The Ultimate Jool 5 Challenge - 1.0 to 1.3

[Ziv]

Hi Everybody,

at first, I'm very happy to see the JOOL-5 Challenge is in good hands, thanks a lot sdj64 for taking it over!

About the mods in my opinion:

Pros: more flexibility and diversity in ship designs, more fun to use good or fun mods.

Cons: more mods means more better parts again the stock even if they are more or less balanced, so potentially easier to do the challenge. It might be good or bad, it depends on the point of view.

When I ran the challenge I was always on the "make it pretty hard so it will be a real serious achievement what only the best can do" side but it was only my preference, but this is only because the harder a challenge the more I'm interested in it. for others this can only make it less fun.

But now sdj64 runs this challenge so he decide on these.

[peachoftree]

Already planning my ISRU run, this is going to be sweet!

(and I have a sneaky idea for tylo)

[JedTech]

Also, loading an experiment into a lab as data to be processed doesn't use up the experiment - the experiment itself can still be taken home. So I don't see the need to allow transmissions.

My least favorite part of the old challenge was the requirement to physically bring back the science parts and/or the Science Lab itself. May I suggest changing the science requirement to simply be "Recovered Science". That is, any science point that is successfully returned to Kerbin and Recovered.

This is easy to verify via screenshot of the recovery screen. And it doesn't require bringing science parts or the Lab back (which can be quite difficult with aerodynamcics and re-entry heat.).

You might also make a rule that the Lab is NOT allowed. This will avoid the new complications of science generation. And the Lab is not needed for this mission since a properly leveled up Scientist Kerbal can now clean experiments.

Edited June 4, 2015 by JedTech

[peachoftree]

Will realchute be allowed?

[sdj64]

Oooookay, lots of mods to review. I'll try to give good reasons for everything.

KW Rocketry and SpaceY - yes

Most of the concern here is with lift rockets rather than the Jool-5 ship itself, unless I'm missing something. I don't want to unnecessarily restrict people. Anything you can do with them, you can do with stock for a fair bit more parts, e.g. 7 mainsails are equivalent to the largest engines in either pack. If everyone starts making their ship with these engines instead of nukes, then I've seriously messed up and need to rethink things. They could help with larger landers but you don't need such a large lander that these engines are necessary for it.

Procedural Parts - no

My main issue with it is that you can make a tank all LF, which gives it a much better ratio than any stock tank has for nuclear engines. A central design issue with stock nukes is dealing with rather poor tank mass ratios when tanks are drained of oxidizer or unwieldy airplane tanks (and at 8/1, still worse than full rocket tanks).

KAS/KIS - no

Two things, first it makes it no big deal to have poor engineering when you left Kerbin, you can just fix it later. Second, having the ability to attach parts to customize your lander is a significant advantage over stock.

Heat Management- yes

At a glance, it looks like the parts are heavy enough to be a fair trade for the heat dissipation advantage.

Dang It - yes

Anything you want to do to make it harder, be my guest...

Fuel Tanks Plus - yes

Already on the list when you asked.

Throttle Controlled Avionics - yes

Sort of like Mechjeb or TAC Fuel Balancer, aids with controlling your craft but doesn't make the craft itself any more capable.

Jettison Fuel - yes

It's a minor advantage so it should be okay. You can do this in stock with two small engines pointing opposite each other on the side of your ship.

Realchute - yes

Never used it, but also never heard of it being OP compared to stock.

Trajectories - yes

It's an informational mod so it's allowed.

Getting to Jool: Stay in one piece after leaving Kerbin until you reach Jool's SOI.

Science Labs: Your suggestion is a good one. I wouldn't forbid the lab, just point out that it's unnecessary in this case (if I'm not mistaken, the lab science has to be transmitted).

Stock Only Stuff: Stock plus informational and visual mods only will get a special mention on the leaderboards, but since there is no scoring system besides the level, some kind of additional score for stock wouldn't make sense.

[BurningLegion]

Oooookay, lots of mods to review. I'll try to give good reasons for everything.

