BSC Challenge: Rover + Skycrane - Yet another winner!

[zekes]

aaugh i knew i forgot something!

[Andrew Hansen]

-Bombo:Better make some of those votes legitimate:D

You're voting for bombo1 because he has the most votes?

EDIT: Rephrased to make more sense.

Edited December 8, 2013 by Andrew Hansen

[Spartwo]

Don't worry you weren't my 5th choice.

EDIT:anyway it's a solid entry,the probe core hangs too low but beyond that all the right choices were made,with small but efficient landing stages.

@Below the last two were positives.

Edited December 8, 2013 by Spartwo

[sploden]

-Sploden:Although not a skycrane full heat-shield and sepratron spam make a solid landing method.(+points for similar launcher)

Actually none of these entries (or any in a legitimately stock KSP installation) are or can be sky cranes, because KSP does not have ropes. My craft can operate in the same way as any of the other entries, but provides the legs as a more reliable rover deployment method. Also, I don't consider 6 sepratrons (2 for the cap, 4 for the "crane") as being "spam." I don't think either of these features are inconsistent with the challenge; I thought instead that the high complexity would be a sticking point. But even that is not inconsistent: I went for complexity because of the original VAB description text, which describes the stock craft as one of the most ambitious designs in the catalogue.

Edit: Thanks for the vote! I didn't realize you were posting your votes.

@Below the last two were positives.

Gotcha, thanks!

Edited December 8, 2013 by sploden

[1Revenger1]

Keep in mind that all these tests were done around KSC, so some stuff won't work as well, or may work even better, because of the gravity. Also these are notes, so it may not be grammaticly correct.

CAARTV: Works great, skycrane has plenty of fuel, failsafe decoupling, nice how it holds kerbals, and a few parachutes

Cons: can't save itself from turtling

BSC rover + skycrane finale: 6 wheels are nice, like the room for kerbals, although I think 4 is a bit much,I think its a little heavy, but thats fine. parachutes are a nice addition and so are the lights.

COns: no way to flip back up if you turtle. FIX THAT STAGING

BSC: Sojurner: Little hard to land, can't recover from turtling. Nice design though, and lots of power. Very hard to turtle, I had to work at it to turtle thuogh

Cons: no lights, hard to land

Columba-A: looks great, parachute is good, lights=GREAT, room for 4 kerbals(I think thats a bit much, but they are seats), hard to turtle, drives well without front 2 wheels, hard to turn though

Cons: little low to the ground, testing at KSC shows that the front wheels break eaisly. Not sure how well it recovers from turtling

Cube MK1: To many engines on that skycrane, try 4, front wheels break eaisly, maybe try seperating the heatsheild and parachute at diffrent times? not sure how well it recovers from turtling, hard to turtle.

Six wheels are nice though

Dunakod DSD: that rover looks nice and compact and amazing! skycrane could use some parachutes though, kinda easy to turtle, can't recover, like the tire choice, I like the goo canister and the lights.

Endeavor: Very little fuel in skycrane, have tried a couple times to land, unsuccesful. try redoing it to have a little more fuel? Can't test the rover without skycrane working, sorry(unless you want me to test it broken...)

Pros: lots of power atleast, is that 2 RTG's clipped into one? A light, thank goodness

NOKERB: Nice skycrane, little underpowered on kerbin, but it probably works well on the other planets I like the parachutes. little easy to tip over the rover, I see RCS on there, good on the mun, couldn't flip it over on kerbin though.

Lights, like the skinny design, and its got a bunch of RTGs, nice

RGC: little low to the ground, front wheels break off eaisly, I am loving that skycrane system, looks god, and you don't even need engines like the light as well, the 2 backup ant engines arn't powerful to counter kerbin's gravity, but I don't think that matters

Overall, great skycrane and rover.

Skybug: thats a cute rover, nice skycrane, little big though for the legs. could use a few more wheels, turtles easy, turtled it when going down the launch ramp. I like the lights and the room for 2 kerbals. I think the problem is its a bit tall, try moving some of the stuff below

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.

