The Ultimate Jool 5 Challenge - 1.0 to 1.3

[septemberWaves]

Is Vx Series II Engine Pack allowed? I feel like it is probably balanced enough for this challenge but of course I have to check if it's okay to use since it's not on the mods list.

[burn_at_zero]

I plan to make an attempt.
The challenge will be documented in a mission report thread. I don't have anything designed yet, so it will take some time.

I'm aiming for level 3, science points, no ISRU. I will bring additional crew and hardware during the transfer for the purpose of establishing a permanent orbital base at Laythe, these crew will not be involved with the exploration nor will they return to Kerbin. Looks like all the mods I use are already approved.

Fortunately there is a big community of challenge winners here who have provided invaluable information.

 

[JacobJHC]

I said before I was going to attempt a Grand Tour, I still am but I am sending a Jool 5 mission to test out the new Ion-Powered equipment, lol and this time I will put enough docking ports.

[sdj64]

Excited to see several attempts in progress.

@eloquentJane I like the direction VX Engines has gone with Series 2, and they look much more balanced to stock.  It is allowed!

 

[MiniMatt]

It's been a while, 2 years to the week, since I last attempted this challenge (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/79820-there-and-back-again-a-jool-5-tale/) and I think it remains the most fun you can have in your kerballing.

It's an engineering challenge, but whereas an Eve return is so extreme it limits choices down to ruthless efficiency, the Jool 5 has enough leeway to "wing it". The Jool 5 allows individual flair, it allows for aesthetics, and it allows multiple solutions to the same problem. Add to that the fact it's such a pretty system, and each moon requires different design and piloting considerations (well, Bop & Pol are kinda similar), and I firmly believe every KSP player should attempt it at least once.

After a two year absence it's time for my second attempt

One of the lessons I learnt from my first attempt was to keep it simple. I decided to ignore that lesson and add massive complexity in the form of USI Life Support.

Another lesson I learnt was that ion tugs suck round Jool. I decided to ignore that lesson too, and include an ion tug for moving the lander into optimum low orbits.

 

I *think* I'm ready. It's going to be tight. I'm packing a lot less mothership delta-v this time - but then I had a lot left over last time. Life support considerations have informed a craft capable of feeding, and keeping from going stir-crazy, five kerbals for around 4½ years. Same lander can for all moons, first stop at Laythe where it dumps the parachutes and hopefully returns to orbit on just the first stage. Then onto Vall, where again it runs entirely on the first stage. Then Tylo (WE HATE TYLO), where both stages are used to make various impact craters on the surface. Then the upper stage alone visits Bop & Pol.

Mods used: Kerbal Engineer Redux, Near Future Solar (seen on kerbin return can & attached to mothership spare xenon tanks), Near Future Construction (radial mounts on lander, ion tug, & mothership nuclear engines, adaptor plate on kerbin return can), Near Future Spacecraft (moon lander S1 & S2 engines), USI Life Support & USI MKS (hab ring, kerbitat module, pioneer module, fertilizer storage, greenhouse, 0.625 nuke reactors, orange liquid fuel tanks), pretties, all the pretties, MOAR PRETTIES (planet shine, EVE, scatterer, etc, as many as it'll take before crashing).

EDIT: And this is why we test things....

Well that lander design just ain't going to cut it. Prime example of how what looks great in the VAB doesn't always work out in practice. The sea-level thrust of that lower stage engine is too low for Laythe (and I suspect a bit icky for Tylo), and the drag is too top biased making for an easy landing but an uncontrollable ascent in atmosphere. The thrust problem is solved by using a (stock) toroidal aerospike engine but that precludes the use of bottom docking ports; a single top mounted docking port in turn will necessitate a redesign of the tug such that it's double ended. Solving the ascent aerodynamics may be trickier - a shielded docking port will help, but that brings extra mass and a problem in assembling (the shielded port has no attach node, even when open, in VAB assembly).

 

Edited July 24, 2016 by MiniMatt

[Starslinger999]

Question: Is Atomic Age not allowed because of its OP jet engine?

If so, Can u make in yellow and add a note saying "The Atomic Jet is prohibited" or something.

I just think that Atomic Age's 2.5m "Lightbulb" engine is so cool and useful. 

Edited July 24, 2016 by Starslinger999
Spelling

[sdj64]

On 7/22/2016 at 4:28 PM, MiniMatt said:

It's been a while, 2 years to the week, since I last attempted this challenge (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/79820-there-and-back-again-a-jool-5-tale/) and I think it remains the most fun you can have in your kerballing.

