700NitroXpress

New mission is posted, please understand the rules changes to NASA launches and Shuttle Missions. If you have questions, ask them.

1. You only have to do it once, if you do it for both moons then it's 20 points. 2. I may not entirely understand the question... If you land 4 kerbals on Mun, you get 20 points, if the same 4 kerbals land on Minmus then that's 20 points. Mission total is 40 points. The scoring per moon is independent of the other moon.

What? NOOOOO!!!!

So I've seen a few videos of the Magic Boulder in orbit around Ike. Scott Manley's video showed it in a polar orbit and then another video showed it in an equatorial orbit both videos showed it at 15km orbits. Where is this thing in 0.22, equatorial or polar orbit? Can you land on it yet?

I go straight up from the launch pad until the orange tanks are done, then angle 45 degrees and throttle down the engines to 3/4 power. Once the AP is at 70km I put it at 100 degrees and continue burning until the AP is where I want it. Then wait until I have 1 minute from the AP, then burn at full throttle until orbit is achieved. If you're having trouble with the current lifer, try using the new one with more power. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-vTRL2n8wvzaVVOWHJlN3MxQms/edit?usp=sharing

Alright, so what I'm going to do with the NASA launch points is just compact them for each mission. So you'll have to launch all craft for the mission using NASA launch vehicles and you get 100 bonus points for the mission. I'm also going to put shuttle missions as: you can only get 100 points max per mission. Mission meaning: the mission posted from Kerbal Space Command HQ. If you do one shuttle mission, you get 50 points, if you do 2 shuttle missions you get 100 points, any additional shuttle missions don't award more points until the next mission. This takes effect on Mission 03

Core craft and Mission 01 package approved, good luck!

Cool, glad it helped, I have a new version that can lift even heavier payloads and has a different center stage for more power. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-vTRL2n8wvzaVVOWHJlN3MxQms/edit?usp=sharing

Here is my new Eve lander, the landing legs finally work even if it lands at an angle. It also hit the ground at 9 m/s and nothing essential broke.

Landing failure, all Red Shirts are dead. Any landing legs just won't survive the landing, once they break, they jiggle around and cause the rest of the craft to explode. I'm going to try it with all I beams. Nose cones are back to being parachutes.

New mission will be posted tonight, one day late due to Thanksgiving

Here's my new design using the I beam configurations. I have 4 shock absorbers for the center section and a large structural plate on the bottom of the lower decoupler. The parachutes should work just fine and the nose cones look good and make me feel better about the craft's chances. I took out the center pod and replaced it with a Skipper engine and a 1440 fuel tank. I'm taking this out to Eve now for testing with 4 Red Shirt Kerbals for testing.

Yeah, anyone can start at any time. The first mission can be accessed by clicking on the "Here" link next to Mission 01. As for bonus points... no, but I can put a badge next to your name that says career mode. I didn't have bonus points set up for career mode or for mods that add difficulty because those are personal choices and not part of how the challenge was designed. Especially since you'll need some advanced parts in order to complete the missions. I wouldn't suggest doing the missions in Career Mode unless you already have the entire tech tree unlocked.

The nose cones are replacing the parachutes that I had mounted on top so it already has a significant mass reduction. I think nose cones help so they're staying. As for landing legs... there's no room, this thing is compact and low to the ground. The I beams actually worked perfectly well in testing on the Eve landings, they even landed at an angle and the craft was able to take off again. Now I just need more fuel and external command seats instead of the pod, then I'll have a small rocket on top that will take them the rest of the way into orbit. What I have right now made it to 45 km from a sea level launch so I thought that was a good test. I'm going to redesign it and then post a new screenshot.

Yeah, time doesn't start until you fire the engines, and it never stops even if the craft stops moving. The mission timer only stops when the craft gets recovered or no longer exists.

Did you do the rest of the mission to Gilly and then back into an Eve orbit briefly, then return to LKO?

No because you sent them both up at the same time. If they were sent up individually then you would get 50*2. If one lands and the other doesn't, then you get no points. They're both apart of the same shuttle mission since they were both launched at the same time, so they must both land in order to gain the points for that shuttle mission. Payload for these points is: Mission Payload. Mission Payload: Attachments to your core craft for fulfilling the mission parameters. Mission critical gear that is needed in order to complete a mission. (A lander, module, science gear, rover, satellite, probe, or other gear designated for the mission) Crew and fuel are not mission payloads.

You get 50 only if the shuttles land on the KSC runway. For using a NASA launcher to get them into orbit, it's 20 points. So if they both land then the total for that launch would be 70 points. If they fail to land, then it's worth only the 20 points for the launcher used to get them into orbit. The payloads that they are carrying have to be added to the core craft. Crew are not payloads, they're crew. So lifting crew into orbit is worth nothing. The same goes with the fuel. Refueling missions are not adding mission payloads to your craft, you're just refueling it. The bonuses are only for the mission payloads themselves being lifted into orbit.

Time continues to run even when you stop, that's why you have to be quick. If you wait at all once you stop on the runway, it still adds time.

You don't need any solar panels ever. Just put one electric generator on it and you're done.

Nose cones make me feel like they're doing something so therefore they're useful. I'm testing a different design now other than the one in the image.

Alright, the I beams work really good, I swapped the engines out for the aerospikes and added more fuel. The parachutes now eject with the I beams so that should reduce the weight. The parachutes on top are now replaced with nose cones to reduce drag.

Alright, I'm testing the I beam one now.

It the game under the Jool Planet info it says 200,000 meters Under Atmospheric characteristics: Atmos. Height = 200,000 m

So, in my designs to build Eve escape pod landers, I'm trying to find a better and more stable solution. The big landing legs are moving when I touchdown on Eve and so the entire craft starts sliding sideways after it lands and everything explodes. This won't work, but on Kerban this doesn't happen. I swapped out the landing gear with the smallest version of the landing legs which should be the most stable because they have less room that they can move before the girders hit the ground. After I made this one with the landing legs I was looking at the I beams. They all have an impact tolerance of 80 and the landing gear has an impact tolerance of 10 - 20. Is the impact of the landing breaking even the heaviest of the landing gear and causing the craft to slide around and explode? Do you think that the I beams is a better solution compared to the landing gear on girders? Both craft land perfectly on Kerban and the I beam version has a wider landing base so I think it would be more stable, what do you guys think? Any suggestions on improvements? I'm landing on fairly level terrain on Eve so it isn't landing at an angle and I touchdown at about 6.5 m/s so it's a really soft landing. Here are the images for comparison: The landing solutions eject when the craft lifts off the ground on Eve.