MadChris48

Your answer lies within.

I get this is a piloting challenge first (didn't you notice my sleek flight profile?) I totally understand it can be considered anywhere between a 'tweak' to straight up 'removing parts'. However, my arugment would be that the challenge is for least LF used to get to orbit, and OP did give some tweaking leeway; which, IMO, removing the unused oxidizer to reach said orbit is 'tweaking' and not re-design of the vessel (technically, I'm not removing parts as part count does not change). Up to OP in the end, just thought I'd bring a new angle to the challenge.

yeah, wasn't sure it would, and was leaning toward probably not; but its worth a shot. thanks for the clever points

Not sure if this will count, but I haven't seen anyone try this yet. Since this challenge is most left over LF in orbit I maximized my payload as such. There is a fair amount of oxidizer left over from a fully fuel laden vessel. However, if you take all the oxidizer out of the last stage, you can get to the orbit on the swivel alone, top tank full of LF, with some to spare. Here's my possibly legit submission. Manual launch, 198 LF remaining.

I was just about to post this too. from 90th to 17th. WOOT!

bless you.

I mean like radially mounted engines angling so far as to torch the tank they are attached to.

I wonder if that's enough range of motion that a funkily designed ship could gimbal far enough to blow itself up.

I use them all the time. In fact, almost never launch without them. Then again, I usually do pretty aggressive launches, turning early and pushing the limits of speed and heat. I'd really like to see an inter-stage fairing, it would really open up the building design options.

OK, after cantab pointed out some deficiencies in the rule set, they have since been revised (thanks!). I hope this makes it a little more flexible and flavorful of a challenge. Let's see where this goes, and if any further refinement of rules is needed I'm open to suggestion. Thanks for the input, now let's get this party started!

I see. As this is meant to be simple as possible to start, I'll edit the wording to be LF/LOX only for now. Im out of town for the day but may expand this to include other fuels in the future. Thanks for your input.

Meh. see Rule #2. Once you start allowing mods people's physics get altered and consistency (and fairness) gets out of whack. I'd like to avoid that stuff all together.

Fuel Sipper Challenge I've been wanting to come up with my own challenge for a while and after doing the Flight School Challenge and seeing the efficiencies of participants vary, I wondered how little fuel one could send a kerbal into orbit with. I'm a minimalist and all about efficiency, so this was right up my alley; hence, this challenge was born. Your Mission: Design a vehicle to get a single kerbal to a 100km x 100km orbit while consuming the least amount of fuel (in kgs) to do so. Your Kerbal does not have to return. This is an exercise in design efficiency and piloting prowess. Rules: 1. Stock parts, normal difficulty settings 2. No gameplay/physics altering mods (visual and informational mods ok) 3. No exploits or 'cheaty' (Wheaton-y) stuff, no clipping of functional parts (fuel tanks, engines) 4. Must have 1 Kerbal on board. 5. Must have at least 1 screenshot of vehicle on runway/launch pad with the resource tab open, and 1 screenshot showing the craft in a 100kmx100km orbit with the resource tab open. 7. Once in orbit, subtract any remaining fuel from your starting amount to get the total consumed for each fuel type. (be sure to subtract the exact amount remaining, I have a feeling tenths and hundredths of fuel will make a difference between scores.) 8. UPDATE: You can use any propellant you like. Your score is the total mass of all propellant spent to reach orbit. Multiply total fuel spent by it's appropriate mass. [TABLE=class: grid, width: 200, align: left] [TR] [TD]LF & LOX[/TD] [TD]5kg/unit[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Solid Fuel[/TD] [TD]7.5kg/unit[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Monoprop[/TD] [TD]4kg/unit[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Xenon[/TD] [TD]0.1kg/unit[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Leaderboard: [TABLE=width: 700, align: left] [TR] [TD=align: center]Name [/TD] [TD=align: center]LF Used[/TD] [TD=align: center]LOX Used[/TD] [TD=align: center]Solid Fuel Used[/TD] [TD=align: center]Xenon Used[/TD] [TD=align: center]Monoprop Used[/TD] [TD=align: center]Total Fuel Mass Spent[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center]Foxster[/TD] [TD=align: center]176.12[/TD] [TD=align: center]124.37[/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center]1502.45 kg[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center]MadChris48[/TD] [TD=align: center]213.31[/TD] [TD=align: center]138.85[/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center]1760.8 kg[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [TD=align: center][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Happy Flying!

This thread makes me so giddy. You guys have done awesome work here. Val, your design is the shiz, over the top. 4k dV is ridiculous for <15 ton SSTO. Way to go, pushing the limits, maximizing. I applaud you! So, thanks for being kick-ass kerbonauts.

You can use 4x symmetry to build asparagus, you just have to be diligent in correcting the staging. - - - Updated - - - After DLing and checking them out, the one that works is just fine. Pecan is right that you don't need the small fuel lines between the tanks in each stack. Otherwise your working model does just that... it works! The design that doesn't work needs the fuel lines removed from the boosters to the main tank, except for the last stack to be jettisoned (again, like Pecan said). Good luck on your design!

super awesome. great work!

Here is my entry. I had a couple better attempts (fuel wise) but this was the only one that I hit the runway with. Managed a 83km x 77km orbit using 631 LF / 396 LOX. Punching through the super-sonic barrier can be tricky to do it efficiently. I did get 1557m/s out of the Rapier before having to switch to closed cycle mode, so that's sweet.

First time recording a session. enjoy!

Here's my entry. My first video too. Enjoy!

Totally possible in one launch. This thread should get you well on your way. SSTO to Laythe and beyond Good luck!

I can fourth this as well. I never used time warp because I was concerned of physics flubs. I'm going to try maxing out the physics delta slider and see if that improves consistency.

Oh my indeed! My competitive nature may make me have to go at this again. Nice throttlin' Nao .

Alrighty!!! Turned on the terminal velocity read-out on KER and played around some more. I hit an amazing altitude of 61478m. I had a few more launches +61km but this one was the best this session. Behold! This makes me really wonder is 62km is possible. I've never used MechJeb, but I think it could beat a manual launch. I believe you can use MechJeb to create launch profiles? If so, I'm sure you can get better throttle control by automating it. I can get a fairly smooth reduction on the throttle by tapping ctrl quickly and gently, but its not 'analog' (or digitally controlled) smooth. Would be cool if there was a way to have the throttle mapped to the mouse wheel (I tried and couldn't get it to map).

Aww man. I got a good laugh out of that one. Going to give it a few more tries when I get home later. Kweller's altitude is gonna be tough to beat (care to share your flight procedure?).

Not sure how I feel about being here alone. Not sure how I'd feel if others were in here with me...