CLOSED -- Flying Duna AGAIN (Thanks for Participating)

[Northstar1989]

Ah gotcha that makes sense, I've never made anything with props but have used far with hypersonic crafts

Just a thought- but there *IS* room for supersonic craft on Duna- although they will tend to be capable of kicking out to suborbital trajectories if you're not careful (as orbital velocity is only about Mach 2 or 3 on Duna, unless you're playing with a Real Solar System scale-up of the planet...)

So far, the only supersonics have relied on KSP-Interstellar, though, as supersonic flight kind of requires either jet engines or rockets... (ion engines don't have enough thrust, propellers have a lousy velocity-curve, and the only rocket entry so far relied on LV-N's without using FAR...) There's the "Last Dancer"- a [FAR] hypersonic which would explode in a wonderful display of fireworks if run on the current version of KSP-Intersellar, due to its lack of precoolers; and my own [non-FAR] supersonic "Eagle Mk2"- which hasn't completed the challenge yet as I can't land the darn thing with the extra reactor-fuel that miraculously appeared when KSP-Interstellar updated...

I guess you could create a non-Interstellar supersonic craft if you used high-ISP chemical rockets (just don't burn them too long!) or NERVA's with FAR installed though (the problem with LV-N's and stock-alike NERVA's is that they produce a lot of drag in the stock aerodynamics model due to their high mass- not so in FAR, as they are dense, and likely located at the rear of the plane)

Regards,

Northstar

P.S. My skills in aerospace design have grown CONSIDERABLY since I launched the Raven Mk2. At some point in the future, after I land or fail to land all my current models, I might introduce a newer lineup of Duna-planes for this challenge, or a similar Duna-flying challenge of my own I've been talking about creating, using some of the lessons I've learned lately in aircraft design...

Edited May 26, 2014 by Northstar1989

[sdj64]

Nice plane, by the way. Some good ideas there.

You could improve the design a bit by reducing the part-count if you installed the Multipanels mod (which basically gives you upsized versions of the Ox-STAT solar panel, though they look a bit ugly, as they are literally just resized OX-STAT panels, and the base is too tall for the scale). This might even allow you to throw on a few more wings and ion engines and build an even bigger version...

Alternatively, the NearFuture mod has nuclear reactors which, though not nearly as power-dense as real reactors (or the ones in KSP-Interstellar, which are modeled after real-life reactors), still produce more EC/ton than any of the solar panels except the OX-STAT panels facing directly towards the sun (and in a plane, most of the time they will be at a significant angle). This might reduce your weight for the same actual electricity production- as the reactors would produce more power than the solars except when flying around Dunar noon- and would allow you to have powered flight at night...

Finally, if you want to really optimize your design, install Procedural Dynamics (better known as "Procedural Wings" though the mod was never actually called this). It will allow you to basically create wings of any size and shape you desire, and the lift coefficient properly scales for large-sized wings (as well as based on other more subtle wing parameters like root-to-tip width ratio: it's basically halfway to FAR in terms of realistic lift equations), so your larger planes will produce slightly more lift compared to their wing area, like in real life... (lift increases exponentially with wing area in real life- though the curve is somewhat balanced by increased drag)

I play with all these mods myself (especially Procedural Dynamics, on Geschosskopf's suggestion- how else would I build giant flying wings like the Raven Mk2 without overwhelming my CPU with part-count and 50 separate lift equations for each wing section?) Procedural Dynamics will be especially helpful for you- since it most strongly benefits craft with large, thing wings like your ion-flyer/glider (like in real life, in Procedural Dynamics thicker wings produce more lift than thinner wings- but I believe their lift coefficient actually decreases, so it's less lift per ton of mass, making thin wings preferable on lightweight gliders...)

Regards,

Northstar

Thanks for the tips on the mods. I have used PWings before but not Near Future or Interstellar. The plane is all stock, by the way (except for KER on the launch rocket), so keeping it that way was a challenge too. The part count comes in a little high at 260. The OX-STAT solar panels are completely weightless though so I think that any other electric solution would weigh it down some more, though flying at night would be a big bonus. If I was to do it again with mods, I'd also go with some electric propellers to help the ions at lower altitudes, maybe even one vertical like a helicopter for takeoff and landing.

Edit: You also said that the only supersonics so far used Interstellar, but my plane does as well. Ions definitely have enough thrust in 23.5 to do so. You can even make a craft that can hover and reach orbit vertically using ions on Duna.

