Jump to content

Hot and Fast: Eve and back without heatshields, radiators, airbrakes, parachutes, or landing gear


Recommended Posts

In July of 2015, I read the challenge idea below on the r/kerbalspaceprogram subreddit, originally posted on a challenge suggestion thread by TMarkos:

Quote

Hot and Fast - Land and return from Eve in a single launch without using heat shields, parachutes, airbrakes or landing gear.

At the time, I thought it was a very fun idea for a challenge, but it never picked up traction and was lost to the sands of time. However, I didn't forget about it, and last week, I decided to pick up the mantle and perform an Eve return mission following it with some extra caveats: no DLCs, no ISRU, no radiators, no fairings, no control surfaces, and no nuclear or ion propulsion. Within 24 hours, I successfully designed, tested, and flew the mission end-to-end. Granted, I did use an autopilot in Eve's lower atmosphere to counter my subpar piloting skills (and the lack of control surfaces), but I have proven that the original challenge is feasible from a technical standpoint. I've posted the Imgur album of the mission below, for the curious and those looking to design their own response to the challenge below, my revival and updating of TMarkos's original idea.

THE CHALLENGE

Land and return at least 1 kerbal from Eve in a single launch without the use of heatshields, static* radiators, airbrakes, parachutes or landing gear.

The quoted challenge is not the official challenge, as I have also disallowed static* radiators.

ADDITIONAL RULES AND NOTES

  1. Avoid physics-breaking or non-stock-performance propulsion methods. (This includes things like kraken drives, most engines from Near- and Far-Future Technologies, and jet engines capable of running in Eve's atmosphere)
  2. No cheating, please. If you have to ask if it's considered cheating, there's a decent chance it is.
  3. No part clipping, please. (Clipping of structural parts is allowed, but not of engines, any resource-holding part, or crew capsule)
  4. The kerbal landing on Eve should be able to walk or swim around on the surface.
  5. Static radiators are not allowed, but deployable radiators are allowed. (This is less of a rule and more of a note for people doing this challenge with ISRU.)

Although I flew my mission with plenty of extra conditions, those are entirely optional to those interested in competing. If anybody wishes to attempt a low-anything (low-cost, low-mass, etc.) mission, I'll add a leaderboard for that respective category (I'll also add a "Gatecrashers" list if the need arises).

Otherwise, if any questions still remain, ask away. These rules are not set in stone, and I'm willing to update them or add new ones to address errors. Good Luck!

FINISHERS

I will add each person who finishes the challenge and posts it on here, along with some notes on their mission.

 

  • @Beriev (Album)
    • Done as a technical feasibility mission, utilizing some assistance from Mechjeb for the Eve landing and Eve ascent (manually flown otherwise).
    • Additionally completed without DLCs, ISRU, radiators, control surfaces, fairings, or nuclear/ion propulsion.
  •  
    •  
    •  

 

Edited by Beriev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EveMaster said:

Nice challenge idea!

But ISRU without radiators is not really possible without trickery, the production rate drops to zero.

Maybe you disallow using radiators while flying through the atmosphere but allow deployable radiators while on the ground for ISRU.

Hmmm, that is a good point. The original reason I had disallowed radiators was because I felt they could be used to cheese heat management during Eve descent, but you are right in that ISRU is supposed to employ radiators.

How about this: static radiators are disallowed, but deployable radiators are still permitted. Eve descent and ascent would have too high a dynamic pressure (without a fully powered descent) to make them usable without breaking, but they are still usable on the surface. Would that work better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2021 at 3:38 AM, Beriev said:

How about this: static radiators are disallowed, but deployable radiators are still permitted. Eve descent and ascent would have too high a dynamic pressure (without a fully powered descent) to make them usable without breaking, but they are still usable on the surface. Would that work better?

I think that is the best and easiest solution. They cannot be used while moving through the atmosphere but still allow for ISRU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2021 at 8:38 PM, Beriev said:

Hmmm, that is a good point. The original reason I had disallowed radiators was because I felt they could be used to cheese heat management during Eve descent, but you are right in that ISRU is supposed to employ radiators.

How about this: static radiators are disallowed, but deployable radiators are still permitted. Eve descent and ascent would have too high a dynamic pressure (without a fully powered descent) to make them usable without breaking, but they are still usable on the surface. Would that work better?

FYI you can't actually cheese reentry/ascent with radiators anyways.  Anytime the external plasma temperature (note this is not the same as the current part skin temp, which will be significantly lower) exceeds the radiators max temp, the radiators are hard-coded to shut down.  The end result is that by the time you would want them to be helping cool the ship, they are shut down, and rather than radiating heat away they are absorbing heat.  And also making lots of drag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 4:42 PM, EveMaster said:

I think that is the best and easiest solution. They cannot be used while moving through the atmosphere but still allow for ISRU.

Sounds good. I've updated the original post already to permit static radiators only.

17 hours ago, Lt_Duckweed said:

FYI you can't actually cheese reentry/ascent with radiators anyways.  Anytime the external plasma temperature (note this is not the same as the current part skin temp, which will be significantly lower) exceeds the radiators max temp, the radiators are hard-coded to shut down.  The end result is that by the time you would want them to be helping cool the ship, they are shut down, and rather than radiating heat away they are absorbing heat.  And also making lots of drag.

Huh, I never know that. Today I learned! I think I'll keep static radiators disallowed, however, as they are still good at producing drag on lighter vehicles (as you pointed out), which kind of feels like going against the grain for this challenge.

If either of you ( @camacju, too) decide to tackle this challenge, I'm definitely interested to see what you all come up with.

Edited by Beriev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a fun challenge, count me in! My craft *almost* works, so I hope I can send in my submission this weekend.

That said, I realized last night that my craft violates the rules by using airbrakes... Although it doesn't use them for braking, it uses them as levers to erect my Eve ascent vehicle from a Mk3 cargo bay. Would this be an acceptable application of airbrakes?

jqsGOMB.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, QF9E said:

Looks like a fun challenge, count me in! My craft *almost* works, so I hope I can send in my submission this weekend.

That said, I realized last night that my craft violates the rules by using airbrakes... Although it doesn't use them for braking, it uses them as levers to erect my Eve ascent vehicle from a Mk3 cargo bay. Would this be an acceptable application of airbrakes?

-snip-

I'm certainly excited to see how you'll touch down on Eve with that.

As for the airbrakes, unfortunately, I'll have to give a no on that. I am kind of torn, as airbrakes make for good hinge actuators in stock KSP, but in the spirit of TMarkos's original challenge, I have to decline their usage.

That said, I have a potential alternative idea for your vehicle: use several smaller rockets mounted perpendicularly to force the rocket vertical, then eject them just before liftoff, like as seen in this video from StratzenBlitz75. Assuming a 30 ton ascent vehicle, you would only need ~500 kN of thrust, which should be covered by a handful of Thuds or Hammers/Fleas.

However, if you still use airbrake hinges, I will still definitely add you, but it will just be under the Gatecrashers category. Regardless, whichever way you go with, good luck!

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.

×
×
  • Create New...