ihtoit

Thanky there's a short photostory to go with that, too. Might post it on the missions board.

the trick with a piggyback orbiter is to make sure that your orbiter engines thrust vector actually goes through the centre of mass of the orbiter + external tank. That gets a lot trickier when you have a single tank that empties from the top down, so my suggestion is to build the ET in three parts: a sliver section in the middle where you draw fuel and oxidiser from, and payload tanks top and bottom which feed into the sliver, all separated by struts. The CoM will not move a lot with that arrangement.

like this? (not an entry, by the way - I built this thing last July just for gits and shiggles.)

um... might I suggest a little light reading for you before I vote this down?

OK, on the face of it, this is a fairly simple challenge: launch SIX probes into equidistant Kerbosynchronous or Kerbostationary orbit. DEFINITIONS: Kerbosynchronous: Orbital period=6h, completion of each orbit is above the same spot on Kerbin's surface. Achieved with a semimajor axis of 3468.75km. Kerbostationary: Orbital period=6h, orbit is circular, probe does not move relative to the surface. Achieved at an altitude of 2868.75km above the equator. Six: one more than five, one less than seven. RULES: - You may use exactly ONE launcher. - Any structural mod acceptable. - No cheat or exploits or anything else that violates the laws of physics. - Your launcher may comprise a mission payload or it may comprise a crewed capsule. - Your probes must be placed sixty degrees apart and maintain their orbital positions without further interaction. - Each probe must be able to communicate with its neighbours and down to the ground (ie, you must make power allowances for an antenna capable of transmitting at least 3Mm). SCORING: 10 points for each satellite placed into stable synchronous orbit. 10 points for using the launcher core as a payload. 5 points for using a crewed capsule in the launcher core instead of a mission payload. 5 points for returning your crewed capsule safely to the KSC Peninsula (no score for landing anywhere else on Kerbin). (Challengers Note: I've done this to death, out of necessity because I use the Remote Tech mod. You'll see my constellation in pretty much all of my space-based challenge entries. One launcher. )

Kasuha: to complete the true definition of what a space shuttle is, can you launch your shuttle with one payload, deploy that, and come back with a different (ie recovered) payload? Like, oh I dunno, take a fuel tank up, deploy that to the station and bring back an empty? Or even swap out the solar array for a nuclear reactor? (and no deorbiting the solar array for a burnup, those things are expensive, they're asking for them in Kermany as their ground-based nuclear reactors are all offline now - they're entirely dependent on Kerbolar power).

sweet run And you're right, those bumps do cause air, slight rule adjustment.

As part of our sporting series, the Boffs have decided on a test event: the Tour de Kerbin. THE CHALLENGE: Build a tandem-wheeled vehicle (one wheel behind the other), AKA bicycle, or in this case, it would be a motorcycle) and take it on a test ride on the following course: Description: From the West end of the runway, past the hanger and the VAB, around the launch pad, antenna array and building complex, enter the complex around the astronaut complex and back under the bridge, past the research building reactor, take a left and follow the building round, behind the VAB and slip between the VAB and mission control, and finish at the East end of the runway. THE RULES: - Any structural mod valid, HOWEVER: - The ONLY parts that are allowed to touch the ground at any point* are TWO WHEELS. Nothing else may touch the ground, and the vehicle may not LEAVE the ground - except for fleeting moments of "sweet air". - The wheels MUST be arranged on a single track line (ie one follows the other) as in a bicycle, not twin-track as in a barrow. - Any form of propulsion valid. - No violating the laws of physics with exploits or cheats or any of that stuff. - From the point where you leave the runway to the point where you reenter the complex at the astronaut complex, your wheels may NOT meet concrete. - Your vehicle must be manned by a Kerbal. - Your vehicle and Kerbal must survive. - *You may use a launch clamp at launch to hold your vehicle upright, however this will be the only point where you will be allowed to jettison parts. SCORING: The most Kerbal design. To get an in-game MET time from a vehicle that doesn't leave the ground, rock your vehicle back and forth until both wheels leave the ground, then when the mission clock starts, start rolling. (Challenger's Note: Bikes are possible, I've seen them done. Manley on Duna, for one.) LEADERBOARD: Kanil in his minimalist design, for a pacesetting 3:42 and reports that the course is bumpy and challenging with fast straights and heavy-braking corners.

