Andrew Hansen

Hey there, If you go to the wiki and scroll down a bit you can see the terminal velocities at various altitudes for Kerbin. The most fuel-efficient launch stays close to those numbers. So in answer to your question, if you have overly powerful engines you'll need to throttle down to stay at terminal velocity (unless your not concerned about fuel efficiency). Or, if your engines are slightly weak, you'll find yourself keeping the throttle at 100% all the time. For me, I usually end up with lower-than-ideal TWRs, and so I'm usually always at full throttle. But alas, keeping your speed perfect isn't necessary. You can afford to waste some fuel if you have enough Delta-V.

I'm going to try doing career mode stock (last time I skipped that). I like the new science changes, so it should be a lot more fun now (I wasn't fond of the "spamming science" way of doing things). Meanwhile I'll make a Sandbox save and try out the RAPIER engines. I want to make a "stock craft" with the RAPIER engines, if there isn't one already. What I mean by that is low part count, funny description, no part clipping, very simple.

I really think that what's important for a resource system is having hard and easy modes. Obviously you can't satisfy everyone. Some people only want a resource system as simple as Kethane. Others want uber-realistic fuel types and separate mining units. Squad can't satisfy both these wants in one version of the game. However, if Hard, Medium, and Easy modes of the game are implemented, everyone can be happy. Is it extra work for Squad to make different materials for a resource system? I don't really think so. In essense it will be the same. Perhaps some extra parts will be needed for Hard mode for all the different types of extraction units. Mainly, though, all they'll need to change is the number of materials and their names. I believe Kerbal Space Program should be a game of lots of customization, just like it is now. P.S. - By the way, I'm really excited to hear about Multiplayer coming soon to KSP!

I think you mean Xeldrak, XolotLoki, and antbin since Deathsoul97 has over three times as many votes as antbin does. It's interesting that no one has voted for me yet, but I don't think it's a big deal since as you've stated, there aren't very many voters so far. By the way Xeldrak, I think it'd be awesome if the next BSC competition had to do with the Rocket-Powered VTOL. I just love that stock craft, and it'll be interesting to see what people come up with.

In my opinion I think that Squad has made a good decision to postpone resources until later. I believe that resources will be much simpler and more fun once we have: -a "Modular Fuels" type system with different oxidiser and liquid fuel combinations, as was stated above. -"stretchy tanks" to house all the different types of fuels and be simple at the same time. -Better part management so as not to complicate things for new players. -Easy/medium/hard modes so that you can satisfy the wants of different players. Although we won't have resource management as soon as we might like, when it comes, I'm sure it will be amazing just as everything else that Squad has made is.

Here's a picture I captured of the seven mailsails from the video (0.45). Pretty neat! The way the Kerbals would make a space station, for sure.

Wow! This has been quite the experience to participate in this challenge. I was rather busy this time and almost didn't get my entry in on time. Thus, I didn't have much time to test it. I really hope that during the next BSC as soon as the entries close I don't suddenly say "Oh! If only I would have changed that one thing...." But I feel honored to have made it into finals. Thanks Xeldrak for re-doing the voting, and thanks everyone who voted for me! Unfortunately, I think that during the next BSC I might be even more busy (depending on when it happens), but I'm looking forward to it nonetheless.

OK, I updated my post.

Note: Despite the fact this is posted after the final vote, I did actually get my votes in on time. OK, I have made up my mind who I will vote for. I have made a changes to my votes, so I'm glad I get to vote once more. Below are the people I voted for: XolotLoki: Your entry was my absolute favorite because it was simple, indestructible, and low part count. Since you used RTGs, you could power all the wheels and lights non-stop. And even on gravity as high as Eve, you can flip your rover over with the powerful reaction wheel included. Although at first I was skeptical of your use of the medium wheels rather than the rugged ones, I soon discovered that their lower traction ensures the rover doesn't flip as easily during turns. Great job! I also voted for you on the final vote. Xeldrak: I love the CRAATRV because it has a wide wheel base and is probably the most stable rover in the whole competition. Although it's not possible to right the CRAATRV if it flips over on Kerbin (although on Duna you can), it's basically guaranteed not to flip over unless you drive it off a cliff, in which case no rover could possibly survive anyway. I also like the semi-low part count. Good job Xeldrak! Antbin: The One-Way Ticket is a very stylish-looking and sturdy rover. I like the roll-cage that you spent a long time perfecting. Although 70 parts is a bit on the high side (for a stock craft in my opinion), I like the fact that it includes RCS. Great rover, antbin! Ravenchant: Others have mentioned how nicely your entry demonstrates the use of the LV-R1 engine. I must agree. Your rover is a very nice expansion of the stock one, in my opinion. The stock skycrane has an extremely high thrust-to-weight ratio, making it nearly impossible to decouple the rover safely while hovering, but yours is much easier to control due to a lower thrust-to-weight ratio. And of course, the use of the tiny probe wheels means your rover is stable, just like the stock one - albeit not able to right itself if it falls over. Congratulations! Rhomphaia: I like the Dunakhod SDS because it has low part count, pretty good stability, and is crammed with science equipment. It also has a wonderful array of spotlights. Unfortunately, it can't right itself on Kerbin if it flips over. Even though the skycrane has very low torque, the high gimbal of the radial engines makes it easy to control during descent. Nice job! Honorable Mentions (10th place): Kasuha Speeding Mullet

Thanks! I've been away recently and didn't see your post for a while, but I appreciate your votes! I suppose I did put a lot of effort into the presentation of my design. Now that I think about it, I should have put some more effort into the rover itself (it was pretty flippy!). I agree with your comments about science equipment. Well said. My rover has wheels, but I'd say it's main feature is the ability to fly with RCS. Personally, I find rovers boring because you can't cover much distance in them very fast. Flying rovers on the other hand? Very fun. That said, it can only fly in Duna's gravity or less. By the way M5000, since you seemed to have enjoyed my video, if you haven't seen another one I've made, you might enjoy this as well.

