Sign in to follow this  
Laie

The Eve Rocks Challenge (v0.90 only)

Recommended Posts

still docking up my craft and trial-and-error-ing my lander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I had the same conclusion that skippers are the best for the lower stages, but my ship become too big on part count and I want to bring a whole base with many buildings, and a plane, rover, etc... so I had to change it to some bigger rocket engines. Its bottom looks similar to your one on the previus picture! :)

ZIV - I do consider you insane - in the best possible way :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I had the same conclusion that skippers are the best for the lower stages,

I understand that part count prevents one from using nothing but Aerospikes, but why would the Skipper be second best?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never managed to pull out an aerospike design of matching size with the same Eve TWR of the skipper design I used for this challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking solely for myself, there are two reasons I'm using the Skippers. First, because I've already done the aerospike/FLT800 thing before, and I wanted to do something new. Second, the Skipper was buffed in 0.24 and is now a very decent engine. 3 tons, 650 kN thrust, a gimbaling engine, and Isp of 320/370. It equals or beats clusters of LVT30s in every category, and loses to aerospike clusters only in Isp. Part count and cost go way down, in exchange for some efficiency. My lander is 200 tons, but should be pretty dang flyable and non-laggy.

Edited by Norcalplanner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All :)

Craft File: "Kethane Mini Eve Lander"

KSP 0.25, 159227 KerboDollars, 208 parts, 17.407 Tons at launch from Kerbin, and 67 parts, 5.366 Tons Ready to takeoff from Eve Sea Level...

Mods Used: Kethane, MechJeb2.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

and the YouTube Video of the Lander test version:

I love Kethane xD

Edited by astrobond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISP is 320 for all big engines. Whether it goes up to 360 or 370 hardly matters for an early stage. The mainsail has a better TWR than the skipper, and the quad cluster is better still.

Personally, I'm going with the Liquid Fuel Boosters this time (ISP be damned); mostly because my first design had lots of trouble with engines breaking off, not only on landing, but every time I switched between vessels. The LFRB tank-with-engine should remedy this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laie, I don't disagree with anything you've said. My initial design this time around used Mainsails, and the big KerboDyne engines are great - they're featured on the lifter stage of my ship. The Skippers just sort of hit the sweet spot for how big my rocket ended up being. I'll know shortly whether it was a good choice or not. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like a smart solution, but, well, how shall I put this... you're aware that the lifter should still work if you removed all non-stock parts, are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That looks like a smart solution, but, well, how shall I put this... you're aware that the lifter should still work if you removed all non-stock parts, are you?

Ooops sorry, I thought that as you said it was possible to refuel on Gilly, why not directly on Eve ? and I had these ship ready to use :)

But now I realize that the challenge need a stock ship !

I'll try to do that... not so easy than with Kethane.... lol ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ooops sorry, I thought that as you said it was possible to refuel on Gilly, why not directly on Eve ? and I had these ship ready to use :)

But now I realize that the challenge need a stock ship !

I'll try to do that... not so easy than with Kethane.... lol ;)

I don't know how Kethane works. If it is a special kind of fuel that requires special Kethane-burning engines, then this option is pretty much useless. I expected that it would be possible to refuel a stock craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kethane's turbines work like jets but function in Eve's atmosphere, I'd think they're outside the scope of this challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how Kethane works. If it is a special kind of fuel that requires special Kethane-burning engines, then this option is pretty much useless. I expected that it would be possible to refuel a stock craft.

Yes you can refuel stock craft with converted Kethane in Fuel and Oxidizer.

That could be a good idea to bring an empty "light" ship near Gilly and refuel before landing on Eve...

But i think that the "stock" challenge is hard also because of the fuel quantity you need to bring on Eve.

So this challenge must stay as is :)

BTW Kethane Gameplay is very different than Stock Gameplay, maybe a separate Kethane Eve Rocks Challenge ?

(sorry for the bad English, i hope you understand what i mean, i'm from France... xD )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand that part count prevents one from using nothing but Aerospikes, but why would the Skipper be second best?

