The KSP Caveman Challenge 1.11.x - 1.12.x

[Blaarkies]

1 hour ago, paul_c said:

As I see it, the only notable change is "EVA Experiments", which adds 25 science points per biome/situation; but its quite late you can unlock it anyway so its something for the end-game.

Unfortunately they are only situation dependent. So for the Mun I could get them in high orbit, low orbit, and surface. I bet on Kerbin there might be more with the atmosphere and all. But it is a bunch of extra science without going interplanetary at least.

[paul_c]

I will take one for my surface trip(s) to the Mun, if ever I get there! I know I need a pilot for the interplanetary stuff (or a spaceship that looks like a hedgehog with a ton of aerials) so I don't want to risk them, but I suspect I need the science points. I am assuming once on the Mun they can get out and gather EVA landed and EVA flying (by jumping) reports?

[Jacke]

9 minutes ago, paul_c said:

As I see it, the only notable change is "EVA Experiments", which adds 25 science points per biome/situation; but its quite late you can unlock it anyway so its something for the end-game.

What Tech node and other things unlock EVA Experiments, @paul c?  I can't find information on that.

Looks like I better check ScienceDefs.cfg.  Ah, EVA Science Kit Experiments are just a single run per situation, not per biome.

And looks like I've got a lot of Science to add onto the Checklists, but only EVA Science Kits could be Caveman accessible.

• EVA Science Kit Experiments (all 6 Situations, no biomes)
• Comets in 4 period varieties (per comet, needs Level 3 Tracking Station)
• Magnetometer (Space Low and Space High, no biomes, needs Tier 7 Tech Node unlocked)

Gives me something to do in my leisure hours.

[paul_c]

The only science is:

Temperature
Pressure
Goo
Materials (Science Jr)
Crew Reports
EVA Reports
EVA Experiments

(I think!)

(Plus "vessel returned from xxxx"; and anything that comes from contracts and world firsts - but on NCD, the 10% means I've not seen any there yet).

Edited February 17, 2021 by paul_c

[Jacke]

Quote

(Plus "vessel returned from xxxx"; and anything that comes from contracts and world firsts - but on NCD, the 10% means I've not seen any there yet).

I have seen both from my previous NCD career.   A nice addition but not that much.

 

4 minutes ago, paul_c said:

EVA Experiments

What are the limitations on EVA Experiments?  How much are the Kits?  What Tech Node unlocks, other unlocks are needed?

Thanks!

Edited February 17, 2021 by Jacke

[paul_c]

"EVA Experiment Kit" is in "Miniaturisation", which is level 5 (90 science points). To unlock also costs £1500, then it costs £150 per kit. I've only used it once in the last challenge (Diamond) to try it out and it only worked on "landed" (I forgot it was global, not biome-specific) so didn't bother with it after, mainly because I'd taken a path of unmanned missions. These got me over the finish line. Obviously for NCD, a sum of the entirety of science gatherable from Kerbin/Mun/Minmus shows you'll need to go interplanetary. And a quick calculation shows you'd need about 300x HG5 aerials or some other weird way to get comms for other planets (even then, there is the science drop off for poor communications). So you're pretty much committed to sending a crewed mission or two.

[Jacke]

12 minutes ago, paul_c said:

"EVA Experiment Kit" is in "Miniaturisation", which is level 5 (90 science points). To unlock also costs £1500, then it costs £150 per kit. I've only used it once in the last challenge (Diamond) to try it out and it only worked on "landed" (I forgot it was global, not biome-specific) so didn't bother with it after, mainly because I'd taken a path of unmanned missions. These got me over the finish line.

Thanks!

In ScienceDefs.cfg, it has a situationMask of 63 and a biomeMask of 0, which means it's global and can be done Surface Landed, Surface Splashed, Flying Low, Flying High, Space Low, and Space High.  baseValue and ScienceCap is 25, so it's like the first run of a Materials Studies in the Science Jr, also 25.

 

12 minutes ago, paul_c said:

And a quick calculation shows you'd need about 300x HG5 aerials or some other weird way to get comms for other planets (even then, there is the science drop off for poor communications). So you're pretty much committed to sending a crewed mission or two.

I have been approaching Caveman always with a pilot in control--or passively steered and Bob to push the Staging button--and returning Science with the spacecraft.

