Juno challenge.

[boriz]

Stock only please. Using a single Juno engine, and no boosters, set the record for various things. Time to location, max speed, max altitude, max duration, max distance etc..

Jeb must be transported and land alive. And no cheaty clipping with fuel tanks and/or aerodynamics please.

I'm currently working on the shortest time to the Island runway. My time is ok (210m/s max), but I keep missing the runway! Grr.

This is what I have so far:

 

 

 

Edited June 27 by boriz

[Bobbejans]

bet

[Bobbejans]

227.3 m/s

[Bobbejans]

243

[Bobbejans]

yo bro where are you??

[swjr-swis]

Juno, you say? Just the one? Has to carry Jeb. Hmm. All this in stock too. Not even DLC? And you want records. Hrmpf.

 

Actually I love that little jet. I may have played around with it a bit ...

 

Low altitude sustained flight on a single Juno (less than 0.5 m ASL):

 

 

Low tech supersonic jet plane on a single Juno (mach 1.6 or 478 m/s in sustained level flight at just under 11 km, with just the tech nodes required to unlock the Juno, 68 tech points used):

Spoiler

 

https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/LT-Supersonic-II

 

Circumnavigating Kerbin on a single Juno:

Spoiler

Still 5.5 units LF left. Jeb wonders what he can do with 5.5 LF ...

https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/MinCN-1885

 

 

On 6/27/2024 at 9:16 AM, boriz said:

I'm currently working on the shortest time to the Island runway. My time is ok (210m/s max), but I keep missing the runway! Grr.

On 8/23/2024 at 11:58 PM, Bobbejans said:

243

 

I won't beat you guys on time, but maybe on least fuel used to get to the island?  Jeb figured 1.65 units of LF should do it.

Spoiler

We only needed Jeb to arrive alive, yes? Gives Jeb time to think what else to do with the 4.85 units of LF left at the KSC.

https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/MinLF-165

 

 

[swjr-swis]

On 6/27/2024 at 9:16 AM, boriz said:

I'm currently working on the shortest time to the Island runway. My time is ok (210m/s max), but I keep missing the runway! Grr.

On 8/23/2024 at 11:58 PM, Bobbejans said:

243

 

Ok fine, I'll race you guys too.

 

A single Juno, 2m53s to a full stop on the Island Airfield. Jeb chickened out on this one, so Val had to do it. 348 m/s before she had to cut throttle to land.

Spoiler

Full album: https://imgur.com/a/uN2SLet

Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/SWiS-YouKnow

[JeDoesStuff]

I'll have to come back to this later, but mach 1 for the juno engine is very unoptimized. 

On 6/27/2024 at 3:16 AM, boriz said:

Jeb must be transported and land alive. And no cheaty clipping with fuel tanks and/or aerodynamics please.

What does this mean? Am I not allowed to use a fairing as a root part (negating the drag of the fairing body)? Am I not allowed to use structural parts to occlude the interstage nodes and thus reduce the drag of the craft? What about attaching the small intake backwards to reduce drag? Am I allowed to occlude the juno engine but let it stick out slightly so that its occluded from drag but still producing thrust (which is possible without part clipping)? 

I will assume no part clipping for now, but I'd like to know which techniques aren't allowed before I throw something together.

[Magzimum]

On 9/10/2024 at 7:25 PM, JeDoesStuff said:

What about attaching the small intake backwards to reduce drag?

I'm not managing this challenge but I think that's exactly what is not allowed here. No real jet aircraft has its air intake backwards to my knowledge, because well, it doesn't work in real life.

The OP hasn't been back to the forum since July 2024, so hopefully this helps you to play an interesting challenge. 

[Bobbejans]

what if we used swept wings?

[JeDoesStuff]

On 9/14/2024 at 3:17 AM, Magzimum said:

I'm not managing this challenge but I think that's exactly what is not allowed here. No real jet aircraft has its air intake backwards to my knowledge, because well, it doesn't work in real life.

