Northstar1989

Nice showing, but see the definition of payload: - You will receive points for every half-ton of payload to make it to orbit. This is by far the most important source of points. Payload is defined as a detachable portion of the rocket which may be utilized for other purposes. It MAY NOT contain any engines used during ascent (even though use of payload engines in normally a good idea in normal play), air intakes, or parts with lift. It must have an accessible docking port, by which it detaches from all other stages. If the payload is 1.25 meters or more, the docking port must be a standard Clamp-O-Tron or larger. If the payload is 2.5 meters or more, the docking port must be a Clamp-O-Tron Senior or larger. The payload may contain no SAS force, except for a single crewed command module, or probe core. Your payload has to be *detachable* via a docking port. Think of the contract parameters requiring this as being to allow for multi-modular assembly of large interplanetary ships... Re-do it with a payload detachable from the sustainment engine- which still appears to be attached in the final screenshot (this will lower your score a little bit, as it will require at least one additional part, will increase your rocket's mass and drag- and the sustainment engine may not count towards the payload), and submit. Make sure to take a screenshot showing payload mass AFTER its detachment from all other stages. Also, please include a screenshot showing mass before takeoff. Regards, Northstar

I'll add your entry to the Scoreboard. Congratulations on being the first player on the Scoreboard! By the way, take note of what Red Iron Crown said- you're wasting space on the image window, as well as compromising your own privacy, by showing part of your desktop. EDIT: By the way, although I don't doubt the part-count you give, please add in a screenshot from the VAB or Orbital Map listing part-count. Regards, Northstar

OK, looks good. "Stock Rebalance" will be added to the list of allowed mods. Regards, Northstar

Check the screenshots. They reveal it has 482 parts and weighs 1452.37 tons, AFTER it has already lifted off and burned some of its fuel. Definitely overweight.

I'm afraid it's actually disqualified. The rules clearly stated: (1) "Your rockets may reach a maximum weight of 1.2 MEGATONS (1,200 tons)" (2) "The following mods are allowed..." nowhere on the list including Stock Rebalance- which I'm unfamiliar with. Though, if you could describe it to me and make good case for it- I might decide to allow it. (3) "Payload is defined as a detachable portion of the rocket which may be utilized for other purposes. It MAY NOT contain any engines used during ascent (even though use of payload engines in normally a good idea in normal play), air intakes, or parts with lift. It must have an accessible docking port, by which it detaches from all other stages." You're missing a docking port on your payload, which I specifically direct you to use to allow it to detach from the lower stages (this was to keep the part-counts down, actually, so more people can use craft posted here if you decide to share the craft file. The docking port allows the attachment of an "orbital tug" to move the payload to wherever it is needed...) I apologize for mixing megatons and kilotons- but the point is clear (1,200,000 tons would be unimaginably large, so the intent was obvious...) Submit something a bit lighter. I recommend trying to trim down the part-count (for points) while you're at it. By the way, I recommend using a dummy-payload to minimize its part count. Just a giant fuel tank with a command module slapped on (and a couple solar panels for the life support, if you're running TAC Life Support), and a docking port. Also, since I haven't seen any entries that meet all the requirements yet (the orange tank bit was also overweight, *AND* over maximum part count- as one of the screenshots during ascent revealed), I'm going to add one more bonus category I meant to add before, but forgot, for a Space-X style or spaceplane launch... This one will be worth BIG points. I also increased the FAR and Airbreather penalties a bit, after seeing the magnitude of the score you would have had for your rocket, had it not been DQ'd... (honestly, I didn't expect players to submit rockets that could lift 150 tons... Then again, these are Kerbal Space Program players we are talking about...) Regards, Northstar

Good point. My bad. I wrote that while laid up with a cold late at night, unable to get to sleep. Fixing it now... Stock entries are fine- though for simplicity, they're not in their own category, and might not be as competitive. The big thing is actually the amount of payload you can get to orbit. And, as for points- you can pick up a LOT by launching from a mountaintop (although I was thinking of EXPl Launchpads, this is actually possible with Stock- just set up a jet-powered skycrane to carry large segments of the rocket to the new launchpad, and connect them with docking ports...) Regards, Northstar

