Heavy Lift Economy Challenge

[Wanderfound]

Here's the challenge:

* Build a basic space station segment. Orange Rockomax tank, Snr docking port on each end, four radial standard ports, probe core, solar, RCS.

* Lift it to orbit (70 x 70 minimum) however you like.

* Cargo must be delivered fully fuelled.

* Stock parts only, no performance-enhancing mods, if in doubt, ask. Informational mods, Mechjeb and KJR are okay.

* Land any recoverable bits back on Kerbin.

* Score is cost after recovery, not counting the cost of the cargo.

* Separate leaderboards for stock aero vs FAR.

Demo run:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

LF √0.8 x 5731 = √4584.8

O √0.18 x 5539 = √997.02

MP √1.2 x 4 = √4.8

Total cost = √5586.62

Obviously still some optimising to be done.

Leaderboards

Stock

t3hJimmer, √9,438

Norcalplanner, √17,009.4 (vertical rocket SSTO)

FAR

Van Disaster, √5288

Wanderfound, √6356.3

Edited July 12, 2015 by Wanderfound

[Van Disaster]

Did a run with my testbed lifter just to see how far off I am after a couple of months of building nothing, and... well, interesting how tight margins are now; throwing a cargo in a too-large craft does make a noticeable difference in economy. I'll rebuild it a little smaller for this particular job later, but for now, using current FAR:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

LF: 6911 @ 0.8pu = 5528.8

O: 5028 @ 0.18pu = 905.04

Total: 6433.84 - round that whatever way you like.

Used FAR - Full Drag/Moderate Area Rule/250k voxels ( which I think are defaults ), MJ, Pilot Assistant, KER, KJR and TAC fuel balancer; parts are stock.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Van Disaster

[Van Disaster]

Built a craft specifically for this, and what a pig it is to re-enter. If I didn't set it at a fixed pitch and leave it alone until it was subsonic it'd just swap ends almost instantly. Needs a higher area of pressure at the rear, but that's quite awkward with something so short.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

LF: 5694 @ 0.8pu = 4555

O: 4076 @ 0.18pu = 733

Total: 5288

Same mods installed as before.

[Wanderfound]

Cool, thanks.

Time to polish up the old ship amd optimise it...

[Requia]

"heavy"

Well I don't normally optimize rockets for something this light but I'll give it a go.

[Wanderfound]

This one didn't actually beat my old score, but I'm sure that it's a more efficient ship than the previous design anyway; there have been several physics and engine thrust changes since the first version flew. Anyway:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Fuel use: 6745 LF, 5335 O. Cost of delivery: √6356.3

Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/tobg1lya3yqtokb/Kerbodyne%20Kretaceous%20II.craft?dl=0

[blowfish]

Couple of questions:

1) Should the challenge be based on a particular version of FAR? The latest development version have ducted area ruling for engine nacelles, which is ... hard to say no to.

2) Are fuel pumping mods like TAC FB acceptable?

[Wanderfound]

The scoreboard is based on the current release version. TAC-FB is fine by me.

[Norcalplanner]

Here's my entry, the Heavy Lift Challenger. It's simultaneously the best and the worst - best rocket entry, best stock aero entry, and worst overall score. I wanted to show that it's still possible (although difficult) to create a useful SSTO rocket, based off of the general design of a craft I did back in 1.02 for the Stock Budget Cap Challenge. Running KER, KJR, and MechJeb.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

15,325 LF x 0.8 funds/unit = 12,260 funds

18,730 OX x .18 funds/unit = 3,371.4 funds

Jettisoned fairing cost of 1,378 funds

Total cost of 17,009.4 funds

[Wanderfound]

Norcal: awesome entry, but unless you land it at KSC it should include recovery cost as well...

[t3hJimmer]

Here is my stock entry. It's a spaceplane, but with 16 RAPIER's its arguably closer to a rocket

I give you the C-1000

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Everything was recovered except the space station segment and the spent fuel.

Liquid Fuel: 14,180 at launch - 2,880 in the payload - 1,267 at recovery = 10,033 -> √8026

Oxidized: 12,540 at launch - 3,520 in the payload - 1,175 at recovery = 7,845 -> √1412

Total Cost: √9438

[Norcalplanner]

Norcal: awesome entry, but unless you land it at KSC it should include recovery cost as well...

Whoops! The rule on the other challenge was you could recover full value anywhere on Kerbin. I'll do it again and land at KSC. I'll also fly the mission at sunrise instead of sunset and get some better photos while I'm at it.

[Norcalplanner]

Here's the redo of my earlier launch. Got closer to KSC, but still landed almost 30 km short (on the rolling plain between the mountains and KSC). Now that I know exactly how far to trust (or not trust) the MechJeb landing predictor for a rocket with airbrakes deployed, I can probably get this within 1 kilometer of KSC if I tried it another time or two. Burned a tiny bit more fuel on this attempt, so the revised total is 17,057.44 funds plus whatever percentage of the remaining craft value I would lose if this was career instead of sandbox for being 30 km away from KSC. No photo annotations this time, since the sequence is basically the same. Enjoy.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Van Disaster]

Couple of questions:

1) Should the challenge be based on a particular version of FAR? The latest development version have ducted area ruling for engine nacelles, which is ... hard to say no to.

2) Are fuel pumping mods like TAC FB acceptable?

I tried mine with ducted area ruling, didn't make any noticeable difference although I'm not exactly plastering intakes anywhere. My craft has pretty high wave drag anyway, I just stopped bothering about it. I spent way more time re-entering than exiting, naturally high drag was actually useful...

[Bev7787]

Does this have to be done in the latest version? I'm still using 1.0.2

[Wanderfound]

Does this have to be done in the latest version? I'm still using 1.0.2

Do whatever's fun for you, just let me know so I can put an asterisk on the leaderboard.