Launch a Kubesat!

[4D4850]

Hello, this is my first post. 

Kubesat (for launching into space) (You do not need to download my rocket, just the Kubesat.)

Story

IONIC is a contractor for the KSC, and made a new type of satellite called a 'Kubesat', using the Probodobodyne QBE. They are planning on making a business of selling and launching Kubesats they and other people have made. Normally, we would object to this, but *something something excuse* means we need to let them. Also, the only vehicle they have for launching Kubesats is the Z-Map Launch Kit. They have promised us a hefty sum of money to design and test a cheaper rocket to deliver Kubesats to a low equatorial orbit. They also want it to be partially reusable.

 

Rules and Goals

Rules

1. Rocket 1st stage must be able to be recovered

2.  Inclination of resulting orbit must be less than 10 degrees

3. Orbit must be stable, and below 250 km, or you can try to impress me IONIC. If you make a genuine attempt at impressing me IONIC, then your submission will be counted. For example, I IONIC would not consider landing on the Mun, but landing interplanetary would make me think you genuinely tried.

4. Part clipping is allowed

Goals

1. Make the rocket cost less then 10000 credits per Kubesat

2. Fully reusable

 

Are mods allowed?

Telemetry mods are allowed.

Autopilot mods (such as Mechjeb) are allowed, because the stuff they allow can be approximated to arbitrary precision with trial and error, and because I'm lazy.

Part mods will be in their own category, and the mod must be publicly available on Github, CKAN, etc. Provide a link to any part mods used, or it's name in CKAN

Visual mods are allowed, if they don't affect gameplay

Mods affecting Kerbin are not allowed

 

Leaderboard

4D4850 (Z-Map Launch Kit):  13,398 Funds

swjr-swis (CheapOrbiter): 3,050 Funds

QF9E: 2,698 Funds

camacju: 2,280 Funds

Other Leaderboard (for interplanetary journeys and other impressive things)

QF9E: 6,459 Funds

 

Badges

I'll get to work in an interplanetary version

Edited January 25, 2022 by 4D4850
Added entry to leaderboard

[Scarecrow71]

Am I to understsnd that we have to take the craft file and download it and modify it so it costs less than 10k?  Or...?

[4D4850]

Sorry. I meant that you download the Kubesat from the link at the top of the post, and design a rocket around that. If you want, you can optimize the rocket I made, but it isn't required to be a modification of the one I made. I'll edit the post to clarify that. Apologies for the confusion.

[QF9E]

I landed a Kubesat on Eve for $6459. Full report: https://imgur.com/a/agfFzwn

My launcher in the VAB

Stable 75 x 75 km equatorial Low Kerbin Orbit, with ample delta-v remaining for an Eve mission.

Landed on Eve. I added an antenna to be able to do interplanetary missions, and a parachute for landing on Eve. The fairing base is also still attached as I did not want to spend money on a decoupler

Booster splashdown. To land the booster I saved the game at booster separation, loaded it after the mission was complete and switched focus to the booster, as KSP does not have an easy way to control two stages separately inside the atmosphere.

[Wizard Kerbal]

For konsole kan I  just build that KubeSat? 
And kan we launch multiple to lower kosts per KubeSat?

[swjr-swis]

Would this be a valid entry:

• 3050 funds, 2.78 t, 18 parts (including the KubeSat)
• Pure stock, no DLC, no mods whatsoever
• Single-stage lifter
• Places KubeSat in LKO with minimal inclination (Pe 77 km, Ap 84 km, 0.5 degree INC)
• Lifter is fully recoverable (with the exception of the fairing and the heatshield used as separator)

 

[swjr-swis]

23 hours ago, QF9E said:

I landed a Kubesat on Eve for $6459.

Maybe we should've started with some simpler entries. Not as many challenge participants left, it seems.

 

22 hours ago, Wizard Kerbal said:

For konsole kan I  just build that KubeSat? 
And kan we launch multiple to lower kosts per KubeSat?

1. I'd say yes. I misplaced the original, and ended up just slapping my own copy together. It's just the three parts and the flag placed the way you'd expect, there was nothing special about it.
2. Yes too, I think. I see nothing in the rules prohibiting this, and the first 'Goal' states 'per Kubesat'. This is probably the winning strategy anyway.

So go on and enter!

 

[QF9E]

12 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

Maybe we should've started with some simpler entries. Not as many challenge participants left, it seems.