The Heavy Launch Rocket Finesse Challenge Kerbal Space Center has put forth a call for bids on design of their next series of heavy launch rocket (or heavy spaceplane). Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to design and test your submission to this bidding war. The Rules - The following mods are allowed: NovaPunch2, KW Rocketry, NearFuture Propulsion, KSP-Interstellar (see exceptions below), B9 Aerospace, Firespitter, FAR (see rules below), Stock Rebalance Mod, StretchyTanks/StretchySRB's/ProceduralParts, MegaPanels, Kethane, Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, KAS, Orbital Construction (won't help you, except as payload- but go ahead and use it if you want), Krag's Planet Factory (once again, not going to help), Extraplanetary Launchpads, Nyrath's Orion mod, ProceduralDynamics, ProceduralFairings, TAC Fuel Balanced, MechJeb2, RemoteTech, TAC Life Support, MechJeb/RT For All mod (adds MJ2/RT to all command modules), any graphics (purely aesthetics) or memory/resolution-reduction mods - Suggest other mods to me if you think they should be allowed. I will be the judge on what it fair and admissible in all matters (and similarly what is exploitative/cheap) - FAR will be allowed (as will ProceduralFairings, which should help with it), however due to the greatly increased performance of many rockets while using this mod, due to the more realistic simulation of drag, you will receive a points-penalty for using it (this is for balance/fairness for those of us whose computers cannot handle FAR's RAM usage). I have chose a value I think will somewhat balance things, but if I find FAR rockets are dominating the scoreboard, I may increase the penalty (this applies retroactively). You have been warned. - Due to the in my opinion unrealistic and overpowered nature of the fusion and antimatter reactors in KSP-Interstellar, these reactors will be totally disallowed FOR ALL PURPOSES. I am a huge fan of some features of the mod myself, but this had to be done. The fission reactors will be limited to current-day (or near-future) technology: Molten-Sodium and Solid-Bed fission reactors only! Also, for those using very old versions of KSP-Interstellar, the Atmospheric Scoop part is banned, as it produces no drag due to an error in the coding acknowledged by FractalUK (the mod creator) - If you choose to use microwave beamed power for a KSP-Interstellar rocket, you will be limited to no more than one 3.75 meter (or smaller) fission reactor at/near the KSC, and one 2.5 meter Uranium reactor (no Thorium or Uranium Nitride- these reactors require more maintenance) at/near the island runway. You may use as much beamed solar power as you like, however- sustainability for the win! - You may design and launch a rocket to takeoff from an alternate launch site anywhere on Kerbin using Extraplanetary Launchpads. You will receive a points penalty for doing so, but it is is not meant to be balanced (it takes a LOT of effort to build a mountaintop launchpad, for instance). This is meant to be one way to potentially increase your score. On the downside, such launchpads often cannot safely launch the largest of rockets due to the inability to secure a perfectly level launch site. - Your rockets (or spaceplanes) may reach a maximum weight of 1.2 KILOTONS (1,200 tons). They may contain no more than 120 parts, but will receive points penalties for higher mass and part-count, not meant to fully balance it out- larger is better. You can even receive a small bonus for launching an enormous rocket, for its shear impressiveness to behold (although this will not outweigh the penalty for its huge mass). It may contain no crew, except for in the payload (so you don't use suicidal Kerbals to help pilot the boosters). - You will receive points for every half-ton of payload to make it to orbit. This is by far the most important source of points. Payload is defined as a detachable portion of the rocket which may be utilized for other purposes. It MAY NOT contain any engines used during ascent (even though use of payload engines in normally a good idea in normal play), air intakes, or parts with lift. It must have an accessible docking port, by which it detaches from all other stages. If the payload is 1.25 meters or more, the docking port must be a standard Clamp-O-Tron or larger. If the payload is 2.5 meters or more, the docking port must be a Clamp-O-Tron Senior or larger. The payload may contain no SAS force, except for a single crewed command module, or probe core. - The largest bonus available to you comes from using a "100% reusable Space-X style reusable launch vehicle". If you don't know what this is, I highly recommend looking it up. I also demonstrate one on my thread (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/57509-Kerbin-and-Beyond-a-Maturing-Space-Program/page20). Note that using a spaceplane will also qualify for this award- IF you managed to land at again safely back at the KSC, or on an Extraplanetary Launchpads runway elsewhere on Kerbin. + The basic idea is that you launch straight up, so that your entire rocket has an apoapsis above the lower atmosphere before clearing your first stage. The next stage then (at least mostly) circularizes the orbit before the lower stage falls low enough to disappear in the atmosphere- and you then switch to the lower stage on its way down. The lower stage, with the aid of a built-in probe core, performs a guidance burn to bring its trajectory back towards the KSC (I am requiring you land it within 50 km