It's an engineering challenge, but whereas an Eve return is so extreme it limits choices down to ruthless efficiency, the Jool 5 has enough leeway to "wing it". The Jool 5 allows individual flair, it allows for aesthetics, and it allows multiple solutions to the same problem. Add to that the fact it's such a pretty system, and each moon requires different design and piloting considerations (well, Bop & Pol are kinda similar), and I firmly believe every KSP player should attempt it at least once.

After a two year absence it's time for my second attempt

One of the lessons I learnt from my first attempt was to keep it simple. I decided to ignore that lesson and add massive complexity in the form of USI Life Support.

Another lesson I learnt was that ion tugs suck round Jool. I decided to ignore that lesson too, and include an ion tug for moving the lander into optimum low orbits.

 

I *think* I'm ready. It's going to be tight. I'm packing a lot less mothership delta-v this time - but then I had a lot left over last time. Life support considerations have informed a craft capable of feeding, and keeping from going stir-crazy, five kerbals for around 4½ years. Same lander can for all moons, first stop at Laythe where it dumps the parachutes and hopefully returns to orbit on just the first stage. Then onto Vall, where again it runs entirely on the first stage. Then Tylo (WE HATE TYLO), where both stages are used to make various impact craters on the surface. Then the upper stage alone visits Bop & Pol.

*image*

Mods used: Kerbal Engineer Redux, Near Future Solar (seen on kerbin return can & attached to mothership spare xenon tanks), Near Future Construction (radial mounts on lander, ion tug, & mothership nuclear engines, adaptor plate on kerbin return can), Near Future Spacecraft (moon lander S1 & S2 engines), USI Life Support & USI MKS (hab ring, kerbitat module, pioneer module, fertilizer storage, greenhouse, 0.625 nuke reactors, orange liquid fuel tanks), pretties, all the pretties, MOAR PRETTIES (planet shine, EVE, scatterer, etc, as many as it'll take before crashing).

EDIT: And this is why we test things....

Well that lander design just ain't going to cut it. Prime example of how what looks great in the VAB doesn't always work out in practice. The sea-level thrust of that lower stage engine is too low for Laythe (and I suspect a bit icky for Tylo), and the drag is too top biased making for an easy landing but an uncontrollable ascent in atmosphere. The thrust problem is solved by using a (stock) toroidal aerospike engine but that precludes the use of bottom docking ports; a single top mounted docking port in turn will necessitate a redesign of the tug such that it's double ended. Solving the ascent aerodynamics may be trickier - a shielded docking port will help, but that brings extra mass and a problem in assembling (the shielded port has no attach node, even when open, in VAB assembly).

 

Very nice looking mothership!  I know one of Nertea's mods has the Hydrogen tanks for nukes, which one is it?

Your lander looks like it would handle Tylo very well, but for Laythe a new design might be needed.

 

On 7/24/2016 at 0:08 PM, Starslinger999 said:

Question: Is Atomic Age not allowed because of its OP jet engine?

If so, Can u make in yellow and add a note saying "The Atomic Jet is prohibited" or something.

I just think that Atomic Age's 2.5m "Lightbulb" engine is so cool and useful. 

No, actually the most OP parts in that pack are the Lightbulb and Lantern.  The former for making motherships, with double the ISP of the stock nuclear engine.  The latter is the perfect combination of ISP and TWR to make a single stage Tylo lander (in afterburner mode) that is very difficult to do without much larger mass in stock.

It is relatively easy to make a stock jet stage for Laythe lighter than the atomic turbojet.

[MiniMatt]

3 hours ago, sdj64 said:

Very nice looking mothership!  I know one of Nertea's mods has the Hydrogen tanks for nukes, which one is it?

Your lander looks like it would handle Tylo very well, but for Laythe a new design might be needed.

Just running stock liquid fuel guzzling 800isp nukes, the orange tanks are fuel-switchable ones from the USI MKS mod with 9:1 wet/dry mass ratios (the 2.5m cylindrical tank is 2.5t dry, 22.5t wet when filled with 4000 LF). Off the top of my head I think NF propulsion changes stock nukes into hydrogen drinkers, but don't have that installed.

And yep, Laythe has gotten harder since v0.24! Drag losses are significant now, aerodynamics can't be ignored, and control surfaces or some gimbal seems really necessary for the ascent. Have just about narrowed down a replacement 2-kerbal design, though at 30.7 tons it's getting a bit porky.