Maybe you're right. Good that I did not post my descent through Jool's atmosphere

[gamepuch]

i'm in will build it today

 

[QF9E]

I improved the LKO cost to $2698, with 12 parts, 2.887 tons in all. Fully recoverable booster, with the exception of the payload fairing.

 

[4D4850]

On 1/17/2022 at 3:53 PM, Wizard Kerbal said:

For konsole kan I  just build that KubeSat? 
And kan we launch multiple to lower kosts per KubeSat?

I don't quite know what the first bit means, but you can modify the KubeSat as long as it has the battery, solar panel, flag, and same probe core. And yes, you can launch multiple KubeSats to lower cost per KubeSat.

On 1/17/2022 at 2:48 PM, QF9E said:

I landed a Kubesat on Eve for $6459. Full report: https://imgur.com/a/agfFzwn

My launcher in the VAB

Stable 75 x 75 km equatorial Low Kerbin Orbit, with ample delta-v remaining for an Eve mission.

Landed on Eve. I added an antenna to be able to do interplanetary missions, and a parachute for landing on Eve. The fairing base is also still attached as I did not want to spend money on a decoupler

Booster splashdown. To land the booster I saved the game at booster separation, loaded it after the mission was complete and switched focus to the booster, as KSP does not have an easy way to control two stages separately inside the atmosphere.

Wow. I am amazed. I'll have to get to work making badges!

On 1/17/2022 at 10:43 PM, swjr-swis said:

Would this be a valid entry:

• 3050 funds, 2.78 t, 18 parts (including the KubeSat)
• Pure stock, no DLC, no mods whatsoever
• Single-stage lifter
• Places KubeSat in LKO with minimal inclination (Pe 77 km, Ap 84 km, 0.5 degree INC)
• Lifter is fully recoverable (with the exception of the fairing and the heatshield used as separator)

 

Yes, that is perfectly valid.

[Wizard Kerbal]

So is 27 25 kubesats overkill?

Edited January 21, 2022 by Wizard Kerbal
25 my bad

[AtomicTech]

11 minutes ago, Wizard Kerbal said:

So is 27 kubesats overkill?

Is this Kerbal Space Program?

[Wizard Kerbal]

U right

[Wizard Kerbal]

!IN PROGRESS, I JUST WANTED TO SAVE THE POST!

Destination: Orbit of Duna(12), Orbit of Ike(12), Surface of Duna(1)
Cost per KubeSat: 1,643.6 per KubeSat(Recovered funds counted)/3,780 per Kubesat(Recovered funds not counted)
"Cheats" used: DLC: Making history & mild part clipping.

Launch
https://imgur.com/a/qU7d6Wq
Aircraft Recovery & Cost calculations
https://imgur.com/a/RrbK1yx
Transferring to Destination 
https://imgur.com/a/mboBrMy
Deploying
To be done!

Edited January 22, 2022 by Wizard Kerbal
This is getting boring. Over 3 hours all i've done is aerobrake and calculate an ike encounter, but my landersat keeps getting destroyed when the main vessel and the landersat enter the atmosphere seperately, so i'll finish this later.

[Akagi]

might try it out!

[swjr-swis]

2 hours ago, Wizard Kerbal said:

Cost per KubeSat: 1,643.6 per KubeSat

Your calculation is technically correct, but so far none of the entries have deducted recovery cost.

@4D4850 - you might want to clarify how you wish to see the cost per kubesat calculated. Eg. with or without discounting the recovery cost of the lifter. It makes a difference.

[QF9E]

WORK IN PROGRESS.

Launcher cost: $30,000, 7 Kubesats

Destination: Jool. 1 Kubesat in Jool orbit (done), 1 landed on each Joolian moon (Tylo, Laythe and Vall done, Bop and Pol still to be done), 1 Kubesat to descend into Jool's atmosphere

Mothership / relay satellite in Jool orbit. Unfortunately my screen grabber operated in 1920 x 1080 while KSP (despite my telling them otherwise) ran in 1920 x 1200, so the top and bottom of the screen have been cut off

Landed on Tylo. My craft ran out of fuel just before touchdown, and one of the fuel tanks has been destroyed. But the Kubesat is still alive, and that's what counts for this challenge

Landed on Vall

Splashed down on Laythe

[camacju]

Single cubesat launch, 2380 funds, fully reusable (except for the fairing shell).