Edited May 26, 2014 by sdj64

[Northstar1989]

Thanks for the tips on the mods. I have used PWings before but not Near Future or Interstellar. The plane is all stock, by the way (except for KER on the launch rocket), so keeping it that way was a challenge too. The part count comes in a little high at 260. The OX-STAT solar panels are completely weightless though so I think that any other electric solution would weigh it down some more, though flying at night would be a big bonus. If I was to do it again with mods, I'd also go with some electric propellers to help the ions at lower altitudes, maybe even one vertical like a helicopter for takeoff and landing.

I forgot that OX-STAT panels and some other light parts have temporarily been given no physics significance (until they can be re-balanced, I assume?) It used to be that having 200 OX-STAT panels would add up to quite a bit of weight and drag- as in for most of the earlier solar-electric designs on this thread...

Edit: You also said that the only supersonics so far used Interstellar, but my plane does as well. Ions definitely have enough thrust in 23.5 to do so. You can even make a craft that can hover and reach orbit vertically using ions on Duna.

Yeah, I guess technically it is a supersonic in the upper atmosphere of Duna... I was more loosely defining the term as aircraft that could reach Mach in the denser air of the lower atmosphere...

Regards,

Northstar

Edited May 27, 2014 by Northstar1989

[Northstar1989]

@Geschosskopf

Just a thought, but, looking at the list of "massless parts", WOW there are a lot more of them now in 0.23.5 than I thought...

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Massless_part

Kind of gives a huge advantage to newer, 0.23.5 designs (which can just spam as many OX-STAT panels as they need for their electricity production, without thought of weighing down the plane).

This gives me some insidious exploitative ideas, just to demonstrate how OP'd that is...

Regards,

Northstar

[Geschosskopf]

It carries 6 kerbals, so that's +4 points

+1 for circumnavigation if landing and taking off again is allowed

? for altitude

That's a great plane! Good enough for 3rd place, too, and if anybody comes along with another 14 points, your little rover will be a tie-breaker. Wear your sig patch with pride

[Geschosskopf]

@Geschosskopf

Just a thought, but, looking at the list of "massless parts", WOW there are a lot more of them now in 0.23.5 than I thought...

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Massless_part

Kind of gives a huge advantage to newer, 0.23.5 designs (which can just spam as many OX-STAT panels as they need for their electricity production, without thought of weighing down the plane).

This gives me some insidious exploitative ideas, just to demonstrate how OP'd that is...

Regards,

Northstar

Actually, 0.23.5 changed this list very little. Most parts on the list have been massless since way back, including the OX-STAT. IIRC, the only ones that changed in 0.23.5 were the retractable ladders and the 3.75m decoupler, which of course didn't exist before. But anything ever shown in the game as weighing 0.005 was treated as massless.

[Northstar1989]

Actually, 0.23.5 changed this list very little. Most parts on the list have been massless since way back, including the OX-STAT. IIRC, the only ones that changed in 0.23.5 were the retractable ladders and the 3.75m decoupler, which of course didn't exist before. But anything ever shown in the game as weighing 0.005 was treated as massless.

Really?

I always took the part descriptions at their word- if they said it weighed 0.005 tons, I always assumed it actually *DID* weight 0.005 tons.

I guess that means the MegaPanels mod I've been pushing people to use all this time in order to reduce part-count without changing mass/EC ration would have actually made their planes a LOT heavier- as they are scaled up version of the OX-STAT with scaled weight (up to 0.5 tons) and they DON'T have PhysicsSignificance=1...

It makes me wonder now why anybody (including me) would actually use the mod...

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/multipanels-1-0/

Regards,

Northstar

[SSSPutnik]

I don't understand the rules?

I thought any ship must fly to orbit? But I see posters using rockets to get to orbit.

"The only source of lift must be the result of aerodynamic forces acting on wings/rotors, so airplanes and helicopters are OK but anything held up by rockets, RCS, balloons, etc., is not."

Can someone clarify? It seems odd, as obviously you need some sort of non aerodynamic thrust to travel through vacuum.

[Northstar1989]

I don't understand the rules?

...

Can someone clarify?

Sure thing- you're allowed to launch your plane from Kebin on the back of a rocket, with drop-tanks as a spaceplane, or whatever else you want to try (note that it has to be built on Kerbin), but you can't use those parts to help you complete the actual flying around on Duna... That is, the plane has to be capable of independent operation separate from its transfer vehicle.

