Kerbin Circumnavigation Challenge - Reloaded [New Rules Once More]

[Porspeler]

Here is my entry.

I'm forbidden from posting attachments for some reason, so here are links to Imageshack pngs of the flight record and an in-flight shot.

Flight record: http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4906/1e7s.png

In-flight screenshot: http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6227/qlsl.png

This was a wonderful challenge. I've been trying to design efficient long range recon aircraft so that I can find anomalies on Kerbin. This was a new (and untested!) design, and I owe a nod of thanks to ZeroIgnite for the idea of putting air intakes on pylons on the wingtips. She used fuel tanks; I used vanilla fuselage because of weight considerations, given the wingspan of my design.

The final third of the trip was nerve wracking, since fuel balancing became an issue. If you look closely at the "ground distance" on the report, it's probably a bit longer than the norm for circumnavigation. The reason is that the vessel became extremely difficult to control once the forward fuel tanks were empty, both in heading and altitude. At one point, I was both way off course and well above an altitude where I would have expected flameout. Thanks to the added air intakes, though, I never flamed out, to my vast surprise. I drifted above the ceiling for the challenge at that point, so that may disqualify me. I hope not.

I'm a "purist", so the only mod I have is Kerbal Alarm clock. I tried F.A.R. for awhile, but I'm no aerospace engineer, and I quit having fun while I was trying to make sense of how to manipulate the numbers so that my aircraft would quit flipping like autumn leaves at takeoff. I gave up on that after I realized that I was learning nothing except how limited my vocabulary of four letter words were for expressing my frustration. There just weren't enough to do the job.

Anyway, the fuel balancing issue remains a problem, since I can't figure out how to keep my tanks from running out without manually transferring fuel in-flight. Any tips on this would be appreciated.

Here's a link to ZeroIgnite's elegant design which inspired my attempt.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/25884-Kerbin-Circumnavigation-Challenge-Reloaded-New-Rules-Once-More?p=576576&viewfull=1#post576576

EDIT: Almost forgot to point out the "primary feature" of the design. As I said, this is intended to be a recon craft, and it's based on another smaller design that has served me well. In both designs, I use three engines: a basic jet engine, and two Turbojet Engines. I group the Turbos together in an action group that I can toggle on and off, and also have the Basic engine similarly configured in a separate action group. Most of the time that I'm exploring, I have the Turbos off to conserve fuel. Whenever I'm ready to move long distance, I'm able to flip on the Turbos and cover distance quickly, with the Basic engine off.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Porspeler

[WafflesToo]

LOL! Sorry, not laughing at you, but with you. My experience with FAR is pretty much the same as yours was. Where I had the most fun was tooling around Kerbin in a sub-sonic aircraft (get it trimmed right and you can fly a straight line just by feathering the throttle). Anything supersonic or hypersonic really didn't do much but exercise my vocabulary of "power-words". The game stopped being fun so into the recycling bin it went.

'grats on your flight. Neat looking bird.

[Flixxbeatz]

Here is my entry.

-snip-

Sorry, but I will be voiding your entry based on your flight record since...

-One must not exceed 25,000m (that is, going 25,001m and above will void your attempt)

[seanth]

A plea for a relaxation of the rules for boats/cars:

Several of us have circumnavigated Kerbin with a boat/overland vehicle. The very long times it requires to cross the oceans is made bearable by using something like mechjeb of k-OS. Maybe have a special category when if you stay below a certain hight, you can use mechjeb?

See this thread for the other circumnavigators: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/25016-In-search-of-Ferdinand-Magellan?p=657141&viewfull=1#post657141

[GraviTykillz]

i have attempted this. Failed. will try again. Its actually harder then i thought it would be

[Porspeler]

Here's Jeb Kerman posing for the media after completing his around-the-globe trip in the "“Kirbenweltumseglergebilden“.

(Hey... long trip, long name.)

As you can see, it's a simple design with no frills. I generally avoid canards, but I was dissatisfied with the pitch rate during test flights and so I reluctantly included them. I used the Mk II fuselage series because they hold more fuel for the same mass as the standard jet fuel tanks. A single RAM scoop was sufficient to meet my airflow needs, poking along at 20% throttle at a cruising altitude of between 20 and 23 km.

High Altitude + Low Throttle = Speed + Fuel Economy

The flight was leisurely and trouble free. My greatest challenge for the entire journey was landing safely, once I’d returned to KSP. Runway landings are a weak point for me, and so I ended up overflying the runway a half dozen times. 12.5% of my starting fuel was used after I returned, buzzing the runway and then circling around again.

Notice the time and fuel remaining as I approach the runway at the end of the trip...

...and the elapsed time and remaining fuel, once I finally managed to get it all right.

Here's the report.

This has been a great experience! I've learned a lot about design and technical issues, as well as becoming a much better pilot.

