

3.There is cases where letting a spacecraft in orbit makes sense and  returning it to the surface is the weird thing. 

4. If you are wondering about the rules,  maybe you are considering to participate.  If a bit of weirdness helped to catch your interest,  I suppose that is a good thing. 

[tseitsei89]

21 hours ago, Spricigo said:

The formula is correct,  those are really intended to be bonuses. But consider a few things:

1 . Recovery will probably make much more difference that a meager 6% bonus. 

2. You may look at the bonus not as a reward for doing something ,  but as an aid for people in trouble to make the craft recoverable.  

3.There is cases where letting a spacecraft in orbit makes sense and  returning it to the surface is the weird thing. 

4. If you are wondering about the rules,  maybe you are considering to participate.  If a bit of weirdness helped to catch your interest,  I suppose that is a good thing. 

Ok that's totally fine then and yeah I am considering making an entry but I am also tempted to play more RSS/RO I downloaded 2 days ago. Yesterday I got to the moon and back and now I'm planning a manned Mars mission already. It's like playing a brand new game!

I strongly recommend it for anyone who is starting to get bored to the normal game (or is starting to think that normal KSP might be a little too easy/unrealistic).