The RCS Thruster Challenge

[littlebuddy0]

The challenge is that you need to get as high or fast as possible with only RCS thrusters to use thrust.

Rules:

1) Only RCS Thrusters (That means no mono engine)

2) You Must Take A Screenshot Of The Info Or It Didn't Happen

3) No Modded Parts

4) No Hyperedit

5) No Cheats

6) Speed Must Not Be Orbit View Under 42km

Here is my example:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Scoreboard:

Highest/Furthest:

1)ment18: Landed And Returned From The Mun!!!!

2)Foxster: Landed and returned from Minmus!!!!!

3)Wild Cobra: Crashed On The Mun!!!!

4)Red Iron Crown: 74km orbit

5)Me: 19,465 m

6)

Fastest:

1)Wild Cobra 2803.8 m/s

2)ment18: 2987.7 m/s

2)Red Iron Crown 2208.5 m/s

3)Me 421 m/s

4)

Good Luck!

If you wonder why the Mun is #1 and not the Minmus, it is because the mun requires more Delta-V then Minmus.

Edited November 9, 2015 by littlebuddy0
Fixes

[322997am]

Nice. But I'm not that interested.

[dbmorpher]

RCS thrusters are a massless part so basically this challenge is: how any emissions can your cpu handle?

[Robet.G]

RCS thrusters are a massless part so basically this challenge is: how any emissions can your cpu handle?

that, and people have landed on the moon with RCS, this isn't really a challenge.

[The_Rocketeer]

RCS thrusters are a massless part so basically this challenge is: how any emissions can your cpu handle?

Nope. RCS thrusters are 'physicsless', not massless. Their mass (and drag I think) are added to the first non-physicsless parent part.

that, and people have landed on the moon with RCS, this isn't really a challenge.

I don't know if anybody has done this without infinite fuel, and especially not since 1.0.

This is a stand-up challenge. If u think it's easy/stupid, prove it.

[Red Iron Crown]

Tried this because it's such a change from the usual fare in here.

Got to orbit, the part count went a bit nuts:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Another stage would make it Minmus capable, I think. Or maybe just adding a bit more monoprop to the upper stage. Or maybe just a better pilot. Craft file if anyone would like to play around with it.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Red Iron Crown

[GoSlash27]

that, and people have landed on the moon with RCS, this isn't really a challenge.

Robert.G,

Landing on the Mun with RCS is easy. We did that as a matter of course back in the day. Nearly every Mun lander was RCS back in 0.18.

Launching from Kerbin in KSP 1.04, OTOH, is very difficult. The atmospheric Isp is awful and the thrust requirement is much higher.

I recognize (and RIC proves) that it is possible, but I'm not going to build a 600+ part monstrosity just to do it.

Best,

-Slashy

[JacobJHC]

Is it possible that you could make a badge for this challenge? I think it's interesting and unique and think a badge would work well with it for those who got to orbit using only rcs thrusters.

[Wild Cobra]

Well, I did this so far, but it didn't happen yet because I'm trying to improve upon it:

Details will come later, when I'm happy with my results. I'm trying to orbit, but everything is happening too fast for me to control. Using 19 stages, and they burn fast. Going to try less stages with more fuel each.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Wild Cobra

[Dman979]

Have you considered adding a points system to the challenge? I might try it that way. I think that your idea is a good one.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm sure you will disqualify this entry. You didn't specify the "RV-105 RCS Thruster Block" though I believe that is what you intended.

I used several of the "Vernor Engines" which are technically RCS thrusters too.

Anyway, I ran out of fuel before I could land on the Mun.

Here is a slideshow, cut down from 146 images to 43:

http://s181.photobucket.com/user/Wild_Cobra/slideshow/Kerbal/Thruster%20attempt%203?sort=9

First and near last images:

- - - Updated - - -

If anyone is interested, here is a pic of the top two stages. All stages below the top one are identical... Copy and paste! 48 Vernor engines attached to the Rockomax Brand Adapter 02 below the fuel tanks on each stage.

I triggered the decouplers at fuel levels of 14,400, 12,600, 10,800, etc. etc. etc. Each stage has 1,800/2,200 fuel/oxidizer, so I triggered at every 1,800 fuel.

Edited October 15, 2015 by Wild Cobra

[littlebuddy0]

Actually you are winning Cobra because by RCS thrusters I meant all things activated with the R key.

[Wild Cobra]

Actually you are winning Cobra because by RCS thrusters I meant all things activated with the R key.

Then maybe I should actually try!

Otherwise, someone will take my design, improve it, and do better than I have.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm disappointed.

Nobody beat my entry yet.

I wonder if I'm wasting my time, trying to do better.

- - - Updated - - -

The challenge is that you need to get as high or fast as possible with only RCS thrusters to use thrust.

Rules:

1) Only RCS Thrusters (That means no mono engine)

2) You Must Take A Screenshot Of The Info Or It Didn't Happen

3) No Modded Parts

4) No Hyperedit

5) No Cheats

6) Speed Must Not Be Orbit View Under 42km

Here is my example:

http://imgur.com/a/Tq3Bk

Scoreboard:

Highest/Furthest:

1)Wild Cobra: Crashed On The Mun!!!!

2)Red Iron Crown: 74km orbit

3)Me: 19,465 m

4)

Fastest:

1)Wild Cobra 2803.8 m/s

2)Red Iron Crown 2208.5 m/s

3)Me 421 m/s

4)

Good Luck!

