BSC: Aeris 4a - AND THE WINNER IS:

[Cruzan]

Yaya~ Happy with my ranking by Cruzan~

It worked very well

Alright, all done. Did we decide on how judges are scoring their own designs? Being ranked on the bottom of 53 contestants seems to be a significant disadvantage, but if other judges have already done it then I'll follow suit.

First, well done! And regarding my score, fair is fair, I knew I was risking a lot by not changing the build technique to stock. Not that it can't be done, as you say, but that round "50 parts" number on the loading list blinded me I guess

Well now that I think about it, while the intakes can be rebuilt using a single cubic strut on each as you say, it would be much more difficult to do the same thing with the VTOL rocket engines without switching them to radials, losing isp... What did you think of those? I haven't seen any comment yet, and they are the most original part of the entry.

Rune. As to voting for your own entry, I put mine ranked 53, like the ones I didn't think were the spirit of the challenge.

The VTOL engines work great!

I know they probably aren't for flying around kerbin, but if they work well enough here then they probably work even better on other planets!

I was bored so I made a stock version for you I didn't rebalance the VTOL engines though as it was just proof of concept. 8 additional parts added overall. 4 cubics for the VTOL setup and 4 cubics for the intakes/reaction wheels.

White Dart 2 Mediafire Download

Edited March 24, 2014 by Cruzan

[Rune]

It worked very well

The VTOL engines work great!

http://i.imgur.com/1tXmHZOh.jpg

I know they probably aren't for flying around kerbin, but if they work well enough here then they probably work even better on other planets!

I was bored so I made a stock version for you I didn't rebalance the VTOL engines though as it was just proof of concept. 8 additional parts added overall. 4 cubics for the VTOL setup and 4 cubics for the intakes/reaction wheels.

White Dart 2 Mediafire Download

Yeah... Now try lifting off from the roof without lighting them up again! It's pretty awesome and surprisingly simple if you spool up the rapier before releasing brakes. I keep meaning to prove it is capable of making orbit after burning half the fuel in making it to the VAB under rocket power.

As to the "stock" version... yeah, I left that as an exercise to the reader, since it involved full part clipping (those cubic struts at least end up completely inside other parts), so it's a building "cheat" in both cases. And the part number OCD, of course. ^^' Glad to see I accomplished the goal I set myself and got you to tinker with it!

Rune. I'm one of the guys that think editor tools should make it into the stock game.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Rune

[BagelRabbit]

Alright, all done. Did we decide on how judges are scoring their own designs? Being ranked on the bottom of 53 contestants seems to be a significant disadvantage, but if other judges have already done it then I'll follow suit.

Here's the ranks:

​http://i.imgur.com/5qBEw1R.png

Eleventh place! That's actually a very good score.

I think I did so well because I approached the challenge with an emphasis on being able to replicate the design. This craft has some very minor part-clipping but would be easy to reproduce. In addition, I think that that my Plover is a good example of how to get to orbit with a very compact and small craft, which beginners seem to need to know. I remember back in 0.16, creating the largest spaceplanes I could and being frustrated when they couldn't even get off the ground.

[Cruzan]

Yeah... Now try lifting off from the roof without lighting them up again! It's pretty awesome and surprisingly simple if you spool up the rapier before releasing brakes. I keep meaning to prove it is capable of making orbit after burning half the fuel in making it to the VAB under rocket power.

As to the "stock" version... yeah, I left that as an exercise to the reader, since it involved full part clipping (those cubic struts at least end up completely inside other parts), so it's a building "cheat" in both cases. And the part number OCD, of course. ^^' Glad to see I accomplished the goal I set myself and got you to tinker with it!

Rune. I'm one of the guys that think editor tools should make it into the stock game.

Ah damn you and your ability to get me to tinker!

The fun part was adjusting the thrust as the fuel practically evaporates out of the tanks haha. I'm not used to such a quick change in mass since most of my VTOL experience is with jets!

Eleventh place! That's actually a very good score.

I think I did so well because I approached the challenge with an emphasis on being able to replicate the design. This craft has some very minor part-clipping but would be easy to reproduce. In addition, I think that that my Plover is a good example of how to get to orbit with a very compact and small craft, which beginners seem to need to know. I remember back in 0.16, creating the largest spaceplanes I could and being frustrated when they couldn't even get off the ground.