Regards,

Northstar

[SSSPutnik]

OK thanks, challenge accepted.

[Northstar1989]

OK thanks, challenge accepted.

Awesome. I always look forward to seeing new entries.

Regards,

Northstar

[Kaa253]

I love this challenge. I have done it a few times actually. First without and lately with FAR. It seems that this challenge is still quietly active after over a year? (counting from the first post). So I will assemble a proper photo album to submit. I don't need to be ranked and I don't have a winning entry but I would like to earn the flight jacket patch. Cheers, Kaa.

[Geschosskopf]

Howdy Kaa-

Yup, still quietly active. And the more the merrier. So welcome to the challenge and I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[custume]

Hi all

I have a machine (airplane) that can goo to duna and back , but ... landing is a problem (big one) I have try it lots of times and almost got it but cant get the speed less that 145Mps, the best I did was 1500 meter 157Mps, less it will stall.

And there is another problem (no landing spot) all hills and holes.

Regards to all

[Kaa253]

Hi all

I have a machine (airplane) that can goo to duna and back , but ... landing is a problem (big one) I have try it lots of times and almost got it but cant get the speed less that 145Mps, the best I did was 1500 meter 157Mps, less it will stall.

And there is another problem (no landing spot) all hills and holes.

Regards to all

I use lots and lots of wing area to give the lowest stall speed I can get and also air brakes from either the B9 or the Firespitter mods.

My latest design has a stall speed around 50 m/s (with FAR, actually I believe it is about the same without FAR installed too). Landing on Duna (i.e. dunes) is very bumpy at best so, as you already understand, it is good to touch down going very slow (or gently descending vertically even).

Edited July 2, 2014 by Kaa253

[custume]

well Almost got it, I use this :

And im uploading the video to YouTube so you can see the disaster happening (lol) of my last attempt.

As I see (I) need about approach speed of 420Mps (meters) at a altitude of 10.000 Meters (+ or - 5.000 feet) them at 3.000 Meters I need to be at 200Mps for a touchdown speed of 30Mps, but is hard, is very hard to land a plane (as) a plane in duna, at the time I get the 40-45Mps transferring from a position going up to one ready to land is harder.

Regards to all

EDIT:

Going to change a couple of things, like add more RC under the wings to provide the lift I need to compensate the lack of air

Edited July 2, 2014 by custume

[Kaa253]

OK. First off. I think I have never before showed in the forums the Duna bi-plane I made back in KSP version 0.21 (the image file stamp says 26 August 2013). I was inspired by what must have been the original thread mentioned by the OP here on the subject of flying on Duna. I cannot find that thread. Does anyone have a link to it?

I was not using FAR back then. I largely copied the design for it from somebody's forum post pictures. I suspect it was actually Geschosskopf's D'OH that I copied? I did launch it (with great difficulty) from Kerbin to Duna and then I flew it very effectively over half way around Duna before I badly crashed it on my third landing attempt (yes I sent a rescue mission and recovered the crew ) It carried the two Kerbals on sedan chairs mounted in the space between the wings. I named it the Duna "Flyer" in honour of the Wright Brothers "Flyer". It struggled to achieve an altitude of 5000 meters and so I had to fly it gingerly through all the low lying land areas. It also had a really terrible turning circle and a propensity to develop a dangerous side slip.

I also started from the flat on the bottom of the canyon that existed on Duna back then and which was only a few hundred meters above the datum, so this does not qualify as an entry in this challenge. Nevertheless, thank you for the help I got back then, I was part of the 1000 views the original thread received and I learned a great deal about flying on Duna and had a lot of fun as well.

Second? Soon to come... my real entry in the challenge

[Kaa253]

@custume

I have landed flying machines like that all the way down to sit on their tail rocket and then allowed them to simply fall over onto the wheels. If it is built sturdy enough it can be done without damage. A freaky-heart-stopping-anxious moment as it tips over; but do-able.

[custume]

@custume

I have landed flying machines like that all the way down to sit on their tail rocket and then allowed them to simply fall over onto the wheels. If it is built sturdy enough it can be done without damage. A freaky-heart-stopping-anxious moment as it tips over; but do-able.

True but that way is not a air plane, well I have to say maybe on duna but on Kerbin the wings will break way (lol)

But im not giving up and im not trying to enter the challenge just trying to land a plane there, it cant be that hard.

