Duna Faster, Better, Cheaper Challenge

[PakledHostage]

I would like to propose a challenge in the spirit of NASA's Faster, Better, Cheaper initiative of the 1990's. While that initiative was controversial, it makes a catchy headline for a challenge that may motivate the advancement of Kerbal science.

THE CHALLENGE:

1. Send a scientific (or scientific capable) mission to Duna for minimum cost.

2. Accomplish some scientific objective.

3. Show off your innovation.

METHOD:

Build a rocket using stock components and fly it on a one-way mission to Duna, carrying a scientific payload. Ideally, deploy the scientific payload and collect data that you can post along with your entry. (Example scientific objectives could include mapping probes, atmospheric probes, etc.) The mission can be kerballed or unkerballed, but kerbalitarian groups will likely oppose kerballed one-way missions.

Calculate the cost of your rocket by adding up the cost of the components, as given in the VAB. There is no credit for recovering used parts because doing so doesn't account for the cost of fuel and preparation of those parts. There is also no credit for re-tasking parts.

Rockets must be made from stock components, with the exception that parts may be modified as needed to carry the scientific payload or reduce crew capacity. (i.e. in my case, I modified my command pod to set the crew capacity to 0 and I modified an RCS tank to carry my scientific payload plugin.) Modification of engine thrust or part masses are not allowed.

Make note of which mods you used in your entry. (i.e. ISA Mapsat, MechJeb, Protractor, etc.)

I have entered my own flight to start, but I expect others will be able to easily achieve a better result.

LEADERBOARD:

1. andydouble07: cost 13025 (MechJeb and ISA Mapping Mod)

2. PakledHostage: Cost 13572 (no mods other than a home-brew atmospheric sensor plugin)

3.

4.

5.

Edited October 14, 2012 by PakledHostage

[PakledHostage]

Here’s my entry (please forgive the double post). I flew the stack shown in the “On the Pad†spoiler below on a mission to collect data about Duna’s atmosphere. The data is plotted below:

The rocket consisted of the following:

Qty 1 Single Parachute (cost 422)

Qty 1 Command pod (modified to be flow by ground controllers) (cost 600)

Qty 1 Empty RCS tank (refitted to carry scientific instruments) (cost 800)

Qty 2 Stack decouplers (cost 975 each)

Qty 1 Small fuel tank (cost 225)

Qty 1 LV-T45 engine (cost 750)

Qty 2 Radial decoupler (cost 1275 each)

Qty 2 SRBs (cost 450 each)

Qty 4 Strut Connectors (250 each)

Qty 3 Fuel tank (850 each)

Qty 1 LV-T30 (850 each)

Total: 13572

I am sure this can easily be beaten. Do your worst!

[FlandersNed]

That looks awesome.

I can't fly to Duna because I suck, but I would like to congratulate you on making a really, really cheap spacecraft that works!

[unWinged]

I haven't landed on mun yet...

But I'm very interested in this thread and will visit from time to time. Maybe some day will carry some science to other planets...

[SiliconPyro]

For SCIENCE! I'm looking forward to seeing other entries. I love efficiency challenges.

[Giggleplex777]

I'll try, but I probably will me SAS...

[andydouble07]

For a cost of 10,600, sent a probe to map Mars Duna from a polar orbit. Used the MechJeb and ISA mods.

Edited October 13, 2012 by andydouble07

[PakledHostage]

Nice. I've updated the leaderboard.

Edit: Can you check your cost calculation? I will use the value that you have provided, but I get a different value when I calculate the cost of your stack myself...

Edited October 13, 2012 by PakledHostage

[MaverickSawyer]

Here’s my entry (please forgive the double post). I flew the stack shown in the “On the Pad†spoiler below on a mission to collect data about Duna’s atmosphere. The data is plotted below:

The rocket consisted of the following:

Qty 1 Single Parachute (cost 422)

Qty 1 Command pod (modified to be flow by ground controllers) (cost 600)

Qty 1 Empty RCS tank (refitted to carry scientific instruments) (cost 800)

Qty 2 Stack decouplers (cost 975 each)

Qty 1 Small fuel tank (cost 225)

Qty 1 LV-T45 engine (cost 750)

Qty 2 Radial decoupler (cost 1275 each)

Qty 2 SRBs (cost 450 each)

Qty 4 Strut Connectors (250 each)

Qty 3 Fuel tank (850 each)

Qty 1 LV-T30 (850 each)

Total: 13572

I am sure this can easily be beaten. Do your worst!

Am I correct in assuming that you used the SRBs first, followed by the liquid-fuelled core stage? Hmm... Seems to be a little bit inefficient. I used a nearly identical version to go to the Mun, but found that the SRB stage yielded over 60% dV losses just from drag, in addition to about 20% gravity losses at burnout.

[PakledHostage]

Am I correct in assuming that you used the SRBs first, followed by the liquid-fuelled core stage? Hmm... Seems to be a little bit inefficient.

Yes, but the objective of this challenge is to be cost efficient, not fuel efficient. They aren't necessarily the same thing.

[MaverickSawyer]

Yes, but the objective of this challenge is to be cost efficient, not fuel efficient. They aren't necessarily the same thing.

True, but if you cound fuel as money, that's a different story.

[andydouble07]

Re-did the math and got a slightly different number for my previous attempt. I think I was missing the radial decouplers or something (they're so expensive):

tank 850 x4 1600

booster 800 x2 1600

radial decoupler 1275 x2 2550

wing 500 x2 1000

pod 600 x1 600

stack decoupler 975 x1 200

small engine 750 x1 750

mechjeb 550 x1 550

ISA 750 x1 750

engine 850 x1 850

total 13025

[PakledHostage]

Re-did the math and got a slightly different number for my previous attempt. I think I was missing the radial decouplers or something (they're so expensive

Thanks. I've updated the leader board. You're still in first place.

And to MavrickSawyer's point: I guess it then becomes a question of play balance. Maybe they'll need to change the part costs when campaign mode is finally implemented. For the time being, it seems that the cost of fuel is included in the part cost. SRB's give you a lot more Delta-V for the buck than a LFT/LFE combination. For my design, I decided that I could afford to waste delta-V by using SRBs in a non-fuel efficient manner, since the objective of this challenge is merely to build a cost efficient rocket. Why not throw your hat into the ring with your own entry?

[MaverickSawyer]

Will do! I'll cobble it together tomorrow.