[GraviTykillz]

My Entry to the Challange

The GKz-100

It was very fun to work a bird that would Fly straight and land with ease..but about my 100 ship or so.. I was off and a trip round Kerbin.

I failed twice doing this..first plane ran out of gas and went into a flat spin and i couldn't recover it a few miles from kSC, second landed about 200 miles short.

But learned alot and had lots of fun.

KSC is a welcome Sight

and HOme

Great Challenge!

Peace

GKz

[Flixxbeatz]

Sorry for being inactive here at forums, was busy playing TES IV: Oblivion and other stuff. Got the new entries now. Welcome to the club!

[Porspeler]

[...]Got the new entries now. Welcome to the club!

Thank you. I'm honored.

[KC5SDY]

Here is my entry. I had a few tense moments. When the tension was not high, I even had a spreadsheet that I was using to monitor my fuel usage, expected distance, expected ending fuel, etc, etc.

Here we are on the runway ready to go...

Got to see a nice Mun rise while cruising along.

I noticed this coming over the horizon too. Not sure if that was Minmus or Dres. Both looked like they were in about the same place.

On Final...

Touchdown!!!

[Flixxbeatz]

Here is my entry. I had a few tense moments. When the tension was not high, I even had a spreadsheet that I was using to monitor my fuel usage, expected distance, expected ending fuel, etc, etc.

Here we are on the runway ready to go...

-snip-

I like the way how you stacked those fuselage tanks on each other Awesome attempt! Welcome to the club.

Also, that speck you saw on the 3rd screenie must be Minmus.

[KC5SDY]

I like the way how you stacked those fuselage tanks on each other Awesome attempt! Welcome to the club.

Also, that speck you saw on the 3rd screenie must be Minmus.

Thank you. I had originally designed that to be something I could fry around the world a few times when I had stumbled across the challenge. It was interesting putting that thing together. Some of the tanks do not connect even though they look like they do. My first run was finding out where to make corrections. Other than that, it flew just fine. It did not like to be low and slow.

I didnt think that speck could have been anything other than Minmus. When I looked, I noticed that it was not the only body that would be in view there.

It was an interesting challenge. I am not used to having a limit to my altitude when I fly around. It made it a little on the tough side. The spreadsheet I put together helped out. I was able to make a few adjustments as I was flying along to see how they changed things.

[noghiri]

I have joined the forums here to attempt this challenge. My first attempt was unsuccessful, so I'm posting the video here to see if any of you have any ideas as to what to do better or change.

http://youtu.be/sb-bn2GRRyk

Sorry my audio's buzzy, I didn't catch that until after it was recorded and uploaded.

Edited October 1, 2013 by noghiri

[KC5SDY]

I have joined the forums here to attempt this challenge. My first attempt was unsuccessful, so I'm posting the video here to see if any of you have any ideas as to what to do better or change.

http://youtu.be/sb-bn2GRRyk

Sorry my audio's buzzy, I didn't catch that until after it was recorded and uploaded.

Something I noticed that helps me out tremendously, hit 'T" to turn on SAS. That will help keep the plane stable. What I have done with July plane, get up to about 10-15K as quickly as possible without going straight up. Straighten up and let it gradually climb to between 20-24K. As your speed increases with the thinner atmosphere, gradually drop your throttle until you are just barely able to maintain your highest speed. For me, that put my throttle at around 10-20%. I did have a spreadsheet running on a laptop next to me that I would plug the numbers in to see how I was doing. From that I would make changes as needed.

[noghiri]

Something I noticed that helps me out tremendously, hit 'T" to turn on SAS. That will help keep the plane stable. What I have done with July plane, get up to about 10-15K as quickly as possible without going straight up. Straighten up and let it gradually climb to between 20-24K. As your speed increases with the thinner atmosphere, gradually drop your throttle until you are just barely able to maintain your highest speed. For me, that put my throttle at around 10-20%. I did have a spreadsheet running on a laptop next to me that I would plug the numbers in to see how I was doing. From that I would make changes as needed.

I had SAS on (Avionics Pack, actually).

What formula did you use for the spreadsheet?

[KC5SDY]

I had SAS on (Avionics Pack, actually).

What formula did you use for the spreadsheet?

There were only a couple times I saw SAS turned on. That is why you were having such a hard time keeping it stable and straight once you were off the ground.

Here is what I put together on the spreadsheet. Granted, I had to stop, hit F3 to get my current stats to plug in. I would wait until I burned 5-10 of fuel then check it. If it was looking like I might cut it close, I would check more often. If I was doing great and looked like I was going to have plenty of fuel, I would check it every 10-20 units burned.

This is what I put together...

It is not displaying the way I wanted it to but, here it is. I can email it to you if you like.

Circumference 3,900,000.00 (Estimate of circumference of Kerbin)

Current Fuel 343.00 (How much fuel do you have left right now?)