I wanted to say aerospike in my comment but wrote skipper accidentally. So aerospikes are the best for lower stages, but you need tons of them to have an above one TWR. And you have to stage a lot of them quickly so I decided to go with stronger engines and stage fuel tanks only at the beginning... the less engines one has to lift and the more time one engines used the better...

Edited by Ziv
missing a word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kethane is a new fuel type. The planet need to be scanned for Kethane and if you land on a kethane spot you can drill and it will fill up the Kethane tanks (the drill needs only electricity).

Then with a converter part you can convert Kethane to any kind of fuel.

Some month ago I left Eve with a Kethane Jet too, it makes leaving Eve reasonably easy as astrobond's pictures show.

By the way I will use Kethane in my mission too, but only for my atmospheric explorer plane. But my Eve Crew Return Vehicle will go there and land refueled.

This raises a question anyway: If I use some fuel to land without parachutes and then refuel it back then is it within the rules? Personally I would not like that because landing an empty return rocket would be far more easier. I already spent a lot of time broking down the engines or watching as the weight of the fuel tears apart my rocket.

And allowing the refueling of the return rocket will mean most of the entries will use some refueling method so the Challenge would bend into that way.

Edited by Ziv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whew, mission success.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Starting: 3211 tons, 546 parts.

Eve lander: about 351 tons.

Some of the pictures are from separate saves, I didn't take photos of every run. And missed a few on the actual run, these are the best looking ones.

Some highlights of the mission.

1. I had to use MJ for some of the maneuver planning and Kerbin ascent.

2. I had to re-load the landing so many times. I needed to land at or above 1800m, and it took a lot of loading to get anywhere near that. I ended up landing at about 1900m for my return run.

3. I didn't plan on having that extra fuel tank when I landed. And I didn't think I would be able to fly with it still attached. Turns out I could fly with it, and I desperately needed the delta V because...

4. I had to get out and push to obtain orbit! I'm serious, my last stage wasn't enough to get me into orbit. So Bill left the engine running, then got out and pushed.

5. I returned a lot of science. Even though it was in sandbox mode.

-GRAVMAX readings from high and low in space.

-Temperature readings from low in space, high in atmosphere, flying, and landed.

-Atmospheric scans from high in atmosphere, flying, and landed

-A seismic reading from the surface.

-Crew report from landed, and surface.

-Surface sample.

Edited by Zipmafia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some of the pictures are from separate saves, I didn't take photos of every run. And missed a few on the actual run, these are the best looking ones.

I agree on the looks -- that sunrise sure is beautiful. But your vessel is only a black patch against the background for most of the time.

Is that six skippers around a mainsail, staged in twos? And the mainsail carrying like 60 tons? That's a low-TWR, long burn rocket. Yet the next picture shows you without the skippers after 2 minutes... and at 10km, which would require a much better TWR than you had. Probably nothing worse than pictures from different attempts, but still. It doesn't add up.

As far as I'm concerned, a copy of the craft file will do and I'll try myself. For the sake of the general public, I'd prefer if you could do that again in daylight with the resource panel open. And as you happen to carry around mechjeb, some more data wouldn't be amiss, either (esp. TWR/thrust/mass - the default "vessel info" panel). Either of the two will do, but I can't accept your submission as it stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This raises a question anyway: If I use some fuel to land without parachutes and then refuel it back then is it within the rules? Personally I would not like that because landing an empty return rocket would be far more easier.

Hmmm. And then there's Slashy who would land an empty rocket together with several tanker-rovers (which I thought to be nifty, if expensive). I think I'll leave this unresolved for a while, lets see if it becomes an actual problem.

Edit to add: I've seen lots and lots of landing gear designs, also contraptions that I'd never have thought of. I don't see why landing an empty vessel would be any more exploity than (say) a landing gear made of 200 cubic struts.

Edited by Laie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured that you might have some more requirements for me to accept my entry, I didn't even think about the ship being a silhouette, I'm just so mesmerized by those sunrises. Sorry.

