The Versatility Marathon Challenge

[Darkona]

First off, sorry for the long post. I'm making this with the intention to help tune the challenge's rules to give equal oportunity fo stock players and those of us with a serious mod addiction

Nitro, here we go:

I use DRE, FAR, Kethane, KAS, Engineer and Mechjeb, of the ones you know.

Precise Node: Lets you edit and fine tune your maneuver nodes and provdies some info. Doesn't affect physics.

Enhanced NavBall: Puts some other markers on the navball on the normal/antinormal and radial/antiradial directions.

Navifish's Docking Port Alignment Aid: This is magnificent and should be stock.

Kerbal Joint Reinforcement: With the new changes to physics in 23.5, it's there just for the physics easing on craft load, to avoid things exploding on my face. My computer has its own little kraken inside sometimes.

RCS Build Aid and Editor Extensions, to help with building. I never use part clipping.

VNG parachutes: Kerbals have parachutes. It would essentially be the same as grabbing a parachute with KAS and deploying it to save your kerbal.

KSP Alternate Resource Panel: A shinnier, prettier resource window to the top right.

Modular Fuel Tanks: Let's you edit a tank so it carries either fuel, LFO or MP. It's balanced against the weight of the part.

Bucky's altimeter and vertical velocity displays. I use it for landings mostly.

The recent Stock Rebalance configs stupid_chris so kindly shared with the community in this thread, sans the changes to torque wheels and RCS.

Now for the part mods (I usually remove everything from many of them except for a few parts I like):

Alchemy Technologies: Originally is a mod with a whole bunch of parts, but I only use the structural adapters, radial decouplers and the trusses.

ALCOR Landing capsule: Is a 3 kerbal landing pod with pretty screens inside, and with less weight than a Mk1-2 pod.

Aviation lights: just a bunch of pretty colored flickering lights.

B9 Aerospace:It's there just for the air intakes, a couple of lights and the air brakes.

CyDist's Service Module and Advanced Service Module: The former is the equivalent of a pancake tank of fuel, half a big tank of RCS, and a big pancake battery, and the same size of all of them together. The latter has the same fuel and monoprop, a decoupler and instead of a large battery, a fuel cell to generate electricity. I don't use that one much.

FASA: just for the launch clamps.

Firespitter: I have the fuel and electric propeller engines and the swamp engine, the seaplane floats, a radially attached SAS and that's it. The engines are slow, air breathing engines that consume fuel and are good for light planes.

Porkjet's Habitat Pack: Inflatable habitation modules for crew, nothing else. Good for hauling kerbals around with style. The weights are balanced against the hitchhiker module.

HGR (Home Grown Parts) and the test versions: Command pods, 1.875m fuel tanks and engines, decouplers and heatshields. There's an inline parachute with a built-in decoupler. Balanced against stock.

Klockheed Martian Smart Parts: Autostaging parts, auto action group parts, fuel control and interruption, and some other goodies I can't remember. I have the Shuttle engines but Not going to use them because they're a bit unbalanced.

Kommit Nucleonics 2.5m NERVA: Exactly the same thing as having two stock Nervas: double thrust, double weight. But it fits in the big tanks.

KSPX: Only using the probe sized SAS units, no engines.

KW Rocketry: Again, no engines. Only using the fairings and the SRBs, and those only for launching, which I believe doesn't affect this challenge.

Lionhead Aerospace's Circular solar Panels: only for the looks, really.

Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics: Hinges, pistons, rotors. Things that can make ships change form or walk or make cranes and stuff.

Near Future Propulsion Pack: I am weird, because I don't like the engines. I loved the Capacitors, so that's all i have. They let you store some electric charge and release it at once, then they recharge slowly. I also kept the structural parts.

Nothke's Service Compartments: Hollow cilinders that let you hide stuff inside. They're merely structural.

Nova Punch: I kept RCS nanocone. It's a cone with RCS thrusters.

RealChute: Makes parachutes behave like actual parachutes. You can preconfigure them (with a GUI, much better than tweakables). They come in many sizes.

