Jump to content

10g Circumnavigation


Aiden.J
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yep. In the alt-f12 menu, change the gravity multiplier to 10. That's the only cheat allowed.

RULES-

Must fly prograde in relation to Kerbin's spin

Must start and end on KSC's runway within 1, 360 degree, rotation (a little more is fine if necessary)

Either an orbit (good luck) or suborbital flight counts (yes, you can land anywhere, but you must end your mission at KSC's runway)

Re-fueling is allowed.

Only one vessel is allowed for the flight (everything used must be in one craft file)

Must stay roughly equitorial (no pole hopping)

Apoapsis must stay under 100km 

Staging is allowed.

Minimal part clipping

No hyperedit/cheating

No mods that add parts, other than KER and MechJeb

No altering files

Fastest time wins (if it's even possible, XD)

TO ENTER-

A screenshot of vessel in flight, in the SPH/VAB, at apoapsis (or two during flight), and at the start and end of the challenge with the clock set to mission time.

Optional- A craft file/a video of the flight.

Hard Mode- SSTO

Super Mode- Impress me.

K guys, have fun. If you have any suggestions, feel free to comment below.

EDIT- Lol XD. I tried for an hour and only got a 10:21 flight. I guess who ever gets the longest equitorial, prograde, flight wins, but seriously, its hard.

Leaderboards-

vyznev- Gee Boat (estimated 36 hours) (craft- https://pastebin.com/dZmwurNg)

Edited by Aiden.J
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, goduranus said:

then orbit might be possible.

i'd like to stress the "might". I do not think it's possible, because Scott Manley did a 5g to orbit craft and it took quite a few engines, and that number will definitely increase exponentially. So, godspeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2018 at 10:00 PM, Aiden.J said:

i'd like to stress the "might". I do not think it's possible, because Scott Manley did a 5g to orbit craft and it took quite a few engines, and that number will definitely increase exponentially. So, godspeed.

Scott Manley's 5g to orbit vehicle was definitely not optimal. Mine was quite a bit smaller, and had plenty of delta-v to spare.

IIRC, I tried pulling off the same trick at 10g, but the problem was that the rocket would invariably fall apart and explode on the launch pad. I didn't use autostruts, though; with those, it might be a lot more doable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
4 hours ago, IMLL1 said:

I have an idea. It won't win the best time, but it will make it. A rover. That's all, just a rover.

Lol have fun driving for 10 hours straight. But this is actually doable

Just make it buoyant on water and fast enough to idk, not be a BOTW speedrun time (32 hours BTW).

Have fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see electric props being of use here, owing to their lack of fuel consumption,but of course that would require building a vehicle, of whatever sort, that can withstand 10 G whilst being electrically powered and operating correctly. My electric planes will do 15 or 20G without propeller damage, but lose the capacity for sustained flight while maintaining altitude at around 4 G. As it is, taking off at 3 G is dicey.

If rocket engines had more realistic TWRs, this would be trivial. Just MOAR BOOSTERS into space.

Edited by Pds314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2018 at 7:18 AM, Aiden.J said:

Lol have fun driving for 10 hours straight. But this is actually doable

Just make it buoyant on water and fast enough to idk, not be a BOTW speedrun time (32 hours BTW).

Well, I thought this was worth testing, so I made a propboat.

mF9T4jY.png

Powered by RTGs and magic reaction wheels, it can skim over Kerbin's unnaturally smooth oceans at the breathtaking speed of nearly 40 m/s. (On land it can go faster, at least briefly. Hitting a bump at high speed is bad, though.) In theory, this means it could circumnavigate Kerbin in about 26 to 27 hours, assuming a perfectly circular equatorial path. Of course, in practice there's a bunch of land on Kerbin's equator that I'd much rather go around, since driving this thing on land at 10G is both tedious and nerve-wracking at the same time. So call it a round 36 hours or so. Oh, and the propeller blows up if you so much as think about trying to physics warp. :sticktongue:

Needless to say, I will not be trying to actually complete this challenge any time soon, at least not with this vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vyznev said:

Well, I thought this was worth testing, so I made a propboat.

mF9T4jY.png

Powered by RTGs and magic reaction wheels, it can skim over Kerbin's unnaturally smooth oceans at the breathtaking speed of nearly 40 m/s. (On land it can go faster, at least briefly. Hitting a bump at high speed is bad, though.) In theory, this means it could circumnavigate Kerbin in about 26 to 27 hours, assuming a perfectly circular equatorial path. Of course, in practice there's a bunch of land on Kerbin's equator that I'd much rather go around, since driving this thing on land at 10G is both tedious and nerve-wracking at the same time. So call it a round 36 hours or so. Oh, and the propeller blows up if you so much as think about trying to physics warp. :sticktongue:

Needless to say, I will not be trying to actually complete this challenge any time soon, at least not with this vehicle.

Damn.... This is good. Can I have a craft file? I'd love to put this on the leaderboards.

EDIT- Its longer than the BOTW World Record.... 

Lol

Edited by Aiden.J
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, RedPandaz said:

Hmmm...are we required to take off horizontally?