KAS/KIS - no

Two things, first it makes it no big deal to have poor engineering when you left Kerbin, you can just fix it later. Second, having the ability to attach parts to customize your lander is a significant advantage over stock. Fair enough. I'll klaw my landers to the Mothership, then. That way, can keep their mass aligned with the direction of thrust.

Heat Management- yes

At a glance, it looks like the parts are heavy enough to be a fair trade for the heat dissipation advantage. ...And that puts nuclear engines back on the table for me.

Dang It - yes

Anything you want to do to make it harder, be my guest... Figured it was following the spirit of the rules.

Fuel Tanks Plus - yes

Already on the list when you asked. Sorry I didn't see it, great to know I can use it.

Throttle Controlled Avionics - yes

Sort of like Mechjeb or TAC Fuel Balancer, aids with controlling your craft but doesn't make the craft itself any more capable. What I'm reading from this is that this challenge is primarily about engineering a successful ship, even if it's not successful to a pilot of my current skill level in KSP. Noted, but I'll still fly it myself as much as possible.

Jettison Fuel - yes

It's a minor advantage so it should be okay. You can do this in stock with two small engines pointing opposite each other on the side of your ship. That...is honestly brilliant. I should have thought of that.

Trajectories - yes

It's an informational mod so it's allowed.

Getting to Jool: Stay in one piece after leaving Kerbin until you reach Jool's SOI. Which fits. One of the engineering challenges is staying together during the transfer burn to Jool.

Science Labs: Your suggestion is a good one. I wouldn't forbid the lab, just point out that it's unnecessary in this case (if I'm not mistaken, the lab science has to be transmitted).

Awesome, thanks for taking a look at them. In particular, I'll be rethinking my interplanetary stage now that there's a better chance I could physically operate the nukes long enough to transfer.

[parzr]

sdj64 Nice to see you take this on, I'm doing a clean save hard mode and may document Jool5 when I go for it

[Mister Dilsby]

Science Labs: Your suggestion is a good one. I wouldn't forbid the lab, just point out that it's unnecessary in this case (if I'm not mistaken, the lab science has to be transmitted).

Was that a reply to me? If so thanks--yes, lab science must be transmitted, my suggestion is really to allow transmission points to count since that's how the lab is meant to be used now (not landed on Kerbin, which was relatively reasonable in v90 ) In any case I am loving ISRU, so would likely do that if I were to take the challenge on, in which case no Jeb level for me anyway.

[DBowman]

...

Last, and this is entirely my opinion--I personally disagree with keeping ISRU in a separate category in a 1.0 version of Jool-5. This made sense back when you needed a mod to do it but now that it's a stock capability I think disallowing it is against the spirit of the challenge (which I see as "stock and stock-like capabilities only"). Not a huge deal, just my feeling.

...

For my part I feel non ISRU cannot 'compete' with ISRU - free fuel cannot be beat. That would tend to force every entry to ISRU. More variety seems like a good thing for participants and spectators.

[Findthepin1]

can i do this in sandbox mode

[Jonboy]

can i do this in sandbox mode

Yes, read the OP. Career/science modes are only needed for the Jebediah Level and you may cheat in as much science/funds as you need to complete the mission

[Carraux]

Procedural Parts - no

My main issue with it is that you can make a tank all LF, which gives it a much better ratio than any stock tank has for nuclear engines. A central design issue with stock nukes is dealing with rather poor tank mass ratios when tanks are drained of oxidizer or unwieldy airplane tanks (and at 8/1, still worse than full rocket tanks).

[...]

I understand your concerns about procedural parts. But the "poor mass ratio" is IMHO not really there.

<Edit> Because you can make a stock tank containing LF only. The Jettision fuel mod or TAC Fuel Balancer may be helper here but you can do it with stock methods only.

A full Jumbo-64 tank weighs 36t.

A Jumbo-64 with LF only weighs 18.4t (only 51.1% mass compared to the full tank)

A PP tank with the same amount of LF weighs 16.65t (46,25% mass)

So the difference between and oxidizer-less Jumbo and a comparable PP tank is less than 5% if compared to a full Jumbo. I would not call that "poor". The big difference is size, though (the PP tank has roughly half the size), but in outer space size is more or less irrelevant.

