Get far, get light

[sevenperforce]

Jeb Kerman has decided he's done with the jerks at KSC, and he's going to get as far away as he possibly can. Unfortunately, he only has a few minutes to scrounge parts from the VAB to build his getaway vehicle.

The Challenge: Get Jeb as far away from KSC as you can, using as few parts as you can.

Rules:

• There will be separate leaderboards for 2 parts, 3 parts, and so on, up to a maximum of 9 parts. Feel free to enter into multiple categories.
• Staging or leaving the vehicle is fine.
• Part count is what initially leaves KSC; doesn't include launch clamps, etc. 
• You cannot use any arrangement which would conceivably allow you to travel indefinitely. So, no solar-powered rover, no glitchcraft, no RTG-powered paddleboat. Also, distance gained from swimming or running does not count. 
• You cannot leave the atmosphere.
• Score is based on ground distance traveled in the F3 menu.
• The kerbal must survive.

Good luck!

Edited May 25, 2018 by sevenperforce

[Human Person]

Here's my 1 part entry. there's a lot of room for improvements, eg preventing it from blowing up so early into the flight.

 

My score is 48.749 m

[sevenperforce]

1 hour ago, Human Person said:

Here's my 1 part entry. there's a lot of room for improvements, eg preventing it from blowing up so early into the flight.

 

My score is 48.749 m

Oh, I thought it was clear -- JEB (or another Kerbal) needs to be the payload.

[Human Person]

you didn't say anything about blowing up, right?

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Hmmm... Booster, fairing, three fins (or, actually, three airbrakes), torque wheel, battery, seat. Blow the fairing as you drop through 18k, pop the brakes, and punch out. Glide under parachute until you run out of altitude.

 

Profit.

 

EDIT: Hmm. Better idea. Replace the brakes with some steerable fins, and the torque wheel and battery with a pair of fixed lifting surfaces... Hmm. This could get mighty fun.

Edited May 25, 2018 by MaverickSawyer

[Box of Stardust]

I was going to do command pod + Kickback, then parachute once out of fuel. But didn't have enough time, so I'll have to wait a few hours until I get home. 

[sevenperforce]

9 minutes ago, Box of Stardust said:

I was going to do command pod + Kickback, then parachute once out of fuel. But didn't have enough time, so I'll have to wait a few hours until I get home. 

I did single-seat cockpit + Twin Boar and managed to get into a 69,000 x 67,000 m suborbital orbit with fuel remaining. Will take quite a while to decay.

I may need to set the ceiling at something like 45 kilometers so that there will always be enough drag to bring you down in one go-round.

[Box of Stardust]

6 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

I did single-seat cockpit + Twin Boar and managed to get into a 69,000 x 67,000 m suborbital orbit with fuel remaining. Will take quite a while to decay.

I may need to set the ceiling at something like 45 kilometers so that there will always be enough drag to bring you down in one go-round.

Oh yeaaahhh, Twin Boar is fuel tank + engine. I forgot about that one. 

I haven't been to space in a while lol, nor have I launched anything that massive. 

[Klapaucius]

4 parts, runway takeoff, 581,000 meters with two Kerbals having a remote getaway holiday.  This thing can be landed vertically (with difficulty) but I ran out of fuel.  I might have made it farther if I had backed off on the throttle, but they were so impatient to get away that they had the throttle open full the whole time. Not my best takeoff as I forgot to set the afterburner.  I edited it down to just under 2 minutes.

 

Edited May 25, 2018 by Klapaucius

[Zeiss Ikon]

I wondered if you'd show up, @Klapaucius.  I still haven't gotten 1.4.3 installed, so Jeb can't open his parachute in the seat, but I've got a command seat on a Mk. 0 Fuel Fuselage with a small round intake and a Juno (and the paraphernalia needed to launch it), waiting to get upgraded.  Probably manage that tomorrow.  Then it's a question of how much I can throttle down the Juno -- and how long I'm willing to sit by the screen...

@sevenperforce Add another 3200 tank and that Twin Boar can probably take Jeb to Duna or Eve, if a transfer window is open (certainly Kerbin escape)  Still only three parts...

Interesting side question -- since a three-part craft like @sevenperforce started can take you pretty nearly anywhere in Kerbin's system (though you may be unable to capture, never mind land, when you get there), shouldn't the scoring reflect the parts mass that Jeb leaves KSC with, rather than parts count?