of the KSC for this challenge- this is easy if you keep your initial ascent vertical) and a short "suicide" burn to cancel its velocity shortly before touchdown with the ground (this takes surprisingly little fuel- drag will slow you down to terminal velocity long before you reach the ground). Use landing legs/pegs to protect the engines from exploding on impact with the terrain- your entry will be disqualified if you use parachutes (they are complex and expensive to reuse in real-life, and drastically overpowered in the stock game) or lose any parts on the way down. + The upper stage then detaches from the payload, and performs a re-entry maneuver of its own to touch down somewhere on Kerbin (preferably close to the KSC, although not required for this challenge due to its difficulty- I was unable to reach the KSC with the upper stage on my own attempts.) In order to be gentle on the reusable (non-payload) stages, I am also requiring you use mechanical decouplers or docking ports to separate them from the rest of the rocket- no explosive decoupler plates please. Similarly, please do not burn the lower stages by igniting the next stage up with the engines pointed directly at them at point-blank range. Objectives You are to launch a rocket (or spaceplane) from on the ground on Kerbin to a stable orbit (the periapsis must be at least 72 km, to provide a small safety margin) around Kerbin. Your objective is to develop a rocket that best meets the standard set for by the KSC, although creativity and realism are also encouraged. Scoring Please submit PROOF of each scoring category. This means a screenshot of the vessel mass on the launchpad, of the payload mass AFTER detachment from the sustainment stage or spaceplane, of the reusable (non-payload) stages touching back down for a reusable rocket/spaceplane, and of the percentage of fuel remaining (the resources tab must be visible) in the sustainment stage or spaceplane AFTER detachment from the payload, if you are going for any of the leftover fuel bonuses... Flying Needle -240 points: for using FAR Airbreather -180 points for using any form of jet engine (this includes Thermal Turbojets) Reusable Glory +300 points for using a Space-X style 100% reusable launch vehicle (the lower stages must be recoverable- no parachutes) or a spaceplane (must land back at the KSC runway, or on an ExPl runway elsewhere on Kerbin) Efficient +50 points use fewer than 50 parts The Answer +24 points use exactly 42 parts Money Talks -5 points for each part in the part-count (this does NOT include launch clamps, but does include payload. Note the 120 part limit.) Fuel Isn't Free -5 points for every 20 tons of rocket mass on the launchpad (this includes payload, for simplicity. Note the maximum weight limit.) Size Matters +10 points design/launch a rocket that weighs over 1000 tons on the launchpad Radioactive Launchpad -12000 points for using an Orion Nuclear Pulse Rocket (these entries should be just for kicks) Mountains Are Steep -30 points for utilizing a launchpad at over 3000 meters Logistical Costs -12 points for utilizing a launchpad other than the KSC (stacks with Mountains Are Steep) Room for Error +40 points for making it to orbit with more than 10% fuel remaining OUTSIDE of the payload (this fuel must be able to reach at least one engine outside of the payload. Don't exploit this by dropping empty tanks at the last minute, or stealing fuel from payload.) Fuel to Spare +70 points for making it to orbit with more than 20% fuel remaining OUTSIDE of the payload (this does NOT stack with Room for Error, and the fuel must be able to reach at least one engine outside of the payload. Please don't exploit this.) Kerbals in Space! +10 points for having at least one Kerbal crewing the payload (however, the G-forces must stay out of the red at all times) Air to Breathe +10 points for using TAC Life Support on a crewed vessel (the life-support may be part of the payload, but remember part-count...) What's This Oxygen? -10 points for running out of any type of life-support provision when using TAC Life Support Pride and Profit +10 points for every half-ton of payload to make it to orbit I look forward to seeing what entries you guys can offer! (I reserve the right to make an entry of my own as well) This challenge has been closed to new entries as of May 12th, US Central Time. Scoreboard: 1. xrayfishx - 4990 points 2. Sensi - 4200 points 3. Red Iron Crown - 3475 points 4. Rakaydos - 2005 points 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Good point- but your ejection burns around Minmus are shorter than your ejections burns around the Mun- and thus more precise, further saving fuel and adding to comfort... An added benefit from a Minmus station is that it gives you the back-up option of making a direct transfer from Minmus to your intended destination if you can't get away with the method of dropping your periapsis and waiting. Since Minmus' orbital velocity around Kerbin is so low, it can *almost* be ignored with some of the more distant transfers (or if, like me, you spend extra Delta-V on Duna transfers so your poor Kerbals don't have to wait in space as long... Good for roleplaying. Also good if you're running a life-support mod, as it reduces the total mass in provisions you need to pack...) It's also sometimes possible to make most of the burn near Minmus, but a small part of it closer to Kerbin (say a bit beyond the Mun's orbit), which is still better than making the entire burn near Minmus... Regards, Northstar

