ultra86

Pantbash...! Sorry man I just saw this post... I must have missed the update email... That's a pretty sweet contraption and the only one to survive in such good shape.. Posting your time!

Sounds like a fun challenge.. Perhaps you should set some benchmarks... using TT Omniwheels I had a solar powered rover that could do up to 100 m/s just about anywhere without flipping over or breaking. Nice wheel of death Xeldrak... Here is a challenge I made a while back you might be interested in checking out http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/38207-Wheel-of-Death-speed-challenge

I know rockets aren't allowed for lift, but one idea would be to mount a series of upward facing Rockomax 24-77's and enough rocket fuel to fire them for a few seconds during several landings. Should stick you to the ground pretty well and allow the brakes to kick in to slow you down before the wobbling/tumbling starts. This is def a worthy challenge.

I almost completed this challenge using one of my own designs last week. I don't think I would have met the travel 1/2 way around Duna portion of the challenge, but otherwise my space plane took off from Kerbin, made it to Duna, and after about 12 attempts I finally landed it in one piece. I was using 4 mini nuclear rocket engines from the Kerbal smaller stock pack (or whatever it's called) when flying around Duna, they provided plenty of thrust to fly. I was carrying a considerable amount of fuel so I was able to cruise around for a while (though getting to where I wanted to go was a challenge). The low gravity makes it extremely difficult to land, and the thin air makes it extremely difficult to maneuver (at least my design). The lack of flat landing space is also a challenge (perhaps I haven't explored Duna enough yet).

err triple... my browser has gone mad

woops double post somehow

Epic Lazro... Top Gear Kerbin

Correction... most Kerbal rocket that didn't explode

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/spacexs-grasshopper-test-rocket-flies-sideways-successfully-6C10923106 Not sure if it's against the rules to post something like this.. My apologies if it is, but tell me this doesn't look like Jeb is at the controls!

Ya, I'm thinking I should adjust the rules so the challenge appeals to more players. Perhaps when creating the mission I was too set on the way I play the game and not thinking enough about how others might like to play. I'll allow this and adjust the rules accordingly. This is probably an easy challenge for some of the more experienced players, but for anyone who hasn't done it yet it can take a while to figure out the magic formula of fuel/thrust/balance required to pull it off.

I'm open to adjusting the rules to make this a little more interesting. I think having the lander return to the spaceplane before landing on Kerbin is still within the spirit of the challenge, and still poses the difficulty of getting enough dead weight into orbit with enough fuel to make the journey to the mun's surface and back. Will amend the rules shortly.

That's pretty amazing. I can't imagine building a ship that takes off from Kerbin, lands on Laythe, and then returns to Kerbin without refueling of any kind. A lot things are possible that I can't imagine tho I hope this challenge is still interesting to some of the more experienced players, as well as those who are just getting into KSP.

Interesting info on Ferram. I was not aware it could provide such a significant advantage. At this point I think the best thing to do is allow it but provide a separate list for those who successfully complete the challenge using Ferram. I would say it's not allowed, but I know a lot of people out there like to use it and I don't want to detract from their experience if they wish to compete in this challenge. I will amend the rules. As for your second question, I think the unique and interesting part of this challenge is having a minimum 2 man crew with separate lander that returns safely to Kerbin. In my mind it seems like it would take a lot more fuel to move more mass to the mun, land it, and then return safely, therefore making it much more difficult to use a single 100% reusable craft. I could be wrong here, def not as experienced as some players. Were the guys doing single stage return missions to the Mun, Minmus, Duna, and beyond doing it without docking, decoupling or refueling of any kind?

The M Prize challenge is an expansion on the popular K-Prize challenge launched by boolybooly. ***** RULES CHANGED ***** ***** It is now ok to return your mun lander to your spaceplane to dock before landing both vessels together ***** Backstory: When I originally completed the K-Prize a few weeks ago I decided to take it to the next level and build a 100% reusable spaceplane that could get into orbit and send a 100% reusable manned landing craft to the Mun and back. After several failed multi-hour attempts spanning several weeks I finally achieved the impossible last night. So... It is in this spirit I present to you a most difficult challenge. Mission: Create and launch a 100% reusable spaceplane with mun lander to orbit. Once in orbit decouple your manned lander and then begin your mission to the mun. Land your lander on the Mun, go on EVA to plant a flag, and then return to your ship and travel safely home to Kerbin. From here you can either land the lander on Kerbin by itself or rejoin your spaceplane and return both vessels together. When you're done both ships will be back on Kerbin 100% intact and ready to be refueled and sent on to their next mission. Rules: 1. Both vessels must be 100% reusable. No dropping of fuel tanks, or other decoupling of any kind. 2. Both vessels must be manned. Probes do not count. 3. Spaceplane must take off horizontally and reach a stable orbit of at least 70km and no more than 100km before decoupling the lander. 4. Mun lander must make it's way from a stable Kerbin orbit of 70-100km to the mun and back by itself. 5. Both vessels must return to Kerbin safely and land on land, NOT in the water, and both must be 100% intact (no broken gear, clipped wings, anything) 6. No refueling or docking allowed of any kind (except to re-attach your mun lander if landing both vessels together). Both ships must take off with enough fuel to get the job done. 7. B9 Aerospace and Novapunch are the only two part mods allowed. B9 may actually be required to complete the challenge. I didn't use NP but I know it's popular/balanced. **No other part/performance enhancing/auto-pilot mods allowed. This means no mech-jeb, no lazor systems, no fusion engines, etc. **Non-performance enhancing mods like steam gauges, chatterer, flight engineer ARE allowed. If you're not sure check with me. **Ferram Aerospace is allowed but winners of the M Prize that use it will be noted in the list (thanks to Stochasty for pointing out the advantages of Ferram) 8. No debug console, part clipping, cheating, or bending of the rules in any way shape or form. The fun is in the challenge itself and your reward is the satisfaction of actually having pulled it off. Here is a link to B9 Aerospace. If not required it will certainly give you more tools to design a ship that is capable. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/0-20-2-b9-aerospace-pack-r3-1/ Winners list: I will add all those who complete the mission to the M Prize post. I'm not sure if it's possible using stock parts, but anyone who completes the challenge with stock parts only will go to the top of the list. Durrr.. just noticed I misspelled reusable in the title.. Hoping a moderator can fix this :/ Pics and info from my M Prize mission: My ship in the SPH Take-off (note, I botched several of the screenshots throughout the nerve wracking 90 minute mission there and back. You can see here I forgot to load Bill into the lander on the first attempt, then failed to take screenshot of take-off in second attempt) Decoupling lander from a stable orbit Spaceplane safely returned to Kerbin. Note, I landed with absolutely no fuel on board. I only had a 1/3 of a second blast at full throttle left to push my spaceplane back into the atmosphere. Now here's where I really botched up the photos. Totally failed to get the money shot of Bill planting a flag on the mun, but you can see from the next photo I did indeed pull it off. Flag on Mun Close-up of the lander Lander safely entering atmosphere with chutes deployed. Again I failed to get the money shot but indeed it landed safely on land. Attempted this at 2am after building and testing for hours so my attention was focused entirely on completing the mission. Just as with the spaceplane there was absolutely no fuel left in my lander. I had just enough in both vessels to pull it off successfully.

