SkyRex94

So i'd like to add this Challenge badge to my Signature: May i just entry with my own Skylon Challenge Entry? Stock Skylon replica It qualifies for : -Payload to Orbit -Landed at KSC Runway Cheers

Mission Report: The flight of the "insert fancy craft name here": Mission Data: - weight and part count of the vessel on the launchpad Launch 1: 692,5t , 393 Parts ; Launch 2: 532 t ; 84 Parts - weight and part count awaiting liftoff on Eve 107,5 t ; 249 Parts - the approximate price tag of your entire mission, if at all possible Launch 1 : 510,207 Funds , Launch 2: 360,304 Funds = 870,511 Funds total. - game version 0.25 - mods used KER, NavBallDockingAlignementIndicator, Chatterer, EVE - tell me how you found your landing site. "I tried until I got lucky" is perfectly alright, but inquiring minds want to know. "I tried until I got lucky" - if there's anything that your are especially proud of, be sure to point it out (provide a direct link to a picture if applicable). under 110t Lander for an under 100m above Sea Level landing. - please also mention the things that didn't work out so well / required a lot of saveloading / you would do different next time. The landing site was trial and error until I got one that was under 500m. The launch from Eve had to be reloaded, because the first inline Stage, so after decoupling the last radial stage, was kinda flip happy as soon as a slight movement. So i was cleverer next try and started to roll-stabilize the Launcher in the Last radial stage , so it stabilized itself while the flip-happy-stage burned. can be seen in the Log. Here are some pictures of the Craft and Landing: some more for Laie and Video-less authentification of the mission: The Lander was actually a highly engineered piece of state of the art technology, (ELV2 = Eve Landing/Launch Vehicle 2, the first design didn't even reached out of the VAB) and was very well designed. The Transfer and return craft on the other hand, was just slapped together using some parts, and also the actual flying wasn't as efficient as it could have been. But I just wanted to get this Challenge before 0.90 and didn't really bothered with high level Node-editing and efficient interplanetary flying, just eyballed everything to bring the Lander there fast Two Kerbals on the Mission, Jeb in the Lander and Bill in the Command Module. Collected a Surface Sample from Eve and an Ocean Sample from Eve's Oceans. Landing Height was 91m above Sea Level, 500m from the Coast. So this should qualify as Level 3 if i'm not mistaken. I couldn't go for Jebs Level, because not using the Atmosphere at a place where soo much Atmo is available was simply against the Engineer in me, especially which such a high gravity it would've been inefficient to do a powered landing. For the First time i've made a Video as a Main Mission Log and not a big album as in my Jool-5 and Solar Flare Challenge Logs. Don't worry it's speeded up into 11 minutes and not the hole time of the mission: Cheers P.S: If needed i can also give you the Craft file of the Lander.