The OP hasn't been back to the forum since July 2024, so hopefully this helps you to play an interesting challenge. 

90% of the things in ksp wouldnt make since irl anyway, and theres a lot of tricks that you can stumble into accidentally and not know that its an exploit, such as the root fairing tricks.  Anyway, I did all my tricks in defiance of the rules (forgot to add a kerbal too lmao) and got to 810 m/s with two juno engines

Obviously, without exploits this wouldnt be possible, but you could def get to like 500-600m/s without those tricks

Edited September 15 by JeDoesStuff

[swjr-swis]

2 hours ago, JeDoesStuff said:

but you could def get to like 500-600m/s without those tricks

And even a bit more, as I'd already shown before you chimed in. So how about we stick to the challenge rules as posted?

 

 

[JeDoesStuff]

2 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

And even a bit more, as I'd already shown before you chimed in. So how about we stick to the challenge rules as posted?

Suboptimal Choices here:

1. too much wing area
2. landing gear
3. draggy part choices

Heres my attempt at following the rules:

note this is too many wings, I just dont want to deal with asymmetrical wings rn

[swjr-swis]

On 9/16/2024 at 12:43 AM, JeDoesStuff said:

Suboptimal Choices here:

Especially for @JeDoesStuff, I suboptimalized my next entry even more, getting a nifty 778.7 m/s in stable level flight at near sea-level:

1. Equal use of wing area
2. Even bigger landing gear (after all, "Jeb must ... land alive.")
3. Moar intake! Because we laugh at drag.

Note that I forced the wheels to retract when the cockpit closes, so they get shielded only when retracted, and only deploy when opening the cockpit, basically uncheating them (since every other stock part strictly adheres to the in-game 'malfunction when shielded' abomination rule). I could've just left them off entirely and make my life easier, but they're there pretty much for intentional Suboptimalization purposes.

I name it the SWiS SubOptimal 1.

g]https://i.imgur.com/Oz7j4Zn.png[/img]https://i.imgur.com/Oz7j4Zn.

It take off like a plane, flies like a demon bat out of hell, and lands like .... well it lands. She's safe, see?

[JeDoesStuff]

@swjr-swis So I took a close look at yours and my crafts, and I realized I had made some very dumb mistakes in the construction of my design, which leads to your craft being more optimal than mine in 3 ways:

1. You flew at 2m above sea level, whereas I flew at over 800m.
2. I had both the doughnut fuel tank and the nose cone occluding the Yp face of the cargo bay's drag cube, so I had an extra surface creating drag.
3. I didn't occlude the reaction wheel, so that was one more addition of drag to the craft

Congratulations on being more optimized

Edited September 17 by JeDoesStuff

[swjr-swis]

37 minutes ago, JeDoesStuff said:

in 3 ways:

All three easily corrected, yes? Is it enough for that 30 m/s gap? C'mon, make it a race.

P.S.: Feel free to re-purpose any of what you see in my craft. I'm seriously itching to see if that 810 m/s can be beat within the rules. Just 31 m/s more ...

[JeDoesStuff]

3 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

All three easily corrected, yes? Is it enough for that 30 m/s gap? C'mon, make it a race.

P.S.: Feel free to re-purpose any of what you see in my craft. I'm seriously itching to see if that 810 m/s can be beat within the rules. Just 31 m/s more ...

It is not possible. With tricks, one engine was not able to break 800m/s.

Anyway, here's my records with about as optimized as I could get the craft to be without resorting to extreme part clipping or asymmetrical wings.

 

Edited September 17 by JeDoesStuff

[swjr-swis]

1 hour ago, JeDoesStuff said:

my records with about as optimized as I could get the craft to be

779.4 m/s even, I saw on one of the freeze frames. Points!

 

That said, I can still see you missing a few tweaks (just from what the video shows, since there's no craft file).

Here's a snap of SWiS ThereIsNoTry (an educated guess-rebuild of your craft, but tweaked) to illustrate. Doing 786.8 m/s.