Current Usage =B5-B2 (Formula subtracting current fuel from total fuel)

Distance Traveled 3,902,917.00 (How far have you traveled so far?)

Total Fuel 1,040.00 (Maximum fuel you started with)

Expected Distance =(B4/B3)*B5 (How far are you expected to travel as of now)

% Expected =B6/B1 (How far are you expected to travel in percent.)

Difference =B6-B1 (Difference between expected distance and remaining distance)

Percent Traveled =B4/B1 (How far have you traveled so far in percent?)

Distance Per Fuel Unit =B4/B2 (Gas mileage)

Remaining Distance =B1-B4 (How far do you have left to travel?)

Expected Fuel Remaining =B2-(B10/B9) (How much fuel should have have left when you land?)

[noghiri]

I thought I kept it on for most of it, only turning of SAS when I needed to course-correct. I'll have to re-watch to be sure, though XD

I'll pm you my email address, it probably makes more sense in a grid.

[KC5SDY]

I was trying to keep it in a grid format but, it just would not let me. I will look for your message.

[khyron42]

I went for a relatively simple design - big delta wing, single turbojet engine, dual ram air intakes. All stock. After the fuel lines failed to feed things correctly for some reason, I disabled fuel flow from all but a few central tanks and hand managed gradually moving fuel from two outer sets of tanks to the central tanks. My successful design is called Recon Delta One, or RoDeO for short.

Halfway around the world, after emptying the outriggers:

Within sight of KSP and descending as fast as I can because I misjudged how close I was:

Successfully landed slightly to the left of the runway, showing the flight results:

[Flixxbeatz]

I have joined the forums here to attempt this challenge. My first attempt was unsuccessful, so I'm posting the video here to see if any of you have any ideas as to what to do better or change.

-snip-

Sorry my audio's buzzy, I didn't catch that until after it was recorded and uploaded.

I went for a relatively simple design - big delta wing, single turbojet engine, dual ram air intakes. All stock. After the fuel lines failed to feed things correctly for some reason, I disabled fuel flow from all but a few central tanks and hand managed gradually moving fuel from two outer sets of tanks to the central tanks. My successful design is called Recon Delta One, or RoDeO for short.

-snip-

Great entries guys! And welcome to the club

[noghiri]

Thanks, but...

I'm not in the club yet. I'm still working towards it. I posted to ask advice from those who HAD made it, and got very good advice.

[Flixxbeatz]

Thanks, but...

I'm not in the club yet. I'm still working towards it. I posted to ask advice from those who HAD made it, and got very good advice.

Oh, sorry. I thought the video was yours. Thanks for the correction.

Anyway, will be waiting for your entry should you finally make it successfully

[noghiri]

The video's mine, but at the end I ran out of fuel in the desert, still a body of water and a peninsula away from the Kerbal Space Centre. As I did not complete the flight and land at the Centre, I cannot say I made it.

I've got a craft that's capable now, I just have to figure out how to reverse the drain order of the fuel tanks so it stops getting too tail heavy as soon as the first set of tanks hits 10 units.

Edited October 3, 2013 by noghiri

[Heagar]

to noghiri:

Things you may/should change at your design:

1. An ASAS instead of the probe one.

2. Take 3-4 RamAir-intakes instead of those you used, there are a way more effective at high altitudes and speed.

3. Get rid of the engine mount/cooler, you didn't need that. It adds only weight and drag.

4. Check your center of lift, it should be considerably behind the center of mass.

Things i recognized by watching your attempt:

At the ascend you should be perfectly at 90 degree if wanted, at higher speeds a course-correction is an heavy task/impossible (depending on the craft).

At 20k reduce the pitch to have an vertical climb-rate of 10 to 15 m/s.

Your where tapping wildly on your keyboard in order to get the wings at level with the horizon, not noticeing that you had broken the 25k altitude-limit already in the beginning of your flight.

If the controls are too sensitive you could:

1. Engage the "fine Controls" by using the Capslock-Button.

2. Avoid to position ailerons to the wingtips and to have too much/big ailerons, this will increase the roll-rate.

Engage the SAS/ASAS after launch with the "T" key alltimes. If the center of lift is behind the center of weight you only have to tap the "F"-key (temporaryly disables SAS/ASAS) once in a while to pitch down --> let the plane work for you!

When the center of mass changes during the flight pump fuel from the aft to the tank in use, ore more up to the front, if needed. KSP will always use the tanks from front first and than switch to the next one to the rear witch holds fuel.

[zorque]

I'll shake this bouncy booty.

I kept it simple, and made the run at around 20KM in just under an hour. Landed literally on FUMES.

Photoshopped the final stats back onto the landing pic, partly because it's easier to read (after I down-res'd the image) and partly because the pic was too pretty to mess up with a center box (they should make it move-able). They're accurate, tho.

-Mike

Launch:

Landing: