Small fuel to orbit challenge

[Hejnfelt]

Shenanigans - that ain't stock.

What exactly isn't stock?

[capi3101]

That bit in the central stack, unless I'm looking at it wrong. What parts are those?

[Hejnfelt]

That bit in the central stack, unless I'm looking at it wrong. What parts are those?

Haha that's just stock clipping at its best. It's 8 X jet fuel fuselages clipped together because they refused to go around the outside. While definitely not optimal visually, it's stock and affects the performance of the rocket just the same in relation to game mechanics, without looking nice.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Hejnfelt

[capi3101]

My bad then...and apologies.

[Bothersome]

1781 / 5720 * 100 = 31.14%

Wow, that's some impressive determination right there. Good score, I'll update the scores.

[eppiox]

Here is my attempt, without oxidiser hax

MechJeb was used to keep thing stable, it works better with the longer tanks but I wanted to be difficult xD

229 / 1440 * 100 = 15.9%

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Bothersome]

Good score eppiox, I'm gonna seperate the scores on the original page to make separate categories.

[Radam]

So Im guessing manual fuel transfers would be against the rules?

[Bothersome]

No, manual transfers are not in the rules. So it's legal.

However, running a mod to move the fuel automatically would be the same as running a fuel line. So no auto fuel moves.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Bothersome

[Radam]

Ok, drop tanks, manual fuel transfer and engines on decouplers, yay. Another entry for oxy deprived league.

1764/5360= 32.91%

"Payload" is 2 Mk2 tanks one on top of another and first 5 and then 4 same tanks glued around them. And yes it seems fuel can flow trough a decoupler, 4 cubic struts and into the engine... Almost an unreal category.

What is your D-V to orbit? I think Im bad at this with 4.2k spent...

[Bothersome]

That's pretty impressive, and definitely shows signs of thinking outside the box. Well done, I'll post your score.

I do not know my D-V to orbit. I don't use any mods.

[Slugy]

I'd like to present an entry that takes the simple approach - mainsails and a skipper for 15.3% (1985/12960)

edit: MechJeb used for most of the ascent.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Bothersome]

Good job Slugy, score updated.

[Radam]

For the reference, stock Kerbal X, modified for fuel and using asparagous staging gets about 15.2% of fuel into space. Tho I heard is supposedly able to get 17%...

[Radam]

Exploiting manual fuel transfers and spikes on decouplers quite some more, I present 2 results:

Deoxigenated line:

3236/9320=34.72%

Normal Fuel as cargo:

1650/7695=21.44%

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Which would also be 20.6t of cargo on a 115.3t launch vehicle, 17.9% cargo fraction.

VAB didnt forbid me to put aerospikes on a small overlap, 12 of them around a tank. Their decouplers were put on key bindings in pairs. So I decoupled one after another when acceleration went over 22ms^2, while transferring fuel from the lowest tank and staging it when empty. Good thing mechjeb was keeping it vertical on ascent, so when I got to last tank I could manually set the pitch. Final circulization took about 200ms.

Edited August 29, 2013 by Radam

[Bothersome]

OK Radam, I think you got the top positions on this one.

Anyone else wanna take him down a notch or two?

[Slugy]

Beaten before I posted!Nice technique Radam.All the same here is one full orange tank delivered for 2942/15480 = 19%, which also gives 16.3% payload to LKO (or 18.4% including the final stage).3 aerospikes on each tank and an lvt45 for some steering in the middle.Edit:Forum is (still) eating my whitespace!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited August 30, 2013 by Slugy

[Jasonbail]

Well I had to take Radams method to beat him but added my own twist. This is for the standard category.

1296/5760= 22.5%

Javascript is disabled. View full album

finding the right staging for this took ages and still probably isn't perfect but I'm going to bed soon so I thought I'd post what I've been able to do so far.

Edited August 30, 2013 by Jasonbail

[Radam]

Good morning nation, its 12oclock.

Nuclear option, yes, I was playing with that before bed aswell. But I got to something now..

1752/7560=23.17%

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Bothersome]

So, it looks like the nukes have been put into use now. The war is heating up I see.

I would have never thought those scores could have gotten so high.

[Radam]

Well to convert from normal fuel to jet fuel cargo is to basically double the final fuel, and divide it by starting fuel + final fuel. Approximately...

So 2*1752/(7560+1752)=37.6% liquid fuel, from my latest nuclear assist score

2*1296/(5760+1296)= 36.7% liquid fuel, from Jasonbails latest score

Basically Rockomax 16 holds 720 units of fuel weighing 9t, for the same weight 9 Mk2 fuselages hold 1440 units...

Edited August 30, 2013 by Radam

[Bothersome]

I'm not following you. Why are you adding the 1752 to the divisor for example?

And number manipulation might work in theory, but I gotta see an actual screenie of it up there to be counted. We can't dismiss the problems of transfer and/or cargo placement and securing to get a theoretically high score.

[Radam]

I dont want it to be counted, its just theoretical comparison between 2 categories.

As I shown, if you put a Rockomax 16 in orbit, thats 720 units of fuel. But if you put 9 Mk2 fuselages, that is 720 units more in orbit and also 720 units more at start...

[Bothersome]

Ah, mmyesss. I see now.

[shand]

I wont post photos as my entries aren't valid (using stretchy tanks) but my launch vehicle can carry a 25t payload to 100x100 orbit (plus a lil bit)

If that payload is just liquid fuel - 20.4%

if that payload is biprop - 11.4%

other than stretchy tanks it fits the bill though. no functioning fuel-lines and otherwise stock.