Stock Ultra-Heavy-Lift Challenge

[666lumberjack]

The goal of this challenge is simple; place as heavy a payload as possible into LKO. 1.0 Aerodynamics have had a huge impact on wide lift vehicle designs, so it's not entirely clear what the best design for carrying those ultra-large payloads is.

The rules are also simple:

Stock KSP, no gameplay-altering addons/mods

The final payload must be in one piece, and must be in a stable orbit of at least 70x70km.

Maximum one launch.

The payload may not contribute in any significant way to the rocket - no fuel, reaction wheels or RCS tanks. You may give it a probe core, but nothing else. It's recommended that you use bundles of full ore tanks for compactness, but this is not mandatory.

You may attach to the payload in multiple places as long as all illegal parts are detached before final payload mass is calculated.

Any design or concept you can think of within the above guidelines is allowed. Shoot for something massive and inefficient or something mildly enormous with a great payload fraction - whichever you think is best.

Entries must provide screenshots of mass on the pad and final mass, plus video/screenshots from in between - enough to make it clear how your craft is functioning.

I will be putting together some kind of leaderboard for the best entries. Good Luck!

Edited June 23, 2015 by 666lumberjack

[Requia]

Is it acceptable to stick torque wheels in the payload and then subtract the weight? the lack of a 3.75m torque wheel creates some aerodynamic problems if its below the payload.

[Requia]

Yeah moving to a 2.5m payload doesn't work.

[A_name]

Can i use the procedural weights mod as payload?

[t3hJimmer]

Isn't this going to come down to who has the beefiest computer that can handle the biggest possible rocket?

[Requia]

I've never seen the rocket I can't fly on my machine, and its ancient (maybe windows memory limits are a problem?).

It make take an hour or two to get to orbit, but it'll get there.

[A_name]

It should also be clarified whether we're allowed to use part clipping for engine clusters, which makes a huge difference.

[Warzouz]

Here is my entry for 1.0.4 : a 600 tons payload at 75km using a recoverable SSTO heavy launcher. Payload to orbit cost should be around 360funds/ton. dV to LKO was around 3200m/s.

On the pad

(Images are clickable)

In the VAB, payload only and full rocket

Flight pictures

Orbit, payload (I miss the mass on the middle picture, I took another one).

Returning home (80km from KSC)

Here is my rocket SSTO family (I'm currently upgrading to 1.0.4)

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/123195

Please note that I removed KJR for this run.

Those rockets are easily scalable. I don't think there is a limit except for CPU capacity. Removing all the parts needed for reentry should allow to much higher payload.

Edited June 27, 2015 by Warzouz

[LittleBlueGaming]

Wide rockets work fine. 5550t on the pad, 1137.6t in orbit.

Looks to be about the limit for my computer, 289 parts gives me around 3fps at launch, not fun to fly.

Worth noting that fuel tanks are better than ore tanks for mass/part.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[sdj64]

This one put 1217 tons into orbit in 1.0.2, probably could do even better in 1.0.4. I haven't even thought of a payload that justifies using this monster. LittleBlueGaming, why didn't you use the largest Kerbodyne tanks? You could reduce your part count significantly. My rocket is a little under 400 parts.

Presenting the Hypercube!

[LittleBlueGaming]

LittleBlueGaming, why didn't you use the largest Kerbodyne tanks? You could reduce your part count significantly. My rocket is a little under 400 parts.

Uh, well, you see... it's because... uh... well I thought I was

Wasn't playing close attention, and I haven't unlocked the larger one in my career game so I'm not used to it.