Yup! Any design that was easy to replicate scored very well. If you pull up pics of the top 5 to top 10 designs in my rankings that is pretty apparent

[breakthrough]

I think I did so well because I approached the challenge with an emphasis on being able to replicate the design. This craft has some very minor part-clipping but would be easy to reproduce. In addition, I think that that my Plover is a good example of how to get to orbit with a very compact and small craft, which beginners seem to need to know. I remember back in 0.16, creating the largest spaceplanes I could and being frustrated when they couldn't even get off the ground.

Odd, when I was learning spaceplanes I was frustrated because every example I could find was so small that it couldn't be modified to do a non-trivial mission or 1600 part monstrosities that just walking there on EVA would be faster due to the framerate. I had to build my first actually useful science jet completely from scratch, which would have been fine except that it took 30 hours past the point I regretted spending the science on aircraft parts at all.

[Xeldrak]

One last reminder: The primary vote closes in two hours!

[Xeldrak]

The primary vote has been closed! The results can be looked up

here.

The following craft will enter the final vote:

Cruzan - BSC Bolt

Giggleplex777 - R-2 SSTO

Heagar - HOTOL II c 4

MiniMatt - Mallard

O-Doc - Gecko

oo0Filthy0oo - Wholphine Hybrid

WaRi - Peregrino

The final vote will close on march 28th.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Xeldrak

[BagelRabbit]

Can you please give a rundown of where all of the contestants scored? (You know, for those of us who weren't lucky enough to make it to finals... )

[Xeldrak]

Yes, just click the "here" in the post above.

[BagelRabbit]

Agh, how could I not notice?

I'm pretty happy with my 16th place finish. SSTO craft were never my strong suit, and this challenge taught me a lot.

Anyway, I'm really looking forwards to the next BSC challenge!

[Spartwo]

I voted for the Bolt the first time and I'm voting for it again.

[HazelPine]

28th place, hmmmm! Not bad for my 2nd SSTO i made! I guess i focus too much on aesthetics every single time...

[Spartwo]

>Snipity do-da<

Edited March 25, 2014 by Spartwo

[Rune]

Well, I didn't make it close enough to the final list in the end. But, I'm still reasonably happy with a lucky 13th place. As Cruzan called, I think the building tricks got a lot of the judges disinterested.

And why am I still happy? Well, because dissecting the results a bit more, 7 out of 21 judges put my craft last (or close to it at 51), and that's a 30% of people that I conclude didn't think my craft should have competed at all, plus me. Then there are 4 others that put me somewhere in between, and then half the judges put me on the top 20, 8 of them among the top tens (the ones that didn't mind the replicable building tricks, I guess). So I think the building tricks (undoable on a stock version without changing a few parts, I was very fast to admit) were the only thing keeping me from the final round. Beware next BSC, since this was my first!

And huge congrats to the finalists, if I may add!

Edit: We do have some time to vote again, right? I want to re-fly them before casting my vote and such.

Rune. I think I blew my best building skill, though ^^'

Edited March 25, 2014 by Rune

[LordFjord]

20th place overall, not too shabby for the Spacegull. The top few definately earned their places, grats to the finalists!

We'll need some new big building challenge after this.

Maybe in the 100ton+ SSTO category?

[regex]

I'm quite frankly surprised my plane made it to the middle of the pack, it's pretty boring and basic. Next time one of these comes around I'll be sure to refine before making an entry; chalk this one up to excitement or something.

[Cruzan]

Well, I didn't make it close enough to the final list in the end. But, I'm still reasonably happy with a lucky 13th place. As Cruzan called, I think the building tricks got a lot of the judges disinterested.

And why am I still happy? Well, because dissecting the results a bit more, 7 out of 21 judges put my craft last (or close to it at 51), and that's a 30% of people that I conclude didn't think my craft should have competed at all, plus me. Then there are 4 others that put me somewhere in between, and then half the judges put me on the top 20, 8 of them among the top tens (the ones that didn't mind the replicable building tricks, I guess). So I think the building tricks (undoable on a stock version without changing a few parts, I was very fast to admit) were the only thing keeping me from the final round. Beware next BSC, since this was my first!

And huge congrats to the finalists, if I may add!

Edit: We do have some time to vote again, right? I want to re-fly them before casting my vote and such.

Rune. I think I blew my best building skill, though ^^'

It looks like mine got a total of 4 rankings of 53

Ya the White Dart would have been an easy top 5 for me if it didn't use the surface mounting from Editor Tools

Actually looking a little more closely, 5 or 6 of your 50+ rankings, Rune, were from judges who scored using a 1-10, then 53 for the rest type of scoring system. I'd be interested to see how much that actually changes things versus ranking all 1-53. Some mathematician will need to do the groundwork for me there (hides engineering degree).