The Grand Career Settings Collection As we all know you can change different difficulty settings in career. But if you only have an idea of what a type of career you'd like to experience, you're kinda forced to try the settings you think would give you this experience and play it through. If you don't like it you have to do another try. So I thought let's make a Thread where everybody can share their experience with specific settings and tell their opinion of what it felt like and how they liked it. I'll try to include the most significant ones, and it's player experiences here in the OP, to create some kind of collection where undecided individuals with an idea of what they want can go to look up which settings might sweet their taste the most. To get started: Funds: It's a little money watching at the beginning of the career, but if you use contracts, especially the 'Explore' ones, they'll still give you a huge amount of money compared to mission cost. So Money still becomes more of a no brainer, the further you progress in Career. The same for penalties: if you don't screw up every second accepted contract it is no issue. Science: Becomes a little more grindy than stock, especially at the beginning you won't be able to use the parts you'd like for a specific mission ( like first mun landing). But it isn't 'absurdly' hard to get the Science, if you squeeze out all the possible science from the mandatory contracts you're doing anyway, you'll gain all the science you need on the fly and don't have to bother with Extra-Science-Missions. Reputation: No problem, as long as you try not to kill anyone. Additions: The special in this settings is the No Reverts and no Quicksave. You have to think twice if you'd like to lauch a craft. But since money isn't that big of a problem it's not required to make everything reusable or land exactly at the KSC. You should take some error-fuel with you in case anything goes wrong, and every crewed Launch HAS to be equipped with a some sort of Lauch escape safety feature if you don't want to kill anyone. Special difficulties arise when there are One-Try-situations: like an Aerocapture or a Tylo-Landing, keep in mind you can't reload and have to be conservative at some points. But this also adds a new sense of immersion to the game: You know, this is it, if it doesn't work somebody gets killed. Or if something goes wrong you have to deal with the consequences, send rescue missions and such. Additional idea is, to test Craft ,planned to carry crew, with a probe first, to see if especially the launch goes well and the craft behaves as intended. Closing thought: The money etc. settings don't even have such a great impact if you're already a little advanced in ksp. The most recognised change is the no Revert and No quickload. It can add to the immersive experience, but also keep in mind you might also encounter the Kraken. But a last tip for that: You are infact still able to quicksave, so hit f5 every now and then, and if something Bug related happens you can change the difficulty, load your last save, and turn quickload of again. So share your opinions about the settings you tried and tell us the expierence. P.S. keep in mind people can also have different opinions about something, so don't rage at anybodys opinions just because you think different. Better aproach: If you think different make your own post about the same settings, so the community can see different viewpoints on something. P.S.S: a little personal question, if anybody has played with 10%-20% Funds but with >60% Science, could you share the experience? I'm right now trying to decide on a setting where Money starts to really matter, while keeping the experience diverse and not to turn it into a Science grind. P.S.S.S.: Am I blind, where is the button to wrap spoiler tags around something?

Dann setz doch nen Satteliten in nen höheren Orbit und lasse dein großes Schiff im LKO. Dann nimmst du den Satteliten zum Warpen und hast dein Hauptschiff mit im Blick. Aber wenn du Interplanetar fliegen willst ist jeder Ort als Startpunkt außer dem LKO ineffizient, da der Oberth Effekt ne Menge ausmacht, schon allein da Kerbin der 3.-schwerste Planet ist im System, da verschwendet man nur Sprit wenn man von weiter weg startet. Und 'MechJeb als einziges ins Spielgeschehene eingreifen' ... naja wenn du es so betrachtest kannst du ALLE anderen Plugins außer MechJeb installieren und hast trotzdem weniger potentiellen eingriff als mit MechJeb... Das ist nunmal ein Autopilot, also wenn du eh MechJeb nutzt kannst auch KAC dazu nehmen, dass macht dann auch nichts mehr aus. Weiterer tipp: Am schnellsten und am meisten lernen darüber wie die dinge am effizientesten gehen und was beim Schiffsdesign viel ausmacht tust du wenn du deine Flüge selber fliegst, also ohne MechJeb. Meinetwegen MechJeb zum eigentlichen ausführen des Burns aber die ganzen Maneuveur-Nodes kannst du per Hand setzen und auch LAndungen Manuell fliegen, so lernst du am schnellsten. (Vielleicht machst du das auch schon das weiß ich net)

My own created TechTree could be exactly what you're looking for, You'll have the ability to go for the Plane parts pretty freely and also get access to wheels in the first Node. T-7 Technololgy Sorry for the self-advertising, but according to the reactions from others in my release thread, it could really be what you're looking for.

Das stimmt jedoch auch nur wenn deine Rakete 'realistisch' gebaut ist, will heißen Aerodynamisch. Stock KSP hat ja auch nix dagegen breite Pfannkuchen mit platter Front zu fliegen , bei FAR kommst du damit allerdings nicht weit. Und deine Rakete sollte unten mehr gewicht und Wiederstand aufweisen als oben, sonst dreht die sich auch gerne mal beim start ausßer kontrolle. Aber generell: Wenn du in der Regel so baust das das was am ende rauskommt einigermaßen nach etwas aussieht was auch eine echte Raumfahrtbehörde starten würde , dann macht FAR bzw. NEAR den start einfacher und du brauchst weniger sprit.

