jonatron5

What started as me just screwing around before going to bed one night turned into a pretty neat little project. The goal of this is to simulate something like the Nazis V-1 or V-2. To build an uncontrolled ballistic missile and work with it to try to hit given targets at range by adjusting the vehicle itself and the launch gantry angle. Here is my personal attempt: unfortunately I had to mute my audio because my music I was listening to got recorded and I didn't want copyright police on me about. Note I think I could have done better but I spent more hours doing this then I would like to admit, and it was late so this is what I got Rules: No Torque generating bodies (Disable torque is ok) All control surfaces must be locked and rigid in flight No inputs from the user can be accepted post launch You must declare a target ahead of time, by placing a probe or something there for accuracy scoring It seems most of these sort of challenges have some sort of scoring system to make things more interesting I haven't thought too very hard about it yet, but I will tentatively say we will use this method [(Ground Distance: KM) X( Payload: Tons)] / (1/Distance from target: Meters) Someone check the math of my formula here, I think I have it setup reasonably, I think with this current setup It might preferentially favor long distances over heavy payloads as its easier to go further than it is to make a bigger payload in the game, If this becomes the case I might add a modifier like (Ground Distance) X (.5). IM also hesitant about how heavily I incorporated accuracy, However if you cant hit the target you don't have a good weapon.

I know 1.0 is going to nuke all my work with spaceplanes. But in the mean while im still fidiling with this thing. I really like the idea of putting the center of mass dead center of the cargo bay. But i will have to do a complete redesign to manage that becuase my center of lift has to be there too. Also a comment on these insanly heavy mk.3 parts, Is it normal to have like 8 jet engines to get the thing off the ground? I really feel wastefull pitting all those engines on the thing but i consistantly land liquid fuel rich. Away from my pc till monday ill give weight and effective payload then and you guys can tell me if im being horribly ineffecient or not

Any guesses as to when well see an release?

Ive finally gotten to the point where i consider myself gairly competent in ssto designs. Even chalking up a few interplanetary ones. However without a doubt what plagues me is using them as lift vehicles. To bring cargo to orbit. The other day i finally got my first mk3 ssto out of design and i honestly think i way over built it compared to its cargo capcity.(specs to come soon) Also im strugiling to get the craft ballanced both during launch and reentry as my cargobay is near the rear of the ship. So while i do have a working solution im looking to make it even better.

No idea if this is dead or not but really sounds fun email me if its alive. I will volunteer for any role I have 1000 ksp hours. So im pretty versatile. [email protected]

As a personal challange I intend to take kerballing to the extreme ie im going to be using my funds to authorize constructions maintaince of space vehicles so for example if I have 3 shuttles ready to go at any time and I loose one on reentry then I will force my self to work with only the two. The main thing this is going to do is force me to wait longer between launches. Anyway I digress. Im looking for mods that I can incorporate to help me achieve this role play and still have fun. Mods I know I will use: Mechanical Jeb navyfishes docking mod. The kerbal beautification pack One of the fairing mods (suggest one) kerbal alarm clock Mods im considering: FAR Infernal robotics. remote tech. better then starting manned. inhanced netball Kerbal attachment system Feel free to suggest mods that arnt on this list or encourage me to use the ones ive listed as considering As a side note ive had some bad experinces with farram aerospace. Everyone says its way better then stock aerodynamics but anytime I use fairing my rockets all ways invert or sway or do something redicuouls and in my mind realistically a fairing is a requirement.

I would like to submit myself for any position available. I have about 1000 ksp hours and ive done everything and im bored. so cheers

And sorry about the poor spelling and poor formatting this is being typed on a phone with an overzealous auto correct. And as to the question about op mods and orion nuclear launch systems I wpuld have to say no. Anything thats not in the cloud of reasonability like b9 far spaceplane plus fairings etc .

Ok I suppose there does need to be some limitation on infiniglide. Not sure how to do that rules was the than to say no infiniglide. On the good Side though I've got the scoring system figured out and I will post it when I get home (on lunch break now) However I feel the need to warn that the very nature of this challange makes scoring pretty arbitrary. So I request anyone who makes an entry also give a personal 1-10 score for creativity on all other entrants. 1being a rip off copy from someone else 10 being not only an original designer but one that looks good works Bette then expected and there is clear evidence of painstaking attention to details.

