BSC Challenge: Rover + Skycrane - Yet another winner!

[Deathsoul097]

That looks really good Upsilon.

Antbin - I found it to be quite stable, but you do have to be careful going down slopes.

In other news, WHY IS THIS IN SPACECRAFT EXCHANGE!? What!? It's a challenge...

Edited December 9, 2013 by Deathsoul097

[XolotlLoki]

I've started my review. I decided to do an actual test matrix, with comments as the last column. Here's a link to the spreadsheet. It's supposed to be completely public, so let me know if Google makes you sign in or anything.

So far just 1/4 through Kerbin rove testing. Not too many entries, so hopefully I'll get to test Munar EDL and roving as well.

If you're wondering what the K/!K means, K means that item in the matrix applied on Kerbin, while !K (not K) means it didn't apply. I will add M/!M after Munar testing.

For example, for the test item "Roll damage", K means rolling the rover caused damage while on Kerbin, while !K means rolling did not cause damage while on Kerbin.

Edited December 9, 2013 by XolotlLoki

[Xeldrak]

Well, thanks for the kind words about my rover - I just wanted to mention that the CRAATRV can upright itself on most worlds (well, not on Kerbin) using it's ASAS. Since someone criticized this.

[M5000]

I've cast my four votes, and, despite not being in the challenge myself, there are quite a few really good entries.

But, I only had four votes, so let me explain how I cast my votes.

Rather than go through each entry, I will explain the general guidelines for what I think the best entries have. There seem to be a lot of entries that are focusing on doing too much too quickly. I believe that an effective stock craft can serve as an example to new players to have an optimally designed craft, whilst still being able to be playable for the masses.

I voted for rovers that were based on a smaller frame, and appeared to be efficient in their build quality. I also tended to shy away from manned rovers, as there isn't too much reason to have a manned "My first rover".

I also searched for rovers that appeared to be able to be mounted atop a 2.5 meter lifter and still be completely covered by fairings, for a more polished look. Rovers that tended to be excessively bulky were not as high on my list. Yes, I understand that looks are not necessarily part of the challenge and entrants were not instructed to design for such a thing, but there's something to be said for a good looking rover, so that certainly swayed my vote in their favor. Besides, the game's stock maximum size is based on a 2.5 meter frame, so why shouldn't the rovers, too, be?

I also searched for rovers that landed on their wheels. As stated before, if this craft is likely to be used by a newbie to the game, I believe that having the rover deployed with some sort of complex mechanism just will add to confusion and frustration on an otherwise simple landing. These rovers gained extra consideration.

In general, I was looking for a design that was well thought-out, clean, and simple, without the added (often unneccessary, while nice) features that more advanced rovers will bring to the table. I was looking for something that could land, and do roving.

In that, I've voted for the following entries:

-SaplingPick

-Tarmenius

-Deathsoul097

-Ravenchant

My favorite of these is the entry by Deathsoul097, as it seems to be the simplest yet most robust of all the rovers.

-M5K

[Deathsoul097]

@XolotLoki / M5000 - Yeah, I tried to make it as stable as possible, so I angled the wheels forward and outwards to give it the largest wheelbase possible while still being controllable. (Wow. A Mod ninja'd me. I still can't get over this )

@XolotLoki - What does K and !K mean, BTW?

@M5000 - Thank you!

EDIT: Wow! Ninja'd by a mod, who said the exact stuff to make my comments relevant. lol.

EDIT EDIT: Yay! I'm doing marginally better than last time!

Edited December 9, 2013 by Deathsoul097

[Speeding Mullet]

CrumbleZone: how do you work the lander, seriously. Nice rover though, good for transporting kerbals, is the RCS for pushing the rover down? I have no idea how well it recovers from turtling, but from the looks, it won't recover to well.

I like the lander can though. Tons of power it looks like as well.

Thanks for the feedback I should have explained a little better. The Lander should really be the populated vehicle on launch not the rover, that was an error to late to fix. Basically use the skycrane as normal, feather throttle close to Mun surface, then press 1 to drop lander (it will land unpowered with no damage if reasonably close to the ground), then strafe a little and press 2 to drop rover. then throttle up the skycrane and send it flying away.

The RCS provides thrust, brake assist and Downforce depending on what keys you use and how your bindings are set - I admit this is probably more of an advanced thing than a my first rover.

The rover has easily enough torque to right itself on the Mun without any rcs.

nosecones could have been replaced with parachutes.

Missed a trick there! Will certainly add and test outside of this challenge for Duna!