What you want is for the the rocket to spend as much time falling inwards towards Kerbin (gaining speed, which will be useful for the Oberth effect) and as little time being slowed down by Kerbin's gravity on the way out as possible. It really doesn't matter the relative positioning of Minmus- only the final trajectory of the rocket as it exits Kerbin's SOI after Kerbin's gravity is done curving its path... For best results, eject from a low Minmus orbit (Minmus' gravity is so weak the benefits from the Oberth effect on ejection will greatly outweigh the increased time its gravity slows you down during ejection) with a burn at a periapsis that will have the final trajectory when leaving Minmus' SOI pointed precisely retrograde from the direction of Minmus orbit around Kerbin. If you get it just right, you sohuld leave Minmus' SOI with enough velocity that you have almost no velocity relative to Kerbin upon SOI-transfer, and will consequentially fall almost straight in towards Kerbin. You want your periapsis relative to Kerbin as low as possible without entering the atmosphere to achieve maximum benefit from the Oberth effect- though you also have to take into account the fuel cost of the burn near Minmus vs. the fuel savings at the burn near Kerbin... Regards, Northstar

A note on the ISRU refineries, ice-mining, and its products for those not particularly familiar with them (such as Geschosskopf) - Standard (NOT in-line) ISRU refineries can directly gather "LiquidWater" from subsurface ice deposits they are landed on, such as those found on Duna, the Mun (in the norther craters), Vall (assumed to be essentially a giant ball of ice), and Minmus (small amounts of ice are mixed with the crystal on the "lake beds"). - LiquidWater can either be used as a propellant for nuclear thermal rockets, or electrolyzed in the ISRU refinery (or in-line version) into LiquidFuel and Oxidizer (in the 8:1 mass ration dictated by water's stoichiometry). - LiquidFuel can be combined with atmospheres containing Carbon Dioxide through the Sabatier Process (at the ISRU refinery or in-line version) to generate LiquidMethane and LiquidWater. If the byproduct LiquidWater is electrolyzed, however, it will not produce enough Oxidizer to burn all of the LiquidMethane. The excess LiquidMethane can either be burned with excess Oxidizer from LiquidWater electrolysis (useful if you are performing ice-mining), or Oxidizer from other sources such as regoltih electrolysis. It can also be passed directly through nuclear thermal rockets as propellent, as can pure LiquidFuel or LFO mix. A sample ISRU operation: Mine: 36 tons LiquidWater Refining Step #1: Electrolyze the 36 tons of LiquidWater [2 H2O --> 2 H2 + O2] into Oxidizer and LiquidFuel. This will give you 32 tons of Oxidizer and 4 tons of LiquidFuel. Refining Step #2: Combine the 4 tons of LiquidFuel (H2) with CO2 in Duna's atmosphere via the Sabatier Reaction [CO2 + 4 H2 --> CH4 + 2 H2O] to get 8 tons of LiquidMethane and 18 tons of LiquidWater Refining Step #3: Electrolyze the 18 additional tons of LiquidWater to get 16 more tons of Oxidizer and 2 more tons of LiquidFuel Utilization #1: Combust the 8 tons of LiquidMethane with the 32 tons of Oxidizer [CH4 + 2 O2 --> CO2 + 2 H2O] for Delta-V at a high thrust! Utilization #2: Either: (A) Pass the remaining 2 tons of LiquidFuel through a thermal rocket or plasma thruster for even more Delta-V at a high ISP! (either type of engine can be powered off a nuclear reactor on the craft, or for much better rocket performance, off a microwave beamed power network- which can work off either nuclear reactors in stable orbits or on the ground, or massive solar farms...) ( OR, run the LiquidFuel through the Sabatier Reaction one last time. Combust the LiquidMethane produced for even more Delta-V! I hope this post is useful for those of you who are considering utilizing KSP-Interstellar's In-Situ Resource Utilization system. Note that I've repeatedly nagged FractalUK, the creator of KSP-Interstellar, to include the Reverse Water Gas Shift Reaction [CO2 + H2 --> CO + H2O] to allow one to essentially strip just Oxidizer from Duna's atmosphere without consuming LiquidFuel when coupling it with electrolysis. This would be useful if you shipped LiquidFuel to Duna from Kerbin (like I did), as it would provide a means of producing Oxidizer for combusting the LiquidMethane you get by running your LiquidFuel through the Sabatier Reaction- you only produce half the Oxidizer needed from electrolyzing the LiquidWater produced. However, he's shown not yet shown any sign that he's going to include the RWGS reaction, ostensibly until a better system can be implemented for organizing the existing reactions than a right-click menu- if he ever includes it at all. Regards, Northstar May13 EDIT: Corrected my math *AGAIN*, and changed the explanation to match. I don't know why it was so hard for me to balance a few chemical equations- I used to be GREAT at basic chemistry like this back in high school and my freshman year of college...

OK, so more images! First of all, the Duna Science Module made yet another boring aerobrake pass: Then, the Duna Crew Module adjusted its periapse for aerobrake (it was previously on a collision course) and caught fire beautifully in the Dunan atmosphere (even without atmospheric oxygen, apparently). The G-forces weren't allowed to climb too high, of course, as this design was less reinforced than the Duna Science Module, and I saw no need to black this crew out... Following that, I came to two awful realizations: (1) I had captured the Duna Science Module into a retrograde orbit whereas I had captured the Duna Crew Module into a prograde orbit. The two vessels were intended, of course, to orbit in the same direction- as I will eventually be scrapping the entire armada and reassembling the parts into a permanent space station in orbit around Duna (with the largest portion of the material' being sent to the surface to build a colony, of course). (2) The Duna Science Module and the Duna Crew Module were going to reach their next periapse at nearly the exact same time. This, of course, presented problems for making sure that the physics were loaded for both craft to allow aerobraking, and neither possibly disappeared in the Dunan atmosphere... I managed to juggle around the vessel loading such that both aerobrake maneuvers were simulated more or less accurately, however, and neither craft disappeared... Both crews alive and well, a bit more time passed, and the Duna Crew Module made its second aerobrake. This is going to be a longggg wait until either vessel is anywhere close to ready for orbit stabilization: The Duna Science Module is built for an Ike landing- which gave me an idea... It might cost less Delta-V to use Ike to reverse the Duna Science Module's orbit than it would to do so using a burn at apoapsis. Alternatively, placing the Duna Science Module in a stable Ike orbit (a highly elliptical, retrograde Duna orbit is actually the best possible starting point for a transfer to a prograde Ike orbit) is also appealing, as this would position the Duna Scinece Module to land near future ISRU refineries on Ike's surface- where it could refuel its Aluminum Hybrid Rockets, as well as acquire a full load of Oxidizer from regolith electrolysis. This would enable it to perform its originally intended role of supplementing my initial fuel budget (which is intentionally LiquidFuel heavy) with Oxidizer, stretching my Delta-V until ice-mining and refining operations on Duna eventually supply me with all the fuel I could ever want... Regards, Northstar

I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying it man! If you're looking for more information on KSP-Interstellar, there's a wiki on it, by the way: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/wiki Regards, Northstar

The Nuclear Orion Parts Tanker made it to a nice low orbit with 115 nukes left. Hmmm, I hope the Kerbals don't get too crazy with them when they finally dock with the thing to unload the RocketParts... (and eventually to recycle it for even more RocketParts) Meanwhile, the Duna Science Module continued with its aerobraking maneuvers to eventually bring it into a low orbit- after performing another minor retrograde burn to bring its periapse back in the atmosphere after Ike pulled the orbit into a more circular shape. I'm bored out of my mind (shown here are 3 separate passes, which only lowered the apoapsis by roughly 1/6th in total- but I don't want to waste fuel needlessly, and I've got nothing better to do until the Duna Crew Module arrives). The Kerbals seem quite happy though... Well, that's it for me for the night. Oh, and for those of you in US. Pacific time, I hope you're having a Happy Easter! For those of you further east- I hope you had a wonderful Easter as well. Time to get some Zzzz's Regards, Northstar

