Kerbin Circumnavigation 1.0.4/1.0.5 - Aviator Challenge Continuation

[Mikki]

Hi Xannari Ferrows,

(1 Circumnavigation, Mission Time was 56 minutes 47 seconds, Mk3 Fuselage with 4 Turboramjets/ 4 R.A.P.I.E.R.S, no SAS module except the build-in of the command capsule...)

I have done this

with this...:

(The frontmost slanted tank was empty at start, was not able to climb...)

I forgot to take the Pic from the opposite side of KSP... The plane has so much fuel left that it might get three times around, gonna try this next.

It has four whiplash turboramjets and four r.a.p.i.e.r.s. mounted... only stock parts. Average height was 21500 meters and speed around 1275m/s.

Pic from landing:

... errm..., can i have a badge now?

Me wonders how the cone on the bu... errm backend got so hot... hey SQUAD, what is going on here?

For the curious: The commandcapsule and the enginenacelles (and the wingtips) are rotated downwards some 10 degrees, the plane flies with a constant wing and fuselage angle of attack by itself, only minor trimming is needed when cruising altitude is reached, i made rarely input for about 2/3 of the trip, i was very surprised by myself. Concorde and SR-71 had similar avionic principies, it works also in KSP, try for yourself, its crazy!

Edited July 27, 2015 by Mikki
Backend cone heating... For the curious... and typos:)

[Death Engineering]

Everything seems to be in order. This definitely looks like a Laythe plane. Maybe that should be a challenge! I'll need to look into that.

I'll be there!

Also, you're distance traveled is quite off. What was your average cruising altitude?

Well, the total ground distance covered from the F3 screenie after the flight was 3,321,998m, if that makes more sense. I tried to keep around 20km altitude with a few peaks around 25km and one plummet/off course excursion to 7km.

[nicky4096]

i have an idea for a new category: "efficiency circumnavigations".

basically try and go once around on as little fuel as possible.

also, i did my best for a badge:

i could certinly do a bit better on the badge, so give me a bit...

Edited July 26, 2015 by nicky4096
dangit, forgot to crop the bloody thing!

[ExaltedDuck]

So... here's my latest results. New PB, but not WR. =\ I know this plane is capable of at least 10-15 seconds better. I managed one at 38:59 last night in it, only realizing after closing the F3 screen that my front gear had slightly... er... fallen off. The successful landing seems to be a razor thin line between flaming death and skipping off the runway and back up into the air just high enough to kill a good time and -- more often than not -- the pilot and command pod and only the pilot and command pod. It's almost amusing.

Anyway, given those troubles, I'll take this as the "as good as my patience will reach for now" time. Clocked in a 39:01.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[nicky4096]

i think you can easily get the WR by rotating the shock cones 180° and replacing those nose cones with rotated shock cones and replacing the small nose cap with a rotated shock cone.

edit:

also, you must have had some insane impressive ascents and descents... my crusing speed on my 38:39 run was something like 1740 m/s.

[ExaltedDuck]

also, you must have had some insane impressive ascents and descents... my crusing speed on my 38:39 run was something like 1740 m/s.

I wouldn't be so garish as to claim that danger is my middle name.

It's my prefix.

- - - Updated - - -

Joking aside, If we assume about 35 minutes of top speed cruising at 1723 m/s, that's 3616200 m covered. Going that same distance at 1740 would take 23 seconds less. So our starts and finishes are probably actually pretty similar.

[nicky4096]

23 seconds is still quite a bit...

[ExaltedDuck]

That previous one was more just to have fun and look good. I expected it would be too draggy to really be a contender. All said, though, it handled so well that it posted a pretty respectable time. Really a joy to fly, with the only rough spot being that the parachutes pitch back hard (intentionally, but a bad idea) I've been experimenting the last couple of weeks with three-engine models after Helmut and Xan really proved the might of that concept. I had a really fast one but after 4-5 revisions I still just couldn't get it to handle smoothly. Too much pitch authority, sudden control inversions, airbrakes causing what I'll call snap oversteer (15-20 degree sudden bumps in yaw. scary)... it was fast but a mess. So the 5 engine thing was more just a distraction to re-energize my mind. And did it ever. I present:

[edit: messed up imgur title. time was 38:44. didn't log in to imgur to upload; can't fix. I'm a derp]

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Bonus images: Hopped in my Ground Utility Tug and put the Pequod to rest with predecessors in my Gallery of Champions.

Edited July 27, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[Death Engineering]

Over the Impact Crater

This is a great challenge because it encourages experimenting with 1.x's aero and stock parts.

On this non-challenge flight came to the conclusion before landing that I had built a heavier craft, using one more engine and one more crew member, and more fuel, to achieve the same result. That's..well, science! I kinda like that.