 

Are you seriously considering taking off vertically? I mean, if there's an advantage or a way your doing it, don't let me stop you, but its vastly more efficient to take off horizontally (or even to not take off at all, like vyznev)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aiden.J said:

Are you seriously considering taking off vertically? I mean, if there's an advantage or a way your doing it, don't let me stop you, but its vastly more efficient to take off horizontally (or even to not take off at all, like vyznev)

Large rocket to LKO should be do-able- I'll give it a shot

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RedPandaz said:

Large rocket to LKO should be do-able- I'll give it a shot

 

Dudeee good luck, remember that you have to land at KSC (within a kilometer or so, take a screenshot of the flight info screen). Anddd, trying to land with parachutes, man idk how your computer will handle that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aiden.J said:

Dudeee good luck, remember that you have to land at KSC (within a kilometer or so, take a screenshot of the flight info screen). Anddd, trying to land with parachutes, man idk how your computer will handle that.

I think it's doable. Honestly the hardest part will be landing close to the KSC - Truthfully I have no clue how to reliably do that. As for landing, I think it can be done with a parachute-suicide burn combo even easier than wheels in 10G

 

Edited by RedPandaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RedPandaz said:

I think it's doable. Honestly the hardest part will be landing close to the KSC - Truthfully I have no clue how to reliably do that

MechJeb's landing guidance includes a landing site map marker that I found very useful for the Falcon Heavy challenge. Although I haven't checked to see if it handles hacked gravity correctly. Otherwise I suggest trial and error. :D

You'll probably have to use either a Soyuz-style landing burn or some kind of a crumple zone to cushion the landing. 5G is doable with just chutes (see my earlier post above), but only barely. Although that's for a manned capsule; landing a probe core should be easier. Still, I'd recommend starting with some drop tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, vyznev said:

MechJeb's landing guidance includes a landing site map marker that I found very useful for the Falcon Heavy challenge. Although I haven't checked to see if it handles hacked gravity correctly. Otherwise I suggest trial and error. :D

You'll probably have to use either a Soyuz-style landing burn or some kind of a crumple zone to cushion the landing. 5G is doable with just chutes (see my earlier post above), but only barely. Although that's for a manned capsule; landing a probe core should be easier. Still, I'd recommend starting with some drop tests.

Did I hear "lithobraking?" :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, vyznev said:

You'll probably have to use either a Soyuz-style landing burn or some kind of a crumple zone to cushion the landing. 5G is doable with just chutes (see my earlier post above), but only barely. Although that's for a manned capsule; landing a probe core should be easier. Still, I'd recommend starting with some drop tests.

OK, I was mistaken: chute spam alone is quite sufficient even for a manned capsule.

3Gsemtt.png

For an actual re-entry, you might want a couple of drogue chutes too, just to make sure the proper chutes can safely deploy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26.2.2018 at 9:07 PM, RedPandaz said:

Large rocket to LKO should be do-able- I'll give it a shot

 

If you manage to do aspargus staging with several hundred mammoth engines, and some high efficient final stages, this would work :D but that's out of my computers reach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kergarin said:

If you manage to do aspargus staging with several hundred mammoth engines, and some high efficient final stages, this would work :D but that's out of my computers reach

I'm pretty sure hundreds of mammoth engines won't be necessary (although the total number of engine bells might get close to a hundred). IME, the biggest issue is that you basically need a bottom stage with a sea-level atmospheric TWR over 10. That's possible with stock parts, but leads to some pretty crazy looking engine clusters:

5QDr3IG.png

(No, this one doesn't quite make it to orbit at 10G, but it's not too far off. Probably needs a few more asparagus boosters; it's only got two.)

BTW, I managed to build a minimalistic stock helicopter that can (just barely) take off and hover at 10G:

FcVwO2y.png

So electric-powered flight is not out of the question. You'll need a lot of reaction wheels, though. (FWIW, this craft is about 55% reaction wheels by mass.)

Edited by vyznev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vyznev said:

I'm pretty sure hundreds of mammoth engines won't be necessary (although the total number of engine bells might get close to a hundred). IME, the biggest issue is that you basically need a bottom stage with a sea-level atmospheric TWR over 10. That's possible with stock parts, but leads to some pretty crazy looking engine clusters:

5QDr3IG.png

(No, this one doesn't quite make it to orbit at 10G, but it's not too far off. Probably needs a few more asparagus boosters; it's only got two.)

 

Ok, clustering some Vetors may reduce the number of boosters. But I still think the number of engine bells will be over hundred.

How far from orbit are you with this?

Edited by Kergarin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Kergarin said:

Ok, clustering some Vetors may reduce the number of boosters. But I still think the number of engine bells will be over hundred.

How far from orbit are you with this?

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

Edited by vyznev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vyznev said:

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

Yes, I was wondering and tried a similar build. Even with 6 aspargus boosters it doesn't get verry far. I barely reached 1000m/s vertical speed.

The twr of your second stage in that picture is already under 10 and so it should loose speed after booster separation.

The more aspargus stages you ad, the shorter the burntime of the first boosters gets. Even with 6, the first boosters are almost immediately empty with that much engines, and that without gaining much speed.

This is really hard.

 

Edited by Kergarin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...