RLA Power Gen: Only kept the RLA MMRTG:, its a mini RTG. Six of those make one stock RTG and have the same power. Think cutting a stock RTG in six and adding just one of those pieces.

RLA Stockalike: 0.625 fuel tanks, small MP tanks, and 0.625 engines. They're either balanced or weaker than stock, but nake for cool designs with very little space. It comes with some structural tiny parts too.

KN2 Cabin: A 3 Kerbal Airplane pod, fuel droptanks for airplanes with 50 units of fuel and self-contained probe-sized rcs thrusters with a tiny amount of MP. They're balanced IMO.

Porkjet's SpacePlane Plus: MK2 size adapters and tanks. I only really use the air intake, it has the same stats as the stock ram-intake but looks way better.

Starshine Industries Parts: Keeping for the Sepatron 2 and the 6.0 thrust that consume more than 6x MP.

LackLusterLabs SXT Parts pack: Only for the structural parts, the tiny jet engine (1/14th of a stock jet engine with slightly worse TWR), and 0.625 LFO tank.

TurboNisu's Stockalike parts pack: Structural mostly, and also fuel tank caps and adapters with fuel in them. Weight/content balanced against stock.

Floating around there are also kOS (Programmable computers), Editor extension, part highlighter, and other mods I either just poke around with for fun or help me build and such. Won't be using them for this challenge, but as I said, I'll mention them so people get to know about them.

Edited April 26, 2014 by Darkona

[700NitroXpress]

Those look fine to use. What's KAS?

[gchristopher]

I have a couple questions about the general scoring: is the "Shuttle Missions" goal satisfied by launching everything from the runway onboard a spaceplane, then landing the spaceplane at KSC? (i.e. does it have to launch vertical attached to a rocket to be a "Space Shuttle" are we just saying it just needs to be a reusable spaceplane?)

Can you get points for both "Shuttle Missions" and "Master of aerodynamics" or is it assumed that a spaceplane needs to be a SSTO?

Same question for "Jet engines are for planes." Is that cumulative with either of the other two bonuses?

I have a fair selection of SSTO's lying around from the Affordable Space Program challenge, but I'm considering trying to scale up for bigger missions like this challenge requires. Here's a prospective core craft and lift system.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I think the core craft is pretty close. It's 17.125t, 10535t dry. 5 crew pods, a claw as the main forward attachment, docking port sr. on the bottom. It has just under 3,400 dV, so no problem for the Mun test run. It's heavy on reaction torque, assuming it'll usually be attached to things, but that might introduce wobble on the docking ports, so that might need to change. I'm a little concerned about its weight, getting it out of Eve's gravity well won't be fun.

The spaceplane isn't named yet, but it's a SSTO that successfully took 100t to LKO, mostly by dint of spamming intakes. It'll need to be tuned and have intakes moved to non-clipped locations before it's fair to use. Also, it crashed on the first landing attempt, but I think that was just the CoM moving too far back from fuel usage in combination with the insane lift and thrust ratios once the payload is gone. Hand-adjusting the fuel position, or maybe TAC or PWB fuel balancer, should fix the landing problem. (Or add radial thrusters to the nose to keep it from bouncing off the runway.)

[Hodo]

Those look fine to use. What's KAS?

I used KAS.

Kerbal

Attatchment

System

It is for wenches, and hooks. Great for making EVA saftey lines for your Kerbals, and for refueling tankers on the ground. Along with lifters and cargo haulers. One of my top 10 Plugins for KSP.

[700NitroXpress]

I have a couple questions about the general scoring: is the "Shuttle Missions" goal satisfied by launching everything from the runway onboard a spaceplane, then landing the spaceplane at KSC? (i.e. does it have to launch vertical attached to a rocket to be a "Space Shuttle" are we just saying it just needs to be a reusable spaceplane?)

Can you get points for both "Shuttle Missions" and "Master of aerodynamics" or is it assumed that a spaceplane needs to be a SSTO?

Same question for "Jet engines are for planes." Is that cumulative with either of the other two bonuses?