The Duna Science Module made some nice, slow, gentle and uninteresting aerobrakes to bleed off a little more velocity while I waited for the Orion Nuclear Parts Tanker to reach Duna's SOI: When the Orion did arrive, however, it malfunctioned violently and suffered an explosion wiping out one of its four RocketParts modules (1/4th of its cargo). Well, actually, it encountered a particularly nasty variant of the Space Kraken. It proceeded a number of F5/F9 attempts at loading it in a row to wobble increasingly violently and then spontaneously explode. However, after quite a few attempts, and some random release of nuclear warheads (I was desperate to try anything to give the random number generators a slightly different seed to work with) I finally managed a version where it only lost one of its RocketParts modules, rather than being annihilated entirely... I then proceeded to maneuver the Orion onto a collision course with Duna (I re-used a Maneuver Planner setting from the Science Module- knowing that the high imprecision of nuclear pulse thrust would lead to a collision course), bleed off its extreme approach velocity as it more closely approached Duna, and then finally maneuver it into a reasonably stable orbit around Duna: While I waited for the Orion to approach periapse (where I will release a few nukes to create retrograde thrust and bring the apoapsis a bit lower- and make the orbit more circular) I also kept an eye on the Duna Science Module- which chance would have it ended up with an Ike encounter pulling its periapse back above Duna's atmosphere. This will cost me fuel, but greatly sped up the deceleration to a lower orbit by pulling the apoapsis down quite a bit as well... In the meantime, I will continue to bring the Duna Science Module and Orion Nuclear Parts Tanker each to their respective parking orbits, while waiting for the arrival of additional craft of the Duna Aramada. The next craft, scheduled to arrive in a bit over a game-day, is the Duna Crew Module (which carries crew members, as well as some extra fuel- both rules the Duna Science Module has also been filling since KSP-Interstellar updates made its planned role of Ike regolith electrolysis impossible...) Shortly following that, the working copy of the Eagle Mk2 and its attached transfer vehicle will arrive in Duna's Sphere of Influence, and I will FINALLY get to submit my first entry to the "Flying Duna" challenge (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/50619-Flying-Duna-AGAIN). Regards, Northstar

Now, for the exciting part. Duna! As the Duna Science Module approached Duna, Barwise and Enrick Kerman's first step was to perform a spacewalk and re-activate the KSP-Interstellar nuclear reactors they would be utilizing to perform all subsequent maneuvers, while simultaneously disabling the inline NERVA engines (with their ISP of 1000 for Molten-Sodium uranium-powered fission reactors, the KSP-I thermal rocket nozzles are superior to the NearFuture inline NERVA engines, which have an ISP of 800. Their thrust is quite anemic though- and I do wonder if I might not have saved fuel utilizing the NearFuture engines as well at some points where I was rapidly shooting away from Duna due to greater benefit from the Oberth effect...) You can spot the nice little red marble of Duna in the distance of this screenshot if you look closely: With the nuclear reactors activated, the brave Kerbals then plotted and performed an initial burn to bring their periapse closer to Duna: As the Duna Science Module swung past Ike, the crew performed a second burn to set an even closer periapse to Duna: Then came the fireworks! The Duna Science Module made the hard aerobrake it was designed for (hence all the struts- and there would be large heat shields as well if I were running Deadly Re-entry) in spectacular fashion! [imgur]">Javascript is disabled. View full album The Kerbals weren't done yet, however. No, not nearly. Although still recovering from the blackout-inducing aerobrake, the automatic guidance system kicked in as planned and began performing a series of long, slow burns in the retrograde direction (periodic checknig of the orbital map introduced pauses) to prevent the Duna Science Module from shooting back off into interplanetary space: Finally, to prevent the Duna Science Module from smashing into Duna on its way back in, and allow for another, lighter aerobrake maneuver; the Duna Science Module performed a short burn to raise its periapsis towards a target of 32 km: This leaves the Duna Science Module where I have it now- floating back towards Duna for a second aerobrake to bring it into a lower orbit. However, I have real-lift activities planned for the moment I'm already late to, so I'll pick this back up for you guys later! Regards, Northstar

