Massive 279 rocket lift off [Video]

[kodack]

*Title is wrong, it's 17x17 rockets or 289*

I was able to get my pet project off the ground tonight. I've been trying to build the largest vehicle I can possibly get off the ground and hitting the limits of what the game can handle with object limits, I was able to lift off with a 289 thruster rocket. It took over a minute for it to load and while running my average frame rate was less than 1FPS. The video is sped up 16 times in order to show it at a more natural frame rate.

Update! Part 2 is up. Stiffer chassis, stable flight, Kerbans blown sky high, wait what?

I'm back with part 2 of "The Big One". I optimized my strut arrangement to stiffen the chassis without adding too many more parts. The result is a very stable launch vehicle.

However the extra parts pushed the total part number to over 1,100 which has slowed the framerate even further. This launch is 20 seconds thanks to speeding up the video by 16x, but that 20 seconds took over 20 minutes to play out in real time. The average framerate was far below 1 fps.

I'm not sure what happened to our Kerbalnaut that turned him into a screaming and quite frightened projectile but it did not end well. Finally at the end of the video we have 1 sole survivor. The two explosions were earlier attempts at creating a stable launch vehicle.

Edited May 12, 2013 by kodack

[bsalis]

Ermahgerd, what have you done.

[NeoMorph]

279 or 289?

Still... OMFFFFFFG!

Would have been better if you had added an emergency parachute and rescued him in the middle of so many things going BOOOOM!

[MBobrik]

omg thats no liftoff that is kaboom in slow motion

[Dr. Muttonstache]

Kerbal Space Program everybody!

[The Deep Space Kraken]

I don't wham to be around when all that debris comes back down!

[Stealth2668]

The most impressive thing is the tolerable framerate.

[MBobrik]

The most impressive thing is the tolerable framerate.

I believe he said the video was sped up 16 so, the framerate was most probably not tolerable at all.

[Stealth2668]

^ ahh yes. Didn't even read what he wrote lol. He said he was getting less than 1 FPS. Nvm then

[leax256]

needs...more...struts.

[ComradeGoat]

A parachute would have been sporting.

[Boffinbox]

WHY!

*drops dead*

[kodack]

So in answer to some questions.

1. It started out at over 450 rockets but it became tedious to load or make changes to it. Plus it blew up on the launch pad as it was much larger than the pad itself.

2. The limits I'm encountering in the game have to do with the number of parts and not necessarily the number of rockets. Without struts to stiffen the chassis it won't lift off at all. However, in order to make it truly stable, I would have to strut every fuel tank, to every other fuel tank, which exponentially increases the part count. Im trying to get the most stable craft possible with the minimum number of struts in order to keep parts counts low. This was my first successful liftoff and it showed me that I need to at least re-strut the outside banks of rockets so they don't flap about.

Given the extreme load times, and low frame rates of down to 0fps when experimenting, the work is understandably slow.

The ultimate goal is to build a kind of flying parking lot which will act as a mobile launch center or landing pad, and land it somewhere else on the planet for use as an experimental test range. I want to construct buildings and use this beast to move them to their location. Several missions later and I should have a flat area with buildings large enough to stage from or land on.

[LeonG17]

I think Jeb has been let lose in the VAB.

Also, try using the LV-T45 rather than the LV-T30 for the gimballing to try and control it better.

[killer420]

Awesome!!!!!!!

[kodack]

One more thing I forgot to mention, The game is not happy about loading, or simulating this craft. I've crashed to desktop on numerous occasions while working on it. It was a stroke of luck to be able to capture an actual flight.

[foamyesque]

Your math is way out, dude. I get a fuel mass in the range of 1.1kT.

That's... not really very much.

[Luna Lovecraft]

See, what I find impressive is that in most rockets, losing 2 fuel canisters and their engines early can ruin a flight.

Not this one.

It takes like 15 to fall off before it starts to sputter.

[Echostatic]

I was giggling like a maniac from the moment it left the pad.

[kodack]

I wasn't sure what the actual measurements for fuel were in the game. I assumed that the "units" in the description screen were tons, so I multiplied by the number of fuel tanks. It seemed small but it was a napkin calculation.

Love that rocket in your screenshot. What a beast!

PS I have worked out the flex issues and been able to add a few more struts, while reducing my overall number of struts. I have just achieved a stable and flex free liftoff but the framerate took a major hit with the additional parts needed to stiffen it. I let it run for 20 minutes and got about 20 seconds of in game time. Average was less than 1 fps. I'm editing the video to put up. I also found a strange bug that can put an EVA pilot flying through the atmosphere from the ground at spectacular speed.

[superm18]

It's...ALIVE!!

[kodack]

I'm back with part 2 of "The Big One". I optimized my strut arrangement to stiffen the chassis without adding too many more parts. The result is a very stable launch vehicle.

However the extra parts pushed the total part number to over 1,100 which has slowed the framerate even further. This launch is 20 seconds thanks to speeding up the video by 16x, but that 20 seconds took over 20 minutes to play out in real time. The average framerate was far below 1 fps.

I'm not sure what happened to our Kerbalnaut that turned him into a screaming and quite frightened projectile but it did not end well. Finally at the end of the video we have 1 sole survivor. The two explosions were earlier attempts at creating a stable launch vehicle.

[CalculusWarrior]

When all those parts started falling from the sky... I totally lost it--you have taken the cry of 'MOAR BOOSTERS!' to the extreme, my friend. Jeb would be proud.

[kodack]

What do you guys make of 1:36 in the second video. I thought I had survived it but the moment he stepped foot outside the capsule he got catapulted at incredible velocity out over the ocean. The only thing that makes any sense is that it's either a bug, or explosions can propel nearby objects to insane speeds.

[foamyesque]

I wasn't sure what the actual measurements for fuel were in the game. I assumed that the "units" in the description screen were tons, so I multiplied by the number of fuel tanks. It seemed small but it was a napkin calculation.

The general convention is that 1 mass unit = 1 tonne and 1 force unit = 1 kiloNewton, since that a. gives reasonably sane values for the masses and thrusts of the rockets and b. works out correctly for acceleration and velocity purposes.

A -800 tank is 4.5 tonnes total, 4 tonnes of which is fuel; 4*17*17 = 1,156 tonnes. It's certainly a big rocket with a great many engines, but it's not record-breaking in either department. Sorry.