Working on a real speed-entry now.

i have an idea for a new category: "efficiency circumnavigations".

I support this.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Death Engineering

[Xannari Ferrows]

Upon seeing submissions in bulk like this, I'll just edit the leaderboard. Finding enough sarcasm to give to everyone at once is too hard...

- - - Updated - - -

i have an idea for a new category: "efficiency circumnavigations".

basically try and go once around on as little fuel as possible.

also, i did my best for a badge:

http://i.imgur.com/chjjsTu.png

i could certainly do a bit better on the badge, so give me a bit...

I'd have to think of balancing parameters for this kind of challenge. It would really depend on the plane, so it'd have to be by percentage rather than a single number.

[ExaltedDuck]

I'd have to think of balancing parameters for this kind of challenge. It would really depend on the plane, so it'd have to be by percentage rather than a single number.

I think it would have to be something like fuel / # of engines / # of circumnavigations. But then that might skew it toward more engines and would definitely skew it toward more laps. But not making it per number of engines would almost certainly force selection of single engine craft, probably only rapiers.

[nicky4096]

sorry, but why go by percentage? surely just going by fuel used would work?

if i am missing something i apologize...

[ExaltedDuck]

Upon seeing submissions in bulk like this, I'll just edit the leaderboard. Finding enough sarcasm to give to everyone at once is too hard...

also, sorry about the rapid fire double submission. I didn't expect to be running a second one today but found the speed tests on that second one so encouraging I just couldn't stop myself. . But anyway, thanks for making and maintaining the thread. This challenge has been about 90% of what I've done in KSP for the last 6 weeks or so... Too much fun!

[Xannari Ferrows]

It would have to be a very complex formula, actually. I'd need time to make one.

[nicky4096]

sorry... why?

(or are you begin sarcastic? )

[Xannari Ferrows]

sorry... why?

(or are you begin sarcastic? )

This is legit. I would need to factor in fuel mass to structural mass, engines, number of them, total units of fuel, and even the flight profile.

[ExaltedDuck]

http://i.imgur.com/MAzGo0m.png

Mikki-

I *LOVE* that entry. I've done a whole bunch with crazy big jets and was ready to run a 5 lap run in 1.0.1. Finished a test run late one night, got home from work the next day, got patched to 1.0.2, and couldn't even make it to 3 laps. It was a 12 engine beast carrying over 44000 units of fuel but able to cruise at about 1640. Nothing I've tried in 1.0.2 with the 2.5m or shuttle parts has been all that viable so it really warms me over to see yours in action.

Edited July 27, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[nicky4096]

well, on a side note...

once 'round on 220 units. could probably shave about 20 off...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

also, not to pester you, but exaltedduck's time ought to be updated...

[Xannari Ferrows]

also, not to pester you, but exaltedduck's time ought to be updated...

It isn't his fastest run.

[nicky4096]

it is

he mistyped it as 39:44, if you look at his F3 it says 38:44

sorry, should have told you that earlier...

[Xannari Ferrows]

Oh, that makes a lot more sense! That totally slipped passed me...

[ExaltedDuck]

I'maderp oops.

lol

and to top it off I wasn't logged into imgur so I can't fix it. double derp lol. Is it Monday or something? (what? not till tomorrow? sigh)

Edited July 27, 2015 by ExaltedDuck

[GraviTykillz]

Very Nice Run Duck..Now if you want me to paint it for you I believe black paint will make it go faster!

edit:

also, you must have had some insane impressive ascents and descents... my crusing speed on my 38:39 run was something like 1740 m/s.

I think Making it crusing speed I could improve on..Desents, well i tell you i have blown up more times then landed with this challange trying to come in way to hot..but that is a crucial time frame and one i think i can get a better time with aligning my decent's better.

[GDJ]

Great run ExaltedDuck! Very impressive.

Do I have to come back and try to best it?

[ExaltedDuck]

Very Nice Run Duck..Now if you want me to paint it for you I believe black paint will make it go faster!

I sent out an email to the staff to gather opinions.

Jeb thought it was a wonderful idea, and wants it a deep candy red with pinstripes and ghost flames.

Bill pointed out that it's painted precisely to prototype specifications, and that production color schemes will be dictated by the contracting agencies placing production orders.

Gene diplomatically suggested that there might be highly proprietary technologies in place that would require an NDA to be signed before allowing any 3rd party contractors anywhere near it. (really, I think he just didn't want it moved off the Astronaut Center lawn. It's really close to his window, and provides a pleasant late afternoon shade)

Finally, Werner quite emphatically insisted "NEIN NEIN NEIN! Ve have decadesh of verk in zis project und ve musht not let ze Soviets close ze procedural fairings gap!"

Edited July 27, 2015 by ExaltedDuck