[Stock] 30 sec Altitude Challenge!

[Mars90000000]

I can assure you that 75km+ and even 100km+ altitudes are possible. Just need to find the right engine layout.

Also, in order to avoid the use of the wing bug where you can create lift using wings and no engines, no wings or any piece creating lift is allowed... Only thrust.

Also: the highscore has been updated!

[Jason Patterson]

I was able to achieve something like 21-23 km with two layers of RT-10 plus a sepratrons upper stage: now I'm wondering how big your ship on the launchpad was, and how many times you had to stage

I used 5 layers of RT-10s with staging every ~85 units of fuel. I played around with it a bit to get a huge TWR at the beginning to try to push through the lower atmosphere just a little bit faster and kept the last stage (where drag became a relative non-issue) fairly long and with a lower average TWR. It still maxed out at 53g though. The first version had ~400 parts. The 30km version was over 1000 parts and each test run took about 10 minutes on my computer (52 seconds game time.) The lower atmosphere is almost entirely the limiting factor in this challenge. If you can get your speed up enough to get through the first 5km just 1 or 2 seconds sooner you wind up going several kilometers higher in the end.

[Climberfx]

This challenge is not fare. When you use FAR system to compete with normal ones. Far system make things a lot easier, i use it for a wile, but i don't use anymore.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Climberfx

[zarakon]

Yep, having your ship mostly made of near-empty solid boosters is how I was winning the original version of this thread, up until people started abusing RCS

The challenge is stock parts only, but is it OK to use mods like Mechjeb for automatic staging, or Dynamic Warp to play in slow motion (and alleviate lag issues)?

[Climberfx]

No way to delete post yet...

Edited May 6, 2013 by Climberfx

[Climberfx]

This is the most i could do! Stock parts, Mechjeb only keep me 90,90,90.

And Starting from the platform floor, no TT18A used.

Single stake, and the fuel finish before the end, leaving momentum.

[Climberfx]

Based on the Ninety-Three model, i made this video, with a little different design...

[Jason Patterson]

This challenge is not fare. When you use FAR system to compete with normal ones. Far system make things a lot easier, i use it for a wile, but i don't use anymore.

Indeed, that's why it says no mods.

[Mars90000000]

Yep, having your ship mostly made of near-empty solid boosters is how I was winning the original version of this thread, up until people started abusing RCS

The challenge is stock parts only, but is it OK to use mods like Mechjeb for automatic staging, or Dynamic Warp to play in slow motion (and alleviate lag issues)?

Stock parts only and no plugins that change the physics of the game (including slow motion).

Mechjeb is allowed for autopilot as it doesn't change the physics of the game nor does it change the properties of the parts. Whatever this "FAR" plugin is, i haven't heard of it but from the sound of it, it looks as if it would change the physics, so its not allowed.

This is a fun challenge, so anything that changes physics or whatnot simply removes the fun of it! Keep it fair! so no bug exploitation (wings and RCS bugs)!

[zarakon]

Dynamic Warp doesn't change the game physics. It doesn't work by the same mechanism as the in-game physics warp. Physics time step increments remain the same, they just get calculated less frequently (or more frequently, if you use it to accelerate). So if you slow time to 1/4, you're reducing the load on your CPU to 1/4, allowing it to run much more smoothly

[Mars90000000]

Dynamic Warp doesn't change the game physics. It doesn't work by the same mechanism as the in-game physics warp. Physics time step increments remain the same, they just get calculated less frequently (or more frequently, if you use it to accelerate). So if you slow time to 1/4, you're reducing the load on your CPU to 1/4, allowing it to run much more smoothly

It gives you a considerable advantage as your computer may be able to handle significantly larger ships than someone else with the same computer but not using the plugin. If sufficient people use that plugin, then I don't mind allowing it so you're not the only one with that advantage.

However, I do still prefer keeping this challenge and stock, plugin-free ('cept Mechjeb) Challenge.

Nothing says we can't have another which allows mods!

[SketchyGalore]

A bit late and a bit short, but here's what I have

15634m

[SmallChange]

Here's my shot: Juuuuuust shy of 20K! >

[Ninety-Three]

I thought I'd post the following ship to give people starting off a benchmark to beat.

A simple probe core and one solid fuel (and a little strut to prevent the engine from overheating the core) can achieve 14337.

