The Ultimate Jool 5 Challenge Continued

[Xurkitree]

Jool-5 mission complete and compiled video - now its just more editing.

Video should be up soon^TM

[Xurkitree]

@JacobJHC I see there are no modded entries in this thread.

Let's change that

Enjoy  

[JacobJHC]

1 hour ago, Xurkitree said:

@JacobJHC I see there are no modded entries in this thread.

Let's change that

Enjoy  

Congratulations @Xurkitree on completing the Jool 5 Challenge on the 2nd Level! This is one of the best videos I've seen submitted for a Jool 5 Challenge. Also, the way the video and the music went together was outstanding. Amazing job!

[Pipcard]

@JacobJHC

My Jool 5 mission is now complete: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9

(if you get forced to the bottom of the page, just click the address bar and press "enter" or "return")

8 Kerbals (Jeb, Bill, Anelle, Camlorf, Valentina, Tiella, Bob, and Negy Kerman), ISRU

KSP version 1.1.3 (sandbox); part-related mods: Taurus HCV, Kerbal Inventory System / Kerbal Attachment System (struts), Kerbpaint (for 1.1.3)

Why 1.1.3? This is part of my continuing sandbox pseudo-career which I started back in 2013 and transferred over to the current version (and Kerbpaint doesn't really work for newer versions).

Before that: Negi Maru module launches (interplanetary mothership), WiM-6 Minmus miner (to fuel the Negi Maru in Kerbin orbit), Negi Star flight 12 (passenger shuttle, KIS strut installation for Dres mission), WiM-9 Jool system miner,  Jool Rabbit 1 lander,  Jool Rabbit 2 lander + Negi Star flight 15

Negi Maru orbiting Pol

Spoiler

Bob on Pol (Jool Rabbit 1 lander)

WiM-9 mining at Pol

Deployment of Jool Rabbit 2

Valentina, Tiella, Anelle, and Negy on Laythe

Camlorf on Vall

Bill on Bop

Jeb on Tylo

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by Pipcard

[JacobJHC]

On 5/31/2019 at 2:42 AM, Pipcard said:

@JacobJHC

My Jool 5 mission is now complete: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9

(if you get forced to the bottom of the page, just click the address bar and press "enter" or "return")

8 Kerbals (Jeb, Bill, Anelle, Camlorf, Valentina, Tiella, Bob, and Negy Kerman), ISRU

KSP version 1.1.3 (sandbox); part-related mods: Taurus HCV, Kerbal Inventory System / Kerbal Attachment System (struts), Kerbpaint (for 1.1.3)

Why 1.1.3? This is part of my continuing sandbox pseudo-career which I started back in 2013 and transferred over to the current version (and Kerbpaint doesn't really work for newer versions).

Before that: Negi Maru module launches (interplanetary mothership), WiM-6 Minmus miner (to fuel the Negi Maru in Kerbin orbit), Negi Star flight 12 (passenger shuttle, KIS strut installation for Dres mission), WiM-9 Jool system miner,  Jool Rabbit 1 lander,  Jool Rabbit 2 lander + Negi Star flight 15

Negi Maru orbiting Pol

  Reveal hidden contents

Bob on Pol (Jool Rabbit 1 lander)

WiM-9 mining at Pol

Deployment of Jool Rabbit 2

Valentina, Tiella, Anelle, and Negy on Laythe

Camlorf on Vall

Bill on Bop

Jeb on Tylo

 

Congratulations @Pipcard on completing the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 3! The mission was really fun to follow, and I like that you left the refueler in the Jool system for future missions! I also liked how long the ship was, most are short and stubby, but yours is similar to the Discovery 1 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. Adding you to the leaderboard now.

[Pipcard]

5 minutes ago, JacobJHC said:

Congratulations @Pipcard on completing the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 3! The mission was really fun to follow, and I like that you left the refueler in the Jool system for future missions! I also liked how long the ship was, most are short and stubby, but yours is similar to the Discovery 1 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. Adding you to the leaderboard now.

Thanks! The large crew cabins on the Negi Maru are meant to self-roleplay the living space needed for long interplanetary journeys.

Edited June 1, 2019 by Pipcard

[JacobJHC]

1 minute ago, Pipcard said:

Thanks! The large crew cabins on the Negi Maru are meant to self-roleplay the living space needed for long interplanetary journeys.

It was a nice touch for sure.

[Pipcard]

On 3/16/2018 at 4:03 PM, JacobJHC said:

@Pipcard ISRU Thread here. A well executed, eight Kerbal mission with one of the longest ships I've ever seen in this game. Excellent mission that toured the Jool System in an engaging thread. Mission was assembled in multiple parts, flew to Jool, landed on the moons (being sure to refuel on Bop and Pol when needed), EVA jetpacked off Tylo, and the crew was returned to Kerbin by a separately flown SSTO.