I had done a quick look at transmission and saw the relay situation got as crazy as you found.  I've not played with the stock CommNet so I'm unsure how it would interact with the Caveman Career limitations.

I'd be interested in hearing other Cavemen's details on how well they did with unkerballed probes and perhaps Science transmission.

 

12 minutes ago, paul_c said:

Obviously for NCD, a sum of the entirety of science gatherable from Kerbin/Mun/Minmus shows you'll need to go interplanetary.

What I discovered going over the Caveman Science numbers on my Checklists, which are calculated by formulae in the background from all the appropriate science numbers imported from KSP, is....

...even at 10% Science return in a NCD Caveman campaign, if you go for all available Science in all situations and biomes possible on Kerbin, Mun, and Minmus....

...you can get the 1184 Science points to complete the Tech Tree to all Tier 5 nodes.  Even with nothing from Contract Science.

Gives 1203.45 Science at 10% return.

Mind you, this is EVERYTHING, from Kerbin, KSC Areas and Structures, Mun, and Minmus.

That doesn't include the 3 non-KSC Areas (Baikerbanur, Baikerbanur LaunchPad, Island Airfield) or 3 Making History non-KSC Areas (Dessert Airfield, Dessert Launch Site, Woomerang Launch Site), each of which can return 3.81 Science at 10% return.

Also doesn't include EVA Science Kit Experiments, which I'm in the process of adding.

The big stumbling block to a Kerbin-SOI only NCD Career is it has to include:

• All EVA Science with a Kerbal (likely ol' Scientist Bob ) on the outside of the spacecraft from Launch to the end of Science gathering.
• All Materials Studies with the bulky Science Jr.
• And a lot of biomes to grind, 11 on Kerbin, 17 on Mun, 9 on Minmus.  Some of them, like Kerbin's Badlands, relatively small targets.

Even with the difficulty of Caveman Interplanetary, I can see why NCD almost demands it.  @IncongruousGoat did a massive orbital construction to do enough Duna+Ike Science to complete his NCD career and I can see why.

 

[Jacke]

48 minutes ago, paul_c said:

Are you going for a 1.11 NCD attempt?

I'm not sure.  I'm sorely tempted.  But an NCD Career is a long haul.  My 2019 NCD career went idle after 11 missions and 87.5 Science.  About 7.39% of the way to completion.

Back in 2019, I managed a Caveman Mun flyby.  In non-career test flights, I've flown with a Kerbals on the outside to orbit and back.  In the Community Caveman Jool-5, I didn't do any of the design, but I flew one of the component spacecraft to orbit, rendezvous, and docking, as well as performed part of the return encounter with Kerbin, where I learned to timewarp with an external Kerbal (usually let them drift away then track them down to recover).

And I've never gone Interplanetary in KSP.  I understand the science and the practice of how to do it manually.  But it's one thing to know and another to do.

And it's not just doing these once.  NCD is grind, grind, grind the tough rocks down.  Grind for funds, grind for biomes, grind to put together rockets either on the ground or in Kerbin orbit.

So, I'm not sure about doing a Caveman NCD Career.  But I look at the effects of lower Science returns and I think there's a big difference even with respect to a Diamond Career.

I might try to knock off a quick Caveman Career, like Apatite or Topaz, for the most Caveman of reasons.

I like how the rocks Apatite and Topaz look.

I'm really interested in hearing how things are current in KSP 1.11 on this topics:

• Ground assembly
• Orbital assemble
• Timewarping with outside Kerbals
• The new stuff added from KSP 1.8 on.
• Bugs to watch out for!

[paul_c]

Kerbin Badlands is easy compared to Tundra!!! It took a piece of luck to land in Tundra. 

I never even found Mun's "Polar Lowlands" on the last run (Diamond) and it took luck to find (Mun) "Lowlands" over the more widespread "Midlands". And "SW Crater" (and obvs Polar ones) need a big old plane change if you arrive, or have other stuff to dock with, on the equatorial plane.

When I did Diamond, my Minmus trip did 6 biomes in one trip and it wouldn't have taken much to extend it to all 9 biomes (and/or crewed too). It relied on docking ports to make a larger "station" in orbit. It turned out, I had tons of excess dV at the end of the trip.