SCAR: Loving that rover, might want to switch the staging around a little though, it can't recover from turtling though, but it sure it great I like the design of the skycrane, I don't get the design of the wheels though, maybe you could explain.

it drives well though.

Test Object: How are we supposed to land that thing!? it wants to flip upside down when I test it, everytime, and each times, its a catostrophic failure. I like the idea of the skycrane though, when I saw it in the VAB, I was like "this is going to be fun" and by the way, its the fun fun, not the fun as its going to be hard.

I love the look of the actual rover though, its a mini car! I haven't looked closely at it sense I can't land it, sorry.

Clippy: I like the rover and the skycrane system, but that launch system has way to many SRBS.... One problem is that when you detach from the heatsheild, it always switches to the heatshield, not the rover. you could probably do with less engines, but other than that, it looks lovly. Also, how does the kerbal stay in his seat, duct tape?

The four I would choose would be...(VAB names)

1.NOKERB

2.RGC

3.Clippy Thing 2

4.BSC: Sojurner

[Spartwo]

Endeavor: Very little fuel in skycrane, have tried a couple times to land, unsuccesful. try redoing it to have a little more fuel? Can't test the rover without skycrane working, sorry(unless you want me to test it broken...)

Pros: lots of power atleast, is that 2 RTG's clipped into one? A light, thank goodness

I did 6 missions in a row between submitting and when the voting opened,only one failed.

Would a video of the descent help?(did you use the skycrane to de-orbit?)

Edited December 8, 2013 by Spartwo

[bombo1]

I think I am gonna vinn:cool:

Edited December 8, 2013 by bombo1

[Andrew Hansen]

I did a comparison of the different entries. I don't have the time to fly them all, but I did some VAB comparisons, as shown in the chart below. Click on the link below the picture for the original review, which also contains additional comments.

Link to My Review

Edited December 8, 2013 by Andrew Hansen

[Spartwo]

See plenty of fuel.

Spartwo:Obivious part clipping

I'm not able to turn it on but I guess there is some for a asthetic purposes

Rtgs are the main power source.If I didn't clip(which I didn't I used the cubic struts) it would look like this.

Ugly right? Edited December 8, 2013 by Spartwo

[Rhomphaia]

Link to My Review

I haven't voted yet. I will shortly.

Mine can carry 1 kerbal and has solar panels as well as the RTG for a quick charge

[Andrew Hansen]

Mine can carry 1 kerbal and has solar panels as well as the RTG for a quick charge

Thanks! Soon to be updated.

Edited December 8, 2013 by Andrew Hansen

[Liowen]

I am a bit confused on the voting, it shows only 24 partaking but there are more votes than that on some. Does everyone have more than one vote or is what is shown not right?

[Spartwo]

Everyone gets 4.

[Rhomphaia]

I am a bit confused on the voting, it shows only 24 partaking but there are more votes than that on some. Does everyone have more than one vote or is what is shown not right?

Every one gets 4 votes, can be all given to one entry or split amongst several.

[Deathsoul097]

Has anyone written a review for the Sojurner?

[Giggleplex777]

Best way to launch a rover.

I was going to submit this rover, but it's too similar to some of the other entries.

[Andrew Hansen]

OK, I have made my vote.

For me, it was a must to vote for someone who made an entry that didn't have too many parts (my judgement would be different for an entry that included a launch vehicle, of course) and that didn't use part clipping or strange root parts, etc. I also was picky about what power source it used. I like RTGs for rovers because then they never run out of electric charge.

I really liked Kasuha's entry, but it seemed like there might have been some part clipping involved, and the root part was a fuel tank, which I personally don't think is good for a stock craft. Another thing is that (if I recall correctly) there was no description text for it! That's a bit important in my opinion for a stock craft.

I also liked antbin's entry a lot, but alas, 70 parts is quite a lot for just a rover.

