Ion Engines for a Rover?

[WhiteWeasel]

Wow, very very interesting, thanks for sharing the results of your test!

Im at the landing on the moon process, the thing is so stupidly wobbly (for once i forgot to add struts in my hurry to take it off to the mun) that I'm not sure if I'll be able to land it safely, but... I'll try! After I land I'll test the ion engines as a way to improve the grip of the rover. If it works Ill try to design one with big solar arrays.

+

I didn't know that the RTG were so weak, ( and I never really checked the numbers at the VAB either, you can blame me, I'm a lazy ass).

Yeah you want to keep at least one so you have a constant source/never run out of power, but they aren't that great otherwise. A solar panel or two and a few small batteries can be much more useful for less weight. Just keep in mind that the big solar panels rotate so make sure they have some ground clearance before launching. Also this should be obvious that the number in the batteries name (Z-100, Z-400, Z-500) is how much charge it has. Special note on the Z-500 is that for the e it offers it weighs as much as 10 Z-100's making it half efficient in e/ per ton. But due to it's roundness it is better integrated into rockets and make for a good rover base.

Why you should not have solar panels extended while moving in atmosphere:

Edited July 22, 2013 by WhiteWeasel

[Guest Aaack]

For the lulz I made a night landing on the Mün, the first I ever did, it went better than expected!

Now I'll be able to post results about the ion engines on the Mün surface.

[WhiteWeasel]

And another problem I see is that the wheels your using have really strong torque, that's why you flip when turning. Try these ones, rovemax model 1:

Edited July 22, 2013 by WhiteWeasel

[Guest Aaack]

ok Several things I just discovered, first, in spite of looking cool the rover is stupidly unstable on the Mün BUT the ion engines DOES make a huge difference, when on it can hold really well 20 m/s, when off the thing rolls over at 10 m/s.

So: horrible rover design, but the ion concept did work!

Edit: i completely forgot I've installed the ASAS, with it on the rover seems safe!, but i disabled all motors except the ones on the front wheels and locked all the steering except on the front wheel also.

It's interesting to see how something completely undrivable turns to be pretty stable with some setup, the ion engines and the ASAS

Edited July 22, 2013 by Aaack

[Guest Aaack]

Well I avoided those specifically, because i thought they were a part of the skiing issue I'm facing with the light rover!

[WhiteWeasel]

Well I avoided those specifically, because i thought they were a part of the skiing issue I'm facing with the light rover!

The wheels you are using are stat wise better...

The Model 1 used to be the fastest wheel available, but the new TR-2L Ruggedized Vehicular Wheel is lighter, more energy-efficient, faster and more impact-resistant, making it the superior choice for most situations.

...but the huge torque will barrel roll light rovers. The ones you are using are better for heavy rovers or mobile bases.

[Guest Aaack]

LOL White, solar panels are NOT aerodynamic surfaces XD

[WhiteWeasel]

LOL White, solar panels are NOT aerodynamic surfaces XD

Well I meant the part about having them broken. But if you do break them, a kerbal on EVA can fix them as well as broken wheels and repack chutes.

[Guest Aaack]

I know, i was just joking, I remember one of the early tests with the heavy rover I made...

The tiny 1x6 solar panels I extended broke like tissue paper at 6 m/s, was fun...

But I didn't know Kerbals can fix them! that's very welcomed news! do they turn into a right click action being near or something like that?

Edit, now my Mün base has a rover per kerbal... I had four kerbals but I read somewhere that if you have two kerbals with the same name in a same spot one of them disappears... and that's what happened I believe.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Aaack

[CodatheSpaceFox]

Glad to hear your ion test was a success. It makes sense, as it helps add a bit more ground related force, and I figure you don't need so much.

Your wheels are for heavier craft, but I use them for everything as well, call me a hypocrite I suppose.

They work well mix and matched though. you can easily combine them in rover designs if worked in correctly. I wonder though, have you considered something to lift your rovers? I wonder if IONs would have enough power to lower a light rover's gravity effect enough as to traverse long ranges in a sort of jumping motion. Maybe mix RCS with ION support to use the new mun terrain as a series of jumps much like a BMX bike would handle them. Maybe not as fabulously, but I figure any time off the surface is faster than on, just so long as it's maintained.

It works with my RCS bikes so far, even thought they don't ever touch the ground, just float from one place to another and land on micro docking ports.

[draeath]

Well I meant the part about having them broken. But if you do break them, a kerbal on EVA can fix them as well as broken wheels and repack chutes.

Does the kerbal have to go find the part that broke off? Is it a one-time fix, or can you repeat?

[troyn123]

Does the kerbal have to go find the part that broke off? Is it a one-time fix, or can you repeat?

Repeat as often as needed, no need to find parts. Sometimes it will only look fixed for a moment as it bounces up, and then breaks again... But if you click repair a second time, real fast while it's still on the bounce-up, it'll repair properly.

[WhiteWeasel]

Does the kerbal have to go find the part that broke off? Is it a one-time fix, or can you repeat?

If it breaks off, your SOL. I mean repair 'flat' tires and solar panels that have be ripped off like my above post.

[draeath]

So, flat tires or panels that haven't had the "base" component destroyed/detached?

I ask that as I've not yet managed to break any so I'm not sure what the difference is!

[WhiteWeasel]

So, flat tires or panels that haven't had the "base" component destroyed/detached?

I ask that as I've not yet managed to break any so I'm not sure what the difference is!

Wheel on right: Fixable

Wheel on Left: Not fixable

[draeath]

I'm asking about solar panels, not wheels. Flat vs Not-Flat is easy enough.

[Guest Aaack]

wow that's awesome, i didn't know it was possible!!

Can't wait to flat a tire or two... errrr I mean....

[WhiteWeasel]

Yes, as long as it's not physically detached or destroyed like the wheel in my pic, it is repairable.

[Guest Aaack]

It would be too awesome if you could have a VAB on orbit or a base... sigh, day dreaming mode!

Ah edit: I've tried the mechjeb add-on, it's awesome but superlags me, near the moon station where I have a gazillion pieces around the lag is so brutal it's almost unplayable, also it appears to not be available on ongoing missions, only on new ones. So regretfully I've uninstalled it.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Aaack

[Kinglet]

If you have problems with rolling over, set a action group to lock the steering of the back wheels.

If you lock it in straight position, it will be very easy to turn at high speeds.

[Guest Aaack]

Hey Meep, yep, that's exactly what i did with the two rovers that doesn't have the ASAS , alas I'm not sure if its possible to define action groups once launched, I manually turn off the wheels steering and power.