I think Marvin fox gets major points for bringing this rephrasing to the forums. And yes ill even allow exploits like this ladder climbing thing. Just make your own entry for it

Also chengong. I would like to clear if for future reference while technically also fine your four cargo planes landed under parachute I guess thats technichally a glideslope but not what I had in mind lol. I ment landing like a plane. As I said due to my failure to clearify your score will stand as it is. All future applicants must abide by these new rules though

That would be most impressive and worth a ton of points. Also sorry about my absence guys I will look back at your previous entry chengong and review it, to answer your question.I kinda saw the mini space planes as more of a payload then actual space craft. So by technicality your score does stand. However I dont want this devolving into a mini glider challenge its about bringing multiple big ships to orbit

Due to a recent feul shortage that seems as if it may last a Long time ksp engineers are considering alternative methods of fueling there reusable space craft. This is primarily to be an excersice in creativity. The obvious solutions are to use srbs or ion engines. And those certainly meet the requirements. But as we all know they are not the only means of propulsion. (Mainsails when inverted make great cannons) Any mods you want May be used so long as they arnt op. So fair and b allanced mods like b9 far spaceplane plus etc. Getting to orbit isn't nessisary as points will be awarded in a sepereate category for distance traveled and height achieved for non orbital designs. Other than the aforementioned,Scoring will be based on whether or not successful orbit was achieved. And the more the crazy propulsion method the higher the Score rewarded. (Still work in out rhe exact numbers) Also anyone who manages to construct an ssto under these rules will receive a large point boost. as will every ton of payload to orbit. Liquid fuel may be used to power the mechanism but not the actual vessel. So cannons are fine. Or say for example a liquid powered rocket sled that releases the vessel. Vessels Mus leave the ground so making a rover amd going for a drive to score "distance" points sadly doesnt count

Hey chengon as first entrant your defiantly in the lead. Only thing I have to fault is your mini space planes cant land on there own they parachute down. put wheels on them and land them one at a time on a glide slope and ill count them. Other then that you've got a solid score with two for sure spaceplanes into orbit.

Apologies for not clarifying. The - is a minus so its a negative 20 pts for every day the mission takes. So you have to ballance your planetary visits vs the time it takes. And yes I know the 25% thing is very arbitrary and he ive been to jool several times rhe only reason i suggested it is becuase it has an atmosphere. I do not reccomend it unless you just want to show off. And the original launch vehicle is purely an orbital delivery platform. The second plane has to be atmospherically stable in your atmosphere of choice.and capable of getting there by itself

(Flavor text) Dear fellow kerbaengineers, it is with great pride that I can announce to you today the new flight directive program. While there qhere those who laughed and said it couldn't be done we here at kerbanotics think other wise. In short, it is universally agreed that an ssto is many times more efficient then rockets. Even Bettre if the ssto can deliver a payload besides fuel and crew. So according to our advanced algorithms two s sstos ought to be approximately 2.0times as efficient as a single one. (Description starts here) This is a slight twist on the interplanetary ssto. The main challange here being to have an ssto deliver another spaceplane to orbit and have the original spaceplane being capable of returning to ksp safely (on glideslope) The space plane payload that was delivered to orbit should be designed to function withen the confines of any body with an atmosphere duna jool laythe or eve. However it has to be able to get there under its own power cruise down to at least a quarter of the way into the atmosphere then climb back to orbit and back To kerbin. Rules. All vessels Must be manned no hyper edit or cheating gliching or debugging (other rule bending is encouraged) Must have atleast one spaceplane piggyback to lko Primary spaceplane Must have suffiecent aerodynamic design to land at ksc after detaching a huge payload. (Other plane) Fuel ballancing is allowed but dont exploit it. only balanced mods may be used ie b9 kw rockets Machine is allowed Scoring: (Got to orbit) 500 pts (Pack it deep)100pts for ever ton of mass space plane 1 delivers to lko orbit. (Look ma no hands) 100 pts land completely on a glide slope no power after initial de orbit. ( the scenic route) 200 pts for ever planetary body visited.flybys count (Time is money) - 20 pts for every day the mission lasts. (Precision engineered) 10 pts for every 100meters below "25%" atnospheric atmosphere entry of target planet (No plane left behind) 100 pts for relaunching the original spaceplane docking with the travel plane and land in at ksc with said plane. (Planeception) Heres where most of your points will come from. And where the challenge gets intresting. The number of total spaceplane you have as measured by me will be that X your (got to orbit score) so entrant number 1has a spaceplane that delivers a spaceplane to orbit. That spaceplane then somewhere along the way releases another spaceplane wich releases another. Plane count x4 so 500 x4 is 2000 pts. I define spaceplane as having at least a single cockpit and bwing able to land at ksc either on its own power or gliding. Good luck have fun! So you guys know I am actually attempting this myself. I can confirm its not impossible at all. I havent gotten my entry where I want it yet and I was really excited to get rhis challenge up for you guys. As I am new im open to any and all criticisms