Der Trick ist deine Nutzlast so leicht wie möglich zu entwerfen dann sind die Burns auch mit Nuklearen Triebwerken gut aushaltbar. Ansonsten für deine Kalkulation: Ignorieren wir mal den Start in einen LKO, da kannst du ja dein Schiff auch zusammen bauen. Von einem LKO in einen Jool intercept brauchst du 2000 m/s , mit bisschen Error vielleicht 2200 m/s , aber das reicht auf jeden fall wenn du auf ein Transfer-Fenster wartest. Innerhalb Jools SOI brauchst du gar nicht so viel DeltaV wenn du mit oberth-Effekt und Slingshots vertraut bist. Und für den Rückflug sind 3000m/s vieeeeeeeeel zu viel, es reichen wenn dus richtig machst sogar weniger als 800-900 für den Rückflug. Also nur mal für Bop gerechnet: 2000 (LKO to Jool) + ca. 1000 (Direkter Aerobrake in nen Bop Intercept und Bop Orbit) + 600 m/s (Landung+Start) + ca. 1000 ( Rückflug mit Tylo Slingshot) = 4600 + 1400(zur sicherheit für fehler) = 6000 m/s mehr solltest du gar nicht benötigen. Und da kann man es auch aushalten mit nen paar L-VNs den Burn zu machen, alternativ mache den ersten Burn mit den 3.5m Triebwerken und viel Sprit, und dann wechselst du auf Nuklear und sprengst die erste Stage ab. Andere Methode wäre den Burn aufzuteile und erst schrittweise die Apoapsis anzuheben, macht die einzelnen Burns auch kürzer und ist sogar noch effizienter, da mehr Oberth Effekt, allerdings wird die gesamtflugzeut bisschen länger. Für Inspiration schau in meine Signatur und schaue dir meinen Log der Jool-5 Challenge an. Cheers

I didn't meant it to be fast, but its faster than anything that has actually ground contact. Not faster than other planes. meant it to carry stuff around faster than it would be per rover but with smaller craft per payload as a full size cargo plane would be.

Is it just me or is there a little bug with the ARIE engine? Either the Thrust is not aligned or the mount point is not aligned. It seems even with thr crafts that come with the mod, in vacuum while thrusting the ship is turning up. Which can only be explained by the CoT not directly in line with CoM.

hey ferram4 , one question: How difficult would it be to implement Ground Effect? Is it even possible with KSP's Terrain? OR a Ground effect just based on height, so it basically only works over an ocean? Would be a great addition. (Or is that already in but just I tested it wrong?) Would enable you to build veeery Big transport-aircraft to carry stuff around very fast. Usefull for Kerbin, and with the coming biomes also for Eve and especially Laythe. Building an Ekranoplan for that would give you the speed of an aircraft but with much smaller wings and so with less fuel consumption per ton. And you could build heavy transporters for hole base-modules without the need for enourmus wings.

I recently tested around a little with RSS. And although i will refuse to go all the way, for two reasons: A lot of part mods needed to improve the stock scale and efficiency. And even on 6.4 the terrain gets stretched beyond recognition. But i kinda liked the scale of 3.2x Kerbin Scale, but the question is: Does a reconfigured RSS need this progress bar every single time when starting up KSP (the one in the main menu) to modify the planets? It does require quite some time every launch

Every time I see GP2 now i have to think of "New planets are a big maybe atm"-Squad. Which drives me close to insane. There are not enough planets yet, we don't need a lot more , just enough to fullfill the diversity: A GP2 with a Ring( and blue) , a Titan-like medium moon with thick atmo, a Triton-like reverse orbiting moon, a comet, a real Io-like volcaninc moon. These are things that stock is lacking right now completely and would really add to the diversity, it's like just 5 more celestial objects, and then we might be able to agree that more are for mods, but right now... there are still unfulfilled possibilities. Just my two cents on the GP2 keyword. Here's hope that they get added in the beta sometime, after all it's content and not new features, so still possible.