Im sending 2 new (brave) souls to duna on a new version, now it have some small rockets to the center that will give the necessary lift (I think) and some more RCS ports and now the dam thing will land horizontal.

thz for the tips, Best regards

[custume]

Hi all again,

Strike 2, not there yet but I just need 10 to 15.0Mps to land

Regards

[Voculus]

Geschosskopf, I need some clarification on rules 4 and 5. Can I use an SSTO, refuel above Kerbin, and then jettison the rocket components that got me all the way Duna, before taking on the challenge?

[Kaa253]

Geschosskopf, I need some clarification on rules 4 and 5. Can I use an SSTO, refuel above Kerbin, and then jettison the rocket components that got me all the way Duna, before taking on the challenge?

I believe so... I certainly hope so because that is basically how I have done it.

[Kaa253]

Presenting the Tesla II, my entry in the Flying Duna challenge.

Mission Design

1. The Tesla II takes off from KSP runway and is boosted into LKO by four strap-on liquid fuel tanks and two R.A.P.I.E.R. engines (jettisoned in LKO).

2. A tug is docked with the Tesla II Duna plane in LKO. My tug design also includes a Duna base to be landed at the Duna starting point. This is called "Duna Base Alpha". I am playing with TAC Life Support so the base and the flyer both carry some food+oxygen+water supplies to support the crew.

3. The tug boosts the Duna base and the flyer into a transfer orbit from Kerbin to Duna.

4. On arrival the tug does a low Duna orbit insertion burn and then a second burn to drop the Tesla II into Duna's atmosphere.

5. Tesla II enters the atmosphere and flies to a landing as a conventional plane.

6. Duna Base Alpha descends using retrorockets and parachutes to soft land beside the Tesla II.

7. Using solar generated electric power and twin firespitter mod electric propellers to achieve powered atmospheric flight the Tesla II circumnavigates Duna and returns to Duna Base Alpha. Electric propeller powered flight can be maintained indefinitely during daylight hours. A kethane powered "zero-bypass" turbine engine is also fitted which enables a little higher speed flight but limited by the kethane carrying capacity of 1600 units.

Mission images

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Challenge details

Total 5 Kerbal crew all travelled inside.

No Orbital Construction, Extraplanetary Launchpads, HyperEdit, infinite fuel or any other "cheats".

Landed from orbit directly to a base of operations located at an altitude of 2839 meters above the Duna datum.

Can fly over half way around Duna without refuelling (and did that in fact).

Can be refuelled for long term use on Duna using the centre mounted kethane drill and has a drag chute which can be repacked.

Mods used (I hope I can remember them all); FAR, Kethane, Firespitter, KW rocketry, Mechjeb, TACLS, AEIS, Procedural Dynamics, Habitat Pack, Kommit Nucleonics, Real Chutes, SXT and SH-mods for the wonderful Kn-2 Kerbonov crew cabin. I do have other mods installed but they were not used for this mission. I do not have nor do I use KSP Interstellar.

With full kethane tanks it can maintain 8000 m cruising altitude (9000 m when empty).

It would be fair to say there was no extra cargo to speak of unless you wish to count the TAC Life Support container (mass=0.2735).

Top air speed according to FAR was Mach 1 (i.e. ~400 m/s where the kethane turbine flames out). Highest altitude attainable was not explored because I wanted to ensure that I never entered a semi-ballistic type trajectory (but actually I feel it cannot actually achieve such a state).

I believe I have completed the challenge as specified by the rules so Geschosskopf, I know you may be busy with RL, I will accept for myself the prize patch now. I am happy to be ranked at any time that suits your convenience, no hurry, I know I am not the winner and...

Lastly, I have to say that compared to my flying on Duna efforts last year back in KSP version 0.21 this was made easier by the 0.23.5 ability to quicksave in the atmosphere. I take my hat off to those adventurers who completed this challenge in past KSP versions. I think the current leader could/should be declared the winner, at least of round one for this challenge, as the level of difficulty IMHO has changed.

Thank you for setting this exciting challenge I have had a lot of fun and I will be incorporating my Tesla II craft design into my future KSP career saves (looking forwards to KSP version 0.24 ).

Cheers, Kaa

Edited July 4, 2014 by Kaa253

[Geschosskopf]

Geschosskopf, I need some clarification on rules 4 and 5. Can I use an SSTO, refuel above Kerbin, and then jettison the rocket components that got me all the way Duna, before taking on the challenge?

