GreenPower Electric Challenge ITS BACK!!!!

[windows_x_seven]

Mind uploading the initial craft (The one in the original post)?

It looks great.

[ghostbuzzer7]

No problem at all I will get the download on my dropbox ready.

[juzeris]

6:40 to a dead stop on the island runway with no damage Woohoo! <..> I hope people keep trying. I certainly will

I'll see you and raise you.

A 6:26 run with another design (link). It is actually weaker than the last one (TWR of 0.58 vs last one's 0.59, I have no idea how you get these times with just 0.51 ), but I.... adopted some ideas from your design, mainly the parachute to shave off precious seconds from landing time. And maybe that tail which produces a bit of thrust every time I touch pitch. I even recorded a video of the run to show I didn't abuse the tail, but it's 30 minutes of video for a 6 minute flight, so until I figure out how to speed it up...

Also, well, I landed this one, but it still exploded. Just me being me.

No SAS [5], Max speed at level flight a bit over 120 m/s [120], time 6:26 [53], total 178, lower than last one.

Here's the photos:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited April 18, 2015 by juzeris
Forgot the score

[wossname]

I'll see you and raise you.

Hehe.

Edited April 19, 2015 by wossname

[wossname]

Is it cheating if you jettison all wings, engines and tail and use a parachute to land? If not, then 6:24...

http://imgur.com/gallery/rHmyM4J

I'll leave it to the judges.

This is getting seriously difficult, The more engines you put on the heavier it gets and then you're back to square 1.

Juzeris, what is your preferred trajectory? I was climbing at 10 degrees until I'm at about 3500m and then fly level until near the island and then crash dive at it, but I don't know how efficient that is. 6:24 is the absolute limit for my crappy aircraft though.

[ghostbuzzer7]

I never established any rules about that and I dont plan making new ones so its allowed. All this creativeness though.

[BoobyTrapGaming]

unfortunately the order in which the images appear screwed up, don't mind that.

my entry:

http://imgur.com/a/2rZJ3#0

the embed code didn't work, so I just used a link.

I did not really build it for the points, more just for fun. here is the score anyway:

-no reaction wheels: X

-speed: 60m/s, so that will be 60 points.

-mass: X

-time: 10m 46s, 36 points according to my calculator

-amphibious award: X

-two-legged award: X

-stunt award: 2 points

-xenon master: X

-greenpower elite: X

-aesthetics master: well, it does not look bad. furthermore, I did some things like nosecones and panels and matching solar panels to make it look better, so I am going to count two points for effort. you may deduct these points if you wish to do so. 2 points.

total: 100 points. nice number.

EDIT: added a download here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0il9c68qf4phtid/Solar%20plane%20Mk1.craft?dl=0

Edited April 20, 2015 by BoobyTrapGaming
Added download

[wossname]

That's a pretty nice looking aircraft.

[ghostbuzzer7]

Notice how he used Jebediah Kerman. The respect is real . Then again he may have just gotten to game or something

[BoobyTrapGaming]

Notice how he used Jebediah Kerman. The respect is real . Then again he may have just gotten to game or something

are you talking about me? I bought the game in januari and what is wrong with jeb? he's awesome!

- - - Updated - - -

That's a pretty nice looking aircraft.

are you talking about mine?

[Starwhip]

I come for you, challenge!

Development in progress...

[ghostbuzzer7]

Ohhh This ought to be good . So this is my stolen wings from my AeroSpace XM-19 Bomber VTOL

Edited April 20, 2015 by ghostbuzzer7

[Starwhip]

Experimental Glider 01 was a catastrophe. EG-02 and 03 were rejected for tendency to crash and burn. EG-04 was promising until it stalled and blew up the Tracking Station.

Something will work!

[ghostbuzzer7]

Interesting. Now you feel the why this is a "challenge".

[Starwhip]

*Insert 2001: A Space Odyssey" Theme*

Count it as an entry if you wish. I've done it!

Now to continue shedding weight for speed!

EDIT:

+5 Points -- No reaction wheels

Top Speed: 80 m/s, for 80 points

+50 points for 12:30 under 20:00.

Total: 135 points

Edited April 21, 2015 by Starwhip

[ghostbuzzer7]

OMG He has finally submitted one

[ghostbuzzer7]

Well, 1.0 might break the GreenPower Electric challenge, however, I will add a leaderboards for 1.0

---Reason---

The new aerodynamics allow for easier speed preview in FAR as shown in Scott Manley's demonstration video. Happy gliding everyone. *Atleast wossname can finally be beaten in 1.0* or may'be not o_o

Edited April 25, 2015 by ghostbuzzer7

[wossname]

Uh, looking at the time scores....

just sayin'.

Edited April 25, 2015 by wossname

[ghostbuzzer7]

*cough* *cough* I never.... put Juzeris in that other comment above you see!!

----Topic Wise----

Round-9 is discontinued and rules have been slightly edited but does not remove any of the existing applicants

[wossname]

My donation to the KSP Challenge Judges' Retirement Fund is in the mail.

[juzeris]

Well, wossname, you're good, I'll give you that. You're really really good.

I've tried shallow ascents, steep ascents, sharp dives, parachutes, high TWR, better cockpits, precise fuel rationing, and it still wasn't enough. I've minimised mass wherever I could. I've performed analysis of your flights.

Juzeris, what is your preferred trajectory? I was climbing at 10 degrees until I'm at about 3500m and then fly level until near the island and then crash dive at it, but I don't know how efficient that is. 6:24 is the absolute limit for my crappy aircraft though.

I've tried that. Got up to one and a half km height. You're probably ascending more sharply than that. Short of resorting to "unnoticeably more infiniglide", I was out of options, and out of ideas, and then round 9 closed, and you had won.

Congratulations.

But then I realised what I was missing all this time. What makes everything fly better. What is the core principle of all space programs.

I recalled Jeb from his picnic.

I rolled out an old trusty design.

Looked at it again.

And thought - what would make it more cool?

So, here's one more attempt. I know, too little, too late, but what kan a Kerbal do (except get there in 6:20)?

Javascript is disabled. View full album

P.S. To answer your question, my preferable trajectory is "in the general direction of the target, while ascending somewhat, and trying not to hit anything, and then trying to hit the airport, but generally too late". For this one I started the descent a bit earlier, but I think it might be better to start the descent even earlier, as you go faster while descending, until drag starts to cancel out the effect. But at 2km height difference, the principle should generally hold.

After your question, I started paying a bit more attention to the ascent angle, it seems I climb at an angle of about 20 in the beginning, and then shallow it out somewhat gradually after 2km.

[ghostbuzzer7]

Congratulations. He has finally been beaten Welcome to 1st place again Juzeris

[Telemake]

Here is my first try. I aimed for a classic glider design, the result was quite slow but really easy to fly :

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Scoring :

-No reaction wheels: +5

-Maximum Speed: +25 (26m/s)

-Mass: +6 (2400kg)

-Time: +5 (18'38")

Alternative points :

Amphibious award: +0

Two-legged award: +5

Stunt award: +0

Xeon Master: +3 (434 units of xenon used)

GreenPower Elite: +10

Total : 59

[Pds314]

There is significant loophole abuse potential here.

In particular, I once made a FAR ion glider reach orbit with 4000 m/s of DELTA V. Sure, my time might be measured in days, not minutes, but I could conceivably put it in an eccentric orbit, then gun the engines and fly straight at Kerbin. I would then re-enter the atmosphere and attain a score from speed alone of like 5000.

[Pds314]

Working on an entirely different self-imposed challenge right now... get one of these manned ones to orbit in FAR