The limiting factor was station-wobble, although for next time I am going to make the central spine accept 8x docked modules, this way I can keep the wobble under control. And in-orbit construction means no aerodynamic concerns (or TWR really, if you can do a multi-orbit TMI). I did 10 trips to construct it, and I'm fully prepared for 20+ dockings per interplanetary voyage.

[paul_c]

2 minutes ago, Jacke said:

And it's not just doing these once.  NCD is grind, grind, grind the tough rocks down.  Grind for funds, grind for biomes, grind to put together rockets either on the ground or in Kerbin orbit.

Diamond is simple compared to NCD. I KNOW for NCD I'll need to visit and revisit pretty much all the Mun biomes 3 times - once to land & transmit; next to land/reorbit/recover using a remote probe; then probably a "mop up" extra points with a crewed mission (which will probably need 3x launches to get enoug fuel in the right place). Then repeat for Minmus....

2 minutes ago, Jacke said:

So, I'm not sure about doing a Caveman NCD Career.  But I look at the effects of lower Science returns and I think there's a big difference even with respect to a Diamond Career.

There is a "hump" early on in NCD whereby to achieve the unlock of "Basic Science" (which unlocks many useful things - Science Jr, Stayputnik, battery, HG5 antenna, science store lunchbox) I needed to exhaustively gather almost all Kerbin science, including 3x  "rare biome/situation" EVA reports eg "splashed down in the desert". 

This is my Kerbin science detailed tracking, I've not tried EVA holding on to a ladder etc but I believe others have had success with it. And my yellow highlighting means "not gathered", orange is "partly gathered" (eg 2x more Goo only earns another 0.2 science....but everything helps).

2 minutes ago, Jacke said:

 

• Ground assembly
• Orbital assemble
• Timewarping with outside Kerbals
• The new stuff added from KSP 1.8 on.
• Bugs to watch out for!

Blaarkies is the guy to speak to on ground assembly. He's also done orbital assembly too. Orbital assembly - I found I could consistently get ~2.5t useful payload into orbit, and constructed an "upside down" spaceship with the controller/engine/etc at the bottom and the fuel tank at the top with docking ports both ends, this way it can give its remaining fuel but dispense with the superfluous parts.

Satellite/spaceship minus fuel tank on top (which had docking port each end, and was detached with the stack separator):

[Jacke]

15 minutes ago, paul_c said:

Diamond is simple compared to NCD. I KNOW for NCD I'll need to visit and revisit pretty much all the Mun biomes 3 times - once to land & transmit; next to land/reorbit/recover using a remote probe; then probably a "mop up" extra points with a crewed mission (which will probably need 3x launches to get enoug fuel in the right place). Then repeat for Minmus....

There is a "hump" early on in NCD whereby to achieve the unlock of "Basic Science" (which unlocks many useful things - Science Jr, Stayputnik, battery, HG5 antenna, science store lunchbox) I needed to exhaustively gather almost all Kerbin science, including 3x  "rare biome/situation" EVA reports eg "splashed down in the desert".

When Imgur becomes more reliable, you should review my aborted NCD Career.  The Imgur Image Galleries have notes on all the screenshots included.

In 11 Missions (1 of which was a duplicate Roller because I'd missed Science with the preceding Roller Mission), I got to 87.2 Science, I had:

• All T2 Nodes
• T3 General Rocketry, T3 Survivability
• And 47.2 Science to spend, likely either T4 Advanced Rocketry or T4 Basic Science.

I'm not sure if one of those is a dangerous route, but I think my career could have pursued either.

There's another key factor with NCD Careers: Contract play.

With Reputation in the gutter (highest I saw was -983), there's no problem cancelling contracts.

The right Contracts get the funds to fly the missions.

The right Contracts get extra Science points that can make the difference between unlocking now or later.

The right Test Contracts give parts not unlocked yet early, like how I got the Terrier engine for the Mission 11 Mun flyby.

Planning out the Contracts means even with a maximum of 2 accepted, a single mission can complete several.  Mission 11 did 3.

 

15 minutes ago, paul_c said:

This is my Kerbin science detailed tracking, I've not tried EVA holding on to a ladder etc but I believe others have had success with it. And my yellow highlighting means "not gathered", orange is "partly gathered" (eg 2x more Goo only earns another 0.2 science....but everything helps).

That's one of the reasons I did my Science Checklists, to know what was were and what I did and didn't do.  On top of that, I had my log and records of the Missions I flew.

