Jump to content

Challenge: Drag race to 100KM altitude

erppa
 Share

Recommended Posts

UmbralRaptor

UmbralRaptor

Posted
Posted

Can you post the .craft file for that thing? That is nuts.

Seconded.

edit: actually, I\'m calling shenanigans. Let\'s look at the first craft picture.

index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1377.0;attach=10224;image

With stock parts (which those initially appear to be), the last stage would have a mass of 6.3 tonnes (full) to 4.1 tonnes (empty). An LV-T30 pushing that mass at full throttle (200 kN), would result in at most ~2-4 Gs. As the rocket is accelerating at 15+ Gs with a full tank of fuel and below full throttle...

Same deal with the second one:

index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1377.0;attach=10226;image

With the listed parts, the craft would mass ~25.45 tonnes, and have a thrust well under the 1000 kN it is capable of. The net acceleration would be <3 Gs. But again it is pulling 15+...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GOOMH

GOOMH

Posted
Posted

My first attempt dub ' The Speedster' was an utter failure, thing blew up around 1000m after violently turning in on itself. The Mk2 version actually did it with stock parts in 1:44 which isn\'t too bad with stock and it being a Mk2.

Final time, now I wish I brought up the overview screen.

tcmbL.png

m25dt.png

The Craft:

9w1dL.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RNSP

RNSP

Posted
Posted

its just a simple mod...you could probably get it to go faster by adding smaller fuel tanks...(i wanted to fool you lol) and/or more engines...the ship is unstable thought unless controlled it spins so fast it blows up and dont launch with full throttle...the engine will blow up...my top speed with that engine is 300,000m/s and you can do that in about 78000M(the one distance above km)

i will try to upload it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
khyron42

khyron42

Posted
Posted

2-stage stock with no solids in 1:44, but I\'m still working on improving it. Fuel lines are magical.

---

Trimmed it to 1:41 with some solids. It\'s not going to win any records, but I\'ll post it anyway in case it\'s useful to someone else to see how I\'m using fuel lines.

inner stage: capsule, ASAS, LV-T30 engine under ASAS, 6 fuel tanks in a circle around ASAS, 6 fuel lines to central engine, 6 LV-T45 engines under fuel tanks.

middle stage: 12 decouplers, 12 fuel tanks, 12 LV-T30 engines, 12 struts, 12 fuel lines inwards to the 6 inner-stage tanks. Burns out around 40 seconds into flight.

Outer stage: 12 decouplers, 12 SRBs. I may try this with just two SRBs per decoupler. Burns out at 25 seconds into flight.

Image gallery Here, to save the forum screen space.

The important part is that all 19 engines burn through the outer 12 tanks and then they\'re dropped along with 12 of the engines. Throughout the launch the central engine can help burn without having any fuel tank weight attached to it. As you can see in the final screenshot, this design runs out of fuel literally at 100 KM altitude - You can just see the tail of the flame still in screen. So more engines with less fuel might do even better. I\'ll see if a similar approach will work with NovaPunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zephram Kerman

Zephram Kerman

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here\'s my entry: 1:41 It\'s all solids. Nearly 10 G\'s, and Bob is smiling for once.

The lower stage kept exploding until I added the lateral decouplers. Now they just overheat to redline, but run out of fuel just before actually detonating, and that\'s good enough for Jeb.

Edited by Zephram Kerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UmbralRaptor

UmbralRaptor

Posted
Posted

-------1:14

161 booster first stage, 7 booster second stage

And no fins or SAS/ASAS? That\'s definitely more efficient than my 169 booster first stage, 7 booster second stage. I\'m guessing that rectangles are more stable than hexagons?

edit for further musings:

The slightly faster time might be because of lower drag + increased stability (my last design had issues around first stage burnout).

I\'m moving development from a P4 to a Core2Duo. It was nifty grabbing a speed record using the slowest computer of anyone playing KSP, but the VAB (and to a lesser extent launch) is a slideshow. At least the C2D has a decent framerate in VAB with the current setup...

Looks like a second set of 6 control surfaces fixes the stability, without costing a measurable amount of time. Adding yet another ring (217 booster first stage, 7 booster second stage) reduces the time to 1:14. I suppose trying a slightly larger upper stage (9 to 11 boosters) may be worthwhile.

dragracer13h_time_1_14.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites
witeken

witeken

Posted
Posted

1:54 with my Saturn V ship.

my best time so far is 1 minute 4 seconds and i think i can beat it, trying one more idea then i\'ll post pictures and ship info as proof.

ok heres the latest one i\'ve done..

1 SAS mod

1 decouplers

1 XL fuel tank

1 5x1 coupler

5 necelle engines

starting image:

JeyUm.png

as close to 100km as i could get with the image:

zcywK.png

images changed to reflect my new time..

new time: 58 SECONDS to get to 102KM!!!!!

old time: 1 minute 3 seconds to hit 101KM.

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

http://i.imgur.com/TtU9P.png

wich mod is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...