I've been up to some exciting stuff lately. Namely, bringing my first manned spacecraft into a stable orbit around Duna! But before I get to the exciting stuff, I ought to catch you guys on a short mission I undertook in the meantime... I present, the Reusable Crew Launch Vehicle (RCLV), a Space-X inspired 100% reusable launch vehicle designed specifically to ferry crew to my 350 km space station: First, the rocket launches in a vertical launch pattern- this is necessary for the recovery of the launch stage later... The launch stage separates near apoapse, and the upper stage engages in a rapid burn to raise the periapse above the atmosphere: Immediately thereafter, the launch stage engages in a short burn to target its landing back at the KSC (with the help of MechJeb, of course), and begins to re-enter the atmosphere- eventually landing upright only a short distance from the launchpad: The upper stage then delivers its payload (2 Kerbals) to the space station, and begins to plot a return to Kerbin under the guidance of the pilot (Kerbal #3) who remains aboard the vessel: The upper stage re-enters the atmosphere, and allows drag (without parachutes) to do most of the work slowing it down through a long, slow aerobrake. It utilizes its leftover fuel to more precisely target its landing to a safe spot and neutralize its remaining velocity shortly before touchdown. As you can see, I was aiming to land back at the KSC- but times my return very poorly, and landed on the wrong side of the planet (good thing there's no Kerbal Cold War!) This leaves all stages of the rocket safely recovered, with no missing parts (the design utilized mechanical decouplers- so theoretically even the decouplers can be re-used, and only need to be re-rigged). The two Kerbal passengers are now safely in orbit at minimal cost: If currency/budget/costs were implemented, and I were running a life-support mod, this would also be an excellent low-cost way to resupply my space stations with food, oxygen, etc. Regards, Northstar

And, the final design of the HELO: C completing both the altitude challenges It should be capable of all the other achievements, but I feel the need to repeat myself: 400 m/s is neither accurate (the real-world speed record was 400 km/h- less than 120 m/s) nor reasonable to ask for with a fixed-rotor electric helicraft capable of lifting 40 tons without some serious part-clipping exploits or Thermal Turbojets powered by at least fusion reactors or above... (testing reveals fission TTJ's simply don't have a high enough TWR- even if I strapped something like 20 of them onto a helicopter) This is due, again, to the velocity curve of electric helicopter rotors- they only produce 30% thrust at an airspeed of 300 m/s, and less at 400 m/s. One would have to exceed a stationary sea-level TWR of more than 9 (extremely difficult- the HELO: C can't even do that with its forward rotors active) as drag will slow the craft down, and be capable of rotating the net thrust to a more than 75 degree angle through either pitching the craft (extremely difficult at such extreme angles with a craft heavy enough to lift 40 tons, without reaction wheel spam) or rotating the rotors... Of course, while rotating the rotors would allow this, without stacking rotors something like 6 high, it's not possible to rotate this much thrust vectoring that way without serious part-clipping on a craft that can lift 40 tons... The forward electric propellers are actually WORSE for high speeds than the electric copter rotors, so spamming forward rotors doesn't work either- they only produce 20% thrust at a velocity of 425 m/s... The real-world speed record of less than 120 m/s was not only achieved with an extremely small helicraft capable of safely pitching forward at extreme angles (it could have NEVER lifted 40 tons- its rotor simply wasn't powerful enough), it was also achieved at BELOW sea level, over an area of salt flats (nowhere on Kerbin does similar terrain exist) BOTTOM LINE: The golden rule of challenges is that you should be able to demonstrate something is possible yourself before asking anyone else to do it. Therefore, Fengist, I challenge *YOU* to develop an electric helicopter that can both lift 40 tons and exceed 400 m/s landspeed in its various versions, without part-clipping, fusion or antimatter reactors. Otherwise, electric helicopters should be allowed to earn the award by beating the real-world speed record- which is still challenging; or utilize fuel-burning jet engines for forward thrust (for that challenge ONLY). Regards, Northstar P.S. With the extreme TWR, intense optimization, and quadruple reaction wheels (to allow steeper pitching) the HELO: C has, its top landspeed is still only just over 200 m/s, at maximum stable pitch (approx. 50 degrees) and using "Cargo Throttle" on all rotors/propellers.

Testing reveals that the wings only serve to slow the HELO down (I thought they might generate enough lift that the helicopter would fly faster with its nose tilted a bit above the horizon, but I was wrong), and in the relevant altitude and velocity ranges, electric propellers provide more thrust for less weight than Thermal Turbojets... Thus, my next version of the HELO: C will lack the wings and TTJ's, have only one reactor (no need for two reactors without the TTJ's), and have 6-7 electric propellers mounted instead... It will be the same basic airframe, and only easier to land without the wings, so perhaps it can still be given credit for the Precision Lander challenge without needing to repeat that one again in its slightly altered form? Regards, Northstar

OK, so the Raven Mk2 made its main burn at Kerbin periapse to head off in the general direction of Duna: Then I had the Medium LFO Tanker I mentioned earlier make a burn for rendezvous a couple hours later, burn to match velocity at closest approach, and then pull in a bit closer until I was able to refuel the Raven Mk2... However, I discovered that due to a bug, the Kerbal who got out to refuel the Raven Mk2 wasn't able to pull close enough to the cockpit to get back inside (he had refueled the Raven before around Minmus- so I know it wasn't an issue of craft design. But the game acted like there was an invisible wall around the Raven cockpits, preventing him from approaching even within 10 meters...) So, after wasting mos of his EVA propellant trying to get closer, I decided to have him do the only possible thing to survive, and probably the most 'Kerbal' thing I've done in this game yet- I strapped him onto the front of the fuel tanker using nothing but the refueling hose, and had the tanker make its burn to intercept Duna (the Kerbal will transfer over an another spacecraft where he can be inside after the tanker circularizes near Duna). I went for a bit of a quicker intercept, so that the Kerbal wouldn't have to sit like this quite as long (and, a the tanker had thousands of m/s Delta-V onboard, I felt the extra expense justified to get its remaining fuel to Duna a bit quicker...) I kept trying to get a good screenshot with the Kerbal having a manaical grin on his face , but unfortunately I couldn't get a good close-up, and his expression was rather bland anyways... Then I had the Raven Mk2 perform its own burn to get a Duna intercept: Based on how little it cost, it looks like I could have actually made Duna on its remaining fuel without refueling- even with enough fuel left over for a later adjustment to allow direct aerocapture (the burn I *did* make wasn't fully optimized- quite a bit less fuel could have been expended). But the margins were a little close for comfort, and I just didn't want to take any chances with the mission... At this point, all my craft (the Eagle Mk2, 'Hornet', Blackhawk Mk6, and Raven Mk2) are en-route to Duna, and haven't broken any of the rules (though I still contend the Raven Mk2 should count as SSTDABK, as the in-flight refueling only turned out to be necessary to have a healthy safety margin on my burns, even with Duna so far away from ideal position...). My next posts *SHOULD* be about their actual arrival at Duna and attempts to complete various challenge requirements. Regards, Northstar