I'd like a Shuttle ticket too please. Besides: Is this a real SSTO Shuttle or just nasa-style-shuttle? I hope for real SSTO. either way: to the bridge: engage the HYPErdrive!

If you are a bad pilot yourself : YES. If you are a good pilot yourself : NO.

Hey , i just tested this mod out a little: Great Size i think, seems the planets are proper planets now, but maintaining a level where stock Kerbal rockets are still usefull and no other part mods needed. And it also keeps the Surfaces look like natural and not streching them beyond recognition. I even think the mountains look more natural. But i also have that Terrain-over-Runway bug (Fresh RSS install) which could get really annoying, since i like spaceplane building. I might consider using this more often, if that bug gets sorted out.(Can RSS lift the KSC about 5m up?) For those interested: Space at Kerbin starts at 81km now. Launch to LKO (95x95km) requires roughly 5600 m/s. (FAR) Mun flyby with free return ca.7250 m/s. I think a KSP-Size Saturn-5 made out of the SLS Parts might just be capable of landing on the Mun and return. Just for consideration of using this in an full career save in 0.90: Could anybody calculate how much deltaV would be required for an Eve launch ( Sea Level to low Eve Orbit)(with FAR)?

Now, slowly but steady i'm getting really hyped for beta. And I like all the features announced until now. I see no problem in Nodes and Orbit paths requiring investments, since (if you not play career the 'lets do just to missions to finish tree' way) they can be unlocked easily and you don't need them for the first Science and Contracts. And after all career it's meant to have some kind of progression. It's like finally implementing a part of my own suggestions from some time ago about implementing features and abilities in the tech tree and not just parts, although this now gets implemented using upgradable buildings. Now abilities like EVA, Calculating conic patches, launching heavy craft, which all require advanced technology involved, also actually require a progression in Career. Great. And the restriction with part count is great IMO, i might be on a lonely spot here, but for me it makes sense, even with the immersion: The Launch-Facilities already limit your weight (and thus, also size) which makes sense. And size is not logic to be restricted through a building, since just building a bigger building solves the problem, and i see the upgrades of the buildings as getting more 'advanced' buildings with new technology involved. Seeing it that way the part count is the way to limit the 'complexity' of your crafts. More parts can be seen as a more complex ship design, which is therefor harder to construct. I see an upgraded VAB as a new VAB with more advanced construction machines inside(be it 'precise' ones, or big-heavy ones like for lifting a shuttle to the side of a tank), which allow the engineers to actually build my crazy complex designs, which they could't in a barn. TL;DR: I find Part count as a limit makes more sense than size IMO and like it. The idea of KXP is also a cool new addition of gameplay depth in career. But the pilot skill has yet to show it's usefulness: For me it's not clear yet, why i wouldn't want to attach a state-of-the-art probe core to my ship and spare one pilot and thus one crew member, while keeping all the abilities. Engineer sounds good. Scientist is not so much revealed yet, so to be seen. Editor extension and switching VAB-SPH: Great. Period. Mk3: Great look so far, a little Space Shuttle-ish. (Although the concept of a Space Shuttle is not so great, it was not really more efficient than normal rockets, due to rebuilding a tank and maintaining the orbiter. You have to go the SSTO Skylon way or the Space X reusability way to really gain a lot) Still to see the Cargo bays, to see what can be fitted inside. Also discouvered the OPT big Space plane parts mod (also 2.5m bay size) two weeks ago, which really looks awesome!!! To see if you might be able to senseful combine both Parts. Fine Print: Cool. More things to do, but that actually leads to my final thought: It looks like the Science System remains the same, although a lot of biomes will be added. I found out IMO limiting the scinece gain in difficulty just makes unlocking needed tech a grind. But (normal mode) in late game you're literally swimming in Science with nothing more to spent it on. And more contracts will also bring you more Science. Problem is: I think i would want most of the Parts unlocked (not all but most) by exploring Kerbins SOI(Kerbin,Minmus,Mun), but after that there is still so much to gain... (I'm holding the Jool-5 Challenge Science Record and got over 25k points from Jool SOI alone,enough to unlock all tech, and thats without biomes!) I want to go there and do stuff but i'm missing the ingame immersion to have something gained with getting all that science. So currently i'm thinking about changing my beta career difficulty to something like: Science 80-110%, penalties:1000% , Money: 10-20%. Making Money the main limiting factor and the main immersive motivation for my Space company. So i won't experience any grind, but have fun doing all cool contracts while actually gaining something out of them because i really need those money, especially if playing no reverts and needing to spent money on testflights of prototypes (especially if they fail...) I think that could overall be more fun then the current hard-mode settings. Does anybody has played in a similar configuration? And might share experience and opinion? Hmm... should just became my short comment in this thread... somehow got a little bit longer...

