The Elcano Challenge: Ground-Based Circumnavigation (Continued)

[Claw]

On 3/24/2016 at 4:20 AM, damerell said:

Mmm. It had struck me that it's about as far as Kerbin

Yeah. Tylo has the same radius as Kerbin. And the terrain wasn't nearly as exciting (to me anyway). Plus all the explodium someone left laying around...

[Warzouz]

Here is my mission report

 

[Claw]

@Warzouz Great job, and welcome to the club!

[Matuchkin]

I'm planning a master-mariner elcano for Earth sometime next month. Is that permitted?

[Enceos]

Lol, I'm a rover lover and I think I spent around 60 hours just roving on the Mun. Circumnavigated it twice on different saves. The Mission was to visit all the arches and monoliths on one rover. Those thrills of 80m/s speed when riding down slope... good times. Just found this topic, didn't know it was a challenge )

[damerell]

2 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

I'm planning a master-mariner elcano for Earth sometime next month. Is that permitted?

Claw is a reasonable person and as such I am sure it will be.

[Matuchkin]

6 minutes ago, damerell said:

Claw is a reasonable person and as such I am sure it will be.

Good. First I need to know if the Panama Canal and the Suez Canal exist in RSS. That is crucial.

[Slam_Jones]

Hey all,

So, inspired by the coming improvements to wheel physics, etc, I've started planning another circumnavigation (original linked in sig), and, also being inspired by @Matuchkin, I'm considering doing RSS Earth.  However my route would be mostly land, to test the wheel physics and all, and, like my last cirumnav, will be done in a small, dune-buggy-style vehicle (as opposed to the massive monstrosities I see complete it most often).  There will, of course, still have to be water crossings, which brings me (almost) to my question.

Now, as I understand it, the vehicle you start with must be (basically) the same vehicle you finish with, excepting legal modifications due to issues.  My question is, how far do those modifications extend?  For example, if I want pontoons on my Dune Buggy (for extra fuel and buoyancy for water crossings) , would they need to be attached from the very beginning, or can I fly them out attached to a plane, land next to the buggy so the driver can disconnect them from the plane and attach them to the buggy via KAS?  If they need to be attached throughout, I'll probably put them on Infernal Robotics hinges or something.  To be clear, the buggy would still be doing the crossing under it's own power, with fuel it has collected itself (with on-board ISRU components), the only difference being a few extra parts for water crossings, for fuel capacity and stability sake.

So, cool or not?  I assume not, which is why I ask first

 

 

TL;DR version - to what extent are KAS/KIS modifications allowed in-field?

Edited April 2, 2016 by Slam_Jones

[Matuchkin]

3 hours ago, Slam_Jones said:

Now, as I understand it, the vehicle you start with must be (basically) the same vehicle you finish with, excepting legal modifications due to issues.  My question is, how far do those modifications extend?

I ask the exact same question. The reason is: because of the amount of time I'll be spending traversing large expanses of water, and the amount of boredom that may surface in my Elcano, I aim to accomplish it like an "expedition". I set various trek points around my routes, at which I will be disembarking and exploring the surroundings. On my polar route, for example, I will be doing such exploration in the Baffin mountains, Novaya Zemlya, and various locations in Antarctica. I will also be setting camps in multiple points such as the sandwich islands.

The question here is, am I allowed to modify my boat to have a second vehicle and portable camp equipment? Am I allowed to disembark for extended time periods in certain locations, as long as I return to the ship?

Edited April 2, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Claw]

Hey kerbonauts. As you can imagine, it's been a busy week.

On 3/29/2016 at 10:45 AM, Matuchkin said:

I'm planning a master-mariner elcano for Earth sometime next month. Is that permitted?

Technically the rules of the challenge are such that celestial bodies introduced via add-on are not permitted. However, an actual Elcano around an Earth sized sphere is certainly in the spirit of things. I'd ask that you give me a chance to think about how to classify rules for such things without making it overly complex. Also, badges...

 

 

[Matuchkin]

10 hours ago, Claw said:

I'd ask that you give me a chance to think about how to classify rules for such things without making it overly complex.

Well, it should be quite simple. The rules for a Kerbin elcano would certainly classify under Earth.

[Claw]

It's not really a question of what rules to apply on the Earth Elcano challenge, but rather how to modify the rule below without making things complex or overwhelming to deal with.

On 12/26/2015 at 1:08 PM, Claw said:

9. Only stock planets and moons are acceptable. Asteroids (stock or modded) or orbital bodies introduced to the Kerbol system via a plugin are not considered valid orbital bodies for this challenge.

 

Off hand I see no reason to halt someone's Earth Elcano (I suppose it actually ought to be encouraged). But since I don't use any mods that add other planets, I need to figure out what the other impacts of changing this rule might be.

I'd say go ahead and start your trip when you are ready. I certainly won't disqualify an entry based on it being on Earth, assuming the other rules are met. I just need to figure out wording for Rule 9.