Hmmm, well I hope you have time to risk a few Kerbals' lives again soon (though hopefully not killing them- except to bugs, reverted 'dummy-launches', and my recent termination of a number of still-viable missions, I have only lost 2 Kerbals so far in my save- both due to an unexpected structural failure in one of a pair of planes strapped to a rocket- the mission being continued as the other plane made it to orbit unscathed...) Anyways, I present the "HELO: Model C". Here she is completing the Precision Lander Challenge: I learned a lot from the HELO: B. Particularly, that I didn't need quite as massive a chopper to airlift 40 tons stably, as long as I enclosed the cargo in the fuselage (where it couldn't pendulum very far). Thus, I was inspired to improve the design- by reducing the weight of the outboard fuselages (now attached by flat structural panels from one of my many mods), and thus being free to use fewer helicopter rotors and STILL have extra mass to budget for some small wings and a pair of Thermal Turbojets, and yet have a HIGHER rotor-only TWR than before... The Thermal Turbojets aren't nearly as powerful as they look, by the way. Each provides only about 12-18 kN thrust in the relevant range of altitudes and airspeeds for a helicopter, and that's with the most powerful 1.25 meter pre-fusion reactors available: KSP-Interstellar's Solid Bed, Uranium Nitride-based 1.25 meter fission reactors. And that's at quite a high mass pricetag for the TTJ's- I'm not sure that an all electric copter can make 400.87 m/s without much larger wings and at least a second pair of TTJ's... (once more, the real-world helicopter speed record, by John Trevor Egginton in 1986: 400.87 km/h (111.35 m/s)) So, it probably can't make that award unless you allow it in on the real-world speed, like you did the HELO: B. It *CAN* circumnavigate at over 136.7 m/s, however... Regards, Northstar EDIT: Actually, it looks like a lot more than a second pair of TTJ's would have been necessary to clear 400 m/s. Try at least 10 pairs for a craft that size...

OK, so the Raven Mk2 made its main burn at Kerbin periapse to head off in the general direction of Duna: Then I had the Medium LFO Tanker I mentioned earlier make a burn for rendezvous a couple hours later, burn to match velocity at closest approach, and then pull in a bit closer until I was able to refuel the Raven Mk2... However, I discovered that due to a bug, the Kerbal who got out to refuel the Raven Mk2 wasn't able to pull close enough to the cockpit to get back inside (he had refueled the Raven before around Minmus- so I know it wasn't an issue of craft design. But the game acted like there was an invisible wall around the Raven cockpits, preventing him from approaching even within 10 meters...) So, after wasting mos of his EVA propellant trying to get closer, I decided to have him do the only possible thing to survive, and probably the most 'Kerbal' thing I've done in this game yet- I strapped him onto the front of the fuel tanker using nothing but the refueling hose, and had the tanker make its burn to intercept Duna (the Kerbal will transfer over an another spacecraft where he can be inside after the tanker circularizes near Duna). I went for a bit of a quicker intercept, so that the Kerbal wouldn't have to sit like this quite as long (and, a the tanker had thousands of m/s Delta-V onboard, I felt the extra expense justified to get its remaining fuel to Duna a bit quicker...) I kept trying to get a good screenshot with the Kerbal having a manaical grin on his face , but unfortunately I couldn't get a good close-up, and his expression was rather bland anyways... Then I had the Raven Mk2 perform its own burn to get a Duna intercept: Based on how little it cost, it looks like I could have actually made Duna on its remaining fuel without refueling- even with enough fuel left over for a later adjustment to allow direct aerocapture (the burn I *did* make wasn't fully optimized- quite a bit less fuel could have been expended). But the margins were a little close for comfort, and I just didn't want to take any chances with the mission... Regards, Northstar

Installed them- they don't seem to work for me. The SABRE Engines *still* don't work for me, and though I haven't tried it, I can assume the wheels still don't work right yet either... Anyways, Fengist, look out for a new post from me soon. First, I'm going to try strapping TTJ's onto the Helo: B like you said I could, and if that doesn't work, I might create a new design entirely... Regards, Northstar