one question: there is this rule "there have to be pods/hitchhikers for all Kerbals involved. No seat-only lifters." What if there is no Pod for the Crew... but no seat either? And if they are 'inside' something? (aghhm..cargo bay...)?

A lot of you seemed to be interested, but apart from my one, only one entry was made so far. So this is a little bump, maybe to remember the ones that where interested, that this challenge still exists. P.S. @any Mod. I think the Poll of this Thread can be removed, Solar Flare is clearly ahead for the name of this Challenge

Hey I tried out this mod and I really like it. And I think the idea of the Engine as an Air-Augmented Rocket is really what KSP needs, especially for Atmo-without-Oxygen Planets. For that Reason I don't like the Idea of splitting it into modular Parts, since the research i made on the technology suggests that the Air should stream in in a straight line to work properly, and I think having it one Part is easier because you don't need to implement a new ressource, just basing it on the density as it is now. Or if you want to do a modular engine too: Don't make it an Air-augmented rocket but something like the Rapier AND keep the current Air-Augmented Rocket as a single big part. I really like the way it looks and it's size. And for Mk2 usefullness: maybe make a smaller scaled down version of it too, but keeping intake and engine in one part still. Also i would like to suggest some further refinement of the Engine behaviour: As I understand the efficiency of such a device relies on how many Air-mass is going through the Engine at a given time. So instead of a peak efficiency at 7km and a reliancy on ship mass, it should really go the 'most intake mass' way. That means making scaling the efficiency on Air density AND Surface Speed. Example ISPs: Space: 370s , Runway- not moving: 400s, Sea Level- Mach 1: 1000s, 10km-Mach 1: 400s, Sea Level- Mach3: 2500s , 10km- Mach 3: 1300s, 10km-Mach 0(Zero): 380s Eve Sea Level, Mach 0.2: 2000s You get the Idea? I don't know if you can make it reliant on the Surface Speed but i think you can fetch the Surface speed data and then it should also be possible to implement it into the efficiency. But please if anything, keep it an Air-augmented Rocket (at least the big engine), i feel thats exactly the type of technology KSP-Scientists need and at the same time being a well known possible concept and not SciFi. Great Mod so far, could become my favorite mod of them all!

Congratiulations, you successfully accomplished the Solar Flare Callenge on Level 2. You made most of your DeltaV with IONs, i can image that took nearly forever burning But due to that your Ship was really compact and efficient. Well done. You've earned a place in the OP.