Manley recently did a video (I think it was his Zardoz flyer in the Interstellar series) where he had a pod floating around in the cargo bay, he closed the door and RCS'd the mothership around until the pod engaged the internal clamp. It's worth hunting it down just for that clip.

interesting idea... try it! Beware the Kraken though, he likes to eat rovers made out of struts! Especially ones that stray too close to the water...

yes but it does mean that you have to integrate three propulsion systems on the same vehicle. Nicely done there, Westi29

it was? I missed that...

nicely done! Who said it was "practically impossible"?? @MaverickSawyer: Pe<35km<70km isn't really practical for a single-orbit aerocapture, sure it will brake (a little) and bring the apoapse down, but at those altitudes you're looking at a second orbit. The rules stipulate a single orbit.

I have an X-Wing somewhere on this forum that does SSTMun (with return) on one lot of fuel and a runway takeoff. And a sub-5t SSTO spaceplane that does much the same thing, but that does need a refuel from Munar orbit on arrival. Both stock except they have MechJeb, Luvodicus Super Nukes and Parom monoprop tanks.

As I was writing this challenge I did consider this, and came to the conclusion that from the way my failed flight turned out, I ran out of fuel pre-apoapse and figured, hell with it and jettisoned the lifter stage in preparation for reentry/landing. At that point the periapse was at 30km and short of a KSC landing by about 50km. By the time I got to 30km, p<0 was some way past KSC and I was seeing atmospheric effects and slowing down. I'll make a clarification, and to answer the other question - you can use MechJeb in the probe stage for informational purposes during the descent phase.

A long time ago, on a planet not too far from here, somebody said that if you hit a golf ball hard enough, it'll go right round the planet and land back where it started. This seems like a good place to try out that theory. THE CHALLENGE: Send a probe on a ballistic trajectory that takes it precisely ONCE AROUND the planet and land as close as possible in an uncontrolled freefall to the point of launch (ie, KSC). THE RULES: - You may use a MINIMUM of two up to as many stages as you like, but your terminal stage MAY NOT include any aerodynamic or RCS control (other than parachutes), or ASAS systems - these must all be in the second to last stage (or, in the case of a two-stage system, in the first (boost) stage). - You may use MechJeb in the terminal stage for informational purposes during the descent but Smart A.S.S. must be showing and set to OFF for screenshots. - Your flight MUST take you above the atmosphere (70km altitude). - You may set an orbital trajectory for your flight during boost phase (in fact this is sensible), but your periapse must allow terminal aerocapture. - All boost/RCS/ASAS stages MUST be jettisoned before you reach apoapse. - Your terminal stage (ie the top stage, with the probe core) will be the deciding factor in how close you land. - All structural parts valid. - Your boost phase must use rockets. Creeping around with jets is NOT an acceptable method! Neither is pushing apoapse until you're back over KSC. - No cheats, exploits, infinite fuel or anything else that violates the laws of physics. - Terminal stage aerobraking may only be achieved using parachutes, with a maximum opening altitude of 1000m AGL (set this in the VAB when you attach your chute (v .23+). - Powered flight must take place entirely within the ASCENT phase. No thrust may be used during the descent phase (ie any point after achieving apoapsis). This includes RCS. Not that anything should be attached to the core at this point apart from a chute or two, and maybe a battery anyway... - For the purposes of this challenge, "AROUND" does not mean a 6 hour ballistic arc straight up and back down, it means a suborbital track AROUND the planet. Total MET for each attempt should not realistically exceed 45 minutes. SCORING: As in golf, lower is better. Birdie (-1): anywhere on the KSC Peninsula. Eagle (-2): anywhere within the ground boundary the KSC Complex (bounded between either end of the runway and the "flat grassed" enclosing perimeter of the Complex). Hole in One! (-3): Land on any roof at KSC. Bogey (+1): Overshot the Peninsula. Mulligan (+2): Fell short of the Peninsula. This is determined by the imaginary line described approximately North to South 5km to the West of the centre of the Complex, that also just happens to bound the plateau. Also score this if you land anywhere else on Kerbin not described above. You may make a MAXIMUM of 18 attempts (launch to landing, quickloads do NOT count to number of attempts but please indicate whether you actually used them, I'll decide later whether to inflict penalties for this), please keep these within the same post (that's what the edit button's for), your total score and the number of holes played will determine your leaderboard position. Please be honest and document failures as well! BOARD: Kasuha Hole: 1 Score: -3 (Challenger's Note: I know this is possible, I have (accidentally, following a failed orbital insertion) bounced a probe off the runway after a single orbit.) Honourable Mentions: Kasuha for showing us how it shouldn't be attempted. Good roof landing, though.