Ok guys just like to say I have not abandoned you im still working on my attempt myself. And I can confirm it is possible. It just is going to be a hell of a lot harder than I thought. I have so far put 1 orange tank on the surface of eloo safely. I have to go back to the drawing board for a redesign though as im about out of places to ADD MAOR BOOSTERS. I hate to do it but I might have to resort to an asparagus monster. Anyway I would also like to note that there is an extra 500 point reward to anyone who does this with a spaceplane. And if it helps get you guys intrested in the challange I have a friend whose drawing up badge designs right now.

valid points. I can rework the scoring system I will also be attempting my challenge as per the rules. Im certain its possible. just goanna be a big ship

Jebbidah has come up with a theory! The other kebalscientists dont see how it could possibly work but it is comming from jeb so it has to work right? Jebs idea is that the natural radiation and cosmic rays in space are ionizing the fuel in all his rockets so that it becomes More powerfull. The nature of these rays has never been noticed before becuase they increase in strength inversely proportional to the distance from the sun (something about electrogravimetric interference) As is typical kerbal fashion Without any scientific data whatsoever, KSP has elected to test this theory of his. and send at least one full orange tank to the surface of eeloo and return it to kerbin in one peice. RULES STOCK Parts only ( no op big rockets) Ferram aerospace is allowed Mechjeb is ok. But bonus points for not using) Must be manned Must have an actually orange tank land on eeloo no equivalent Ship must be launched in one peice no orbital construction. Scoring Mission accomplished +1000 points Dead weight(do not consume any of the orange tanks fuel dont pump fuel into or out of it)+ 500 points. Simplicity is best -2 points for part on the ship Efficiency is better-10 points for every stage on the ship MORE GASS+ 500 points for every ton of fuel extra brought to eeloo surface and back this scales with weight i.e. .5 ton extra is + 50 points

Guys! this is a simple case of thinking outside tthe box heres my entry no mods 100% legit. seeing as how all planets in the game are spheircal bodies and the circumference of a sphereical body is purely dependant on ones lattitude along it so logically by extension I would like to point out no where in the rules is it sepecified that this must be done around the equitorial circumfrerance. Its bending the rules a little but it works in my book

Hey I was thinking. People dont start busisnesses just to pay for the upkeep on them. They start them to earn money. So I would immagine our ticketsalso need to include enough buffer room to not only pay for the plane but make some profit on it assuming say a 30 year lifetime on the things compound that with the travel time it takes and the waiting of phaseangles for maximum efficiency and everyones ticket cost just doubled at least

Ok I messed around with this yesterday and its not near as bad as I thought. Im looking at two different designs right now. One ssto the other is a shuttle style. Im having trouble pushing the ssto from highspeed airbreather into orbit. So I might try the shuttle and assume the drop tanks are resuable.

Now im a veteran ksp player here and I love tackling ssto and resuable vehicles. But without gimbiling those shuttle engines I dont see how you ballance theshuttle on the lfos. I mean the shuttle screwd the center of mass wayoff the center of thrust. So you have to counter that exactly with the correct ammount of offcenter thryst on the shuttle engines wich means since your throttle is on your main engines too. You must be running it full throttle and using the thrust limiter to steer it bkac on track? Am I right or is there another trick to it?

Give us b9 and ill have it done in a week. Becuase its going to be very hard without it

Seems like most peopel are avoiding this challenge. Ill try it once I get back from work. My plan is for an insanly light ssto and put like 5 ion engines on the back. Ittl be slow but it ought to get there. Reserve me a spot on the leaderboards lol