[Starslinger999]

On 7/25/2016 at 9:58 PM, sdj64 said:

 

No, actually the most OP parts in that pack are the Lightbulb and Lantern.  The former for making motherships, with double the ISP of the stock nuclear engine.  The latter is the perfect combination of ISP and TWR to make a single stage Tylo lander (in afterburner mode) that is very difficult to do without much larger mass in stock.

It is relatively easy to make a stock jet stage for Laythe lighter than the atomic turbojet.

Ok then, Ill just use a crap ton of Nervas and maybe a few of the RLA "mighty" .625m Nerva engines for my Scanning probes.

I better get to work on my Kerbalism Jool 5 because why not?

Another thing i want to say: Why isn't OPT spaceplane parts Prohibited?

There "Dark Drive" is literately as OP as some Warp drive mods 

Edited July 27, 2016 by Starslinger999
Spelling :P

[Thomas H.]

 

It’s time for a Jool 5. 
I designed every Stage and lander with way more dv then needed. 
There were specialised Landers for every moon. (Vall and Bop had the same design).
Except for the Tylo-Lander there was a rescue concept.
One Kerbal is landed on every moon
Because I brought a communication satellite network for every moon of the Jool system, the order got a little messy. Without Kerbal Arlam Clock it would have been impossible. Some parts might be too fast for an enjoyable video so don’t watch if you have Epilepsy!
Come and see:https://youtu.be/6qkvdn22RyQ

- Which game versions did you use?  1.1.3.1289(x64)

- What mods did you use, if any? kOS, Kerbal Arlam Clock, RemoteTech, Kerbal Engineer Redux

- How many Kerbals are on the mission? 11 only 5 landed on the moons

- How many launches were needed to start your mission from Kerbin? Just one

- How much did your mission cost? 4.342.590 but a significant part of that is the cost for Pu238

- Did you needed a refuelling mission? No i did not.

- Did you bring additional stuff like satellites, rovers, etc? A satellite network for every moon, One backup lander (but that one was destroyed by a “software” bug)

- Share the delta-V information too, if you tracked it! I did not track it
 

[sdj64]

It was getting a little quiet in here, wasn't it?

 

@Thomas H. Congratulations, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 3!  Your video was a bit much to take in, I would maybe have liked two videos: one that's a bit more slowed down to see everything you did, and another highlight reel for entertainment.  Your mission was a great accomplishment nonetheless!  Everything was designed robustly with large safety margins.  I don't think anyone has set up a remote-tech network on a Jool 5 completion before, or used KOS.  Robots are the future!

Also, great first post and welcome to the forums! 

[sdj64]

Taking some tentative steps towards another Jool 5.  This time, I'm going for a "completionist" Jeb's level of every available science experiment on every biome of the moons.  The mothership will be an ISRU single stage to anywhere ship that carries exploration craft to go to each biome once landed.  Laythe = plane, Tylo = rover, Vall Bop Pol = hopper-lander.

Here is the Laythe plane.  It starts folded in a cargo bay.

The wings unfold with a hidden hinge in its own small cargo bay, which also contains the science parts.

Now it is a light, efficient plane that can carry 4 Kerbals to any biome on Laythe!

 

 

[SpaceplaneAddict]

Alright, I've been dormant long enough

it's time....

 

 

Unleash, Project: Fury!

[DaElite101]

On 6/8/2015 at 7:16 PM, parameciumkid said:

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.

I really like how you clipped the fuel tanks, it really looks nice!

EDIT: Just realized this was a year ago, sorry...

Edited August 10, 2016 by DaElite101

[JacobJHC]

@sdj64 You said if I am going to complete the grand tour it needs to leave Kerbin as 1 ship. Would it be possible to launch into orbit and have the ship send a smaller ship go to the Mun and Minmus and then have both ships meet up at Duna or Eve?

And if possible could you explain more on what I must do for it to count for this challenge? I am closer than ever as I finally have a working Eve lander.

Thanks!

[JasmineJas]

Very impressive!

[sdj64]

On 8/10/2016 at 5:26 PM, DaElite101 said:

I really like how you clipped the fuel tanks, it really looks nice!

EDIT: Just realized this was a year ago, sorry...

They are definitely aesthetically pleasing, but remember, these are not allowed in the challenge (no clipping)!