EDIT: It looks like we have til the 28th to do more refined testing. I'll break my scoring system down a little further to get a more accurate result.

[Ravenchant]

Hmm, 11th place? I'm pleasantly surprised, seeing that my entries' atmospheric behaviour is... sub-par. In fact, it glides as gracefully as a rock with its engine cut off. Cheers to the finalists, may the most deserving one win!

[Heagar]

Congratulations for giggleplex777!

I didn't know that i was mentioned in that final vote.

However Xeldrak, even with your saftey-first try to let only the peoply vote who had commited to this challenge, it seems to be possible to vote in the final stage when you are logged in.

In my case i do nothing, as all others should do.

[Rune]

It looks like mine got a total of 4 rankings of 53

Ya the White Dart would have been an easy top 5 for me if it didn't use the surface mounting from Editor Tools

Actually looking a little more closely, 5 or 6 of your 50+ rankings, Rune, were from judges who scored using a 1-10, then 53 for the rest type of scoring system. I'd be interested to see how much that actually changes things versus ranking all 1-53. Some mathematician will need to do the groundwork for me there (hides engineering degree).

EDIT: It looks like we have til the 28th to do more refined testing. I'll break my scoring system down a little further to get a more accurate result.

Yeah, yeah, I should have used small RCS tanks instead of reaction wheels to mount the intakes, and the horribly sounding radial engines to get the VTOL effect without cubic struts. But beauty before brains!

And as to the scoring system, this poll seems to use such weird methods, just thinking about it makes my head hurt. So I'll leave it to the statisticians and their alchemy, but yeah, it would be nice to see a result that ignores the rankings of "53" (not that there isn't a lot of raw data which I like, but I can't make sense of half of it). Of course the only one that comes to mind is a simple weighted average, and I'm sure someone from economics is just now pointing out how wrong would that be (I know it would be a lot at least).

Rune. Fellow engineer that didn't get in this to win anyway.

[Cruzan]

Yeah, yeah, I should have used small RCS tanks instead of reaction wheels to mount the intakes, and the horribly sounding radial engines to get the VTOL effect without cubic struts. But beauty before brains!

And as to the scoring system, this poll seems to use such weird methods, just thinking about it makes my head hurt. So I'll leave it to the statisticians and their alchemy, but yeah, it would be nice to see a result that ignores the rankings of "53" (not that there isn't a lot of raw data which I like, but I can't make sense of half of it). Of course the only one that comes to mind is a simple weighted average, and I'm sure someone from economics is just now pointing out how wrong would that be (I know it would be a lot at least).

Rune. Fellow engineer that didn't get in this to win anyway.

I exported it to CSV so I could actually understand the rankings. The whole "So and So beat So and So 12 out of 7 times" thing does nothing for me

It's crazy to see just how much Giggle's design is blowing everyone else out of the water:

[ssTALONps]

Wow. 15th place? Twice better than I expected for such an unusual design!

I was originally expecting something like 30+ place

And for the final vote, I'll vote for Mallard.

It incorporates essential design techniques (angle of incidence, abort action groups, etc) and has good handling characteristics.

[Blaster]

While the KR100 did not make it to the finalists, KermaJet thanks the judges for at least considering the vehicle.

In light of this, KermaJet is releasing the KR100C - a modified version of the KR100, with the issues addressed.

Changes: The rear landing gear is spread out thanks to a new undercarriage, the RAPIER engine is reinforced, and the tail can no longer be striken on takeoff or landing. KermaJet has found in testing that the RAPIER engine will dismount from the fuselage on hard landings. Simply reinforcing the engine with strut bracing fixes the issue. KermaJet has also modified the landing gear configuration, to prevent flipping on braking, and to ease taxiing, and slightly rebalanced the RCS thrusters, to reduce translation rolling. KermaJet suggests to flight assist software programmers to find a way to actively balance RCS movements using throttled outputs.

Download

[Cruzan]

While the KR100 did not make it to the finalists, KermaJet thanks the judges for at least considering the vehicle.

In light of this, KermaJet is releasing the KR100C - a modified version of the KR100, with the issues addressed.

Ya I was surprised not to see you make the finals since you scored 2nd on my sheet!

I'll have to test out your new design when I get a chance. I plan to revise my Bolt once this is all over to fix it's overly stable flight characteristics.

[capi3101]

Tell ya what, ThePseudoMonkey, you can have 43rd, I'm comfortable with 44th. I didn't expect to even show, honestly, and I'm not disappointed. Now that the field's properly narrowed down, I might see about jumping in for the final round vote.