So for the first question about shuttle missions. You have to have a vertical launch from the launch pad. Your shuttle setup should resemble something close to an actual NASA shuttle launch. The points from shuttle missions can stack with the points from NASA knows best. But they do not stack with master of aerodynamics.

You can get points for both separately, but not on one launch. A shuttle launch gets shuttle mission points and an SSTO launch from the runway and back gets master of aerodynamics points.

Jet engines are for planes, is a buffer point of 5 points just for not using get engines on lifters from the launch pad. You only get it once and only as long as you keep jet engines on your planes and don't attach them to rockets. So you could get it even if you don't use planes at all. This is just supposed to help offset point penalties from space debris. So if you launched that core craft you have right now on a rocket, you would get the jet engines are for planes points because you used a rock with no jet engines on it. But you don't get points for launching the core craft or the Mun shakedown run.

[700NitroXpress]

Thanks for the description Hodo.

I added a approved mods list to the rules on the first page and a link to the top of this page for the list that Darkona posted. I think all of those mods should be fine so long as there aren't op parts being used that outclass stock parts.

[gchristopher]

Thanks!

I was confused because the Master of Aerodynamics bonus doesn't specify that you have to bring it back to KSC. So, would these be worth the same?

- a launch using a vertical-take-off rocket SSTO that doesn't use jets and lands back at KSC

- a runway-launched SSTO spaceplane that lands back on the runway?

i.e. do both earn the 10 point Master of Aerodynamics plus staying eligible for the 5 point Jet Engines are for Planes mission bonus? Or by Master of Aerodynamics, did you mean to limit it to SSTO spaceplanes? (That would make more sense, because SSTO spaceplanes are a lot more involved than SSTO rockets.)

It makes sense that a true "Space Shuttle" style lifter would be worth a big bonus. Asymmetrical lifters with wings taking off vertically are really hard in Kerbal!

[Sensi]

I'll be back for mission 5 in a few days. I've found out that I had to rebuild the propulsion stage of my coreship to avoid its disintegration (probably because of the ring of struts). Tests show that it's stable now.

Congrats for your mission 5 Finwen, but

NASA knows best 8 launched with Delta IV lookalike lifter.

...

8*100 points.

It should have been 100 points, not 800, because it's a bonus per mission, not per launch : rule "16. NASA knows best - Use NASA style launch vehicles to get all of your mission payloads into orbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...aunch_vehicles) = +100 points per KSC HQ mission (Not included on Mission 01)".

Or maybe I've misunderstood that rule, Nitro ? In this case, I'll start using NASA-like lifters too instead of SSTOs

Nice to see new challengees taking part to this campaign. Good luck guys

[700NitroXpress]

Thanks!

I was confused because the Master of Aerodynamics bonus doesn't specify that you have to bring it back to KSC. So, would these be worth the same?

- a launch using a vertical-take-off rocket SSTO that doesn't use jets and lands back at KSC

- a runway-launched SSTO spaceplane that lands back on the runway?

i.e. do both earn the 10 point Master of Aerodynamics plus staying eligible for the 5 point Jet Engines are for Planes mission bonus? Or by Master of Aerodynamics, did you mean to limit it to SSTO spaceplanes? (That would make more sense, because SSTO spaceplanes are a lot more involved than SSTO rockets.)

It makes sense that a true "Space Shuttle" style lifter would be worth a big bonus. Asymmetrical lifters with wings taking off vertically are really hard in Kerbal!

Master of Aerodynamics doesn't have to be brought back to KSC, but it would be nice if you did I guess. It's only 10 points each and this too is another point system that I was using as a cushion for the debris penalties so that way it wouldn't hurt as much if you did get a lot of debris on a mission.

For the second part with your examples, those are correct, master of aerodynamics would only apply to the space plane SSTO. You would also receive the 5 points for jet engines are for planes. You would not get an additional master of aerodynamics point for the shuttle because the shuttle is already worth more and it doesn't have to be an SSTO. The shuttles usually have a booster stage and then the main engines. Building these types of shuttles is challenging without mod parts so yes that's why there's a lot of points to be had if you do it.

