Jump to content

Doing it Apollo style

Xeldrak
 Share

Recommended Posts

Xeldrak

Xeldrak

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have no problem with huge part counts. However, the challenge requires that you fly a rocket designed by yourself. So, should Mulbin come here and post a Imgur-Album of him flying a mission with his design, I'm fine with it.

I don't see why I should give less points if someone goes with a more complicated design, with more fairings or details...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jwenting

jwenting

Posted
Posted
Not quite. Remember, this was in the early days of computing. Most pocket calculators have more computing power than the LM, and the entire spacecraft's computer system is outpaced by a modern smartphone.:cool:

sounds like Jeb's mechanical equivalent would fit right in :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnno

Johnno

Posted
Posted
You should also figure out dishing points for using the least number of parts to accomplish the mission.

I'd disagree with this. It would just push everyone toward the same design, not to mention that the lack of variety in parts already makes it hard. Since it's supposed to be a Apollo style challenge I'd much more prefer to build something that also looks similar to apollo.

There was no ASAS on those landers if I recall. Only some type of basic SAS.

As I've already pointed out the Apollo intrumentation and control went beyond what we have in KSP. Banning mods should be more than enough, no need to ban ASAS as well. I'd fly without ASAS anyday if you gave me the throttle control and visual intrumentation of Apollo. Without it though it's hard enough in KSP.

Everyone knows Mulbin's monstrous design fits this challenge perfectly, but if you add in a reduced part count point gradient, it would even the playing field (no offense Mulbin).

No need, challenge rules already state 'bring your own rocket'. I'd prefer seeing what designs people come up with having complete part count freedom, rather than limiting everyone toward the same optimized design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kappa73

Kappa73

Posted
Posted

Here's my submission to the challenge, which was by the way very fun and educational. This is my first video too... skip to about 6 minute mark if you are not interested in the building and designing phase.

for my score i got this:

- 3-man Mission +10

- 2-man Lander +10

- Lander stored behind the CM during ascent +20

- Free return trajectory to the mün +10

- Flawless landing (no parts broke off, Neil Armstrong is watching you!) +10

- After succesfull Mün landing docked CM and MM in Orbit (no swapping ships without docking them first) +10

- MM disposed by crashing it into the Mün (remove Kerbal first!) +5

- Plant flag on the Mün (no cumulative, i.e. two flags don't get you 6 points) +3

- Spashing down on Minmus +5

10+10+20+10+10+10+5+3+5 == 83

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kappa73

Kappa73

Posted
Posted
you forgot you base 30 points...so, you are at 113 points

however, you did not SPLASH down on kerbin, you landed...so 108 points

ahHA hehe. i suck at the score counting, thanks for correcting the score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pinkieseb

Pinkieseb

Posted
Posted

I might give this a try and I'll record, because i never remember to take screenshots! :D

Oh and btw Neil and Buzz didnt land, Collin did :) Neil and Buzz stepped out onto the moon, became famous and then poor Collin had to watch them through a window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Superfluous J

Superfluous J

Posted
Posted
Oh and btw Neil and Buzz didnt land, Collin did :) Neil and Buzz stepped out onto the moon, became famous and then poor Collin had to watch them through a window.

That is not correct. Armstrong landed and walked first. Buzz rode along and walked second. Collins didn't watch them through a window; he was left in orbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xeldrak

Xeldrak

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Gave pa his 5 points

And no, Collins was in the CSM while Neil and Buzz were on the moon. To watch them though a window he would need realy good eyes...

However, I allways forget his name because he was the one left behind, wich kinda annoys me.

Edited by Xeldrak
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnno

Johnno

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here's my entry. Think I got everything except fairings, I did give them a go but launchpad tests proved I hadn't taken enough care in design (first time trying fairings at all), I was itching to fly and it was getting late so I gave up on them. Might make another entry later (especially if any more mission points are added).

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Base +30

3-man Mission +10

2-man Lander +10

2-stage Lander (leave the decent-engine on the mün) +20

No asparagus

Escape tower +10

Lander stored behind the CM during ascent +20

No fairings

Free return trajectory to the mün +10

Flawless landing +10

Munar Roving Vehicle onboard +15

Docked CM and MM in Orbit +10

MM disposed by crashing it into the Mün +5

Plant flag on the Mün +3

Splashing down on Kerbin +5

Total: 158

Just realized I forgot to take a closeup of the escape tower. Basically just 8 sepratrons on a octostrut (on top of a decoupler) with a few octocubes and 4 struts for show.

Edit: tweaked my imgur link so hopefully there's no scrollbars.

Edit2: found a typo ;.;

Edited by Johnno
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xenonclave

Xenonclave

Posted
Posted



That was an interesting mission, to say the least.

- Base +30
- 3-man Mission +10
- 2-man Lander +10
- 2-stage Lander (leave the decent-engine on the mün) +20
- Lander stored behind the CM during ascent +20
- Flawless landing (kinda) +10
- After successful Mün landing docked CM and MM in Orbit +10
- Plant flag on the Mün +3
- Kerbal dies -20

So 93 I guess?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xeldrak

Xeldrak

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Alright, so we have a new champion!

Sorry, Xenoclave, you are out of the top-5 but you got a honorary mention for your video.

Also: I'm amazed how many of you have a two-stage lander. I never came up with a useable two-stage design...

Edited by Xeldrak
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnno

Johnno

Posted
Posted
Alright, so we have a new champion!

Yay! (sorry sal_vager)

Sorry, Xenoclave, you are out of the top-5 but you got a honorary mention for your video.

That video was brilliant, well done Xenonclave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xeldrak

Xeldrak

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Might make another entry later (especially if any more mission points are added).

Well, I've been thinking about adding more points, but I'm having a hard time comming up with more goals

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnno

Johnno

Posted
Posted
Well, I've been thinking about adding more points, but I'm having a hard time comming up with more goals

A few off the top of my head in no specific order, these are just suggestions and not intended to hijack the challenge in any way. Adjust anything/everything as you see fit if you want to add them Xeldrak.

MSEP - Mün Surface Experimental Package (inspired by Mulbin's build and the real deal - ALSEP). Deploy experiments packages at/near the landing site, could even make it harder with bonus points for number of experiments and/or distance from lander. A package would be probecore + power (and whatever shiny bits you want to add).

Minimalistic - 3 points - Deploy one experimental package at landing site

That'll do - 5 points - Deploy two experimental packages at the landing site

For science! - 10 points - Deploy two experimental packages 2.5km from the landing site (and at least 2.5km from eachother)

Science extravaganza! - 15 points - Deploy four experimental packages 2.5km from the landing site (and at least 2.5km from eachother)

Rover exploration (distances/points are not cumulative)

Test drive - 1 point - Drive within 2.5km of your lander

Proper shakedown - 3 points - Drive beyond 2.5km of the lander

Gone drivin' - 5 points - Drive beyond 10km of the lander

Are we there yet? - 10 points - Drive beyond 30km of the lander (awards you the Land Nav. ribbon)

Landing accuracy (would require you to being a small probe capable of landing on its own from orbit - points are not cumulative)

Where are we? - 5 points - Land within 5km of the probe

I can see my probe from here - 10 points - Land within 2km of the probe

I can touch it! - 15 points - Land within 500m of the probe

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnno

Johnno

Posted
Posted
Johnno, any particular reason you're using a Skipper engine instead of the lighter, higher efficiency Poodle on your CM? Just curious if there's something I'm missing

I just use it for its dashing good looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...