In the end, I voted for Xeldrak's entry. For one thing, it was a very professionally-looking entry, name, and description. It used RTGs as a power source and the Ruggegized wheels (I'm biased in that regard). As a bonus, the lander was very stable, could right itself on Duna-gravity worlds, and basically just had many tweaks and quirks that are nice to have in a rover.

The only downside would be that when I was flying it, I noticed that the skycrane was just a wee bit assymetrical.

Good job Xeldrak! You've just earned yourself four votes.

[Tarmenius]

SCAR: Loving that rover, might want to switch the staging around a little though, it can't recover from turtling though, but it sure it great I like the design of the skycrane, I don't get the design of the wheels though, maybe you could explain.

it drives well though.

I'm glad you like it. The wheels were configured that way to prevent the rover from rolling over during sharp turns and from rolling forward during braking. What do you mean by "turtling"?

[Spartwo]

Getting stuck on its top.

[Rhomphaia]

Dunakod DSD: that rover looks nice and compact and amazing! skycrane could use some parachutes though, kinda easy to turtle, can't recover, like the tire choice, I like the goo canister and the lights.

Thanks for the review, the turtling is mitigated a lot if you use the action groups to set it to RWD/FWS. I probably should have built a prettier Skycrane though, It was a bit of an afterthought since the rover is one I usually sling under landers.

Has anyone written a review for the Sojurner?

My reviews will be up soon, I didn't say much about the Sojurner but I did like it, will almost certainly be getting some of my vote.

[Deathsoul097]

Thanks! 10CHR

[Bizmar]

Deathsoul, Lions, Tarmenious get my admiration for sticking to the challenge in spirit, simplicity and heat shield replication. Nice stuff!

[Rhomphaia]

For those entries that came with a launcher or other components that I felt were beyond the scope of the challenge, I removed those parts prior to testing, mass and parts count reflects cradt after reductions

Attachment is determined by the largest part that will fit on a point without clipping rather than the size of the node.

Landing capabilities are determined as an EDL using the crafts Delta V and TWR with this delta V map and Check's parachute calculator rather than any actual attempt.

Next consideration was what methods could be used to stop the skycrane crashing down on the rover.

For stability I drove around KSC starting with full throttle down the Launchpad ramp, followed by a hard turn, back up the ramp, down the steep slope at the back/side of the launchpad then round the launch pad over ramps and whatnot to see what would cause it to flip and if anything broke off.

Power time is running full throttle with all power draining equipment running, It is a bit guesswork for those with RTGs

Original.
Nice looking little rover and skycrane.
Mass 1.23 parts 52
Attachments that fit - 1m bottom, 2m top
Land on Minmus or smaller, Kerbin, Eve, Laythe, Duna is possible though high elevations difficult.
No independent control over skycrane
Rover nice and stable around KSC
2m13s full operation in darkness. 3h47m46s standby mode

Roller stock
mass 12.86 parts 92
No description
Very basic looking rover, lander design rather than skycrane.
Attachments, 2m bottom
Land, anywhere with atmo (using chutes), Up to Moho (though very slim margins for moho)
Skycrane has independent control.
Very fragile driving round KSC. not very stable.
4m7s full operation in drakness, unlimited standby (RTGs)

Super Rover
mass 1 parts 32
Nice little rover, no skycrane though. picked mun subassembly for testing although there is no provision for "stock" subassemblies in game, (need better vocabulary to differentiate between stock and stock)
odd Symmetry on wheels. not sure what is going on.
Land up to Mun, possibly eeloo, atmo Duna
Attachments 2m above and below.
No independant skycrane control
Very stable round KSC
53s full operation in darkness. 1h1m59s standby

Cube MK1
mass 3.99 parts 40
No description.
Rover very basic, skycrane and heatshield looks good
Attach 2m bottom
Land up to Vall, anywhere with atmo
no independant contol of skycrane.
Rover reasonably stable round KSP, though risk of breaking RTGs or rolling in high speed turns
RTGs provide continuous power.