By the way, can you please change your opening description? Negi Star was not an SSTO, it is a spaceplane launched on a partially reusable rocket.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Pipcard

[Orky Kultur]

So, I'm hoping to give this a go, but first I have questions on rule 2:

1. How strict is it? Is it no clipping of any kind whatsoever, or only where there is significant function derived from the clipping?
Specifically what I would like to do (no screenshots, sadly): mk1 liquid fuel tanks, radially symmetric around a central mk1 LF tank, do not /quite/ fit inside a mk3 cargo bay; it takes a single small nudge (holding down shift + move) inwards to prevent them clipping through the flat sides of the bay. Visually and functionally this is identical (center of mass is within the cargo bay either way and hence the parts are shielded from drag), and it is visually identical to the point where I imagine I could have 'gotten away with it' if I'd just not said anything. Is this within acceptable parameters?

2. If the answer to (1) is "nope, can't clip that"; does the no clipping rule apply to the launch vehicle? (Not sure my neurodivergent-ass brain would let me fly a launch vehicle with bits clipped through it anyway, but thought it was worth asking)

3. Do the new BG robotics parts, specifically pistons, count as structural or functional parts, and hence are they clip-able or not?

 

[EDIT: I'm in the vehicle design phase right now, so if the answers to the above are all 'no don't do that' it isn't the end of the world, but I thought I oughta ask]

Edited June 7, 2019 by Orky Kultur

[Kerolyov]

Hi @JacobJHC thinking of having another attempt at this, been 2 years since I achieved Level 1 and thinking of trying either a Level 2 or 3 attempt, once I've got back up to speed with all the recent KSP updates.  Noticed the rules have two crossed on the first post (5 & 6 re seats and refuelling), what does this mean that the rules no longer apply or that they are optional?  Not easy to search the whole 24 page thread to clarify this (maybe you could add something on the first post to explain?)

Thanks for all your work on maintaining this excellent challenge.

[JacobJHC]

Sorry everyone I was on vacation, I'll get to reading everyone's messages.

On 6/7/2019 at 9:25 AM, Orky Kultur said:

So, I'm hoping to give this a go, but first I have questions on rule 2:

1. How strict is it? Is it no clipping of any kind whatsoever, or only where there is significant function derived from the clipping?
Specifically what I would like to do (no screenshots, sadly): mk1 liquid fuel tanks, radially symmetric around a central mk1 LF tank, do not /quite/ fit inside a mk3 cargo bay; it takes a single small nudge (holding down shift + move) inwards to prevent them clipping through the flat sides of the bay. Visually and functionally this is identical (center of mass is within the cargo bay either way and hence the parts are shielded from drag), and it is visually identical to the point where I imagine I could have 'gotten away with it' if I'd just not said anything. Is this within acceptable parameters?

2. If the answer to (1) is "nope, can't clip that"; does the no clipping rule apply to the launch vehicle? (Not sure my neurodivergent-ass brain would let me fly a launch vehicle with bits clipped through it anyway, but thought it was worth asking)

3. Do the new BG robotics parts, specifically pistons, count as structural or functional parts, and hence are they clip-able or not?

 

[EDIT: I'm in the vehicle design phase right now, so if the answers to the above are all 'no don't do that' it isn't the end of the world, but I thought I oughta ask]

1. If you have screenshots I can verify, but just from your description the fuel tank clipping in the mk1 sounds good.

2. Clipping rule does apply to the launch vehicle, if you post a screenshot from the launchpad or VAB I can verify if it works or not.

3. Functional, so no extreme clipping.

On 6/8/2019 at 6:25 AM, Kerolyov said:

Hi @JacobJHC thinking of having another attempt at this, been 2 years since I achieved Level 1 and thinking of trying either a Level 2 or 3 attempt, once I've got back up to speed with all the recent KSP updates.  Noticed the rules have two crossed on the first post (5 & 6 re seats and refuelling), what does this mean that the rules no longer apply or that they are optional?  Not easy to search the whole 24 page thread to clarify this (maybe you could add something on the first post to explain?)

Thanks for all your work on maintaining this excellent challenge.

The crossed out rules no longer apply, sorry for the confusion.

Thanks!

[Beriev]

Hello, I have a question pertaining to the "no cheats" rule. When I move my Jool-V ship from the VAB to the launchpad, it rips itself to shreds the moment physics initiates. However, I have found that if the "unbreakable joints" cheat is activated for a second or two while the ship settles down into its clamps and then deactivated before launch, after that, the ship is perfectly stable, even in flight. My question is, would that be permitted when I do the real mission, or would it fall under "using cheats during the mission?" Thanks.