[700NitroXpress]

It should have been 100 points, not 800, because it's a bonus per mission, not per launch : rule "16. NASA knows best - Use NASA style launch vehicles to get all of your mission payloads into orbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...aunch_vehicles) = +100 points per KSC HQ mission (Not included on Mission 01)".

Or maybe I've misunderstood that rule, Nitro ? In this case, I'll start using NASA-like lifters too instead of SSTOs

That's right, I did put a cap on these so the point system wouldn't be exploited. I'll have to correct these, good catch.

So, to clarify... and I forgot about this myself, that's why I didn't catch it. You can get 100 points total as a bonus per mission for NASA launches and Shuttle Missions. So for mission 6, this is 200 points total as a bonus if you do both. For the NASA points to apply, you must launch every attachment into orbit with a NASA style launch vehicle. If you use something else for one launch, you void the points. For shuttles, you only need to do two successfully to get the bonus, then you can launch everything else however you want and you still get the bonus for shuttles. Shuttle missions count towards the NASA points bonus, and the SSTO counts towards the NASA points bonus, but only if you use an SSTO that's modeled after a real world SSTO like the Skylon.

Edited April 27, 2014 by 700NitroXpress

[700NitroXpress]

Announcement

If your core craft is damaged during a mission, you must still try and complete that mission with the damaged ship. As long as this isn't Kraken related. Once the mission is complete, bring your ship back to LKO, then equip it for landing on Kerbin (if needed). You then have to land the core ship at the KSC light green grass area or in the water within 1km of the KSC shoreline. All of your crew must survive the landing. You may then launch the same ship back up into orbit fully repaired and ready for the next mission. You may not make changes to the ship during this process.

[gchristopher]

master of aerodynamics would only apply to the space plane SSTO

Sorry for so many questions!

I see that you gave Sensi 90 Master of Aerodynamics points for a rocket SSTO on Mission 1.

Not a big deal either way, but I'd hope to compete on the same rules as earlier entries. Maybe if people have already scored the 10 points for a rocket SSTO, add another few points for making it a spaceplane and landing at KSC to the rules?

[700NitroXpress]

Sorry for so many questions!

I see that you gave Sensi 90 Master of Aerodynamics points for a rocket SSTO on Mission 1.

Not a big deal either way, but I'd hope to compete on the same rules as earlier entries. Maybe if people have already scored the 10 points for a rocket SSTO, add another few points for making it a spaceplane and landing at KSC to the rules?

Everyone has lots of questions, and I have lots of answers.

Ah, I see. Yeah, so that is an SSTO, even though it's not a plane... still I'll change the points, he gets 10 points, not 90 because he lifted it all as one part. The score was for per attachment and that one part that he lifted up there counts as one attachment even though he undocked the lander later and there's multiple satellites on it. I launched mine up in clusters of four for two launches total, but not in SSTO's. So for that, whatever points there are would be applied to two launches and those would count as two attachments even though there are four satellites per attachment.

So if you launch a kit into orbit that contains all of the mission gear and attach it to various parts of your ship. That kit took one launch and therefore counts as one attachment no matter how many different parts make up that kit. So all of the points would only get applied to one launch and one attachment.

I might have to double check everyone's scores later on.

[gchristopher]

Ah, I see. Yeah, so that is an SSTO, even though it's not a plane... still I'll change the points, he gets 10 points, not 90 because he lifted it all as one part. The score was for per attachment and that one part that he lifted up there counts as one attachment even though he undocked the lander later and there's multiple satellites on it.

Err, that's not how I read it. I think Sensi actually launched that monstrous SSTO rocket 9 times. See how each satellite has 3 of those 3.4t RCS fuel tanks? I think the picture was of one satellite, and on the third picture, it says "repeat 7 times." So there were 8 satellites and the rover, each launched on a separate huge SSTO? (wow)

Yeah, I think that was 9 giant SSTO flights. You can see them all assembled into a moon ship later.