interesting... I wasn't using Romfarer (which can extend physics range dramatically, apparently), but my static launch tests showed all the missiles from point of launch all the way to impact - most of them exceeding 2.5km linear range. How... odd.

Not a problem if they have probe cores on them.

On the 96th Anniversary of the first real attempt to disable the German naval stronghold at Bruges-Zeebrugge, the Boffs have decided it might be nice to show off our Naval prowess by staging a mock shore bombardment on the abandoned Island complex. There's only one slight problem: We currently have no naval prowess. THE CHALLENGE: Build and launch a seagoing vessel, armed with missiles together capable of launching a bombardment of the Island complex from a stand-off range - in the particular case, from offshore. THE RULES: - ALL structural parts mods valid. - Your vessel must launch missiles from the WATER. I don't care if it flies, the operation at Zeebrugge involved no aircraft. - NO infinite fuel, unbreakable joints or any other exploit or cheat, known or unknown, that confers an OP or physics-defying advantage. - EXCEPT: You MAY use Gravity Hack to move your vessel from land to sea - at which point, you must turn OFF Gravhack, save and restore your game to fully restore gravitational effects. - Your missiles must be of the unguided variety. Point and shoot ballistics, that's it. HINT: I have a "standard" rail of dumb missiles which have a G2G ballistic range of around 4.5km and a maximum ceiling of around 6km. The rail uses Oscar B tanks topped with probe cores and tailed with small stack separators and Rockomax 48-7S motors. The following image is a slightly older design on a test mount, using sepratrons (which REALLY killed part counts!) for a ceiling of about 1200m: SCORING: No scoring system in place, I want to see pretty orange blooms on the Island. If you prefer a scoring system, please suggest one. WARNING: this will kill part counts if you decide to deploy a boat with a cluster munition. (Challengers' Note: I'll be posting my ship design later on once my video tasks are done for the day, that missile rail is just itching for some action...!)

I'll let you have that, very nice design! (hydrofoils?? Must have a go at that...!)

interesting... but fail. The brief is to plant a flag in the tower. Also, the stipulation is in the OP, therefore it's a rule. End of.

that's a pretty plane... Anyone else notice that the universal solution to challenges like this one is to use a skeleton lifter? Isn't anyone going to have a go with an enclosed cargo ramp?

by way of demonstration, here's a lithobrake demonstrator I just threw together. Stock apart from MechJeb and my favourite nuke engine: Going up: Terminal on descent: Landed: and only ONE piece broke off!:

Quantumcurvature did a Munar lithobrake with an overengineered probe that would have survived a Kerbin lithobrake. He used stock landing legs and a Grand Slam bouncy-bomb design, those legs didn't even bend on impact.

OK. I'll just throw a block of stock landing gear wheels on a MK.I lander can - 'cos those things are indestructible!