The goal is to build a Duna-capable airplane or helicopter on Kerbin and deliver it to the ground on Duna. You build whatever will be flying around on Duna and consider that an immutable payload as far as parts go. This is to keep you from making the challenge vehicle at Duna with Extraplanetary Launchpads, Orbital Construstion, or KAS. However, you CAN deliver this payload without Kerbals, fuel, or other transferrable resources if you have a way to supply those once it gets to Duna.

So, the air vehicle itself, the thing that will be doing the challenge flight on Duna, is a solid lump you can't change physically once it leaves the ground on Kerbin. But how you get this lump from Kerbin to Duna is your business. You can use whatever launch system you want, whether you fly it up as an SSTO spaceplane or with a rocket dropping boosters all over. You can then get it to Duna by itself or dock a transfer stage to it. You can land it like a spaceplane on Duna, or you can land it the 1st time with disposable descent stages and parachutes, it doesn't matter. Just get it on the ground at the minimum altitude, get rid of any remaining parts that were needed to get it there, add Kerbals and fuel as necessary, and from then on the air vehicle is on its own.

[Geschosskopf]

Presenting the Tesla II, my entry in the Flying Duna challenge.

VERY nicely done! That is a very nice-looking ship on top of being quite functional.

I believe I have completed the challenge as specified by the rules so Geschosskopf, I know you may be busy with RL, I will accept for myself the prize patch now. I am happy to be ranked at any time that suits your convenience, no hurry, I know I am not the winner and...

I have this thread set to nag me whenever somebody posts in it, so I'm always watching .

Anyway, that was a very impressive entry. My only question is on the cargo. I've been counting Kethane itself and drills, etc., as cargo if the plane can function without them, on the theory that the plane could be used to deliver Kethane to bases. So there are several questions here actually. First, can the plane meet the challenge requirements on electric power alone, without burning Kethane? Can it achieve 9000m without burning kethane? Can it circumnavigate (landing at night is OK) without burning Kethane? If so, not only the drill but all the Kethane itself counts as cargo.

As it stands right now, you've got + 3 for 5 Kerbals, +1 for all Kerbals inside, +4 for 9000m (assuming you didn't need Kethane to get there, +3 for 8000m otherwise), + 1 circumnavigation assuming Kethane wasn't required, + 1 for FAR, and + whatever for cargo.

I believe you're the 1st to do this challenge with life support. That is something I hadn't considered before so I'll have to amend the rules. Life support really doesn't fit in as cargo because if you're using it, you can't leave home without it, so it's more like structural weight that has to be overcome by ingenious aerospace engineering. As such, I believe using life support should be an additional bonus for carrying the extra dead weight. And the more Kerbals you have aboard, the more dead weight you have to carry to keep them alive. So I'm thinking that using life support should be a bonus of +1 by default for 2 Kerbals, with an additional +1 for each ton of life support supplies, to keep it in line with the cargo points. This would give you an extra +1 in addition to the points above.

I'm putting this new rule for a life support bonus up for public discussion, starting now and going until next Friday, 11 July. Then I'll make a final ruling on it.

Lastly, I have to say that compared to my flying on Duna efforts last year back in KSP version 0.21 this was made easier by the 0.23.5 ability to quicksave in the atmosphere. I take my hat off to those adventurers who completed this challenge in past KSP versions. I think the current leader could/should be declared the winner, at least of round one for this challenge, as the level of difficulty IMHO has changed.

That's a good point, but IMHO it has no effect on the difficulty of the engineering ingenuity required. The vehicle is bound by the facts of its construction and the stock or mod atmospheric behavior you play with, so will fail or succeed the same way regardless of whether you can quicksave in flight or not. The ability to qucksave in flight is a convenience to the player that provides an ability to quickly recover from fatal pilot error, instead of having to do the entire flight leg (perhaps several hours of real time) from scratch again. So I don't see this as making the challenge easier because it doesn't affect the difficulty of the engineering aspects, which is at the bottom line what this challenge is all about.

So I'm inclined to drive on as-is without changing any rules for this new feature. I mean, it makes doing the challenge have less impact on my budget of free time, but doesn't physically make it any easier to meet the targets (no matter how much I thank Squad for providing it). However, if others feel this does actually change the difficulty of the challenge, feel free to speak up. Final ruling will be rendered on 11 July, as I've already got a court date then .

Thank you for setting this exciting challenge I have had a lot of fun and I will be incorporating my Tesla II craft design into my future KSP career saves (looking forwards to KSP version 0.24 ).

I'm glad you enjoyed it. Feel free to submit a new entry if you so desire.