BSC Skycrane and Rover
mass 7.06 parts 39
No description
Very basic looking
Attach 2m top
Land anywhere but eve
Stable and sturdy around KSC
RTGs keep continuously powered

BSC: Sojurner
mass 1.71 parts 30
Nice looking simple little rover, same goes for skycrane and heatsheild.
attach 2m below
Land up to Eeloo, Anywhere with atmo.
Nice stable and sturdy around KSC
10m37s full operation, RTGs provide unlimited standby

Torch Lander STOCK
mass 15.98 parts 145
No description.
Nice looking simple rover and skycrane.  Heat shield, looks a bit cluttered and is more of an annoyance than anything else and doesn't really fit with stock,
Attach 2m below
Land anywhere with atmo, up to moho
Rover very prone to flips, survives but turtled.
Neither probe core or command seats aligned with direction of travel.
1m31s full operation unlimited standby

Endeavor rover
Launcher included, I tested only from the FL-A5 and up
Mass 1.2 parts 39
No description, launcher should have been removed, not sure the point of ditching parachute as engines fire would have been better to keep it till the next stage, kept getting hit by it.
Cute little rover/skycrane
2m above and below
Land up to minmus, anywhere with atmo.
No independant control of skycrane, if the parachute misses this could hit.
Rover sturdy though can flip at speed.
6m13s full operation, unlimited standby

RGC
Mass 6.09 parts 86
No description, 
2m below
Bit over built for a BSC, would prefer to see things in VAB, engines built into rover with a jettisoned parachute pack rather than skycrane
Land on Gilly, anywhere with atmo (high altitudes on duna will require engine assist and 'chutes have been staged away)
Parachutes blasted clear with sepratrons
Rover fairly stable round KSC but not very sturdy, tendency to smash wheels and lower RTGs
RTGs provide unlimited power for full operation provided they don't get smashed off.

SkyBug  Mk1
Mass 4.44 parts 114
hidden under those fairings is a nice skycrane with an odd little rover.
2m below
Land anywhere with atmo, upto eeloo. although engines fire same stage as 'chute they are obstructed by the fairings, so are useless until 'chute and fairing are ditched.
independant control of skycrane.
Rover not paticularly stable or sturdy round KSC
11m22s full operation, unlimited standby.

Test object Mk. XIV
Launcher included, tested from BZ-52 radial attachment point up
Mass 10.25 parts 132
Minimal description
2m below
Odd setup, looks a bit unintuative for new players, rover must be manned, turns out a bit unintuative for me too, test aborted.

R-31 Dustmarcher & Heron skycrane
Includes separate transfer stage, tested from RC001S down.
Mass 3.24 parts 109
Very nice looking rover and skycrane
2m above and below
Land up to Vall, Duna.
Independent skycrane control, though probe core is upside down.
Nice and stable around KSC. action groups to lock steering on middle wheels and disable pod torque seem to have little effect on stability, which is good with or without them.
2m43s full operation.  4h43m20s standby

BSC rover + skycrane finle
Mass 21.89 parts 69
Not the best description.
Has to be manned. not very pretty. had landing legs
2m below
Land up to Vall, anywhere with atmo.
Skycrane blasted clear with sepratrons. though stack seperator is not.
Stable though a bit fragile round KSC.
RTGs provide unlimited power.

SCAR
Mass 1.6 parts 39
Simple looking but well equipped rover, nice simple skycrane/heatshield
2m below
Land up to mun, anywhere with atmo, again 'chute is staged away as engines fire.
No independant control of skycrane or 'chute.
Rover stable though a bit fragile
2m4s full operation, unlimited standby.

RovoBot
mass 16.35 parts 105
Minimal description
Rather bulky skycrane (not that I can complain) minamist looking rover though quite functional.  Rather a high part count for it though
2m below
Land up to moho, anywhere with atmo.
No independant skycrane control, drouges tend to rip tvr400-l free when fully deploying in kerbins atmo.
Rover stable though a bit fragile. (loses front wheels easily)
21m24s full operation, unlimited standby.