 

15 minutes ago, paul_c said:

Blaarkies is the guy to speak to on ground assembly. He's also done orbital assembly too. Orbital assembly - I found I could consistently get ~2.5t useful payload into orbit, and constructed an "upside down" spaceship with the controller/engine/etc at the bottom and the fuel tank at the top with docking ports both ends, this way it can give its remaining fuel but dispense with the superfluous parts.

Satellite/spaceship minus fuel tank on top (which had docking port each end, and was detached with the stack separator):

Very interesting.

But I've noticed a stumbling block.  Getting T5 Miniaturization and access to the Docking Port Jr.  Without that, can't assemble either on the ground or in space.

My Mission 11 Mun flyby rocket was already at the limit, 17.93t and 30 parts.  If I unlocked T4 Basic Science, I need nearly 90 Science more to get T5 Miniaturization.  But now without the Terrier engine, although I would have the parts available from T4 Basic Science.

Would have the Science Jr.  Still some Kerbin science available on the earlier experiments too.

Looks like this part of getting through a NCD Career is a rather challenging part.   And makes me think this is where I need to go, a new NCD career.  Because even with Diamond there wouldn't be this sort of challenge at this point.

[paul_c]

I think I'm at 110.6 science earned (I can't remember how much the unlocks were) but part of the fun is figuring out the order in which to unlock the technology. Some items are "wants" or "nice to have" and some are simply needed otherwise you'll reach a dead end.

Mun is possible/'easy' once the Terrier is unlocked. Before then, the Swivel T45 is the smallest (and only, if you discount the Reliant T30 as useless because it as no gimbal) liquid fuel engine and its weight means you'll never achieve enough dV within the 18t limit (without other weight-savers like the 0.1t reaction wheel pack and a controller, to avoid needing the command module). I know people have done it with solid fuel etc but remember too, in Caveman there is no precision of maneouvers either.

Docking port - yes its needed but its not a "blocker", since you can go to the Mun and return enough science with one decent vessel. Actually I've not done the detail planning to double-check its not a dead end again, but in previous missions I've managed a spaceship which could fly to the Mun, land, take off again and return its science in 18t/30 parts. Very stripped down, no science jr but its possible. My guideline was "3000dV left once in LKO" - 800 to get to Mun, ~200 to orbit, ~800 to land, ~800 to take off again, leaving 400 for return and corrections. And I was reliably sending a spaceship with docking port/science jr which could land on Mun, re-orbit then dock in Mun orbit.

I have yet to do the detail planning for Mun stuff, since I know I'll need about £100k money to fund it all, it will come a bit later on. Definitely on NCD, there is a lot of needing to do contracts alongside to keep the funds flowing in, then an occasional "spend" to gain science. Its difficult to combine those two (repeatably).

[IncongruousGoat]

30 minutes ago, paul_c said:

Mun is possible/'easy' once the Terrier is unlocked. Before then, the Swivel T45 is the smallest (and only, if you discount the Reliant T30 as useless because it as no gimbal) liquid fuel engine and its weight means you'll never achieve enough dV within the 18t limit (without other weight-savers like the 0.1t reaction wheel pack and a controller, to avoid needing the command module). I know people have done it with solid fuel etc but remember too, in Caveman there is no precision of maneouvers either.

In my experience the Reliant is far more useful than the Swivel, even though it lacks gimbal. The Reliant is .25t lighter and has markedly better Isp, which really makes the difference when trying for something like a Mun flyby. The lack of gimbal does hurt, but I've found it's possible to get away with just capsule reaction wheels if you're careful about aerodynamic stability on ascent.

34 minutes ago, paul_c said:

I have yet to do the detail planning for Mun stuff, since I know I'll need about £100k money to fund it all, it will come a bit later on. Definitely on NCD, there is a lot of needing to do contracts alongside to keep the funds flowing in, then an occasional "spend" to gain science. Its difficult to combine those two (repeatably).

Funding is less of a problem in NCD than it might initially seem, actually. Before orbit, you're spending a lot less money than you'd think, since rockets are cheap and science is so scarce that you're not spending a lot of money on unlocking parts. Then, once you can get into orbit, it's possible to generate infinite money by farming survey contracts, which makes the whole problem moot.

