noorm

According to Wikipedia... "Compressive strength for materials is generally higher than their tensile strength" So, compressing fuel tanks from the bottom doesn't require strong fuel tanks like pulling them from the top? But... like a few have pointed out, this is a game... and when you try to find an optimal solution to game mechanics, you don't usually handicap yourself with style or realism!

You didn't talked about aerodynamics or the decoupler... I don't know what's the weight of decoupler in real life, but at 0.4 in kerbal (for the bigger one is used), it didn't really deter me. I still think the initial philosophy is sound and could apply in real life if we had magic technology. (drop only what you need to drop, as often as possible).

This is gonna be an interesting thread to watch... If possible, with sugar on top, please post video!!! Or... post craft files and I'll make a short video for you! I'll try to find the mad scientist in me... but some people seems to have way more imagination than me!

I'm not an artist or a mad scientist... more like a min-maxer!

11843m/s reported delta-v and 2 science sats for only 40318$!!! If it's good to shed dead weight, why not shed dead weight more often? Why drop engines when I could drop only the empty fuel tanks? The video and pictures: I've used this craft design twice, once on the duna/ike system, once on the eve/gilly system. For both missions, I fulfilled the exploration contracts, in addition to deploying satellites for futures data collection contracts. Of course, I finished both missions with fuel to spare. In detail, the mission objectives: Orbit ike or gilly Do science in orbit Deploy a science sat for future data collection contracts Land on the moon Do science on land Takeoff and get in orbit around the main planet (duna or eve) Do science in orbit Deploy a science sat for future data collection contracts Land on the main planet Do science on land

And... while we wait for other videos (both the rotor and the clamp method), please enjoy this short interlude: (Illegal propulsion method for this challenge btw...)

No, but an "Unlimited class" honorary mention!!!

So the docking ports are on two vehicles right? I wonder because otherwise it's a funny example of bootstrapping...

If it's not a ramp, the second rule I quoted should apply!

I would guess not...

After some rigorous analysis of high resolution telemetry data (i.e. eyeballing a scansat map), mission control determined that our first honest try should be around the highest elevation on Gilly. That is around 29Ëš45'0.00"S, 123Ëš45'0.00"W. Following a brief visual search, a maximum elevation of 6400m was found during an EVA by Jeb but no steep slope. An initial jump was nevertheless attempted around that location. An apoapsis of 10992m was attained. The following scientific findings worth of mention where discovered: It is very hard to control a rover on gilly, even with two Place-Anywhere 7 RCS ports. Multiple attempts at reaching a relatively slow speed had to be done. The flag marking the highest elevation was displayed floating in the air on the map view. I believe there is a discrepancy between the real terrain model and the map view model. And now ladies and gentlemen... the pictures:

I would think the lenght of the rover is more important than the weight for you special style... for a constant rotation rate, things further from the rotation center will experience a faster motion. But please don't quote me... I'm not an kergineer!

I see now... the technique! I may revisit this challenge... maybe... once I'm done with some scientific analysis... like eyeballing a map!

Reach the highest suborbital trajectory with a rover on Gilly, with no artificial ramp. Use the best hill you can find! Rules!!! Main propulsion is done with electric rover wheels only. Functional parts must be stock. (Information or cosmetic mods are permitted.) Any stock form of stability assistance, traction improvement or similar device not contributing to forward or upward velocity is permitted. (I use 2 upward facing Place-Anywhere 7 RCS port to keep me on the ground.) Hyperedit and similar tools that facilitate rapid prototyping and testing are... strongly recommended! Crewed or uncrewed... Your rover can explode and any kerbal can die except Jeb! Jeb is not allowed to die, ever... especially not publicly! Ranking will be based on the apoapsis from a screenshot of the map view. Mouse over the apoapsis to be sure the apoapsis height is displayed. If you do something heroic, we would appreciate more screenshots or videos. If you find a real nice hill, coordinates or some other way to recreate your bold feat would be nice too! I am not a Gilly specialist but I wonder if it would be possible to get into an escape trajectory this way. If this happen, consider my challenge broken unless we can agree on some way to rank escaping trajectory (time to escape right after jump?) And here is some kind of proof it can be done: This was a first test starting from latlong 0,0 (according to hyperedit). I didn't really looked around for a launch site yet! Thanks!

Noooo... I'm happy reaching over 1km... Grats to the new winners! Beside, there are other challenges to try! Or invent! I just did a "Gravity-assisted-rover-Gilly-suborbital-jump" test... gotta look at the challenges rules and formulate the thing... For science... and stuff... you know?

I do use Hyperedit... or I wouldn't be doing that minmus jump thing so many times so many different ways! I just made a new ramp. I assumed 45Ëš angle was the most efficient for launch, so I start building from the top down instead of from the bottom up. That way I'm absolutely positively sure my last structural panel is at 45Ëš. I also used only 1m panels offset 5Ëšeach, instead of 2m panels. That way, my launch happen more quickly and I hope I don't lose as much speed while climbing the ramp. I also recalled Jeb from the space station so he can be my driver!!! I'm sure this is the most important factor. Finally, I changed my wheels for the faster TR-2L instead of the M1. I do prefer the M1 personally, it's more forgiving when you drift a little bit... but I need to do like everyone else if I want to beat the 1km magic mark! So... a little over 5km acceleration with the TR-2L gives me 1067.9m or 1068.5m... (video frames before touchdown and after touchdown) Top speed was 23.1m/s about 50m before the ramp (I removed the UI to take a screenshot after that!!!) I will assume since I didn't win the championship a simple screenshot will be enough. I have the video if required: The M1 in the same conditions gives me 925.3m or 925.6m. Top speed 21.1m/s, about 50m before the ramp. I don't see how I could do 1.3km without some special jumping or wiggling method. I give up! Edit: I give up... unless a new height jump challenge emerge!

And if "everyone" hit the ramp at the max speed of 23m/s (or whatever max speed the best wheel provide), then only the ramp will matter. How close can you get your ramp to "the ideal" ramp for the most optimized balistic trajectory! You could always spice things up in the next challenge... allow anything but engines. I would try to use explosive decoupling!

Do you think it's possible to reach 1km? Using faster wheels, a different ramp with smoother takeoff for less speed drop, optimized launch angle, etc...? But I allready got diminishing returns between each improvments for my 3 tries.

I hope I'm not too late for my first challenge! I've been playing with rovers for the last few days so here it is... between 845.7m and 846.3m!!! I failed 2 times before beating the current world champion! First time 350ish meters, second time 730ish... and I was still accelerating before hitting the ramp so I could get a few more meters by starting further! P.S.: I did speed up the acceleration x5 in the video... but it's still a bit long! I also didn't match the sound of the various segments! First time I use avidemux!