OK...

I'm actually kind of new to KSP compared to others. I didn't play it till 1.04 came out a few months back.

What is the farthest reaches to be had, to clinch a victory?

[Slam_Jones]

From where I'm standing, this is starting to look like a "who can handle the most parts" challenge. Not that anything's wrong with that, it's just not many people are into it.

If you get WhackJob in here, though, then it's all over. That man will melt his CPU if he has to.

[Wild Cobra]

From where I'm standing, this is starting to look like a "who can handle the most parts" challenge. Not that anything's wrong with that, it's just not many people are into it.

If you get WhackJob in here, though, then it's all over. That man will melt his CPU if he has to.

It does get difficult.

I have been using two computers. My slower one, when I checked a week back in my laptop, has a 4th generation i7 that is 38% as fast as the fastest CPU available... which also cost several thousand. My tower has an i7 that is faster yet, around 45% as fast as the fastest. My laptop is a gaming computer, the MSI Leopard pro with a GTX 950X. It doesn't even sweat at all with this game. The game seems seems to be limited by its 32 bit nature. I can play a bluray movie on my dual monitor setup, and not see any slowdown of the game... slower than it already is, at the same time, and that's with my tower that has the faster i7 CPU, but slower GT 720 graphics card.

I have been developing stuff for the Mün Rocked competition. I am currently at almost 2,900 parts for the Mun lander from launch, but have a defect I haven't figured out yet.

Here is a pic of one of its incarnations:

- - - Updated - - -

I also have this refueler in the Mun orbit for when I get a station there:

Edited October 15, 2015 by Wild Cobra

[ttnarg]

I forgot the ore contaner and the the take off was too painfully slow to do again.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Wild Cobra]

I forgot the ore contaner and the the take off was too painfully slow to do again.

http://imgur.com/a/MqCG6

Nice job.

Looks like I may have to take another go at it...

[Wild Cobra]

From where I'm standing, this is starting to look like a "who can handle the most parts" challenge. Not that anything's wrong with that, it's just not many people are into it.

If you get WhackJob in here, though, then it's all over. That man will melt his CPU if he has to.

Problem is, limitation isn't the CPU. Neither of my computers CPU's or graphics cards break a sweat for over 2,000 parts. It's some limitation in the game itself, the way it manages the parts. I don't fully know why, but I suspect it's the unity 4 graphics engine limitations. If what I read is true, it's because of that graphics engine's 32 bit limitation.

My tower has a slightly faster processor than my laptop and 32 GB, but my laptop has a far superior graphics card and 16 GB. I use dual monitor with both, and playing a bluray movie on my tower while playing the game doesn't effect the game at all.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Wild Cobra

[Red Iron Crown]

Problem is, limitation isn't the CPU. Neither of my computers CPU's or graphics cards break a sweat for over 2,000 parts. It's some limitation in the game itself, the way it manages the parts. I don't fully know why, but I suspect it's the unity 4 graphics engine limitations. If what I read is true, it's because of that graphics engine's 32 bit limitation.

My tower has a slightly faster processor than my laptop and 32 GB, but my laptop has a far superior graphics card and 16 GB. I use dual monitor with both, and playing a bluray movie on my tower while playing the game doesn't effect the game at all.

The physics in KSP is single-threaded, so can only use one core fully (if you have a quad core this looks like 25% CPU usage); other cores are available for other tasks. The performance bottleneck is almost surely the CPU and not anything graphical.

[Wild Cobra]

The physics in KSP is single-threaded, so can only use one core fully (if you have a quad core this looks like 25% CPU usage); other cores are available for other tasks. The performance bottleneck is almost surely the CPU and not anything graphical.

And when my total CPU usage is averaging under 16%, what then?

I don't slow down until the game is using about 3.5 GB of memory, for it's 32 bit engine.

I just put in a bluray on my dual monitor setup. I have KSP in a window of 1600 x 900 on one, and playing the movie full screen HD on the other. My total CPU usage with a station of 1,395 parts and a refueler docked is between 15% to 18%, averaging 17% with all I have going on right now. My GPU load is between 3% to 39%, erratic. It's the GeForce GT 720. The processor is the i7-4790 at 3.6 ghz, and 32 GB memory. My resource monitor has KSP using 15.04 - 15.05% of the CPU, the movie playing is only adding a 1.09 to 1.12% load.

It's a four core virtual 8 processor. Full load on one virtual processor would be 12.5%, so it stands to reason that I am limited on this point. However, if unity didn't have to swap memory to go beyond 32 bit, the processor would have far less work to do.

Last I checked, this processor was about 40% as fast as a $7,000 top end processor.

[Red Iron Crown]

And when my total CPU usage is averaging under 16%, what then? <snip>

Then you have a quad core with hyperthreading. It's slightly exceeding the nominal 12.5% because it does some things in other threads, too.

32-bit memory limit is not relevant to performance here as it doesn't start swapping when hitting the limit, it crashes.

The Bluray you're playing is being decoded on the GPU, not the CPU.

[Wild Cobra]

32-bit memory limit is not relevant to performance here as it doesn't start swapping when hitting the limit, it crashes.

Must be why I can't edit a ship once its past about 2,500 parts.

[Wild Cobra]

FYI to all.

I just doubled my frame rate with large part counts by disabling hyperthreading in the bios.

[littlebuddy0]

This is not Mun Rocked nor does it wish to be.