2 hours ago, paul_c said:

Diamond is simple compared to NCD. I KNOW for NCD I'll need to visit and revisit pretty much all the Mun biomes 3 times - once to land & transmit; next to land/reorbit/recover using a remote probe; then probably a "mop up" extra points with a crewed mission (which will probably need 3x launches to get enoug fuel in the right place). Then repeat for Minmus....

NCD is pretty grindy, but it's not quite that bad. If you look at existing submissions the most anyone has done is 19 Mun landings, one per biome (and that was me, doing things in a stupid and brute-force way). It's possible to get enough science/tech to land on Minmus just from Kerbin & low/high orbit science, and being able to land on Minmus opens up enough science to either let you clean out a Mun biome in a single mission, or to go interplanetary and get science that way.

[Jacke]

1 hour ago, paul_c said:

I think I'm at 110.6 science earned (I can't remember how much the unlocks were) but part of the fun is figuring out the order in which to unlock the technology. Some items are "wants" or "nice to have" and some are simply needed otherwise you'll reach a dead end.

I think the key Science number near here is 130.  It allows all of T3 except T3 Stability (which can be delayed) and both T4 Advanced Rocketry for the Terrier, T400 Tank, etc, and T4 Basic Science for the Science Jr and the other Science goodies.  With those, can push for 90 more Science to get T5 Miniaturization and the Docking Port Jr and other bits.

And for most of the rest, @IncongruousGoat covered much the same.  Too slow making new posts by chipping out stones!

 

Quote

Mun is possible/'easy' once the Terrier is unlocked. Before then, the Swivel T45 is the smallest (and only, if you discount the Reliant T30 as useless because it as no gimbal) liquid fuel engine and its weight means you'll never achieve enough dV within the 18t limit (without other weight-savers like the 0.1t reaction wheel pack and a controller, to avoid needing the command module). I know people have done it with solid fuel etc but remember too, in Caveman there is no precision of maneouvers either.

I go for the T30 over the T45.  The T30 costs less, masses less, has better Atmospheric and Vacuum Thrust, and better Atmospheric Isp.

The T45 only edges out the T30 on Vacuum Isp, with 320s over the T30's 310s.  But with the T45 being 0.25t more massive, in most cases even on an upper stage, the T30 will be the better choice.

My Mission 11 Mun Flyby rocket used a T30 on the 1st stage and a Terrier (under test) on the 2nd.  Being long, the Mk1 Pod's reaction wheel had a long lever arm during the 1st stage burn.  If I had to design without the Terrier, I'd still go for a T30 on the 2nd Stage.

Mind you, this is all unrealistic, another victim of Squad just not knowing Rocketry at the start and making those crazy strong unrealistic reaction wheels.  Large gimballed engines were developed in the late 1950's, with ungimballed engines only used in legacy designs like the R7 and in combination with gimballed engines, like on the Saturn 1's S1 stage, the Saturn 1B's S1B stage, and the Saturn 5's S1C stage.  Spacecraft themselves I believed used ungimballed engines mostly for reliability.  But maneuvering except for some satellites is all RCS.

I've got to leave this one be, else the craziness of the stock Tech tree and what is where will start getting to me.  Again.

 

Quote

Docking port - yes its needed but its not a "blocker", since you can go to the Mun and return enough science with one decent vessel. Actually I've not done the detail planning to double-check its not a dead end again, but in previous missions I've managed a spaceship which could fly to the Mun, land, take off again and return its science in 18t/30 parts. Very stripped down, no science jr but its possible. My guideline was "3000dV left once in LKO" - 800 to get to Mun, ~200 to orbit, ~800 to land, ~800 to take off again, leaving 400 for return and corrections. And I was reliably sending a spaceship with docking port/science jr which could land on Mun, re-orbit then dock in Mun orbit.

That's 6500 dV on the whole LV+Spacecraft.  In 18t/30 parts.  Without a Docking Port.  Wow.  That one I'd like to see the details on it.  And what Tech nodes it needs.

I'd need to get better at Caveman orbital launches (Mission 11's was...I wrote 3815m/s but looking at the screenshots, says about 4075m/s).  Better aim on Caveman Trans-Mun Injections too (may have underburnt this one with 878m/s, but I was going for a set apoapsis that was good).

 

Quote

I have yet to do the detail planning for Mun stuff, since I know I'll need about £100k money to fund it all, it will come a bit later on. Definitely on NCD, there is a lot of needing to do contracts alongside to keep the funds flowing in, then an occasional "spend" to gain science. Its difficult to combine those two (repeatably).