I can see about a video, as it is pretty darn amusing... Kinda hoping they actually do this on Eve and Duna when I get them there. I will try without thrust, but it shouldn't matter because thrust does not equate to forward motion in a rover with no thrusting engines, and it wouldn't result in reverse motion (which is what these guys are doing). I'm not sure how I would even set my trim ... What exactly are you referring to when you ask that?

I decided to build and test a 4 rover landing craft that separates in the air and allows each rover to parachute separately to the surface. So... I put 4 kerbals on board and headed to the launchpad. To my surprise, every time the rovers land the 3 I'm not controlling take off at full speed when the chutes cut upon impact with the ground. It's pretty hilarious as I can follow them around for a while. The kerbals inside seem to have no regard for their safety and one by one they all drive to their deaths. Even more amusing they all take off in reverse. I can put the brakes on before separation to avoid this calamity, but I'm curious if anyone else has experienced similar behavior?

551. Add planet Funkotron so Jebediah can kick it with Toe-Jam & Earl

If not astronauts most assuredly engineers. I too have put some thought into how inspiring this game could be to young people. It was a silly thought but the other day I was thinking if I won the lottery I'd donate high powered computers and copies of KSP to the local Boys & Girls Clubs.

Cheers to Harvester and C7 for reading through the concerns in this thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/41835-Come-back-old-ASAS-all-is-forgiven%21?p=540433&viewfull=1#post540433 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/41835-Come-back-old-ASAS-all-is-forgiven%21?p=542605&viewfull=1#post542605

Also experiencing problems... and man is this thread confusing Running KSP steam no mods. Built new planes/rockets from scratch (good ships, I've sent many a kerbal to orbit and beyond) 1. When using the following the SAS/ASAS/WHATEVER appears to operate more as a suggestion than any type of stabilization device. It does influence the flight of my craft, but it might as well not as I have to constantly adjust my controls in space or atmosphere. command module the part that looks like old ASAS reaction wheels batteries solar panels gimbaled engines wings/fins/control surfaces Something must be wrong... There is no way this could have been the intended upgrade the dev team was so excited about. After 5 hours of play in .20 I built a stock rocket that was took a lander, rover, and plane to Laythe, successfully landed and both the rover and plane departed successfully for a tour of the moon. After 5 hours of play in .21 I barely made it to the mun and Jeb didn't survive impact.

Nice work NavalLacrosse... Looks like Bob Kerman had a bumpy ride in true wheel of death fashion.. I posted your time! Mars that's massive... I made a few wheeled versions but none using the tt/omniwheels etc plugin... Mine just spun in place at extreme speeds.. fun to watch but dangerous Here are some less than exciting rolling pins of death I created... Turns out the round rocket parts aren't round at all. Most likely they're 16-32 sided.. The adapters that come with Novapunch (I *think*) were the roundest objects I could find in the game.. Even then these designs struggle to get up to speed because the small diameter of the wheel doesn't leave much room for proper thrusting

Here is my first attempt... Ion engine with enough battery power and solar panels to cruise at high speeds and engage in dogfights at max speed for long enough to win. It gets off the ground at around 22 m/s and turns on a dime. It did technically fly with 3 kerbals on board but only 2 survived testing. No weapons yet but I have 69 parts left. I'll submit when I have successfully tested weapons and destroyed some ground units.

Darren I'm impressed...!! That's quite a contraption.... Curious about the leaning though.. perhaps that's caused by the torque of the engines (shouldn't be)?.. maybe this is the same leaning others were talking about Going to post your time and a link to your video in a few minutes.. Also have some unsuccessful attempts of my own that are worthy of sharing that I'll post later.... think "uneventful rolling pin of boredom" :/

That looks way too cool... If you reach a significant speed I'd be inclined to start a new category for dual axle wheels of death

That's an interesting question.. I think to remain a wheel of death the entire ship must rotate as a wheel does... it's fine if it's wide with 2, 3 or 4 wheels.. but they should all be on the same axle and the entire ship should spin via rocket power... I am however very curious to see what your "car of not really death" looks like