The Lithobraking Challenge

[Quasar]

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to present the following hypothesis for your perusal: slow, gentle landings are for wusses and people who drive Volvo's.

The lithobraking challenge is all about seeing how fast you can smash a lander into another world and still have Kerbals capable of things like breathing and independant movement afterwards.

Rules

1. Stock parts only except MechJeb.

2. Pod must be crewed.

3. Lander should be light-weight enough to land on a body other than kerbin.

For vetting, I will require two screenshots, one just before landing...

And one after...

I'll make different leaderboards for different levels of accomplishment/survival. Leaderboards will be ranked based on the speed shown in the first screenshot, or the speed of impact if you provide a video.

Kerbin Ground Tests Leaderboard: (For people who don't want to leave home. )

Eppiox............... Unamed............... 115.9m/s

Niteling............... Exploding Fuel Tank Cushion............... 103.8m/s

Extraterrestrial Leaderboards: (Landing must be performed on a body other than Kerbin)

Any landing you can walk away from...

Quasar............... Litholander Mk3............... 91.0m/s............... No MechJeb

Niteling............... Exploding Fuel Tank Cushion............... 79m/s

Landing thrusters intact after landing

...............

Capable of returning to Orbit/Kerbin

...............

Edited October 15, 2012 by Quasar

[niteling]

Does it have to be "another world", i.e. not Kerbin? Just playing around at the launchpad, I've found that full fuel tanks actually work quite well to soften the impact (and the blast throws the capsule well clear, to land safely somewhere else ).

[Whatshtisthis]

Well, somehow this fits exactly what I plan to do soon...

I guess great minds think alike.

[Quasar]

Heh, the “another world†idea was to prove you didn’t just fluke it: that your design was consistent enough to merit adding a space-stage and landing it for real, and to demonstrate that your lander was in fact a lander and not just a pile of metal you’d attached boosters to. I assumed you’d test your design a couple times on Kerbin first, to work out its maximum landing speed.

I realise it’s a bit restrictive, though: I’ll add another leaderboard for Kerbin ground tests.

[niteling]

Hmm... guessing attachment privilege is something you get after a few more posts? Anyway, 103.8 m/s survivable impact using my "exploding fuel tank cushion" idea. I actually can't get it to go any faster in atmosphere, so next step is to lob this thing to Mun.

Immediately before:

After, showing live kerbal (and a previous run's cockpit in the distance...):

A spectacular nighttime run, showing the crew capsule about to be thrown clear:

(resident Kerbal has an appropriate facial expression for the event )

~Felix.

[niteling]

The fuel tanks method is proving considerably more challenging on Mun -- I'm wondering if the physics engine is smart enough to factor atmospheric effects into explosions (colour me impressed if it is). I've only been able to get 79 m/s survivable on Mun so far. Going to try a few more runs with different descent angles, then I'll try adding some kind of plate to ride the blast better.

Does it count as surviving if it's a glancing blow (i.e. almost horizontal impact), the capsule survives, gets thrown, but is definitely going to get destroyed the next time it contacts the surface; then the Kerbal EVAs and uses his suit thrusters to safely decelerate? Guessing not (Though technically it would be a "landing you can walk away from"...)

~Felix.

[niteling]

Here's the "bail out before the capsule crashes" method:

so that the capsule travels through the length of exploding fuel tanks, which

...and after two minutes of suit-RCS braking

[spoiler=...he is standing safely on Mun ]

This method kind of seems like cheating, though, because it'll probably work for *any* impact speed (assuming the Kerbal can suit-brake through enough delta-V). Think I shall restrict myself to relatively straight-down approaches now

~Felix.

[eppiox]

This may count... it's not that heavy but it's quite large.

Also awesome bounce at the end, that module can take a pounding.

Edit:

Survived 150ms using the same ship, seems that I always survive under 120ms, but over that is sketchy, so far about 3 of 10 have blown up over 120ms.

Edited October 14, 2012 by eppiox

[Quasar]

Does it count as surviving if it's a glancing blow (i.e. almost horizontal impact), the capsule survives, gets thrown, but is definitely going to get destroyed the next time it contacts the surface; then the Kerbal EVAs and uses his suit thrusters to safely decelerate? Guessing not

'fraid I'm gonna have to agree: the challenge is about smacking into the ground, not skimming along it. It's a very kerbal method of landing, though.

This may count... it's not that heavy but it's quite large.

Also awesome bounce at the end, that module can take a pounding.

That definately counts: it'd be interesting to build a space stage around that, too. Nice design (and using seperatrons to accellerate your ship into the ground... right now Jeb is crying with happiness. ).