The Contracts to "Survey <location> over <altitude>" are great, as any altitude over that's still in the SOI works.  I've seen in other Careers, often someone gets left up in a Polar orbit with the appropriate gear just to milk them without needing a new launch.

 

21 minutes ago, IncongruousGoat said:

NCD is pretty grindy, but it's not quite that bad. If you look at existing submissions the most anyone has done is 19 Mun landings, one per biome (and that was me, doing things in a stupid and brute-force way).

19 !?!

Quote

It's possible to get enough science/tech to land on Minmus just from Kerbin & low/high orbit science, and being able to land on Minmus opens up enough science to either let you clean out a Mun biome in a single mission, or to go interplanetary and get science that way.

Good!  Because I've only done around 5ish Mun+Minmus landings.  All un-Kerballed before CommNet with many nav aids, though the landings were manual.  (Only Kerballed one was on a simulation flight that broke off its engine on landing.)

Though getting a good Caveman Trans-Minmus Injection is going to be my challenge.  Had a tough enough time doing it Caveman for Mun and it wasn't a good one either.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Jacke

[JAFO]

4 hours ago, Jacke said:

I might try to knock off a quick Caveman Career, like Apatite or Topaz, for the most Caveman of reasons.

I like how the rocks Apatite and Topaz look.

The best of all possible reasons! Shall I go and whip up a combo Apatite-Topaz badge for you now, in anticipation of you doing so?

 

3 hours ago, Jacke said:

Looks like this part of getting through a NCD Career is a rather challenging part.   And makes me think this is where I need to go, a new NCD career.  Because even with Diamond there wouldn't be this sort of challenge at this point.

I heartily approve of this ambition! Hmmm.. maybe I ought stick an NC-Diamond opposite the Apatite and Topaz stones, in readiness!

 

2 hours ago, Jacke said:

Being long, the Mk1 Pod's reaction wheel had a long lever arm during the 1st stage burn.

Hmmm... I seem to recall a Scott Manley video, a long time ago, where he explained why in real life, this was faulty logic, and demonstrated that even in KSP, it doesn't work like that. I might have to go looking for it.

 

[Jacke]

BTW, I'm finding I'm needing to do a lot of fiddling to get my Science Checklists up to KSP 1.11 completion.  Once I do, they'll be better than ever!

But right now, I see the quick typo fix done earlier today heartily introduced its own typo in the form of a broken header on Mun's page.  Fixed and now version 20210217b is available.  Again, only a typo fix.  True KSP 1.11 Science compliance coming soon!

 

3 hours ago, JAFO said:

The best of all possible reasons! Shall I go and whip up a combo Apatite-Topaz badge for you now, in anticipation of you doing so?

ACK!  I'm only likely to do one just to get me name independently inscribed on the cave wall.  And to sport that cool, cool badge in at least one form .

 

Quote

I heartily approve of this ambition! Hmmm.. maybe I ought stick an NC-Diamond opposite the Apatite and Topaz stones, in readiness!

AAACCCKKK!!!  Don't jinx me, man!

I want a challenge that will have me thoroughly learn KSP as it is right now and many operations manually in detail that I'm either rusty or inexperienced with.

Caveman NCD is a parkour marathon in stages.  Needs to be eased into it again before I take that flying leap.

 

Quote

Hmmm... I seem to recall a Scott Manley video, a long time ago, where he explained why in real life, this was faulty logic, and demonstrated that even in KSP, it doesn't work like that. I might have to go looking for it.

I think you're thinking of the fallacy of having the rocket engine up higher, as in Robert Goddard's early designs (picture in the spoiler below), would allow the rocket to having passive directional stability.  They often didn't because most times there wasn't enough drag on the lower portion to move the centre of pressure far enough aft of the centre of gravity.  Moving the thrust source had no effect, just moving its mass.

Spoiler

 

My Mission 11 rocket (again picture in the spoiler) likely has its centre-of-mass below mid-length, as I believe the Mk1 Pod and the Science Bay mass less than the T30 near the bottom.  2nd Stage's Terrier, just above mid-length, would offset that somewhat.  And as the fuel of the 1st Stage is burned off, I think the centre of mass would move up a bit.  I'm unsure where the centre of pressure would be, but a rule-of-thumb is it's in the centre of a lengthwise cross-section.  Which puts it very near the centre-of-mass.  That should make its static stability low.