[Matuchkin]

Just now, Claw said:

It's not really a question of what rules to apply on the Earth Elcano challenge, but rather how to modify the rule below without making things complex or overwhelming to deal with.

 

Off hand I see no reason to halt someone's Earth Elcano (I suppose it actually ought to be encouraged). But since I don't use any mods that add other planets, I need to figure out what the other impacts of changing this rule might be.

I'd say go ahead and start your trip when you are ready. I certainly won't disqualify an entry based on it being on Earth, assuming the other rules are met. I just need to figure out wording for Rule 9.

Why not just add sections, for different mods or bodies? That's what I'll do if I was you.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Claw]

On 3/29/2016 at 11:00 AM, Enceos said:

I'm a rover lover and I think I spent around 60 hours just roving on the Mun.

Haha, nice! It's almost strange how easy it is to get sucked into hours of driving around.

 

22 hours ago, Slam_Jones said:

For example, if I want pontoons on my Dune Buggy (for extra fuel and buoyancy for water crossings) , would they need to be attached from the very beginning, or can I fly them out attached to a plane, land next to the buggy so the driver can disconnect them from the plane and attach them to the buggy via KAS?  If they need to be attached throughout, I'll probably put them on Infernal Robotics hinges or something.

If all you need is pontoons, and you manually move them around as you describe...then I can probably accept that modification. Using IR would be more "technically correct." Do you maybe have a picture or concept prototype for what changes you will make? That might make it easier to see.

 

19 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

The question here is, am I allowed to modify my boat to have a second vehicle and portable camp equipment?

Depends on exactly what you mean by "second vehicle." It sounds like you're planning a water circumnavigation. In which case, having an "exploratory rover" of sorts on the ship is perfectly acceptable (and I'd actually love to see that!), so long as all those vessel meet back up and continues traveling together.

 

19 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

Am I allowed to disembark for extended time periods in certain locations, as long as I return to the ship?

Yes, always.

 

11 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

for different mods or bodies?

Only a few categories of mods are expressly forbidden. I'm trying to not maintain a list of acceptable/prohibited addons if at all possible. Also, the "no modded celestial bodies" is a carry over from the previous thread for this challenge, so I hadn't thought about that particular rule much.

Edit: Oh wait, I think I see your meaning now. Yes, any modded celestial body entries will likely go into a single category of it's own. Just need to figure out if there are any add-on bodies that shouldn't be permitted. I suppose RSS is an easy decision, but I don't know much about the other planetary mods.

[Slam_Jones]

48 minutes ago, Claw said:

-snip-

If all you need is pontoons, and you manually move them around as you describe...then I can probably accept that modification. Using IR would be more "technically correct." Do you maybe have a picture or concept prototype for what changes you will make? That might make it easier to see.

-snip snip-

Sure, I'll try to whip up a paper concept (KSP has been acting strangely for me :\ ).  The other idea was just dumping a pile of spare parts next to them (in a KAS box) and having the driver weld it all together.

Current testing has shown that my current buggy concept can be put back together rather easily in a few scenarios.  Regardless I'll try to get a decent visual representation so you know what I'm on about

Edit: Also, I'll be doing regular Kerbin again. I calculated how long it would take to drive around RSS Earth (I won't be using time warp while moving) and it was 300+ hours     So yeah, for me, Kerbin it is! lol

Edited April 3, 2016 by Slam_Jones

[Matuchkin]

Just now, Slam_Jones said:

Edit: Also, I'll be doing regular Kerbin again. I calculated how long it would take to drive around RSS Earth (I won't be using time warp while moving) and it was 300+ hours     So yeah, for me, Kerbin it is! lol

Yeah, I calculated also. I'm prepared for 5 months of travel.

 

Edited April 3, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Claw]

21 minutes ago, Slam_Jones said:

I calculated how long it would take to drive around RSS Earth

Yeah, haha. That's why I can't see a good reason to categorically deny navigating around an RSS Earth.

So for the moment, Earth is fine. Just need to look for loopholes, since they always get exploited.

[Matuchkin]

2 hours ago, Claw said:

If all you need is pontoons, and you manually move them around as you describe...then I can probably accept that modification. Using IR would be more "technically correct." Do you maybe have a picture or concept prototype for what changes you will make? That might make it easier to see.

I might make a crane, to haul a boat off of my ship, haul trucks, kerbals and supplies into the boat, haul said supplies off the boat once the boat gets to shore, haul all that back on the boat days later, return to mothership and haul the boat with all its supplies back on, and continue the journey.

Also, may I use infinite fuel and pretend I have an electric engine, if I still stock up on RTGs and solar-panels? If not, I'll have to wait until boat pack r4 comes back again (or until someone decides to create a mod).

Edited April 3, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Chemp]

1 hour ago, Matuchkin said:

Also, may I use infinite fuel and pretend I have an electric engine, if I still stock up on RTGs and solar-panels? If not, I'll have to wait until boat pack r4 comes back again (or until someone decides to create a mod).