My main question was whether I could use a SSTO rocket and get the SSTO points, mostly because a spaceplane ascent takes so much longer. I can do either, but I'll take the easier option if they score the same.

p.s. Wow, awesome mission Sensi

[Sensi]

Thanks gchris.

Err, that's not how I read it. I think Sensi actually launched that monstrous SSTO rocket 9 times.

Indeed, the pics and comments in the Imgur album clearly show that my skycrane didn't "lift it all as one part". Although "monstrous", it couldn't do that

Actually, there were 11 SSTO flights, one for each attachment (8 sats, 2 rovers and 1 lander), but the two flights carrying the rovers didn't qualify for "Master of aerodynamics - Use an SSTO to carry the attachment payloads into orbit to be docked with your core ship = +10 points per attachment (attachment mass must be 10 tons or greater)" as their weight was less then 10 tons.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Sensi

[700NitroXpress]

Yeah, I think that was 9 giant SSTO flights. You can see them all assembled into a moon ship later.

My main question was whether I could use a SSTO rocket and get the SSTO points, mostly because a spaceplane ascent takes so much longer. I can do either, but I'll take the easier option if they score the same.

Ok, never mind then, I'll fix it again. Yes you can use an SSTO rocket and get the points because I didn't specify plane even though that's what I was thinking at the time... oh well.

Sensi, I'll change it back then, my bad.

[gchristopher]

Well then, let's get closer to getting this train wreck underway!

So, is this a "Space Shuttle?"

Here's what it has going for it in terms of "Shuttle-ey-ness":

- Vaguely recognizable as a Space Shuttle. (Won't have an openable payload bay with stock parts, but roughly the same shape)

- The only liquid fueled rockets are the ones attached to the shuttle. Only solid rockets are attached to the external fuel tank. (6 are needed for adequate dV scaling, but the design is equivalent.) This necessitates that the shuttle main engines are angled to sort of aim toward the center of mass. (This is the most horrible requirement, and where most shuttle-builders seem to cheat to get around the insane center of mass locations.)

- The first stage is the main engine + boosters, subsequent stages are just the main engines.

- All stock, with MechJeb only for the readouts. Not remotely flyable by autopilot.

Here are the major points against it:

- The main engine angle is way outside of the engine's gimbal range, so a second, forward-facing rocket engine is used for the final insertion and deorbit burns. I don't think the above contraints are achievable otherwise.

- The biggie: I added two jet engines that are used ONLY to assist with landing. The thing has a roughly 5:1 unpowered glide, which is about as crappy as the actual space shuttle! However, the actual space shuttle lands at much faster speeds than the KSP physics engine will support safe landing, KSP parachutes don't work to decelerate on the ground, and without FAR, landing in a true aerodynamic stall is impossible. Stock KSP really isn't up to simulating a true "shuttle" landing. I think making it land like a Kerbal spaceplane, under minimal power, could be considered a reasonable compromise.

Performance:

- It is miserable to control during ascent, requiring a mixture of careful thrust adjustment, tons of SAS torque, aerodynamic control surfaces, and on-the-fly fuel rebalancing to get the 18t payload to orbit. It's one seriously wobbly haphazard gravity turn!

- After the awful ascent, once the external fuel tank is detached, it is just a normal KSP spaceplane with poorly placed wings and lots of useless cosmetic bits to make it look like the Space Shuttle.

For the purposes of the Versatility Marathon Challenge, is this a Space Shuttle?

How about this one I made out of gingerbread?

[gchristopher]

Oh, wait. I am reading back through more posts. I see Sirine's shuttle landing was awarded the points? Hmm, I see the shuttles attached to the station, but can't find a picture of how they were launched. (But I can find an argument about what a shuttle is.)

Maybe wasn't necessary to set up the preposterously complicated model of the NASA Space Shuttle? I dunno, it seems like the main challenge is strapping a plane to the side of a giant fuel tank, intentionally setting up your CoM at weird angles to your engine positions, and trying to get it to actually make orbit.