I may not get a chance to test everyone's vehicles due to RL commitments but I will do my best to make a solid comparison based on the evidence available before the deadline.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Speeding Mullet

[XolotlLoki]

@XolotLoki - What does K and !K mean, BTW?

Whether that test item applied when on Kerbin. Your rover rolled when turned at top speed on Kerbin, so it got a K in that column. But the roll didn't cause any damage, so you got !K (not K) in that column. I'll add a M/!M to those columns after Munar testing.

[XolotlLoki]

Thanks for the review.

SIR

Rover prone to flips, though very sturdy and with reaction wheels to right it.

Out of curiosity, did you drive with torque on or off? In the craft file description I suggest driving with torque off (toggles on action group 1), and only turning it on to de-turtle or do tricks.

I wasn't sure though if anyone really read the descriptions, or bothered to act on them if they did. And my rover will flip with torque off if you try sufficiently hard

Edited December 9, 2013 by XolotlLoki

[Ravenchant]

Finally finished with short reviews! Unfortunately, I only tested on Kerbin, so take the commentary with a grain of salt

Andrew Hansen - NOKERB Exploring Machine: 

The ascent stage, while looking rather dangerous, turns out to be easily controllable- just floor the throttle. 

The lander is powerful, maybe a bit too much, but that can be a plus. Unfortunately, there's no science to be done 

with this craft, and its rover is unstable when turning. RCS may remedy that on smaller bodies, but it will 

eventually run out.
...thing's [I]fast[/I], though.



antbin - The One Way Ticket:

The rover is easily controllable and really sturdy, but I found the staging somewhat awkward; no experiments 

available on the rover either (hey, I had to nitpick on something...  ) Nice!



Bloody_Looser - Test object Mk. XIV: 

Really don't know what to think of this one. While the rover itself looks good, roves well and has everything a 

rover needs, actually getting it to the surface is another matter. The last stages are prone to flipping and a 

pain to control. Lithobraking is the name of the game here. Surprisingly enough, the thing emerged from a rather 

brutal crash almost unscathed. Definitely among the most unique entries, but not quite win material.



bombo1 - Super Rover:

Really liked your idea of separate Duna/Mun subassemblies. The rover is very stable, nimble and easy to control; 

overall, it looks what you would imagine one of a players' first rovers to look like. The only real downside I 

could find is the small amount of electric charge, which replenishes slowly as well.



briansun1 - RST XV-1V:

Easy to use and stable, has lots of electricity and is accordingly illuminated. But frankly, it's a heavy beast 

and someone trying out stock craft is unlikely to build a launcher capable of such loads. Also: no experiments.



Deathsoul097 - Sojurner

One of the better entries, IMHO. Easy to operate, so stable it doesn't even know what turtles ARE, and the delta-V 

budget permits room for error. However, the final descent is a bit twitchy thanks to a very high TWR and that 

antenna has some ugly clipping going on. An additional experiment or two couldn't hurt, but I'm nitpicking again.



Kasuha - BSC Skycrane and Rover

It's fast, sturdy, has plenty of power and can right itself after flipping. However, you'll use the latter feature 

often - it really likes frontflips, and could also benefit from some science parts as well as action groups.



leafty - RovoBot

Looks a bit bland, but is a very stable rover with plenty of power, good for doing science. Too bad the landing 

requires a lot of precision, else broken wheels WILL happen.



Lions - Cube MK1:

Generic rover is generic.

The skycrane fulfills its function well, but RCS ports are rather useless being positioned the way they are. No 

science to be done either.



Liowen:

Very innovative and stable lander-crane with plenty of delta-V. The rover is nice as well. Only fault: the whole 

contraption needs to be attached at a very awkward spot (the battery).



pedorsf - RGC:

There's no actual skycrane present, so it can't land on the Mun. Those two Ant engines are in the wrong stage, 

pieces of the fairing tend to get...stuck, and there's an oscar-B clipped somewhere.
On the plus side, the rover is not a bad on at all, and fairing separation looks totally awesome. When was the 

last time YOU exploded something and got a rover out of it?



Ravenchant - R-31 Dustmarcher & Heron skycrane

No idea, you tell me!



Rhomphaia - Dunakhod:

The skycrane is super easy to operate for such a heavy one-props! Probably the best entry here built around the 

boxy rover body, it really has everything...except an affinity for sudden maneuvers. Turtles rather easily.



SaplingPick - SkyBug Mk1:

A stable and capable rover. I also like the insect look! Its only fault is that it doesn't pack enough punch for 

the Mun.