If you want to use mods, you could always make an airboat and build the propeller(s) with Infernal Robotics. Put some small landing gear on the hull and you have an easy way to get your rover on land.

Still, I'd love to see the mothership with a crane.

[Matuchkin]

4 hours ago, Chemp said:

If you want to use mods, you could always make an airboat and build the propeller(s) with Infernal Robotics. Put some small landing gear on the hull and you have an easy way to get your rover on land.

Still, I'd love to see the mothership with a crane.

Well, have fun making a decommissioned missile cruiser an airboat. I'll explain.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Matuchkin]

1 hour ago, Matuchkin said:

Well, have fun making a decommissioned missile cruiser an airboat. I'll explain.

Right. I plan to use a decommissioned missile cruiser, the KS Bonaparte, to tranport all my stuff around the globe. I plan to use KAS winches to deploy/collect a pontoon, with a Buffalo MSEV and some kerbals on it (along with some supply boxes), whenever a trek is underway. The landing gear idea, stated by @Chemp, is a very good idea that I am going to use now that I heard of it. However, I plan to power the pontoon with an electric propeller, provided by KAX.

[Van Disaster]

Rule 4 precludes putting a bunch of vehicles on a boat and just offloading seperate exploratory vehicles. If you can put wheels on your mothership & drive that on land, *then* you're legal.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Van Disaster

[damerell]

21 hours ago, Claw said:

Edit: Oh wait, I think I see your meaning now. Yes, any modded celestial body entries will likely go into a single category of it's own. Just need to figure out if there are any add-on bodies that shouldn't be permitted. I suppose RSS is an easy decision, but I don't know much about the other planetary mods.

I suggest:

Nothing smaller than some defined size, except stock Kerbol system bodies. (I suggest "nothing smaller than Minmus"; Pol and Gilly get a pass by virtue of being stock). Nothing with a surface gravity less than some amount, except stock Kerbol system bodies (maybe around 1% of Earth g?).

The mod must be generally available and used by some people who aren't the circumnavigator.

 

I also suggest there's no point in trying to cover all the angles. As with the second post here, if someone comes up with a clever loophole, that doesn't mean you're obliged to respect that loophole. You're only trying to prevent people from being disappointed when they're acting in good faith but didn't understand the rules.
 

[Claw]

9 hours ago, Van Disaster said:

Rule 4 precludes putting a bunch of vehicles on a boat and just offloading seperate exploratory vehicles.

Rule 4 is really meant to be applied to the vessel that is doing the circumnavigation. That's what I meant to indicate earlier when I said "if he's doing a water circumnavigation." The boat needs to make it all the way around, which I believe is why Matuchkin was checking into the canals existing in RSS.

The land vehicles can disembark, do some exploration, then back to the ship as a side trip to the main journey. If the expeditions could be completely ignored (i.e. as if they were never brought along) and the ship still complete it's circumnavigation, then the expedtions are incidental story.

The land vehicles on the ship could not be used to, say, stop in at New York and drive to San Diego where it magically meets back up with the ship. The ship still needs to sail around one way or the other (probably through Panama), because the boat is the vessel doing the circumnav. So no "landmass hopping" is allowed.

Though I can see how this is confusing. So if my meaning is not clear, please let me know. The least confusing thing would be to get back on the ship right where it was left, which is also the impression that I'm getting from this discussion, and should be fine.

Unless I'm misunderstanding @Matuchkin?

[Matuchkin]

1 hour ago, Claw said:

The land vehicles can disembark, do some exploration, then back to the ship as a side trip to the main journey. If the expeditions could be completely ignored (i.e. as if they were never brought along) and the ship still complete it's circumnavigation, then the expedtions are incidental story.

The land vehicles on the ship could not be used to, say, stop in at New York and drive to San Diego where it magically meets back up with the ship. The ship still needs to sail around one way or the other (probably through Panama), because the boat is the vessel doing the circumnav. So no "landmass hopping" is allowed.

Though I can see how this is confusing. So if my meaning is not clear, please let me know. The least confusing thing would be to get back on the ship right where it was left, which is also the impression that I'm getting from this discussion, and should be fine.

Unless I'm misunderstanding @Matuchkin?

You understand me correctly. I don't plan to landmass-hop with them, though. I plan to conduct "research missions" in interesting locations, such as the Baffin Mountains, Antarctica, or several Pacific Islands/ atolls. I will return to the ship afterwards, and continue my journey. Also, I was asking about the Panama/ Suez canals because I was going to use them in my first planned (equatorial) route. Now, my planned route goes up through the Baffin Islands, through the North Pole, around Novaya Zemlya and Russia, and Through the pacific. Then, I will continue through Antarctica (Weddell Sea and South Sandwich Islands), and go back up to KSC. So now I need to ask about the quality of the map in general, whether it features any small pacific atolls or islands (such as Wake Island or Rose Atoll), and in how much detail the map follows the actual terrain.