[700NitroXpress]

It's a little funky, but it'll work. That's a shuttle.

Yeah, Sirine's works as a shuttle mission, but not a NASA shuttle mission.

Here's the shuttle thread in the space craft exchange. Most of these will work for the NASA and shuttle missions points.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/63045-Shuttle-thread

Edited April 28, 2014 by 700NitroXpress

[Finwen]

That's right, I did put a cap on these so the point system wouldn't be exploited. I'll have to correct these, good catch.

So, to clarify... and I forgot about this myself, that's why I didn't catch it. You can get 100 points total as a bonus per mission for NASA launches and Shuttle Missions. So for mission 6, this is 200 points total as a bonus if you do both. For the NASA points to apply, you must launch every attachment into orbit with a NASA style launch vehicle. If you use something else for one launch, you void the points. For shuttles, you only need to do two successfully to get the bonus, then you can launch everything else however you want and you still get the bonus for shuttles. Shuttle missions count towards the NASA points bonus, and the SSTO counts towards the NASA points bonus, but only if you use an SSTO that's modeled after a real world SSTO like the Skylon.

Yepp that a good idea to cap it. I did wounder why it wasnt capped to something per mission and i was thinking of asking here. makes sense. It is not clear what you mean with KSC HQ mission. I thought it did mean a mission flown from KSC

16. NASA knows best - Use NASA style launch vehicles to get all of your mission payloads into orbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...aunch_vehicles) = +100 points per KSC HQ mission (Not included on Mission 01)

[700NitroXpress]

Yepp that a good idea to cap it. I did wounder why it wasnt capped to something per mission and i was thinking of asking here. makes sense. It is not clear what you mean with KSC HQ mission. I thought it did mean a mission flown from KSC

16. NASA knows best - Use NASA style launch vehicles to get all of your mission payloads into orbit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...aunch_vehicles) = +100 points per KSC HQ mission (Not included on Mission 01)

Per KSC HQ mission just means that it's per mission on this challenge. So there's only 6 missions right now and there's a max of 100 points per mission.

[Finwen]

I like the Kethane mod and but I think using Kethane mod to fill up fuel on a ship should give some negative points.

It is almost like refueling and make it a little easier of we don't need to get fuel for the return trip.

4. We're gonna need a bigger boat - You didn't bring enough fuel to fully complete the mission = -25 points

Kethane drill rig and converter that weights allot so i think refueling with Kethane should give some negative score like -10 points.

I used Kethane refueling on mission 4.

On mission 5 i had Kethane drill and converter with me but i didn't use it. I took it with me for fun and for future possible use on Duna.

On mission 6 i am planing to bring it with med but not use it on the mission.

[700NitroXpress]

Yeah Finwen, I think I should just keep the point subtraction the same because it's basically refueling then. So the -25 points should be the same for both. You can have it on your ship without being penalized, but if you use it, then you're accepting the refueling penalty.

[plymoth45]

I would like to join this challenge if ya'll don't mind. I've been watching it for about a week now as a guest and it looks like a lot of fun! Here is my Core ship entry as well as a couple of images from the shakedown. I'm currently in the planning/build-up stages for Mission 1.

The only mod I'm using is Engineer at the present time, the rest is stock.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Stats:

Mass: 122 tons/52 tons dry

D/V: 6,358 m/s

TWR: 0.20

4x LV-N Atomic Motors

12x PB-ION Electric Motors

1x Clamp-o-tron Sr. Docking Port

5x Clamp-o-tron docking ports

3x Crew with room for an additional 4x

Edited May 2, 2014 by plymoth45
Imgur tags

[Darkona]

A Challenger appears!

Behold, the Silver Arrow.

Equipment: 1 Sr Docking port, 4 regular docking ports, 1 junior docking port, 4 KAS pipe end points, 2 RADIO-GAGA-A Radio Transmitters, 2 KAS Winches, Mechjeb unit, KER unit. Extra attachment points for KAS struts.

Waiting for approval.

Already made the Mun and back perfomance test, will provide screenshots once accepted.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Darkona