Monoprop To Space!

[CitizenAerospace]

Monoprop To Spaaaaace!

The challenge: Build an entirely mono-propellant space craft.

I noticed a lack of monopropellant challenges here, so I thought, why not! This challenge isn't so much about how hard it is as what sort of crazy designs you can come up with in order to max-out your points.

The Rules:

-No FAR or NEAR

-Can not use any other fuel type other then monopropellant during the mission.

-No mods that add new monopropellant engines to the game

-No part clipping

-No physic-engine-abuse

Score System:

+1 point for every Kerbal onboard, +2 for every Kerbal to space, +5 for every Kerbal on the Mun/Minimus, +10 for every Kerbal on Duna/Eve

+1 for every stage recovered (only qualifies if you reach 10km+)

-1 for every stage lost.

*Notice* Recovery is defined as landing your craft safely, with no damage, ready to be collect and flown again.

+2 for every stage recovered at the launch pad (only qualifies if you reach 10km+)

For suborbital flights:

+1 for every 10km above 75km achieved

+10 for every 1000kg of payload to 75km

+10 for every launch to space (75km) without refuel

For orbital flights:

+1 for every 50km above 75km Ap. achieved.

+1 for every 50km above 75km Ap. achieved.

+10 for Mun encounter

+10 for Mun orbit

+10 for Mun landing

+50 for landing on and returning from the Mun.

+200 for Eve/Duna encounter

+500 for Eve/Duna orbit

+500 for Eve/Duna landing

+500 for Duna return

You win the entire game if you can return from Eve with just monopropellant....

Awards:

Lowest Part Count (Orbital flight):

Virgin Galactic Got Nothing On Me (Most Kerbals to 100km):

To The Stars (Most DV): Foxster, 10km/s DV

Scoreboard:

1. Foxster with "Mono Virus": 10km/s DV on launchpad, landed and returned from both Mun and Duna. 1712 points.

To submit, upload a picture on launch pad, at least one throughout flight, and on at the end of the flight. Every screenshot must have the resources menu open for obvious reasons.

Edited February 26, 2015 by CitizenAerospace

[Starwhip]

Your attempt?

(This shouldn't be too hard)

Oh, and your scoring system is a wee bit out of whack. Way too many possible points.

[Foxster]

Your attempt?

(This shouldn't be too hard)

Oh, and your scoring system is a wee bit out of whack. Way too many possible points.

Yup, moon landing and return is quite do-able.

[CitizenAerospace]

I'll update the system now (oops I think i added too many 0's...)

- - - Updated - - -

I'll upload my attempt, I was just being lazy

[Foxster]

Here's an entry from me. The MonoVirus...

Launchpad

Going up

Kerbin orbit

Mun orbit

Mun landed

Back to Mun orbit

Back to Kerbin

Chute open Kerbin

Splashdown

Can the OP score that for me? - Can't work it out myself

[Foxster]

..and then I realised that with 10K+dV on the pad I could do Duna surface and back...

HKO @ 650km (for max warp)

Duna orbit

Down on Duna

Back to Duna orbit

Near to Kerbin again

Splashdown

Score is something like...

+1 for every stage recovered = 1

-1 for every stage lost = -12

+1 for every 50km above 75km Ap. achieved @650K = 11.5

+1 for every 50km above 75km Pe. achieved @650K = 11.5

+200 for Eve/Duna encounter = 200

+500 for Eve/Duna orbit = 500

+500 for Eve/Duna landing = 500

+500 for Duna return = 500

Total = 1712 (I think)

Edited February 25, 2015 by Foxster

[CitizenAerospace]

Awesome! The landing legs on that thing are awesome, fantastic DV stats to! I'll add you to the leaderboards.

[Tw1]

That is a particularly neat design, foxster.

[ihtoit]

very nice.

Except...

Aren't most of those parts physicsless? Hence in violation of the rule that says, and I quote, "-No physic-engine-abuse "?

[Panzerbeard]

very nice.

Except...

Aren't most of those parts physicsless? Hence in violation of the rule that says, and I quote, "-No physic-engine-abuse "?

I don't think using massless parts really counts as physics abuse; by that token we should always take the cylindrical batteries instead of the massless radial ones, or never use the cubic struts. I really think that rule is more targeted at exploits like infiniglide, kraken drives, etc. I guess it's down to the OP's discretion, and he/she obviously approves, so everything's froody

Besides, most of the mass there is in the propellant tanks anyway.

Edited February 26, 2015 by Panzerbeard

[sdj64]

The O-10 monopropellent engines are physicsless, which would make every entry to this challenge "physics-engine abuse" by that token.

That said, it does have interesting implications, for instance TWR is completely free. It's not a tradeoff of weight vs delta-V as with other engines. Your interplanetary transfer stage could have a TWR of 10 if you want it to. Because of that, it's actually not too bad to make an Eve lander with it since the majority of the dry weight of most Eve landers is engines.

Not a submission yet. This lander should be good for ascending from 3000m or higher. It's about 35 tons and uses 48 O-10 engines.

[Foxster]

That's inspired me to have a go at an Eve lifter too. How hard could it be?

[Nik333]

Seems like interesting one! But what about Minmus? And Ike and Gilly? You should give points for that too, because it would be nice to do for example Mun and Minmus in one flight!

[CitizenAerospace]

Wow, didn't realize just how far monopropellant can take you! Why have I not been using this before! Interesting to note though that all the crafts so far have been essentially payload-less... Anyone want to try a manned Mun mission? I'll update the points with new categories when people actually do the stuff thats out of the existing categories. Also, I am aware of the massless effect of most of the parts that will be used in this challenge, I do not include those in physics-engine abuse. As has been stated before by someone else, I consider that infiglide and kraken drive, ladder-phantom force abuse etc.