Lithobrake! Challenge

[Tobbzzzz]

Hello!

I just worked out a challenge , mainly focused on the ''Unlimited Fuel'' debug.

CHALLENGE!

- Highest crash speed wins.

RULES!

- No cheaty engines or similar stuff, only pure stock.

- No mods/plugins that remove/change air resistances.

- Command pod most survive.

ENTRY!

-Submit your speed and a photo of the vessel to enter.

- Score is calculated in this way:

X = basic score

Y = Parts that survived.

X+Y= SCORE

Have fun lithobraking!

Edited August 18, 2014 by Tobbzzzz

[whistlehead]

I feel like highest survived crash speed might make more a more interesting lithobraking challenge

[Tobbzzzz]

I feel like highest survived crash speed might make more a more interesting lithobraking challenge

Indeed. Will edit that in.

[kStrout]

Can you have parts of your craft explode, but then the main craft stay alive?

[Endersmens]

So...what's the point of this challenge? To take a screenshot right before impact at high speeds? Seems a bit...redundant. There's no real challenge. Like whistlehead suggested, changing the rules to state that you must survive the lithobraking would make it a challenge. With a screenshot before lithobraking, hopefully during, and after, showing damages. Maybe make the scoring system as (speed of impact-# of parts lost)

You can check the part count by going into map view, and clicking the little vessel tab on the right of the screen. Doing this before, and after lithobraking would show you how many parts were lost. (Screenshots of this might be needed for proof)

So, say i submit one. I take a screenshot of me free falling towards the Mun at 20 m/s. I take one in map view showing that my litho-lander is composed of 20 parts. I take a screenshot of the impact, and another afterwords. Then i take a screenshot of the "vessels" tab after impact, and say my engine blew up and i was left with 19 parts. My score would be (20-1)=19. losing no parts would be considered a perfect score, leaving your final score as the speed of impact.

now, an exploit of this may be that someone could impact at 1,000 m/s, and lose all parts of a 1 part vessel and be left with a really high score. So another rule may be that the Command pod must survive. Maybe even that 50% of the vessel must survive. Lots of different rules you could choose from. If you want me to help you with more rules than i would be more than willing.

[thereaverofdarkness]

This is pretty similar to my Maximum Impact Velocity challenge, except for the surviving part. Nobody on mine ever did that successfully.

[Endersmens]

tobbzzzz, I think instead of taking the score as velocity + Parts survived, it should be velocity - parts lost.

The reason is, i can make a 1000 part vessel and lost 100 parts and get a really high score. Or, instead of gaining 900 points, i would lose 100. This would discourage massive part counts and taking advantage of it

[dryer_lint]

I used infinite fuel to burn straight toward the Mun and crash a probe into it at something like 5000 m/s. (I forget the speed, but it was fast enough for the whole trip to take only 15 minutes) The probe crashed so hard I went a little bit under the terrain.

Does that count?

[EdFred]

And what is x? A basic score of what? 3? 17? Pi squared divided by e^6.4?

I assume X is the impact velocity,

You may want to go with x * y for the score - because...

I can crash something at 20,000m/s with no parts surviving, and score 20,000 But if I crash something at 19998 and one part survives I only score 19,999. I would think that the second one should be higher on the leader board.

Of course, I could build a 1,200 cubic strut unit crashed at 70m/s and rack up a score of 84,000....

Sooooooo, maybe your scoring system needs to be modified a bit.

Edited August 18, 2014 by EdFred

[Endersmens]

I still think X - Y being Velocity - Parts lost would be the best scoring system, with the "command pod must survive" rule. That seems to be the most fair in terms of least loopholes

[ihtoit]

hm... hint: stock landing gear is indestructible.

I have something from an earlier challenge that is a: stock b: manned and c: performs as required, impacting at something like 550m/s and only losing one part.

The trick is to perform a slow ballistic descent and make sure you're rotating with the body when you hit.

[EdFred]

Stock landing gear is NOT indestructible. I have destroyed many a landing gear.

[ihtoit]

use angle snap, it is extremely difficult to break it off a stock mount such as a mk.i lander can and for all practical purposes, impossible to destroy. I use them for Munar lithobrakers all the time.

[Endersmens]

So I have another question, by lithobraking, you don't mean we have to stop on the surface right? Cause i was thinking of using landing gear, pointing the direction I am orbiting, and just skimming the surface and bouncing off. A "touch and go" basically. Would that count?

[battlefieldaces]

Lithobraking is ground only, as its name states. IMO skimming is not valid

[ihtoit]

skimming is valid, that's how one lithobrakes (Luna probes, for a RL example). Plowing into the dirt at right angles at orbital velocity is pretty much guaranteed destruction, I don't care what planet you're orbiting.

[battlefieldaces]

Still, there are no parts that could plow into the water at about 200m/s and survive, no matter the angle. I remember Scott Manley when he was using air scoops to make a hydroplane. The scoops have 80m/s impact resistance, but in the video they got destroyed at around 100m/s. So yea, making something that could survive more than 200m/s will go above 100 or 150 parts.

[ihtoit]

hydrobraking in KSP is invariably fatal, I don't know why, water is a little bit softer than... rock.

(I seem to remember one of the answers to my SEAL challenge being a hydroplane that made the 30-someodd-km return trip from the Island shore to KSC Peninsula high tide mark in a little under three minutes. That's fast. I think the guy used wing boards.)

Holy brown stuff on a stick, I actually found my lithobraker! Here it is: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/77385-Parachuteless-Return?p=1109109&viewfull=1#post1109109

Edited August 24, 2014 by ihtoit

[Endersmens]

Lithobraking is ground only, as its name states. IMO skimming is not valid

Ground only? "skimming" would refer to "skimming" the ground. Your point is invalid. I actually don't even understand your point.

From Wikipedia: Lithobraking is a landing technique used by unmanned space vehicles to safely reach the surface of a celestial body while reducing landing speed by impact with the body's surface....Incoming angles are made shallow enough such that the impact has the characteristic of a glancing blow, rather than a direct impact on the surface..." Check it out here.