Xeldrak

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! You'll see....you'll see....

Allright, PsuedoMonkes's link works for me now, too - maybe google just had a hickup

While collecting all your craft files (following antbins suggestion) I found some discrepancies... Important message! (At least for three of you) @ThePsuedoMonkey You download link does not work, please check this. Might be google or my browser is acting up... @tntristan12 Did you forget to post your .craft file or did I overlook it? @SRV Ron Same to you - did you post your .craft file? Didn't see a link Please take care of this stuff, otherwise I will have to disqualify you

My entry: I chose the rather odd Munar Orbit Rendezvous mission profile - I launched the lander and put it into münar orbit. Then I started to Kerbals in the Mothership and put it into münar orbit. There they docked, Bill went to the Mün, launched again, entered the mothership without another dock and together they left for Kerbin. I LOVE the idea of the one-man-open lander - that was really fun Primary mission objective (+20): Stock or Mod parts*. Separate leaderboard for each. 100% stock Using a mission profile of 1-2 launches and a two-Kerbal crew, orbit both Kerbals around the Mun and return the crew to Kerbin. two launches Up to three missions may be launched if a Munar rescue mission is launched. two missions Mission Munar Orbit Rendezvous (+6): Using two launches to low Kerbin orbit, separately send two spacecraft to Munar orbit. Once there, dock them together and complete a landing mission. check Landing prestige: One Kerbal on the Mun (+7). check Capsule We're done with that (+3): Detachable support module (Jettison from command module before Kerbin landing at least three of:RCS cells, electrical systems, lighting, legs, retro package) check Just in case (+3): Launch Escape System present check Lifter Won't Apollo miss that Saturn 5? (+6): At least one rocket uses a 5 engine first stage and a 5 engine second stage. check Lander On your space bike (+4): At least one open cockpit lander check Recovery Welcome home (+10): Both crew return to Kerbin check We can take it (+3): Be able to safely return to Kerbin on water or land without damage. check 62 points!

Submissions are closed! Primary elections have started! Vote here! Please drop a few line who you've voted for! Primary Elections will run for 48 hours - the six best entries will enter the final elections! Remember to come back in two days! I voted for Mesklin - his Space Lynx looks very good, has lots of dV and seems to be very sturdy. I'd say that rover is overkill, but overall it think is a nice example to emulate. PS: Twenty entries.....the collages start to become work-intensive ^^ Contenders AmpsterMan - Two Stage Lander Redux antbin - A-11 Lander Bobnova - Lander Giggleplex777 - 2-Stage Lander mk2000 GregroxMun - mk2 two stage lander Karmacoma - MunMin1 Mesklin - Space Lynx Lander MiniMatt - Two-Stage Lander Take 2 Mulbin - Two Stage Lander rdrdrdrd - L1 mem Rhomphaia - Two-Stage Lander searlefm - new 2 stage lander SkyRender - Llama Lander Slugy - Lander Replacement sploden - Improved 2-stage 2-man lander SRV Ron - Duna Lander Syhrus - 2-Stage Lander ThePsuedoMonkey - Pelican tntristan12 - Thelander Mk IV-a Xeldrak - CR Columbidae Lander

It's allright, you still have ~3.5 hours left.

A quick heads up: As I'm writing this, you still have ~10 hours left to post your entry

Yeah, I'm allready thinking about making a two day pre-election of 3-6 canditates and then make a another final vote, because of the many contenders. As I'm writing this, you still have ~28 hours left to post your entry

Over here we would simply place the ceiling at 2.4 meters Well, to be hones, if you grow up with metric system it's just as intuitive to you. I'm from a craftsman family - it's just a question of familiarization. @Holo Not, the scale tell you your mass. But the scale only works on Earth - for some reason no manufacturer cares to mention that. On Moon the scale would give you a nonesensical number - neither your weigt, nor your mass.

Well, I'm working on this challenge - a preview picture of my first testflight, practicing orbital docking:

Ah, well, I decided to take part in the Challenge myself once again, since I had a good idea (I think) while walking the dog. I present you the ChemRock Columbidae Lander: It's a small, one man lander that weighs only 8.16 tons. Remembering my first landings, I made this thing STURDY - it can land with 20 m/s without breaking of parts (allthough it will bounce around). I've even landed it on the mÜn with 30 m/s, although at this speed it's a gamble. With a total dV of ~3250 m/s it can land from a insane 100 km orbit around the Mün und reach this orbit again with it ascend stage. So there is quite a lot of wiggle room is every way. It'd call it a mix between the Apollo LM and the LK Lander - although leaning heavily to the russian side. It's also outfittet with a fully functional RCS system, landing lights and solar pannels. (MechJeb not included in .craft file) Statistics Parts: 54 Mass descent stage: 5.43 t Mass ascent stage: 2.73 t Combined mass: 8.16 t Descent propulsion: 4x Rockomax 48-7S Ascent propulsion: 4x Sepratron I / 1x LV-909 dV: 3245 m/s (vac) Get your ChemRock Columbidae Lander here!

Hm - I'll might have a try on this one. Sadly there is no two-man capsule.

@gtrx Well, you wrote yourself that your lander does not really fit description of the challenge. You still got time, why not build a new one that ahs a chance of winning A quick update, since there seems to be some confusion over the time left: At the time I'm writing this, you still have ~37 hours left

nah...you still got time. God, these timezone make me all dizzy.... I started this post at 30th August 2013, 15:04 Mountain Time. That was ~41 hours ago - so you guys still have ~55 hours left..... Seriously, could we set the forum time to UTC?

Well I think in about a week - I'm don't have a very strict schedule.