Skycon Crumplezone
Lander with rover and sky crane ontop, launcher included. removed evething attached by clampotron snr's for testing
mass 19.96 parts 78
Slightly clippy design.  would prefer rover to stage away rather than undock, rover must be manned. could have used a ladder to get on and off, as is must board then leave command seat to get back into capsule.
2m above and below.
Land up to vall, not Eve, risky on kerbin, nosecones could have been replaced with parachutes.
independant skycrane control.
Rover stable though fragile.
8m15s full power unlimited standby.

BSC anthill - The One Way Ticket
Did not count crew pod into challenge
Mass 5.15 parts 65
Nice looking skycrane, rover looks a bit on the plain side with everything sandwiched between the panels. good staging setup and description.
2m below, 1m above.
Land upto eeloo, Duna.  Laythe and kerbin possible if enough fuel burned off, eve not possible.
Skycrane pulled clear by imbalance, nice touch.
Rover nice stable and sturdy round KSC. even without drivetrain configuration
4m30s full operation, unlimited standby

Lorry Rover Lander
Countain a whole bunch of stuff that i did not include, basically removed everything from the small decoupler down.
Mass 2.66 parts 62
Large nosecone makes skycrane look a bit odd, with sepratrons and RCS blocks leftover from Launch vehicle, not too keen on looks of solar panels on rover
1m below
Land up to Mun (margins tight), anywhere with atmo.
Independant skycrane control
Rover stable and sturdy round KSC
Virtually no running in darkness.

CRAATRV
Mass 8.97 parts 58
Big, somewhat plain looking rover, nice skycrane though, fits well
2m below
Land up to moho, any with atmo except possibly higher elevations on eve.
Skycrane lited clear by sepratrons
Rover stable and sturdy round KSC
8m8s running, unlimited standby.

NOKERB  Exploring Machine
Has launcher, removed from small decoupler down for testing.
Mass 17.54 parts 44
Lander not skycrane. Rather basic rover
1m below 
Land upto Moho, (tylo maybe possible but very low TWR), not higher altitudes on Eve or laythe.
No independant control of lander
Rover not very stable, Will flip easily when turning. RCS cant right it on Kerbin.
RTG give unlimited power

SIR
Mass 6.41 parts 21
Very basic rover and skycrane.
2m above and below
Land up to moho, anywhere with atmo though Eve will require burning off a lot of fuel.
No independant skycrane control
Rover prone to flips, though very sturdy and with reaction wheels to right it.
RTG give unlimited power

Rover + Skycrane improved 13
mass 6.25 parts 99
Enclosed design not very "stock" feel, over complicated multi stage design with landing legs.
2m below
Land up to moho, anywhere with atmo
independant control of lander though not of 'chute
Rover not very sturdy (wheels fell of) prone to flip (RCS can't right on kerbin)
RTG provide unlimited power.

Columba-A
No description
Mass 3.51 parts 55
Slightly plain looking skycrane, Rover a bit odd looking with very little ground clearance
2m below.
Land up to moho, anywhere with atmo
Independant skycrane control
Rover stable, though tendt to catch on the slightest bump, often breaking or knocking off wheels
RTG provide unlimited power

2 Votes to the R-31 Dustmarcher & Heron skycrane

1 vote each Sojurner and The One Way Ticket

[antbin]

All right! There's still a fair number of entries, so this is gonna take some time... My first pass:

Andrew Hansen - NOKERB Exploring Machine
The lander seemed a bit overbuilt, and therefore top-heavy and roll prone.
Not enough SAS to handle.
Skycrane worked good though!

antbin - The One Way Ticket
#N/A, but y'all should try it!

Bloody_looser - Test object Mk. XIV
Skycrane wasn't stable at full thrust, even with RCS enabled... needs SAS or a rebalance.

bombo1 - Super Rover
No skycrane, yet gets 40 votes?  >

briansun1 - RST XV-1V
No description.
Skycrane has Good TWR and separation
Parachutes ripped 4:1 Rockomax adapter off on Duna re-entry!
Rover tippy, even in linear docking mode.

Deathsoul097 - Sojurner
Super elegant, simple and tidy, while being featurepacked.
Rover a little tippy and delicate.
4 wheel steering unstable...