Ok, so a LOT going on today. First of all, I decided to call off the whole Munar scannnig project, and crashed the Scansat into the Mun for !SCIENCE! Then, I decided to send the Ultra-Heavy Scrapper Ship on a transfer to Duna- where it might be of some use... So, I started off by shooting it out of Kerbin's SOI. A later burn will be necessary to get a Duna intercept. It's had over 8000 m/s of Delta-V before departure, so it should be no problem getting it to Duna even now... I then rendezvous'd the Munar Light Fuel Lander with the Light Moon Explorer Mk3, but realized it didn't have an extra KAS port to transfer over the fuel anymore (my having left the KAs port on the LME-2). As such, I switched over to the Space Center for a while to take care of terminating some debris and other flights at the Tracking Station (more on that later), and try and decide what to do next. But when I switched back to the LME-3, having decided to pull it as close to the Munar Spacedock as its remaining fuel capacity would allow (it had enough fuel to make it 95% of the way there), and then transfer over the Munar sample as well as Kerbals onboard via EVA... Unfortunately, for some reason the LMe-3 broke apart when I reloaded it (no pics, sorry) for some strange reason- probably because it was so close to the fuel lander and the two had entered the same physical space while unloaded.. This caused nothing to remain but the command capsule and the parachute (I still have no idea what happened to the fuel tank or engine- they probably exploded before the craft was even fully loaded...) So, I decided to bail out of the the Kerbals by EVa and transfer him and the Munar surface sample to the Munar Spacedock that way: It took me several in-game days as I accidentally hit the time-warp up an extra order of magnitude at one point, but I'm willing to ignore the unrealism in the Kerbal's oxygen lasting that long as the LME-3 never should have broken apart for no apparent reason in the first place, and if I had waited until the correct transfer window, I could ahve EVA'd the Kerbal over in less than an hour (it took less than 30 minutes to set his apoapsis to the same altitude as the spacedock and allow him to float to that altitude- most of the time was spent phasing...) Finally, last but not least, here is an image of the orbital map at close to the current moment. I am about to make the Raven Mk2's ejection burn that should raise its apoapsis to past Duna, and then follow it up with the fuel tanker. If Duna were phased into the correct position, that would be all I would have to do- but since it's not, I'm going to have to perform an in-flight refueling and then make an additional burn to add a much greater radial outwards component to the Raven's trajectory... (heavy aerobraking will be used to deal with its rather high velocity-difference when it enters Duna's SOI- although I could just as easily perform a standard capture with very little aerobraking, for realism' sake, if I performed a second refueling after the burn...) As it currently stands, and as I alluded to before, I've terminated a great number of flights. Specifically, by this point I have terminated every single flight withing Kerbin's SOI except for the 3 final spacedocks (Mun, Minmus, and the latest one in low-altitude orbit around Kerbin), the impactor probes on the Munar surface (I'm going to use up some of the Munar Spacedock's remaining RocketParts and fuel by smashing a small fleet's worth of impactor probes into the Munar surface, for !SCIENCE!), the Raven Mk2 and its tanker (nearly on an escape trajectory from Kerbin anyways- even before I finish the main ejection burn), and the Ultra-Heavy Scrapper Ship (which has not yet exited Kerbin's SOI). Every single other flight, base, or piece of debris was terminated- including my Mountaintop Launchpad... This way, I can just focus on colonizing/exploring Duna, although my more permanent effort in that regard will have to wait until contracts and currency is finalized- and will of necessity be done on a MUCH tighter budget than this time around... Regards, Northstar P.S. For those of you who don't understand why I keep saying "!SCIENCE!", which is probably most of you, it's a reference to the awesome game Dwarf Fortress- which I at this point haven't played for many months, but is still awesome. An awesome but difficult free game you ought to all try (use a tileset if you can't stand ASCII graphics, like me) the DF player community has made its motto, "Losing is Fun!"

As always, the various mods were updated surprisingly quickly... I've already tested it, and all I had to do was update ModuleManager and MechJeb in order to get things back on track... I've been a little focused lately on real-life, but I look forward to some more posts very soon (probably today). Also, I've decided my space program has become far too bloated for the frequency I play KSP. Since I'll probably be starting a new save with 0.24 (or whichever updated adds the economy and contracts) at some point, I'm going to whittle down my program to virtually nothing- having already demonstrated the effectiveness and viability of various concepts... This means, most prominently, forgetting about most of my Kerbin SOI infrastructure (I probably won't get much use out of a Mun or Minmus base before I wipe), and re-focusing on Duna. I might send a couple vessels from the Mun/Minmus with what fuel and RocketParts I can send off to Duna from the stations without too many more recycling operations. The rest I'll probably terminate to save lag... Regards, Northstar

First of all, your graph is inaccurate because you're completely neglecting the orbital velocity you have around the Mun or Minmus. While the orbital velocity you would have around Minmus is nothing to write home about, with proper ejection from a low Munar orbit (and making a much higher Delta-V burn than you need simply to escape Munar obit), you can easily keep a significant amount of velocity from a Munar orbit. Second, Minmus has the MAJOR advantage of being able to Kerbin-dive. Because the orbital velocity relative to Kerbin of Minmus itself is very low, all you have to do is escape from Minmus' SOI in the retrograde direction, and you'll basically dive right straight in towards Kerbin. It's very easy to get a periapsis of around 75-90 km with VERY low fuel expenditures from Minmus. At that point, if you timed it correctly, you'll have the benefits of BOTH a super-charged Oberth Effect (since your starting velocity is much higher than you would normally have at that altitude) AND a high-orbit refueling. This allows for unquestionably the lowest Delta-V transfers from Kerbin SOI of virtually any starting location. Regards, Northstar