Spartwo - Endeavor:

The lifter may start off slower than an overweight penguin, but you get plus points for the engine setup^^
Has a nice delivery system as well, dunno if it can land on the Mun - should be possible with assistance from the 

transfer stage. The rover could use a bit of stability, though (nitpicking again...  )



Speeding Mullet - Skycon Crumplezone:

Interesting rover design! I bet that communotron could double as a parasol on, say, Laythe. Moving beach bar, 

perhaps? 
It's an impressive craft overall, but a bit beyond what the challenge requires...newbies would probably have some 

trouble with the decoupling order.



sploden - Kuriosity:

Beautiful. Just...beautiful, I don't care if it's part-clipped. Easy to operate, too. RCS makes up for the lack of 

torque. The rover, however, seems a bit...tiny considering the size of its launcher.



Tarmenius - SCAR:

Nice! Though you will probably need to do a suicide burn for the Mun. Don't have much else to say, sorry:p


UpsilonAerospace - Columba-A:
A good craft overall. Embrace the atom - almost literally, heh? Its tiny ground clearance makes for some 

precarious jumps, because it hangs on... a lot of slopes. But we play this game for its thrills as well, amirite?



Xeldrak - CRAATRV:

Extremely stable skycrane, ditto for the rover. But front girders wobble a bit during turns, 

causing...difficulties. Shame, it's an interesting design!



XolotlLoki - Simple, Indestructible Rover:

And [I]how[/I]! This is a sturdy rover if I've ever seen one. Just...wheelies! Consecutive backflips! If it had any 

science on it, it would be among the best.



zekes - Lorrie:

The only one of these entries that crashed my game. You managed to make an epic delivery system, but the rover has some stability problems.

After mulling it over, the four points go to gryffindor:

• Spartwo
  
• Deathsoul097
  
• SaplingPick
  
• bombo1
  

Rhomphaia, Xeldrak, you would be the runners up. Sorry :/

[Deathsoul097]

Wait... What antenna?

EDIT: OH! OOPS! I meant to remove that, just ignore that... *Quietly sweeps under the rug*

[Liowen]

Ravenchant I thought the same thing about the battery when designing it, but after testing it out I have not had issues with that to be honest. In fact I am taking it to Duna on my Youtube save right now and actually took it there awhile back without issues.

A side note I have seen some saying it is unstable. If you mean that dropping it at the launch pad and driving from there, I have found there is a small glitch in the terrain that catches the wheels. I just drove it on Kerbin (around 11km from the KSC) without a problem. One reason I call it roller is that if you let it freewheel downhill with lite breaking you can recharge the battery.

I am going to be testing some of these soon myself, and being new this should be.....interesting

Edited December 9, 2013 by Liowen

[Andrew Hansen]

My apologies boys and girls, but I couldn't hold myself back from making another advertisement. I wanted to make an improved version of my entry with some things that I've learned from this challenge. This time, I made the ad in cinematic mode, making it a lot prettier. I did forget to check "Hide my cursor" in my recording program, however.

It still turned out to be a nice ad.

Things I've Learned:

• Those tiny wheels are actually more useful than I thought! For one thing, they're a lot more stable than the Ruggegized ones. The probe ones need only a small platform to make them stable, while the Ruggegized ones need a very large platform to keep them from flipping during corners. Also, the small rover wheels turn on a dime!
  
• A TWR above one is nice to have on the skycrane, to permit newbies to test it out on Kerbin.
  
• Reaction wheels are better for flipping yourself upright than RCS.
  

Download the Robotic Exploring Machine!

Edited December 9, 2013 by Andrew Hansen

[Liowen]

Things I've Learned:

• Those tiny wheels are actually more useful than I thought! For one thing, they're a lot more stable than the Ruggegized ones. The probe ones need only a small platform to make them stable, while the Ruggegized ones need a very large platform to keep them from flipping during corners. Also, the small rover wheels turn on a dime!
  
• A TWR above one is nice to have on the skycrane, to permit newbies to test it out on Kerbin.
  
• Reaction wheels are better for flipping yourself upright than RCS.
  

Yeah playing with the wheels I found them to be the best for what was needed. I will lay odds though that they will change it so each type is better at certain things, and worse at others at a later date. Locking the steering seems to help some what if you only have the front steering it, but I am not sure of 6 wheels though but I guess it would be the same.

[Rhomphaia]

Thanks for the review.

Out of curiosity, did you drive with torque on or off? In the craft file description I suggest driving with torque off (toggles on action group 1), and only turning it on to de-turtle or do tricks.