Edited May 26, 2018 by Zeiss Ikon

[MaverickSawyer]

Oooh, that's an interesting idea. Perhaps a combination of the two factors?

 

EDIT: Having given this some thought, I've got a possible scoring system:

 

Range (in km)/ (part count x mass in tonnes). Highest km/tonne value wins.

Edited May 26, 2018 by MaverickSawyer

[Box of Stardust]

If you go on EVA, the flight log resets to record the new 'vessel' in action. So... it's a bit tricky to do a launch, then glide with the parachute.

Nonetheless, I managed to get... a general idea of how far I was able to get, without strictly leaving the atmosphere. Jeb is almost halfway around the world from KSC.

 

Bit of a whoops moment on this one, but it shows how far the vessel itself actually went:

 

And the final stage parachute glide:

 

The biggest issue at this point honestly was not exploding from reentry heat, since a lot of this was coasting around 50km at orbital velocity.

[Geonovast]

Instead of going for maximum travel distance, I focused more on the spirit of the challenge.  Really no point to orbiting the planet twice if you just end up landing at the mountains to the west of the KSC if the point is to get away.

I also focused on something fairly realistic that Jeb could steal. 

Lost the engine on landing, because throttle control was a bit tricky.  Definitely better than if I'd tried to land normally with no gear.

Plane is 8 parts.  KER shows 9 because it counts a kerbal in a command seat as a part.

Ground Distance: 854,492m

Total Distance: 861,299m

Only mods installed were KER and TakeCommand.

 

Edited May 26, 2018 by Geonovast

[MaverickSawyer]

Wait, you didn't use a paraglider? That could have saved you two parts!

[Geonovast]

10 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said:

Wait, you didn't use a paraglider? That could have saved you two parts!

Done in 1.3.1, no stock chutes.

[doggonemess]

7 hours ago, Geonovast said:

Instead of going for maximum travel distance, I focused more on the spirit of the challenge.  Really no point to orbiting the planet twice if you just end up landing at the mountains to the west of the KSC if the point is to get away.

I also focused on something fairly realistic that Jeb could steal. 

 

Lost the engine on landing, because throttle control was a bit tricky.  Definitely better than if I'd tried to land normally with no gear.

Plane is 8 parts.  KER shows 9 because it counts a kerbal in a command seat as a part.

Ground Distance: 854,492m

Total Distance: 861,299m

Only mods installed were KER and TakeCommand.

 

That's perfect - right in the spirit of the challenge. There should be a category for 'most overpowered solution' and 'smallest solution'.

J.

[ManEatingApe]

If you're open to some, erm "creative" offsetting, then you'll enjoy this monstrosity.

3 parts total (not including the launch clamp).

Plenty of TWR and economical to boot!

Lapped KSC twice and came down just past this point.

F3 dialog shows 14,568 km travelled.

Full album link

Edited May 27, 2018 by ManEatingApe

[Klapaucius]

54 minutes ago, ManEatingApe said:

If you're open to some, erm "creative" offsetting, then you'll enjoy this monstrosity.

3 parts total (not including the launch clamp).

I love it.

[Zeiss Ikon]

Well, I did use a paramotor, once I got it to actually take off from the runway.  100% stock (haven't even got Better Burn Time installed yet) 1.4.3, upgraded from 1.4.1 just for this.  Turned out to need 8 parts (Small Circular Intake, Z-200 battery, Small Inline Reaction Wheel, Mk. 0 Liquid Fuel Fuselage, Juno engine, LY-05 nose gear and a pair of LY-01 main gear, and a Command Seat, not counting the contraption needed to get Jeb into the Command Chair), but the whole thing weighed less than a ton on launch (exact weight unavailable at the moment -- vessel still in flight).

I'll come back and edit in the exact launch weight and final distance in an hour or so when Jeb finally runs out of fuel.  Amazing how long 50 units of Liquid Fuel lasts when you're running a Juno at around 6-7% thrust (1.2-1.4 kN at around 4000 m altitude).

I'm going to put the rest of the pictures under a spoiler:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Flying into sunrise.  Should have already been out of fuel, based on original range calculation.  It actually saves fuel to fly a little faster; the parafoil can fly in a lower drag condition.