Man, I'd like that! Actually, I agree with you.

Wow! That makes me feel better. At least I know that those votes are probably legitimate now. In other news, I sure wish I would have been able to enter this challenge a bit earlier and do some tinkering with my rover. If I could have, I would changed my entry and used this design.

My apologies boys and girls, but I couldn't hold myself back from making another advertisement. I wanted to make an improved version of my entry with some things that I've learned from this challenge. This time, I made the ad in cinematic mode, making it a lot prettier. I did forget to check "Hide my cursor" in my recording program, however. It still turned out to be a nice ad. Things I've Learned: Those tiny wheels are actually more useful than I thought! For one thing, they're a lot more stable than the Ruggegized ones. The probe ones need only a small platform to make them stable, while the Ruggegized ones need a very large platform to keep them from flipping during corners. Also, the small rover wheels turn on a dime! A TWR above one is nice to have on the skycrane, to permit newbies to test it out on Kerbin. Reaction wheels are better for flipping yourself upright than RCS. Download the Robotic Exploring Machine!

OK, I have made my vote. For me, it was a must to vote for someone who made an entry that didn't have too many parts (my judgement would be different for an entry that included a launch vehicle, of course) and that didn't use part clipping or strange root parts, etc. I also was picky about what power source it used. I like RTGs for rovers because then they never run out of electric charge. I really liked Kasuha's entry, but it seemed like there might have been some part clipping involved, and the root part was a fuel tank, which I personally don't think is good for a stock craft. Another thing is that (if I recall correctly) there was no description text for it! That's a bit important in my opinion for a stock craft. I also liked antbin's entry a lot, but alas, 70 parts is quite a lot for just a rover. In the end, I voted for Xeldrak's entry. For one thing, it was a very professionally-looking entry, name, and description. It used RTGs as a power source and the Ruggegized wheels (I'm biased in that regard). As a bonus, the lander was very stable, could right itself on Duna-gravity worlds, and basically just had many tweaks and quirks that are nice to have in a rover. The only downside would be that when I was flying it, I noticed that the skycrane was just a wee bit assymetrical. Good job Xeldrak! You've just earned yourself four votes.

Thanks! Soon to be updated.

I did a comparison of the different entries. I don't have the time to fly them all, but I did some VAB comparisons, as shown in the chart below. Click on the link below the picture for the original review, which also contains additional comments. Link to My Review

You're voting for bombo1 because he has the most votes? EDIT: Rephrased to make more sense.

<deleted the post, nothing to see here>

Xeldrak, try renaming your thread to something with the word "challenge" in it. Maybe then it will catch a mod's attention.

Ladies and gentlemen! I present to you the NOKERB Exploring Machine! Description Features At only 58 parts, I was debating whether I should call it the NOPARTS Exploring Machine instead! (Just kidding. ) No part clipping (no use of debug menu). Includes ascent stage so you can launch it right away. Transfer stage and landing stage are combined for simplicity. Lander has exactly 5,650 m/s of Delta-V and a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.7. When the lander's main fuel tank is 1/3 full, it has a thrust-to-weight ratio above 1. Rover uses four RTGs to provide constant power to its wheels and lights. Rover has two lights for night-time driving. Rover uses high-traction and high-speed Ruggegized wheels instead of the original puny ones. Rover features back-tire braking to prevent it from flipping. Rover has a nice amount of RCS which can help it "fly" (even on Duna) or flip itself back upright. YouTube Advertisement Imgur Album Comparison with other entries As you can see, the NOKERB Exploring Machine includes a lifter, has low part count, has lights, uses Ruggegized wheels, is powered by RTGs to provide constant power, and even includes RCS! It doesn't have room for Kerbals, but that's because it's called the NOKERB Exploring Machine! Download the NOKERB Exploring Machine!

Sure! You can make an entry whenever you want. If nobody posted anything on this thread for a month, then if you posted something it would be known as "necroposting." But since this is an active thread (as of this reply's posting date), you can post even a few days later.

Congratulations! I'm tempted to have another go at it. You did it on Minmus... I do have a feeling that would be easier, so if I try it again, I'll do it there. EDIT: I don't believe I will be making another submission. I'm kind of busy. Just wanted to let you know so you wouldn't be expecting something that wasn't coming. Great job anyway!

I understand how you feel. Although I landed the pinhole on the Mun entirely without cheats, I wanted to make it look neat by putting it on top of a Mun Arch, so I used Hack Gravity to make it easier. I will post a short video of me placing it on the Mun Arch without using any cheats. EDIT: Here's the video:

Good job Voodou! I'll put a note beside your entry because you used a very large transfer and ascent rocket which I'm sure you don't want to be part of the weight. Your Minmus landing was very impressive! I'll say that you were able to use a craft weighing 1.27 tons to land on Minmus and return to Kerbin (I know you could do it with the rest of the RCS and a bit of pushing), even though you didn't do that. Just for future clarification, however, the challenge is to make the whole ship as light as possible - the ascent stage, any transfer stages, etc. I'll update the OP. Voodou, if you want to, maybe you could add a jet-powered ascent stage to your lander, remove the parachute, RCS, and docking port, and if necessary add another fuel tank to give you the extra Delta-V to make the burn for Minmus from LKO and come back. When we're talking about heading off to Gilly, docking might be a good choice. For that, I think you can just add a jet-powered ascent stage to your transfer stage, and then I'll include the total weight of your whole craft in the original post.

By all means! Yes, docking is allowed.