Kerbal Charter Challenge!

[HazelPine]

@Van Disaster, is that possibly a future mod? If you make into a releasable mod, it would be awesome, those look so cool! Also, I imagine the score for your cargo run may be lower than 30,000, since you have to divide it by the cost of fuel. Good luck on that front!

[Van Disaster]

7 minutes ago, Pine said:

@Van Disaster, is that possibly a future mod? If you make into a releasable mod, it would be awesome, those look so cool! Also, I imagine the score for your cargo run may be lower than 30,000, since you have to divide it by the cost of fuel. Good luck on that front!

I'm frustrated enough by the lack of small modular aircraft that there's certainly the intention, but I do have a pile of half finished stuff lying around ( there's more locally ofc ) and not a great track record at finishing - also I've never done an IVA. However it'd be a nice thing to get out there for people doing this challenge, that's for sure.

To get a score of 1, you'd need to burn 37000 units of fuel with a 30t average even for a 1t average that'd be 1250 units.

 

[zolotiyeruki]

Here's my Bush Cargo entry.  Fuel cost: 0.8 * (1440-833) = 485.6  Average cargo mass (all were the same): 17.05 Tons

Score = 485.6/17.05 = 28.48

No part or physics mods--stock aero and parts only, but I used KER and Pilot Assistant a bit.

After dropping the first tank, the plane was *very* nose heavy, even with all the fuel shifted aft.  Also, I didn't include enough intakes, so I had to be gentle on the throttle at first when taking off.  So...not a great plane to fly

http://imgur.com/a/ts2OO

[Baybrawler]

Wow! Those look amazing! Finish a few up and release a mod pack, you could even do a alpha release soon or even now. I think it would give you the motivation to finish a few, and figure out the parts people like the most! 

[Koolkei]

F*** me... 70% through the 2 and a half hour trip and the plane exploded. and KSP won't load the last quicksave.

OP hybrid plane is OP. turns out it can go up to 2.4 mach and still go even faster on FAR @ 23000M..... but it overheats...

 

so fudge that. i found another loophole

will post the result soon*

 

*: as soon as i find another way to record.

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Koolkei

[Van Disaster]

My cargo run was going so well...

Spoiler

 

 

but ended up just like every other cargo attempt except the first run I didn't record in any way. Grmph. I blame uh, wind shear.

Whatever electric prop is sitting in my parts list is ridiculously overpowered

Edited September 9, 2016 by Van Disaster

[HazelPine]

That looks like a solid plane! Do you mind revealing how much cargo it carries in total and average? Looks like it needs to touch the nose carefully!

[Van Disaster]

49 minutes ago, Pine said:

That looks like a solid plane! Do you mind revealing how much cargo it carries in total and average? Looks like it needs to touch the nose carefully!

Five of these:

Spoiler

which have an annoying tendancy of breaking wheels/getting them blocked at inopportune moments, but mostly they're ok. I think I might double the nosewheels on the plane, but then I bet something else goes wrong

[Koolkei]

i don't get how do are you able to go so slow, with wings so small, and lift so much and be so efficient on FAR?

[Van Disaster]

9 minutes ago, Koolkei said:

i don't get how do are you able to go so slow, with wings so small, and lift so much and be so efficient on FAR?

Reference area ( FAR telling me how much lift surface there is ): 466m^2 - that's hardly small! the wing loading for the fully laden craft comes out at 320kg/m^2, which is about the same as a Eurofighter & half an A380 ( and just over 1/3d of a MD-11, which explains why every one I flew in made you climb back up the aisle from the loo ). Large flaps across 2/3ds of the wing too. Drooping leading edges let it fly at high AoA, but I tend not to do that much because the drag is insane. About 5 deg incidence on the main wing.

Aircraft glide much better in FAR than stock ( as they do in real life too ) - stock is still rather syrupy. I spend most of the time gliding. Lift is probably a bit higher in stock, if I compare the same craft.

Edited September 9, 2016 by Van Disaster

[Koolkei]

so long and small wings are better for low speed lift than big and short wings?

[Van Disaster]

Higher aspect ratio is generally better for more lift at slow speed, it's just more drag too. For puttering around short distances like this the plane type to emulate is a glider/Twin Otter/C130.

Here's a full cargo run - unfortunately when part empty the dual nosewheels turned into dual pogosticks, so I took 3 attempts at the Regional airport before deciding that "down in one piece" was good enough. The cargo also caused more trouble than usual. I'm too tired to drag it all into Premiere & edit it, sorry. As of time of posting YT is giving me an hour left to process, but I don't fully believe that.

Spoiler

 

So, score:

Fuel: 645-403 * 0.8 = 193.6
Cargo: 5 x 18,163kg
Score: unit/kg = 0.01066 ( are you really sure about this, Pine? )
Score: unit/t = 10.66
 

[HazelPine]

Almost sure. For the score you ise the cargo mass in tons, but I guess I told you about the mass that appears in the leaderboards.

 

Pretty nice entry, once I get home I'll udate the OP with your score and fix it for you if I get to it first!

It should be: 193.6/18.163= score, but I don't have a calculator handy ATM.