The Mk1 Pod's reaction wheel should act at the centre of the pod.  So it has a good lever arm with respect to the rocket centre-of-mass, around which it should normally act.  Now transferring a torque on the Mk1 Pod to the whole rocket is a bit tricky, especially if it bends.  But I think there is a benefit from the length of that lever arm.

To the best of my recollection, I had no issues controlling the rocket during flight.  (I did need more practice to get it to orbit efficiently, thought.)

Spoiler

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by Jacke

[Blaarkies]

New update, and also done! 

Did the final Mun landings and ended with some extra 334 leftover. I didn't get to any green Monoliths though, that needs some dedicated time to find those.

[JAFO]

3 hours ago, Jacke said:

I think you're thinking of the fallacy of having the rocket engine up higher, as in Robert Goddard's early designs

Umm.. nope. I'm aware of that particular fallacy... but this was most definitely that there was zero advantage to having a reaction wheel at the extreme end, as opposed to the centre, of a long craft. Like so much about how things work in zero-g, it's totally counter-intuitive, but apparently that's the case. The lever/torque thing doesn't apply. He did go into a detailed explanation of it all, which naturally I can't remember. Even worse, I searched, but can't find it, so it seems that it wasn't the subject of a dedicated video, but was merely discussed in the course of one of his regular KSP videos.

 

21 minutes ago, Blaarkies said:

New update, and also done! 

Did the final Mun landings and ended with some extra 334 leftover. I didn't get to any green Monoliths though, that needs some dedicated time to find those.

Excellent! I'll go check it out after I finish my cyber-sec class tonight.

Edited February 18, 2021 by JAFO

[Blaarkies]

37 minutes ago, JAFO said:

Umm.. nope. I'm aware of that particular fallacy... but this was most definitely that there was zero advantage to having a reaction wheel at the extreme end, as opposed to the centre, of a long craft.

I remember the same video. Its exactly because it is torque force, as opposed to a tangential force at a distance to a pivot. Because of how a torque force interacts with the center-of-mass, it doesn't matter where the "origin" of that torque force is.

On long wobbly craft it could still affect how things wobble, right? (in terms of stability at least)

[Jacke]

EDIT:  I'd wrote the following and was then busy with the rest of this post....

Hmmm.  Thinking of the physics....  Not sure, but some thought has me thinking that's right.  In torques, think of the reaction wheels having to turn the rocket.  Centre of mass being farther from the centre of rotation means the effective moment of inertia is greater.  Which would mean the reaction wheels are less effective.

To get it right, I think I'd have to move from using torques to using forces.  Or remember/rederive the frame transformations of torques.  Either way or even another way, too much physics for now.

EDIT: ...when I see @Blaarkies has a good summation with better words.   I also vaguely remember Scott Manley talking about it, but also can't find where.

However, reality is often somewhat moot in KSP.  How did Squad code their reaction wheels?  Does distance from the CoM matter or not?

 

Anyhoo, busy working on my Science Checklists.  I've got a bit of info I can share on it.

I'd gone through the formulae very carefully two years ago.  And I've got through them again adding the missing experiments to Kerbin, including the totals for Recovery of Vessels from Flying, Sub-orbit, and Orbiting Kerbin.

Some numbers for 100% Science Return:

Experiment	Kerbin	KSC Areas	KSC Structures	Experiment Total
Recovery	27.6			27.6
Crew Reports	94.0	55.0	7.5	156.5
EVA Reports	230.4	88.0	12.0	330.4
Mystery Goo	153.4	42.9	19.5	215.8
Temperature	150.4	88.0	12.0	250.4
Pressure	141.6	39.6	18.0	199.2
Material Studies	377.6	105.6	48.0	531.2
EVA Science	120.0			120.0
Grand Totals	1295.0	419.1	117.0	1831.1

60% of 1831.1 is 1098.66.  Even a Topaz Career is within 100 Science of completing just with the Science in the Kerbin SOI excluding Mun and Minmus.  Of course, getting all those Kerbin biomes and situations might be harder than throwing in two or three Mun Flybys, consider Topaz would need at least one.