And I honestly believe that no serious ship designer here is that dumb to send tons of never-be-used-oxidizer to Jool and back, so he/she will surely jettision the oxidizer before launch...

(I certainly will do)

Don't understand me wrong: My intention is not to persuade you to have PP in this challenge (I can live without it). I only wanted to point out that it not a real challenge NOT to have PP in the contest, because stock can be as nearly effective as PP, if tanks are properly drained.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Carraux

[selfish_meme]

5% is more than enough to win the mass class

[Red Iron Crown]

Subscribed. Jool-5 is the best challenge ever, cheers to ziv for maintaining it so well for so long and to sdj64 for carrying on with it.

[Carraux]

5% is more than enough to win the mass class

The mass class is stock only, PP doesn't count here anyway (besides other mods which offer you a better mass ratio, eg. Fuel Tanks Plus)

[Hotaru]

- If you use a lab, no processing! Science that is processed must be transmitted, so you won't get any points for doing it...

Just to clarify, this isn't quite how the MPL works. The problem is that science and data are not the same thing. Processing science in the lab does not use up the science, it only adds data to the lab. Once the science is processed, it can still be returned or transmitted to Kerbin for science points. In fact it can even be taken to a different station and processed through another lab! The lab will continue processing the data into still more science points in the background, which must be transmitted (not returned!) back to Kerbin.

Example: I have a space station in Munar orbit with a landing craft. The lander goes down to the surface, takes a surface sample worth (say) 100 science points and 50 data for the lab, and brings it back to the station. The sample is processed through the lab, which gets 50 units of data. The sample is now transferred (by a Kerbal EVA, Ship Manifest mod, or similar) to a space shuttle and returned to Kerbin for 100 points of science. In the meantime, the lab is now processing its 50 points of data in the background. A few in-game weeks later, I come back to find it's turned that data into another 200 points of science, which are then transmitted back to Kerbin. So from that surface sample I've got a total of 300 points--100 from returning the sample itself, another 200 from the science lab.

So if you process science through a lab for the challenge, you would get no additional points for doing so, but you could still return the original science to Kerbin for full points at end of mission.

The end result is, while the lab could still benefit your career save, as the rules stand now it would basically be dead weight from the point of view of the challenge, seeing as its only other function is to reset Mystery Goo/Science Jr. experiments, and a scientist Kerbonaut can do this as well. Personally I think this is fine, the MPL is basically a source of virtually unlimited science points, so being able to use it would basically make the whole idea of Jebediah's Level pretty much pointless.

[Carraux]

I would suggest then to dismiss the idea of generating science / bring science back at home (well, that's only my 2 cent)

Another question for Jeb's Level: 5 Kerbanauts are required for this level. Does this mean that I have to build a 5 person lander? That would be challenging!

[BurningLegion]

For my part I feel non ISRU cannot 'compete' with ISRU - free fuel cannot be beat. That would tend to force every entry to ISRU. More variety seems like a good thing for participants and spectators.

I'm planning for the two-Kerbonaut level (Cause it'd be just unfair to send one Kerbonaut on a five-year mission, and going straight to the five-Kerbonaut level would require 20 tons of life support), and I haven't run into any fuel problems on the planning stage. A lot of that is probably because I will be abusing LV-Ns and Ion Engines for the trip to, back, and tooling around the Jool system, with chemical rockets only being fired when their thrust advantage is necessary (IE, landing). But now that I think about it, I only tested the feasibility of mining on Tylo, not on the low-grav moons, Bop and Pol.

Also, one thing I'm debating - Ion Engines versus LV-Ns. My current design incorporates 16 LV-Ns and 24 Ion Engines in different stages. I'm suspecting I'll need to do a lot of math for this, so my question is: Does the fuel/power consumption of LV-Ns and Ion Engines scale directly to the amount of thrust? I'm considering the advantages of using a nuclear stage at all. During the exit from Kerbin, we'll be close enough to Kerbol to rely on the sun's power, and at Jool unless my math is messed up it'd cost less in mass to run Ion Engines on radiotope generators and fuel cells than it'd cost to run LV-Ns on LFO. Generally, smaller payloads are easier to get into orbit and more stable when attached via docking connectors. Additionally, it's easier to distribute Ion Engines across the entire payload to provide generally even thrust.