Oh you spotted a hole there, indeed. I forgot to prohibit Kraken Drives... I will change that immediatly, thanks for the 'hint'

Sure, look at my Entry, both Probes moved on their own to get to the same Orbital Period. As long as they are low enough (Apo < Requirement) They can have every orbit you'd like. Just they should have the same Orbital Period to stay in the same place relativly to each other. And two of them shall be oposite of each other ( atleast a clearly visible 'Eyeballed' seperation of min. 150 degrees, thats what i would let through as still 'oposite') essentially no hyperediting of ships, no hyperediting of new fuel on the way and so on. What exactly do you have in mind if you have to ask what 'no cheating ' means? The intention was to make it similar to the Jool-5, so you have a specific requirement to accomplish the challenge and not having a leaderboard who was best. So i chose 500mil as this requirement, but i think i will highlight the current lowest entry by making it bold in the OP, so you can see who was closest (as with highlighting the Power output for Jebs Level)

Oh Yes ! That looks good! Great Work! Really well done! Imagine it with a Ring in the Sky over a Titan-equivalent... It really has the feeling i wanted for a blue Gas Giant! If you've a .png texture file from working on it, would you send it to me via PM? As soon as Kopernicus gets ready for custom GasGiant Creation i would make it real in KSP?

I'm sorry but i can't accept your Entry: 1. Your second Flight Periapsis is too low. 2. several minor clipping violationts, but which are adding up to a clipping violation: Wing Tanks inside the Wing, Wing Tanks and Engines slightly insided each other, Main Fuselage slightly inside itself(Mk2 is wider than Mk1) (and thats the reason you don't show the inside of your cargo bay) 3. I find it kinda suspicious you're not showing the underside of your craft, since i would be interested in how the Tanks(?) were the Rear Gear is attached to are attached to the craft. And besides, if you figure out the cost by used fuel: do not use 0.18 for oxidizer multiplier but instead 0.182 since the real number is 0.18181818181818... and you're missing some funds otherwise Sorry for that but i have to treat everyone under the same rules if a challenge shall be fair. Cheers

I've finally finished my own Entry, sorry for it taking so long, i had some other things to do in the last time. But finally here it is: The Flight of the Stardust Game Version: 0.25 Mods: FAR, KER, Replaced Sun Texture, Fusebox, Procedural Fairings, Precise Nodes, EVE, Chatterer, TimeControl, NavBallDockingAligIndicator Jebs level: 5 Kerbals, 2 Sattelites, 1 A-Class Asteroid, 1 Power Plant Ship Mass in Orbit: ca. 1.669.000 kg Aprox Cost of all Launches: ca. 3 Million Funds 6 Ship Part Launches + 6 Fuel Launches = 12 Launches + Asteroid This was my biggest Ship (in Orbit) so far and also my longest Mission of all Time (Kerbin Time), Part Count of the Final Stardust was around 600 and i encountered that this seems to be the playable limit of my Notebook, since it starts to lag every time i wanted to move it. Mission Log: Flying to Eve. During a close flyby accelerate of ca. 3*Jools distance apoapsis. After some decade of flying, doing the Plane change out there for a cheap 550 m/s to get Polar. Also deploying the Asteroid Impactor and set it to an collision course. After another decade --> Asteroid Impact. Braking to final Orbit using several burns at Peri. Final Orbit Apo: 379.000.000 m Doing an EVA with the Crew. Assemble the PowerPlant and measure output at Apoapsis = 7158.51 Ch/s Deploying first SAT and accelerate it to a Period of 16h. Waiting for alignment and deploying Second SAT at the oposite place, also accelerating to 16h Period. Setting up the flyback Maneuver and accelerating. Again using several burns to raise Apo again and get an encounter with Kerbin from a Polar Orbit Reentry Speed at Kerbin ca. 10km/s. Lander tipped over on touchdown but nothing broke, All 5 Kerbals savely back home after a half a Century. Achieved Jebs Level, so all Levels are possible with the current rules. The Stardust even got a closer Apoapsis than needed. Pictures: So, finally the Kerbals of my Space program have properly researched the Sun Achieved Jeb's Level, and a Place in the OP.