The ULTIMATE Challenge for Ion Power...

[Chiboko]

You underestimate the power of decoupler launches

[dryer_lint]

How about we ram the ion engines into each other, creating explosions to propel the asteroid? It's technically mostly ion-powered.

[Werwolf]

First and foremost, this is not a challenge which I am posting here. I am simply speculating something. Read on, friend, to see my newest crazy idea...

What if... one landed an asteroid, at the KSC, with ONLY ION ENGINES?!?! Could it be done? No parachutes, just ions... post your thoughts.

No, it is impossible. TWS of less than 1 on the Ion engine in Kerbin's atmosphere. I see people talking about strut crumple zones, etc, but the OP CLEARLY states Ion engines ONLY. No, it's impossible.

[Kenken244]

as I recall, the largest asteroids actually have enough impact resistance to survive a fall into kerbin without any thrust at all. so this should be trivial.

[GoSlash27]

It'd depend on what you consider a "landing".

[Epthelyn]

No, it is impossible. TWS of less than 1 on the Ion engine in Kerbin's atmosphere. I see people talking about strut crumple zones, etc, but the OP CLEARLY states Ion engines ONLY. No, it's impossible.

If you're going to take it that literally then you might as well disregard xenon tanks as well. Then it's impossible without the debug menu.

However, the OP only prevents a means of slowing down that isn't ion engines, i.e. all other engines and parachutes.

Besides, why not have a crumple zone consisting entirely of ion engines?

[KvickFlygarn87]

I think the dev mentions that ion engine and LV-1will have a boost in 0.24.

Nope, they had a buff in .23.5

[sndrtj]

I'd actually find it a shame if ion engines were to get yet another buff. They are already way overpowered compared to the real thing. I'd like it more if we could warp while ion engines are on. They are supposed to be on for months/years.

[NERVAfan]

Most of the craft would just end up being a mash-up of gas containers, solar panels and batteries. Anything left would be engines. And the more mass you take up with utilities, the more engines you need; the more engines you need, the more utilities you need.

The smallest solar panel and battery are massless.

[horndgmium]

I'd actually find it a shame if ion engines were to get yet another buff. They are already way overpowered compared to the real thing. I'd like it more if we could warp while ion engines are on. They are supposed to be on for months/years.

Exactly how many days straight real time do you plan on burning ion engines in order to make maneuvers?

[Tsevion]

Well... it's not exactly ions, but this video includes me landing an asteroid safely at KSC with neither engines nor parachutes, start at timestamp 4:27

[CavemanNinja]

To sum this up, because adding more ion engines would only add weight and because ion engines have a TWR of below one, the most efficient and effective design for an ion powered asteroid-lander would be a single ion engine and a couple rtgs rigged to the bottom, which burning from high enough continually should give enough thrust to let the asteroid absorb the impact.

But then again, that's more of a lithobraking than a landing, right?

[Starwhip]

I get the feeling that I might actually start up a challenge based on this.

But I'm not entirely sure what it would be about. Because asteroids can fall from orbit and still survive, so I'd have to do something about that. Perhaps if an attached Kerbal dies, you fail?

I'll think about it.