In VAB. Two spark engines, a bit of fuel, 2380 funds. I use the FL-T100 because it has better drag occlusion properties than just spamming Baguette tanks. Is this beneficial? I don't know. But it makes flying this craft a lot easier.

Spoiler

On runway. I don't know why I'm using SPH instead of VAB here, but it doesn't really make a difference. Actually if I really wanted to min-max this challenge I would launch from the Dessert Airfield since it is at higher altitude.

Launch. Low drag and decent TWR means I pitch over right away.

Since the fairing is properly drag occluded it actually provides a bit of lift. I use this to keep the trajectory above the  horizon while I gather horizontal speed.

Engines shut off a bit late because apoapsis increases really quickly in the final stages of such a shallow ascent.

In orbit

Cubesat deployed

Deorbited, with some fuel saved for later

Parachute deployed

Landing burn

Splashed

 

[4D4850]

On 1/21/2022 at 5:49 PM, swjr-swis said:

Your calculation is technically correct, but so far none of the entries have deducted recovery cost.

@4D4850 - you might want to clarify how you wish to see the cost per kubesat calculated. Eg. with or without discounting the recovery cost of the lifter. It makes a difference.

I think recovery should not be subtracted, both for compatibility with older entries, and (in story) to account for the extra costs to travel there, recharge the recovery system, refuel, and transportation.

[Wizard Kerbal]

2 hours ago, 4D4850 said:

I think recovery should not be subtracted, both for compatibility with older entries, and (in story) to account for the extra costs to travel there, recharge the recovery system, refuel, and transportation.

That’s why I landed on the runway!
It’s fine, I get it. I’ll go finish now

[QF9E]

By combining @camacju's run with my previous attempt, I've managed to bring the cost for a single Kubesat launch to LKO down even more, to $2216. The idea is to launch to an AP just above the atmosphere, then circularize until PE is just inside the atmosphere and use the force of the decoupler to raise PE of the Kubesat above the atmosphere while keeping PE for the launch vehicle inside the atmosphere. That way the launch vehicle re-enters automatically and you don't need a separate probe core to control re-entry, which saves some money. It also saves a bit of fuel as the launch vehicle is lighter. However, this technique only works for very Low Kerbin Orbits with PE only just above the atmosphere.

In the VAB. I turned the Kubesat on its side to prevent its flag from burning up during ascent. The flag is on the bottom, towards the decoupler.

Spoiler

In flight. Note very low drag, even lower than camacju's craft.

Reducing throttle near the end of the launch to keep temperature of the fairing under control.

End of circularization burn. Note PE just below the edge of the atmosphere

Kubesat after separation. Note PE just above the atmosphere. The decoupler adds about 7 m/s to the Kubesat, which is just enough to raise PE.

Re-entry. Take no heed of the maneuver delta-v indicator: I forgot to delete the circularization maneuver before separation, and since the launcher is technically debris at this point the game does not allow me to delete the maneuver right now.

Splashdown

@camacju: What parts did you use to occlude the fairing on your craft? You wrote that one side is occluded by the FL-T100, but I have tried to recreate your launcher and was unable to find a part to occlude the other side that matched your craft with respect to cost, mass and drag reduction.

[camacju]

1 hour ago, QF9E said:

@camacju: What parts did you use to occlude the fairing on your craft? You wrote that one side is occluded by the FL-T100, but I have tried to recreate your launcher and was unable to find a part to occlude the other side that matched your craft with respect to cost, mass and drag reduction.

The other side was occluded by a bunch of random parts. I used the decoupler, both spark engines, and an octagonal strut, all attached to the interstage nodes.

Also, the reason you have lower drag is because I have a higher AoA in my screenshot at 60 m/s. Note that I have lower drag at main engine cutoff, when I am going both faster and lower. This is because I'm using a root fairing body in the craft. If you do this you could probably save more mass and cost.

[QF9E]

3 minutes ago, camacju said:

This is because I'm using a root fairing body in the craft.

I'm sorry, what does that mean? My fairing is also the root part of my craft. Any tips are appreciated as I am quite new to the whole occlusion thing.

[camacju]

10 minutes ago, QF9E said:

I'm sorry, what does that mean? My fairing is also the root part of my craft. Any tips are appreciated as I am quite new to the whole occlusion thing.

Oh nice!

Basically all you need to ensure is that both sides of the fairing are fully occluded, but it seems you don't have enough parts to do so. I'm not sure which part gets the best occlusion area per weight and cost however.