On 8/14/2016 at 11:10 AM, JacobJHC said:

@sdj64 You said if I am going to complete the grand tour it needs to leave Kerbin as 1 ship. Would it be possible to launch into orbit and have the ship send a smaller ship go to the Mun and Minmus and then have both ships meet up at Duna or Eve?

And if possible could you explain more on what I must do for it to count for this challenge? I am closer than ever as I finally have a working Eve lander.

Thanks!

There are so many different ways to do a grand tour and I don't want any ruling I make to limit that creativity.  The intent of the rule in the OP was to make sure the grand tour is thematically one mission, and not a bunch of missions that happen to join together briefly in Kerbin orbit before setting out to do their own thing.  It shouldn't be much different to meet back up after Mun and Minmus, in an orbit of Kerbin, and go together to Duna or Eve.

[WillThe84th]

I take it KOS is allowed?

[septemberWaves]

I have a pretty important question. Suppose a fairing is used as a structural element (part of my idea for a current Tylo lander involves using a fairing for aesthetics), would it be acceptable to clip functional parts (e.g. science equipment) through the sides of the fairing provided that they aren't clipped into anything inside the fairing?

[sdj64]

21 hours ago, WillThe84th said:

I take it KOS is allowed?

Yes it is allowed. One recent participant used KOS landing scripts for efficient landings, it was impressive to see especially on Tylo.

3 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

I have a pretty important question. Suppose a fairing is used as a structural element (part of my idea for a current Tylo lander involves using a fairing for aesthetics), would it be acceptable to clip functional parts (e.g. science equipment) through the sides of the fairing provided that they aren't clipped into anything inside the fairing?

Yes, that would be fine.  I would say you are using the fairing as a structural part so it is allowed.

[DMSP]

@sdj64, I'm wondering, if you used the Mod Pathfinder but never created any fuel from it (would be proven with screenshots), would it still count in IRSU? I'm thinking of doing a Jool 5 mission in my story (possibly) but one of the key points would be to set up colonies (literally) everywhere.

Thoughts?

Edited August 20, 2016 by DMSP

[Calvingamr]

I am going to try this challenge out at Jebs level with TAC Life Support

Edit

2 more questions: 1st would it be possible to use Taurus HCV ( adds a few 3.75m parts) and use the 7 crew crewcapsule to transfer the crew to the ship? It won't even go with the crew to Jool

                              2nd how long were your Jool 5 missions so i now how much LS i have to pack with me

Edited August 21, 2016 by Calvingamr

[JadeOfMaar]

On 7/26/2016 at 8:11 PM, Starslinger999 said:

Another thing i want to say: Why isn't OPT spaceplane parts Prohibited?

There "Dark Drive" is literately as OP as some Warp drive mods 

I'd like very much to see the answer to this. I primarily build with this mod and made a version of my flagship for this challenge... Yes it contains Dark Drives.

[Starslinger999]

Update on my jool 5: For some reason, the Save wasn't loading (Its because of the Mods) so i will have to restart that >:(

Ill be Back with Pics of the Mk ll!

Edited August 21, 2016 by Starslinger999

[sdj64]

On 8/19/2016 at 11:41 PM, DMSP said:

@sdj64, I'm wondering, if you used the Mod Pathfinder but never created any fuel from it (would be proven with screenshots), would it still count in IRSU? I'm thinking of doing a Jool 5 mission in my story (possibly) but one of the key points would be to set up colonies (literally) everywhere.

Thoughts?

That sounds fine.  Screenshots of the landers right before landing and right before lifting off should be enough to prove that the base gave it no fuel.

On 8/20/2016 at 6:49 PM, Calvingamr said:

I am going to try this challenge out at Jebs level with TAC Life Support

Edit

2 more questions: 1st would it be possible to use Taurus HCV ( adds a few 3.75m parts) and use the 7 crew crewcapsule to transfer the crew to the ship? It won't even go with the crew to Jool

                              2nd how long were your Jool 5 missions so i now how much LS i have to pack with me

I looked at Taurus HCV and it is now allowed.  I didn't think it was updated to the most recent version of KSP but it is fairly balanced to modern stock parts.

In 0.25 my mission took a little over 6 Kerbin years.  YMMV, especially if you use gravity assists.

On 8/21/2016 at 4:53 AM, JadeOfMaar said:

I'd like very much to see the answer to this. I primarily build with this mod and made a version of my flagship for this challenge... Yes it contains Dark Drives.

OPT Spaceplane Parts is prohibited.  I must have forgotten to add it to the list when the question was asked at first.

Edited August 22, 2016 by sdj64