I've also decided I really do need to do a non-NCD Caveman Career.  I just don't know enough about how to put together more advanced Caveman launch vehicles and spacecraft to properly judge which Tech are really critical in advancing the career.  Not to mention needing practice in Caveman Mission operations.  With mine and other's experience of running NCD Careers, I could even do harder things considering an NCD Career will follow.

So, to choose, become one with the Caveman.

Which to pick between pretty rocks Apatite and Topaz?

         

Pick bigger one!  Bigger on Badge!

         

[JAFO]

1 hour ago, Blaarkies said:

I remember the same video. Its exactly because it is torque force, as opposed to a tangential force at a distance to a pivot. Because of how a torque force interacts with the center-of-mass, it doesn't matter where the "origin" of that torque force is.

Thanks! Good to see one of us has a decent memory at least. (Hint: Don't get old.. it sucks.)

 

1 hour ago, Blaarkies said:

On long wobbly craft it could still affect how things wobble, right? (in terms of stability at least)

Can't say for sure, but I suspect not. At least, I don't recall ever noticing that the capsule end wobbled less than the other. Empirical testing called for, perhaps?

 

32 minutes ago, Jacke said:

However, reality is often somewhat moot in KSP.  How did Squad code their reaction wheels?  Does distance from the CoM matter or not?

I believe Scott demonstrated in the video that this is one of those times when KSP actually does match reality.

 

33 minutes ago, Jacke said:

So, to choose, become one with the Caveman.

Which to pick between pretty rocks Apatite and Topaz?

         

Pick bigger one!  Bigger on Badge!

         

Yes! Also.. it's shinier. I'm pretty sure Cavemen regard that as an important factor.

[Blaarkies]

11 hours ago, paul_c said:

I think I'm at 110.6 science earned (I can't remember how much the unlocks were) but part of the fun is figuring out the order in which to unlock the technology. Some items are "wants" or "nice to have" and some are simply needed otherwise you'll reach a dead end.

Btw have you had any luck finding green monoliths? I forgot to really go hunting for them in my attempt, but it sounds like they would really help out a lot in NCD
Almost like they were sent by a super advanced civilization to help out these poor cavemen...

To discover them you would probably need a Juno engine to get there, or at least very good piloting skills to plot a sub-orbital route to "there"

[paul_c]

I don't know how you'd find them??

[Blaarkies]

Ok, well there's a black monolith north of the KSC. Standing on the launch pad, look perpendicularly towards the runway. Now go past the Runway and you will reach the monolith before the shores. This one doesn't do anything as far as I know.

The OCTO core has 6% chance of detecting anomalies (like green monoliths). Get some in orbit, right-click, open up that KerbNet and look around for question mark symbols (?). Once you see one, click to save it as a navpoint. Then just go there.

Im not sure how that 6% is calculated though. Is it at rocket assembly? In which case you need to do a thorough check with many different probes. Maybe EVA engineers can hack this by re-rebuilding in orbit prob core into "new" rockets? Not sure, i only managed to find them outside of the challenge so far

Edited February 18, 2021 by Blaarkies

[paul_c]

12 hours ago, Jacke said:

That's 6500 dV on the whole LV+Spacecraft.  In 18t/30 parts.  Without a Docking Port.  Wow.  That one I'd like to see the details on it.  And what Tech nodes it needs.

Just looked thru my archive (Diamond attempt) and this was the "best" dV flown craft. It has all the science kit, but no equipment to re-enter Kerbin's atmosphere. I did do another which could do that, but didn't really use it, preferring to play it safe by gathering the science then docking with a "returner".

From top to bottom, of the "business end":

Docking port
Small reaction wheel
Battery
OCTO controller
2x small fuel tanks
science jr
fuel tank, solar panels, aerial, thermometer, pressure gauge, goo at the base (for drag/aerodynamics)
Spark engine

Of course, its designed to squeak just under the 18t/30 parts limit. I normally spend an amount of time swapping fuel (tanks) between) stages to see what produces the best dV (respecting that the Terrier needs to operate in vacuum; and the Spark is low-power). The smaller the fuel tank, the finer the control so you can get closer and closer to 18t. The Science Jr is light but bulky. Its a case of: It has everything needed; and nothing not needed.

Its purpose is to travel to Mun, then do a significant plane change (to reach poles or SW Crater), then land, take off, do another plane change and dock with something in an equatorial plane.