I wasn't sure though if anyone really read the descriptions, or bothered to act on them if they did. And my rover will flip with torque off if you try sufficiently hard

I drove with reaction wheels off, in staging mode with default controls. I always took note of descriptions, and used any options mentioned to increase stability. Besides if you try to drive with the reaction wheels on, its not so much about driving as cartwheeling. Nice and indestructible.

[Tarmenius]

Getting stuck on its top.

Ah, that makes sense.

Yes, on Kerbin it will definitely get stuck if you manage to flip it over. However, during my Duna test-run, it flipped over due to the twitchy nature of rover wheels and ended up on its head (without damaging any parts, either!). I was able to roll it back onto its wheels quite easily, so I'd suggest that turtling would only be a problem on the higher-gravity bodies.

In a day or two (when I have Finals mostly squared away), I'll be spending some time looking through the other submissions and will post a summary of my initial findings and vote.

[sploden]

I vote for XolotlLoki's SIR. Has the bare essentials with no meretricious frills, and works properly. Would have liked a drogue chute, some landing lights, sepratrons, and some struts going from the rover's four corners to the vertical beam.

I wish KSP had a smaller reaction wheel unit, RCS pods with one port facing straight out (5 directions rather than just 4), and multiple sizes of each wheel type. Trapezoidal parts for makeshift enclosures might also be nice.

[Deathsoul097]

Wow. This thread is all over the place, first it was in challenges, then the exchange, now back to challenges.

[Kasuha]

I drove with reaction wheels off, in staging mode with default controls.

There is quite a lot of ways how to drive a rover and I believe turning reaction wheels completely off is one of techniques a newbie is very likely not to use.

IMO most likely mode to be used by newbie is SAS on, normal (non-staging) mode. My rover is not really bad in that mode on Kerbin but starts to have problems in lower gravity.

Second most reachable (and IMO going to be used next by a newbie) is staging mode with SAS on. I found my rover very usable in that mode in low gravity environment (Duna/Dres), with occasional turning SAS off to let it straighten up.

What I found best to be used though is to remap keys to have separate keys for rover steering and for torque control (I moved my rover controls to numpad). Because that allows me to use SAS while driving and torque controls to position the rover for impact after a jump. I don't say a newbie is going to use that mode any soon, but I believe it's the best choice for rovers overall.

In general I would say, though, that if a rover is equipped with a huge torque wheel, it's meant to be used.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Kasuha

[Rhomphaia]

There is quite a lot of ways how to drive a rover and I believe turning reaction wheels completely off is one of techniques a newbie is very likely not to use.

Not all reaction wheels, only the ones turned off by an action group as specifically mentioned in the crafts description to turn off for normal driving.

[KasperVld]

Moved this thread to the Spacecraft Exchange since the focus on the thread is exchanging better stock vehicles, not having a challenge/competition.

[Kappa73]

Moved this thread to the Spacecraft Exchange since the focus on the thread is exchanging better stock vehicles, not having a challenge/competition.

you, sir, have made a mistake.

[Kasuha]

Not all reaction wheels, only the ones turned off by an action group as specifically mentioned in the crafts description to turn off for normal driving.

Ah, okay. I thought you meant you did that with all rovers.

I think overlapping rover controls over torque controls (and having them act at once) was very bad choice in designing default key bindings. So far I have not found a single convenient key setting for rovers, assigninh rover-specific keys to numpad looks like best choice available but that also requires steering by both hands, leaving no hand to handle the camera. I think best would be to be able to map torque keys to shift+WASD and rover keys to WASD for rovers because steering and torque are rarely needed at once but you need to switch between them pretty fast when torque is needed. I tried it even with using Space in docking mode but in that case docking mode turning SAS off is a major obstacle.

[Kasuha]

Moved this thread to the Spacecraft Exchange since the focus on the thread is exchanging better stock vehicles, not having a challenge/competition.

*sigh* here we go again.

Well, technically, this is not the classic kind of challenge where you have a task to do in an efficient or epic way, it's a designer competition so I understand it's not entirely clear where to put it. But since all previous BSC challenges were in the challenges subforum I'd still like it better to stay there.

[Xeldrak]

Well, it's an engineering challenge - and we are having a competition. Seriously, there will be a winner. I don't seery very many threads in the exchange the crow a winner and die pretty much after that.

[KasperVld]

We've had a discussion in the moderation team and decided to keep this thread in Challenges. A thank you to all the people who gave their feedback.