@gtrx The lander is supposed to have two stages. One for decent, one for ascent. Like the Apollo LM. You were never asked to build a complete Rocket, just the lander. Well, I didn't add latest version into the rules, because I never considered that there might be people still using old versions. It would be really nice... @Flixxbeatz Yeah, rebuild it and be so kind to consider the "things to consider" section...

@SkyRender You've been added @Flixxbeatz A .craft file is required, or did I miss the link?

@SkyRender, MiniMatt: Sorry, I didn't spell this our clearly earlier - but only a single entry is permitted. So please tell me wich one I should add. The rest of you have been added. Seems like the rover is a rather popular choice

The three new entries have been added. @gtrx No Mods means no modded parts in the .craft file. These a crafts made for noobs - you should be able to load and use them with a fresh installed, vanilla KSP @AmpsterMan Well, read the "thing to consider" section and consider it ^^

I really like the look of that lander, MiniMatt - now just get the .craft file uploaded somewhere and you can be added.

@Horn Brain Yes, you do not need an RCS - I've docked two vehicles with no RCS whatsoever. But (as I've explained in the OP) stock craft are made with new players in mind. To repeat myself: Your craft should be easy to use, simple and safe. Optimizing for wight by leaving away the RCS seems more like something for advanced players.

Primary elections are done! Time for the grand finale! You can vote over here! Please drop a few line who you've voted for! Final elections will run for another 48 hours. You can download all six .craft files in a single .zip file over here.Also check the orignal posts for more pictures and stats on the finalists Karmacoma - MunMin1 Mesklin - Space Lynx Lander MiniMatt - Two-Stage Lander Take 2 Mulbin - Two Stage Lander Slugy - Lander Replacement Xeldrak - CR Columbidae Lander Submissions are closed! Primary elections have started! here! Please drop a few line who you've voted for! Primary Elections will run for 48 hours - the six best entries will enter the final elections! Remember to come back in two days! Several people asked for it: the third round of Better Stock Crafts! Last episode, Giggleplex777 won with his Meteosat - congratulations. But after spending so much time is space, it is time to get boots on the ground. This time we are doing the two-stage lander! As you all should know by now, the stock crafts in KSP are horrible for the most part. So I challenge you to come up with a replacement craft. There are a few things required for you submission: You craft MUST NOT use any mods - 100% stock You need to show us at least one Screenshot You need to make you .craft file available Otherwise your submission will not be accepted. Also, only one entry per participant is accepted. And there are a few things you should consider -Your craft should be easy to use, simple and safe - stock craft are mostly for new players, they should not be overwhelmed by 10 action groups that must be used at the right time. -Your craft should be an example new players can emulate. It should demonstrate design techniques. What ARE action groups? What's aspargus? Can linear RCS boosters be of some use? These are questions new players could be able to answer by testing your craft. -If you use Action Groups of have any special commentary to make, use that neat, new description field in the VAB. It's a fine line between encouraging a new player with something new and overwhelming him - try to walk it. How is this going to work? This time we will try 4 Days to build, 4 days to Vote. You will have 96 hours to build you craft, post your entry here with at least one screenshot and its .craft file. Also be so kind to drop us a few lines, about your craft. What are your thoughts on the design? Why is it a good stock craft? Once submissions are closed, I will either create a new thread or create a external vote, we'll see. Anyways, I would like to encourage you to write a few lines why you voted you that craft, it keeps the thread fresh and we all have something to read while we wait for the votes. What craft are we doing this time? As you allready know from the caption, we are doing the two-stage lander. The stock-craft is actually not too bad - it has a docking port, enough fuel and space for two kerbals. It does however lack an RCS system, wich is really essential íf you intend to use that docking port. Now, what do I think a two-stage lander should be? I'd of course think Apollo LM at once. However, I also think we should be more general: a two stage lander should be able to land on most moons or dwarf-planets like Eelo. Having a decent and an ascent stage is obligatory Considering that it's the go-to choince for a Apollo-Style mission, it should also have a docking port to reconnect to a Command Module and should be nimble enough to make docking not needlessly hard. Parachutes are unnecessary - at least in my humble opinion. This time I can give you only very few inspirational pictures, since there were not very many landers. However, I give you the Apollo LM, the LK Lander and the Altair spacecraft. TLDR: Same rules a last time, we're doing the two stage lander Contenders AmpsterMan - Two Stage Lander Redux antbin - A-11 Lander Bobnova - Lander Giggleplex777 - 2-Stage Lander mk2000 GregroxMun - mk2 two stage lander Karmacoma - MunMin1 Mesklin - Space Lynx Lander MiniMatt - Two-Stage Lander Take 2 Mulbin - Two Stage Lander rdrdrdrd - L1 mem Rhomphaia - Two-Stage Lander searlefm - new 2 stage lander SkyRender - Llama Lander Slugy - Lander Replacement sploden - Improved 2-stage 2-man lander SRV Ron - Duna Lander Syhrus - 2-Stage Lander ThePsuedoMonkey - Pelican tntristan12 - Thelander Mk IV-a Xeldrak - CR Columbidae Lander

Hm...I wonder, why a moderator moves a thread, that clearly does not contain a proper challenge (Challenge Submission Guidelines ) to the challenge forum.

please, it's "capsule"

@Astilious Yeah, first claiming that it's far from the amazing stuff you've seen here, just to claim the full 218 points. Well, you've been added. Talking about saving&loading: Well, it's allright if you load a lot - I couldn't check it anyways. I like it if someone actually accepts, that one (or more) of his kerbals died or that he botched the landing - but I can't blame you for quickloading. I'd probably do the same.