[SmallChange]

Yeah, this challenge could be named "SRBs due crazy stuff when they are running on fumes".

With that. I had been trying that, but with a little crown of Sepratrons on the end.. Scratched that design, redid and got pas the 20K barrier! I'm coming for ya, top 3!

Like Jason said, I too expect diminishing returns with this design, but I'm going to see what I can expand it to!

**EDIT** Holy cow.. That run cruised up to 223,721m with zero thrust after the 30 second mark!

**EDIT 2**

Ha! Over 25 gives me the #3 spot, I believe!

Edited May 6, 2013 by SmallChange

[clapanse]

Hmm. It'll take some more tweaking to be competitive with some of the designs here, but here's a 22,222 shot (with 28 stages of the short solids):

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o19jjmtbtvemk7q/3rd%20attempt.PNG

(I love the fireball it's engulfed in though...)

Edited May 7, 2013 by clapanse

[Ojimak]

For those interested, it's unfortunate to note that despite the awesome power of decouplers, this challenge has probably advanced beyond them.

600ish parts on the pad:

30 seconds in:

Check out the highest speed achieved (52,799 m/s, too bad drag on the probe core is enough to slow it down)

-Ojimak

[Clouds]

too bad drag on the probe core is enough to slow it down

There doesn't appear to be a rule that the vessel/debris being measured needs to have a control module...

[skykooler]

The is technically legal, in that it doesn't violate any of the posted rules. No mods, but I used the debug menu to turn on infinite fuel after my solid motor burnt out. 76,345 m:

[Mars90000000]

The is technically legal, in that it doesn't violate any of the posted rules. No mods, but I used the debug menu to turn on infinite fuel after my solid motor burnt out. 76,345 m:

no debug menu cheat.

Debug menu is a cheat, falls in the same category as mods and plugins!

[SmallChange]

I suppose there could be an "Infinite Fuel" category, and that would really become a nuanced competition... Maybe so much that it would be better as a different competition.

I was kind of worried people were going to be using that... No good way to prove they aren't. Oh well. This is a pretty honest forum.

[Ninety-Three]

I suppose there could be an "Infinite Fuel" category, and that would really become a nuanced competition...

Actually, infinite fuel would be extremely simple. Cover a probe core in as many separatrons (Empty TWR: 145, far surpassing the next-best SRB at 51, and the Mainsail at 25), use clamps to empty them on the launchpad. Engage infinite fuel, disengage clamps, spend 30 seconds at ~145 TWR. The only engineering to do would be in using cubic struts to earn more attachment points for separatrons and slightly improving your TWR by building strut-assemblies with a better weight-separatron ratio than your base core.

[Mars90000000]

So I made another challenge where everything is allowed, so let yourselves loose there! This one stays a stock only, plugin/cheat/bug free challenge!

Enjoy!

[Ojimak]

Actually, infinite fuel would be extremely simple. Cover a probe core in as many separatrons (Empty TWR: 145, far surpassing the next-best SRB at 51, and the Mainsail at 25), use clamps to empty them on the launchpad. Engage infinite fuel, disengage clamps, spend 30 seconds at ~145 TWR. The only engineering to do would be in using cubic struts to earn more attachment points for separatrons and slightly improving your TWR by building strut-assemblies with a better weight-separatron ratio than your base core.

I already tried doing that for fun, and its not as incredibly easy as it initially seems. Overheating issues occur really quickly and I know that at least my computer has issues where, once a certain amount of separatrons are on a craft, it shakes itself to pieces as if parts are clipped, even when they are not. But it is awfully fun to fly into the sun after only a few minutes of effort.

[Ninety-Three]

I already tried doing that for fun, and its not as incredibly easy as it initially seems. Overheating issues occur really quickly and I know that at least my computer has issues where, once a certain amount of separatrons are on a craft, it shakes itself to pieces as if parts are clipped, even when they are not. But it is awfully fun to fly into the sun after only a few minutes of effort.

I did some experimenting with dense separatrons for this challenge: overheating is only relevant if you stick too many 'trons on the probe core. So long as they're mounted on octo-struts they'll be fine. I encountered the clipping thing too, but my testing showed that it was a matter of the separatron clipbox being really weird, as opposed to a matter of quantity. Certain configurations will shake you apart, some are safe.