Kasuha - BSC Skycrane and Rover
Skycrane has great shields.   No parachute?
Rover tippy, but good ground clearance.
Tough.
If this had a description it would be scoring at the top!

leafty - RovoBot
Skycrane overbuilt, too much thrust & parachutes,
Skycrane so heavy it can crush rover on landing.

Lions - Cube MK1
No Description.
Rover RTGs gonna get smashed.
Otherwise reasonable

Liowen - Roller stock
No Description
Skycrane has too much TWR and parachutes.
Skycrane and rover look a bit too complicated.
Good stable rover.

pedorsf - RGC
No description
Hard to stack in a rocket
Can't self-deorbit.
Staging not super intuitive.
Too many chutes for the mass. Can't land on Mun?

Ravenchant - R-31 Dustmarcher & Heron skycrane
Reversed skycrane navball confusing.
Fun to land.  Like the ants.
Not as tough as it could be, but works fine.

*** 2nd HALF OF TESTING ***

Rhomphaia - Dunakhod
Good description, appearance, features.
Skycrane has a LOT of fuel, heavy enough to crush rover.
Rover cute, stackable, handles OK.
Possible to endo-flip.

SaplingPick - SkyBug Mk1	
Really liked this one.  Great presentation.
Unstackable though.
Almost perfect skycrane otherwise.
Rover cute, but slightly tippy on landing.


Spartwo - Endeavor
No Description.
Looks simple aside from partclipped parachute.
Decoupling tricky.
No landing light.
Minimalistic lander.

Speeding Mullet - Skycon Crumplezone
Good description. 
Unneeded launcher.
Can't stage skycrane. No chute?
Rover reasonable but flexy and not rollover proof.
Like the 2.5m  bicouplers as sidemount helpers.

sploden - Kuriosity
Good description. 
Looks good, but not inter-stack mountable.
No landing lights.
Lovely fairing, too bad about clipped rockets.
Tiny, tippable rover.

Tarmenius - SCAR 
Quite nice!  Good description.
Not inter-stack mountable. No landing lights.
Straightforward skycrane.
Like the compact, rollover-resistant rover!

UpsilonAerospace - Columba-A
No description,
Can't lose parachute before firing rockets. No landing lights. Too much thrust.
Rover looks fragile.

Xeldrak - CRAATRV
Ideal description
Simple enough appearance but cantilevered 47-9S rockets a bit of a hack.
No landing lights on skycrane.
One rollover and probe core go byebye. 

XolotlLoki - Simple, Indestructible Rover
Well described. 
This is about as minimalistic as it gets!  Respect!
No landing lights. Too many RTGs.

zekes - Lorrie
No description!
Looks a bit fancy.
Need to remember to drop some stages throttled down, some throttled up.
Nosecone didn't separate, parachute clipped.
Skycrane heavy, crushed wheels on landing.

Whew!

I'm going to spread my votes around - three to unmanned rovers, one to a crewed rover.

• Saplingpick
  
• RavenChant
  
• XolotlLoki
  
• Kasuha
  

Edited December 11, 2013 by antbin
Misspelled Kasuha, sorry!

[BagelRabbit]

I see that my design is being praised by some with some constructive criticism from others. Thanks for the feedback -- I'll try my best to implement it in other designs.

Incidentally, I've seen several comments wondering about the rover's ground clearance. I made the rover so close to the ground for three reasons. First, if the rover landed with the skycrane still on it (my preferred way of doing it), the wheels would sink down so that the bottom of the craft was resting on the terrain. This improves its stability a little. Second, when a wheel breaks, it is lifted into the air enough that it is above the bottom of the rover, meaning that it's easier to fix for any Kerbals on board (and is less likely to fall off altogether.)

[note: The direction of the stack decoupler has since been reversed.]

Finally, the rover is built to avoid the dreaded turtle effect, despite the large number of Kerbals sitting atop its relatively small frame.

May the best rover win! (Whether or not it's mine )