I'm proud of my work in constructing a 16 LV-N stage that can fire literally indefinitely if supplied with LF, and that would be a huge asset at Jool, but Ion Engines may just be a better choice.

I would suggest then to dismiss the idea of generating science / bring science back at home (well, that's only my 2 cent)

Another question for Jeb's Level: 5 Kerbanauts are required for this level. Does this mean that I have to build a 5 person lander? That would be challenging!

I saw Shadowzone do a one-person lander on Jeb's level. It means each moon is visited by a different Kerbonaut, but not that every Kerbonaut visits every moon.

[Stratzenblitz75]

Agree with all the others, Its nice to see this challenge rebooted for 1.0. Thanks to sdj64 for reviving this awesome challenge!

Speaking of 1.0, I think I have our first entry! Jool-5 Non-Stop. I basically restricted myself to using one capsule, and no docking or ISRU in order to create a serially staged monstrosity.

Here is the release thread:

Hope you enjoy!

As you can see, I left the resource tab open for the entire trip for easy checking.

[LtWhiskers]

Masterfully done Stratz. I like your use of ladders. Have to admit, I haven't laughed that hard in awhile (Laythe take off). Anyway, respect.

[problemecium]

Okay so on the topic of clipping. The intent of the rule is obviously to prevent stuff like this from being submitted, but what's the consensus on things like these?

Please tell me they're okay, or at least close! I assure you that there's nothing clipped in addition to what's visible here, just a bit of "mushing" tanks so the thing fits where it needs to.

Edited June 9, 2015 by parameciumkid

[waterlubber]

I have a question. Are we allowed EVA landings? I will be attempting this challenge--at this point, I feel confident in my abilities. Probably not best to do it the week of comprehensive exams. Maybe. I'll probably edit this with my entry, so stay tuned!

[JPmAn]

Why not use the Corvus?

[sdj64]

Agree with all the others, Its nice to see this challenge rebooted for 1.0. Thanks to sdj64 for reviving this awesome challenge!

Speaking of 1.0, I think I have our first entry! Jool-5 Non-Stop. I basically restricted myself to using one capsule, and no docking or ISRU in order to create a serially staged monstrosity.

Here is the release thread:

Hope you enjoy!

As you can see, I left the resource tab open for the entire trip for easy checking.

Great video! Funny and impressive at the same time. Amazing how small a ship you were able to use for the three smaller moons. Looks good, I see that HyperEdit H but the video proves it was not used

Okay so on the topic of clipping. The intent of the rule is obviously to prevent stuff like this from being submitted, but what's the consensus on things like these?

http://i.imgur.com/JKv6Kz4m.png http://i.imgur.com/rINp4rCm.png http://i.imgur.com/kt5xwsD.png

Please tell me they're okay, or at least close! I assure you that there's nothing clipped in addition to what's visible here, just a bit of "mushing" tanks so the thing fits where it needs to.

The problem is not visible/invisible, but the space it takes up is important too. The first and third designs will fit in a Mk3 cargo bay, but unclipped they probably won't. The second design will probably overheat instantly in 1.0. None of them are very close to legal, since they all have some things that are at least half clipped into other things.

I have a question. Are we allowed EVA landings? I will be attempting this challenge--at this point, I feel confident in my abilities. Probably not best to do it the week of comprehensive exams. Maybe. I'll probably edit this with my entry, so stay tuned!

Yes, EVA landings are allowed. Good luck with your submission!

[problemecium]

Lame. I guess I'm stuck in an alternate category then.

Technically I do disagree on the issue of things "more than half" clipped into other things. Nothing's clipped more than a quarter except the orange tanks in the first image (a design I wasn't planning to use anyway).

And I've verified through testing that the engine cluster does not overheat instantly - in fact at 73.5% thrust it can run indefinitely.