After flying all night and into the morning (notice the MET), Jeb sighted land.  He'd known it was there, but didn't think it was possible to reach it.

Still not certain, but it was starting to look like he might make it.  Bingo fuel, but this craft glides better than it has any right to.

Quit looking at the map.  It looks impossible from there.

Looks like we'll make land.  It'd be nice to land on the plateau, but Jeb would happily settle for the beach.  Better than ditching with fixed gear hanging down.

Any landing you walk away from, like Col. Yeager used to say.  Going to need a new Juno, though.  Not bad for gliding 20+ minutes after running out of fuel, though.

Okay, NOW you can look at the map.

 

Pay no attention to the Highest Speed and Most Gee Force -- the first time the craft stalled, it fell 3 km while I was looking at my browser.  Caught it at 800 m, at 175 m/s near-vertical descent, and pulled all that G getting out of the dive after recovering.  Do, however, note the distance -- 744 km.  And the takeoff weight of the craft, including fuel (but not including Jeb)?  Just 719 kg (of which 250 kg was Liquid Fuel).  Final part count: 8.

Further Edit: According to this:

Quote

Range (in km)/ (part count x mass in tonnes). Highest km/tonne value wins.

My score should be 725 km / (8 parts x .719 T) = 126.  What did yours weigh, @Geonovast?

Edited May 27, 2018 by Zeiss Ikon

[Geonovast]

2 hours ago, Zeiss Ikon said:

My score should be 725 km / (8 parts x .719 T) = 126.  What did yours weigh, @Geonovast?

First SS shows 757 Kg.

[Zeiss Ikon]

'Doh!  My distance was 744 km, not 725, so my correct score should be 744 km / (8 parts x .719 T) = 129 (km/part*tonne)

Yours, @Geonovast ought to be 854 km / (8 parts x .757 T) = 141 -- don't tell me I'm going to have to take off the landing gear and go back and fly it again... 

[zolotiyeruki]

FYI, the distance shown in the F3 display is NOT accurate at all.  It appears to sometimes include the rotation of Kerbin itself, and a slower-moving craft will have its distance exaggerated more than a faster-moving craft.

[Zeiss Ikon]

@zolotiyeruki I don't see much of that effect.  Despite the fact my parafoil took more than three hours (half a Kerbin day!) to do what @Geonovast's speedy flier most likely did in half an hour, the difference in reported distance is very close to the actual difference in travel distance.  Look at the maps; we wound up on the same peninsula; mine almost in the surf (like the Gossamer Condor flying from Crete to the Greek mainland), his well inland.

Now, whether that reported distance is accurate or not -- I flew for three-plus hours at speeds from 20 to 40 m/s; calling it an average of 30 m/s gives a dead reckoning figure of  60 * 60 * 3 seconds * 30 m/s = 324 km -- which is still about twice what I expected from extrapolating early fuel burn (though I did gain a good bit by being able to throttle back and still fly higher/faster once I'd burned off some fuel weight; I started at 1.8 kN thrust setting, and finished the tank at about 0.6 even though I was flying twice as fast at 4x the altitude) against distance back to the launch system.  Even if I'd flown the whole way at 40 m/s, that would only have been about 440 km, and F3 reported 744.  However, a stock install has no better way to measure distance once you're more than 100 km from your launch apparatus.

Now, if the F3 report included Kerbin's rotation, I'd have gained approximately half a circumnavigation just by being up there literally all night (launched shortly after sunset, landed a bit after sunrise) -- that's close to 1000 km just by riding the surface of Kerbin around.  I obviously didn't get that.

I can leave the wheels on the runway -- which would both lighten my craft (increasing my score; also by cutting the part count to 5) and cut drag, letting me fly at lower throttle, hence stretching my fuel.  Flying as high as possible would stretch things even further; assuming the craft remains controllable without the below-center drag of the landing gear (I think it will, it was just as squirrelly with the gear as without before I figured out how to get the reaction wheel to do its job), I have little doubt I could bust 1000 km (measured the same way).  I'm just not sure I want to spend another 4+ hours herding a craft that requires attention, at the least, every couple minutes to be sure it hasn't stalled and dropped.

Then again, there's F5 and F9.  I don't have to do it all in one sitting...