[sturmhauke]

I'd suggest looking into your autostrut config, or even a redesign, regardless. If your ship is unstable on the launchpad, it can potentially be unstable at other times, especially on reload, landing, or during maneuvers.

[JacobJHC]

9 hours ago, Beriev said:

Hello, I have a question pertaining to the "no cheats" rule. When I move my Jool-V ship from the VAB to the launchpad, it rips itself to shreds the moment physics initiates. However, I have found that if the "unbreakable joints" cheat is activated for a second or two while the ship settles down into its clamps and then deactivated before launch, after that, the ship is perfectly stable, even in flight. My question is, would that be permitted when I do the real mission, or would it fall under "using cheats during the mission?" Thanks.

If you can prove that it was only enabled to keep the ship from exploding on launch that should work just fine, but if you use it at all after you hit the spacebar to launch that would break the rules. Best of luck!

[Xurkitree]

What's better than one Jool-5? 

Two Jool-5's!

@JacobJHC

[cantab]

I now want a docking port hat :-D

Nice demonstration of two very different approaches in one mission. Also looks like the big ISRU ship never staged anything, unless I missed it? Making it Jool-∞ capable.

What's the story behind bailing out on the lightweight Laythe landing?

[PhoenixRise86]

I know this is mostly a stock-game challenge, but how would you feel about a JNSQ Jool 5? (All planets/moons/distances are rescaled to ~2.7x stock scale and some atmospheres are different) The only thing that I've seen that would reduce the challenge (which is mostly increased by the scaling) is that Tylo has a thin atmosphere which would allow for aerocapture/parachute-assisted descent.

[Xurkitree]

15 hours ago, cantab said:

I now want a docking port hat :-D

Nice demonstration of two very different approaches in one mission. Also looks like the big ISRU ship never staged anything, unless I missed it? Making it Jool-∞ capable.

What's the story behind bailing out on the lightweight Laythe landing?

Yeah the first ship is an Jool-5 capable SSTA. Extra mass of the second payload made it harder to design but adding more boosters works great everytime.

As for the Laythe bailout, the Kerbal was creating very unbalanced drag, causing the ship to tumble dramatically. No amount of torque or autopilot to fix. Then OndrikB suggested that I bail out and doing so immediately stabilised the tumble and it made a graceful touchdown. This is why I shouted him out - without that tip I would have just shelved the mission and declared it failed.

[Norcalplanner]

15 hours ago, PhoenixRise86 said:

I know this is mostly a stock-game challenge, but how would you feel about a JNSQ Jool 5? (All planets/moons/distances are rescaled to ~2.7x stock scale and some atmospheres are different) The only thing that I've seen that would reduce the challenge (which is mostly increased by the scaling) is that Tylo has a thin atmosphere which would allow for aerocapture/parachute-assisted descent.

I was planning on doing this in my new JNSQ career, so I'd definitely be up for the challenge. At best, there could be a new JNSQ category. At worst, we could be gatecrashers but still share our mission reports here for others to enjoy.

[GRS]

Doing a Level Jeb now, in a Modified Hard Mode with some Difficulty raising props using The New 2nd Largest of My Crafts (8000+ Tons)

[Coolinee Kerman]

Would a Jupiter 4 mission in RSSRO be remotely close enough to this challenge to count? Likely not but I figured I'd ask anyway.

[PhoenixRise86]

Trying a new run with recording to see if I can post vids of the mission.

[JacobJHC]

I have returned from my vacation. Time to review things and answer other things.

[JacobJHC]

Congratulations @Xurkitree on completing the Jool 5 challenge on level 1... TWICE! The mission was excellently executed, and I found the Tylo lander to be more entertaining that I probably should. It was so basic, yet so powerful. I also thought that the second Laythe landing was fun, I've never seen anyone land on Laythe quite like that. Adding this mission to the leaderboard now.

On 6/19/2019 at 11:12 PM, PhoenixRise86 said:

I know this is mostly a stock-game challenge, but how would you feel about a JNSQ Jool 5? (All planets/moons/distances are rescaled to ~2.7x stock scale and some atmospheres are different) The only thing that I've seen that would reduce the challenge (which is mostly increased by the scaling) is that Tylo has a thin atmosphere which would allow for aerocapture/parachute-assisted descent.

Maybe. How thick is Tylo's atmosphere.

[JacobJHC]

On 6/20/2019 at 2:18 PM, Norcalplanner said:

I was planning on doing this in my new JNSQ career, so I'd definitely be up for the challenge. At best, there could be a new JNSQ category. At worst, we could be gatecrashers but still share our mission reports here for others to enjoy.

@PhoenixRise86 @Norcalplanner You know what? Go ahead. I'm curious how that works out  I'll make its category when the first mission for it is done.