I kept forgetting to take screenshots with every attempt, so I just compiled the good ones from every attempt. It was all the same craft. I am sure that the first five, and every shot from eve orbit on was from the completed run. I had to load alot to get it just right, so I have no idea which others where from the completed run.

I actually never payed attention to the engine names, but yeah, I think it is like you said. I would have gone with the new massive engine, but it was too heavy to lift it and it's fuel from Kerbin.

I will try to do this challenge again in the daylight so that the community can actually see what is going on, but until then here is the craft file.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tj6etrd579tfkyu/Eve%20Return%20Craft%20IV.craft?dl=0

You might have to fix some of the staging for the parachutes, like I said, I wasn't expecting to land with the extra fuel tank.

You are going to need to assist the parachutes on touch down, if you let it slam it breaks the decouples for the asparagus staging.

It needs to land at or above 1800m otherwise your kerbal isn't coming home.

Oh yeah, don't forget to get out and push into orbit, that was a lot of fun.

In any case, I understand you wanting more evidence about completion. Just know that cheating is not my thing, I don't feel accomplished unless It's all me.

I have no idea what your experience is, but I had to use all of mine to make it home. Good luck flying this beast, it took me days to accomplish.

It isn't about finding loopholes, I MADE IT BACK!!!! YAY!! :D

Edited by Zipmafia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, my entry.

Mods used: MechJeb (I think that's it).

-KSP version 0.25

-Weight and part counts are in the album.

-Took me two attempts to get it right. First attempt worked OK, but it was plagued by half a dozen tiny problems (one of which required the installation of a mod to solve) that convinced me to start the mission over and improve on my original design.

-The only things that I think could really be improved are the landing site (Not close enough to the ocean. Maybe just add a rover instead) and Eve transfer, which was remarkably inefficient. Maybe take out a few parachutes and landing legs. Otherwise, I think that my mission is pretty well designed.

Javascript is disabled. View full album
Edited by Vaporo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I figured that you might have some more requirements for me to accept my entry, I didn't even think about the ship being a silhouette, I'm just so mesmerized by those sunrises.

Next time, bring a rover or something and explore the countryside. Getting stuff to Eve is cheap, and the high G and gentle slopes make for excellent rover terrain. You can't make a campfire in KSP, but one can still move to a hill or high dune and enjoy the sunset from there. I have to admit that I'm a bit disappointed about everyone playing strictly to the challenge so far, scooping up their soil sample and gone in sixty seconds. I think you've been the first to bring additional science equipment.

Your craft is entirely Eve-capable -- and a simple, straightforward design to boot. With a more conventional landing gear and refueling in space, the whole mission could be done in under 200 parts. Not bad, not bad at all!

By the way: the tiny radial engines have no free field of fire: they use fuel but produce no thrust until the stages below them are gone -- and by that time, their thrust is no longer needed until the core runs out. You could therefore replace the radials with any other type of engine. I landed at 3500m and managed to reach orbit on the first try. High ground helps, and I didn't activate the tiny engines until the mainsail was gone. Had 600m/s of rocket fuel left in orbit.

Congratulations, you completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Level 1!

Why did you put decouplers at the tips of your landing gear, by the way?

Edited by Laie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All right, my entry.

That whole thing balanced on top of two Mk1 pods sure looks eerie. Coming to think of it, why two pods? Just curious -- whatever your reasons, this is a nice mission well done.

Congratulations, you completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Level 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That whole thing balanced on top of two Mk1 pods sure looks eerie. Coming to think of it, why two pods? Just curious -- whatever your reasons, this is a nice mission well done.

I couldn't find a decent looking, non-part clipping way to hold the Eve return stage directly over the center of thrust without compromising the integrity of the lander. So, I figured I'd just bring along two and keep myself balanced the stupid way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this would be relatively easy if I minimize the Eve ascent stage and just lift it from Kerbin on jet engines. But, Jeesus, Eve stage quickly grew to 300t. That's insane!

@Vaporo: your ship looks scary! Did you turn off pad destruction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your ship looks scary! Did you turn off pad destruction?

Yep. I use indestructible facilities for most of my sandbox saves. And why does everyone think my ship is scary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this