[Van Disaster]

It'll be 10.66 then. You were confusing me with measuring cargo mass in kg

[Koolkei]

cost of fuel -> 89*0.8= 71.2

total cargo weight 3.956*5 = 19.78

score : 71.2/19.78 = 3.599595551061678 -> or just 3.6 not low enough. i need to revisit this later. and also train my landing skill.

 

[Van Disaster]

Heh, I did consider bombing the airfields ( I noticed that loophole too! ) but I thought I'd do a landing run first. I might have to invert my cargo bays & drop things for fun though...

Also I suspect BDA or a homegrown physics bubble mod might be needed.

[HazelPine]

Ok, updated the OP with the new scores! @Koolkei takes the lead in the Bush Cargo Drop-offs in FAR, with @Van Disaster in 2nd place as of now! Looks like you guys also too notice of just how open the challenge is for designs! The fact you can drop your cargo isn't a loophole, it's a feature! As long as the cargo lands and you get back home, everything is fine!

 

Also, I think I figured out what I want to do with the cover image for the challenge. Sooo, if you want your plane featured in the image, please send a screenshot/picture of ONE airplane which you have entered into the challenge. It doesn't have to be the one that is in the leaderoard, but just one you flew as an entry. Also, send the image of the plane with a view from this angle, so to make it easier on me:

Spoiler

Good luck on your future flights, everyone! Hoping to see even more cool designs!

Edited September 10, 2016 by Pine

[zolotiyeruki]

 

Pine, I think you missed my bush cargo entry upthread a bit:

 

[HazelPine]

I knew I missed something! Funy thing is, I even checked to see if I forgot an entry... 

 

Guess my old age is catching up to me.. In a few years I'll be 20-ish. Oh my. 

 

As soon as I get to my pc I'll put you in, sorry for being an airhead. 

[max_creative]

2 hours ago, Pine said:

Ok, updated the OP with the new scores! @Koolkei takes the lead in the Bush Cargo Drop-offs in FAR, with @Van Disaster in 2nd place as of now! Looks like you guys also too notice of just how open the challenge is for designs! The fact you can drop your cargo isn't a loophole, it's a feature! As long as the cargo lands and you get back home, everything is fine!

 

Also, I think I figured out what I want to do with the cover image for the challenge. Sooo, if you want your plane featured in the image, please send a screenshot/picture of ONE airplane which you have entered into the challenge. It doesn't have to be the one that is in the leaderoard, but just one you flew as an entry. Also, send the image of the plane with a view from this angle, so to make it easier on me:

  Reveal hidden contents

Good luck on your future flights, everyone! Hoping to see even more cool designs!

What if you do a cargo drop with two planes? A small plane, like an Aeris 3A, and a big plane, like a Mallard. Use a decoupler, remove the engines, and put a probe core on the Mallard. Modify the Aeris 3A to have big engines. Really big engines. 

Control it from the Aeris 3A, then fly to the airport. Drop the whole Mallard plane, and shut off the big jets and turn on the normal jets on the Aeris 3A. Fly near the Mallard plane, then land. Switch to the Mallard, and glide to the airport. Take off the Aeris as fast as possible, and fly back to the KSC. Land the Aeris. The whole Mallard is the cargo. By keeping the engines on the Aeris, it can catch up, but the Mallard can't go too far. 

Basically, fly the planes to the airport, use the whole Mallard as cargo, and fly back with only the Aeris. It works, right? 

[Koolkei]

oh cmon. i'm pretty sure there quite a bit of players here that are 30+ i'm not that old, but i am, still a bit older than you. we're still young..... i think

[Van Disaster]

18 hours ago, Koolkei said:

cost of fuel -> 89*0.8= 71.2

total cargo weight 3.956*5 = 19.78

score : 71.2/19.78 = 3.599595551061678 -> or just 3.6 not low enough. i need to revisit this later. and also train my landing skill.

Hate to point out errors, but that should be 71.2/3.956, we're taking the average cargo mass rather than the total.

3 hours ago, Koolkei said:

oh cmon. i'm pretty sure there quite a bit of players here that are 30+ i'm not that old, but i am, still a bit older than you. we're still young..... i think

I would be one of those :p. There are retirees here, there's occasional polls about age groups.

[Koolkei]

1 minute ago, Van Disaster said:

Hate to point out errors, but that should be 71.2/3.956, we're taking the average cargo mass rather than the total.

I would be one of those :p. There are retirees here, there's occasional polls about age groups.

 what average?

" The score is based on the cost of fuel used divided by the total mass of the the cargo (add all delivered cargo masses) "

now that i paid attention again. mine is the correct calculation. yours is the wrong one. your score should have been 2.131806419644332, or just 2.13. lower than mine

[Van Disaster]

Hm, you're right - I'm sure it originally said average. Did you change that at some point, Pine?

Back to bombing airfields

[HazelPine]

Yeah, I did. That little tidbit of the rule was making it a bit hard to double check if people had average masses worked out or not, so I simplified it a bit. If you want it changed back, just tell me, but I think total mass works just as well as average on this challenge.