The ULTIMATE Challenge for Ion Power...

[Starwhip]

First and foremost, this is not a challenge which I am posting here. I am simply speculating something. Read on, friend, to see my newest crazy idea...

What if... one landed an asteroid, at the KSC, with ONLY ION ENGINES?!?! Could it be done? No parachutes, just ions... post your thoughts.

[Redrobin]

Sure, put lots of structural parts for impact and have the patience for the looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong burn.

[Starwhip]

[KSC] Jeb, are you still there? We haven't heard anything for the past fifty years.

Yeah, this would create a new definition of a long time.

EDIT:

"Hey, what's the deal with the gigantic blue glow on the horizon over there?"

"Oh, don't worry, Bob! That's just the five thousand ion engines stopping the asteroid that's going to hit the KSC..."

Edited March 20, 2014 by Starwhip

[liweih]

I think the dev mentions that ion engine and LV-1will have a boost in 0.24.

[Starwhip]

Still, the number of engines would be astronomical. No pun intended.

Perhaps a Kraken Drive is in order... but let's not go there. This is for Ion Engines, not mystical mythical anti-gravity game-breaking awe-inspiring really-long-description part-clipping lag-inducing engines like the Kraken Drive.

[cantab]

You couldn't land the asteroid, or anything else, on Kerbin on ion rocket thrust with the current ion engines, since the engine by itself has a Kerbin TWR less than 1. So you'd have to bring it in with an aircraft.

A plane capable of landing the asteroid at KSC would be quite the achievement whatever the propulsion.

[Redrobin]

You couldn't land the asteroid, or anything else, on Kerbin on ion rocket thrust with the current ion engines, since the engine by itself has a Kerbin TWR less than 1. So you'd have to bring it in with an aircraft.

A plane capable of landing the asteroid at KSC would be quite the achievement whatever the propulsion.

You could have trusses to absorb the impact

[Starwhip]

Lots. And lots. And lots. Of trusses. Hundreds of meters of them, strutted and cross-membered and RCS-ed and reaction wheeled... WAIT A MOMENT! WHEELS! Make giant wheels, if for no other purpose than fun. Have trusses as axles and structural plates as treads, RCS or reaction wheels to roll them... The world's largest and heaviest rover.

[m4rt14n]

Considering Spaceplanes dont even need any engines to land, it'll just be a matter of sticking enough wings.

[cantab]

You could (use crumple zone trusses), but then it's questionable how much the ion engines are actually doing in the landing.

[Whackjob]

Lots. And lots. And lots. Of trusses. Hundreds of meters of them, strutted and cross-membered and RCS-ed and reaction wheeled... WAIT A MOMENT! WHEELS! Make giant wheels, if for no other purpose than fun. Have trusses as axles and structural plates as treads, RCS or reaction wheels to roll them... The world's largest and heaviest rover.

Gotta love big rovers!

I like the idea of a rockrover... landing I imagine would be seriously difficult, even as a plane. That would be a LOT of mass you'd be shucking about!

[wolfedg]

Personally I would prefer a massive array of parachutes to slow the asteroid down and make a theme park out of it later.

[merendel]

Considering Spaceplanes dont even need any engines to land, it'll just be a matter of sticking enough wings.

Lol I can just picture an asteroid riged up for infiniglide. A giant rock with enough winglets on it to imitate a chia pet.

[SSSPutnik]

I hope ions never have a TWR above 1 on Kerbin, they would be too good then.

[The Destroyer]

Unless the Ion engine is masisvley boosted, then it's basically impossible due to TWR. Not to mention tthe fact that solar panels wouldn't work in the atmo at speeds, so lots of RTGS=Lots of weight

I declare this impossible to land a asteroid only with ion engines

[mellojoe]

Whats the power differnce between an ion engine and shooting an asteroid with lasers? Isn't there a proposed asteroid "defense" system that suggests parking a craft next to an asteroid and then bombarding it with lasers? This should theoretically nudge it enough to slightly adjust its orbit. Would ion engines not provide a STOCK similar solution? You'd have to have something like MechJeb auto-pilot to be able to leave the engine burning while you switch to other crafts and do other things like time warp and continue with the rest of the game.

Stick on an ion engine, set it and forget it.

[Streetwind]

Yes, but the purpose of this thread is discussing whether or not you can use ion engines to land the asteroid safely on Kerbin, not just divert its trajectory.

(Spoiler: you can't)

[rkman]

Maybe with the buffed ion engines in 0.24, but they'd have to be buffed a whole lot to be able to even lift their own weight on Kerbin. Or maybe if crashing into the surface is counted as landing.

[Starwhip]

Yes, I suppose this is true. If the TWR is less than 1, then the more engines there are the worse it gets.

Now wait a moment. I realized something. Landing on Kerbin might be impossible, but how about somewhere where Ions have a TWR > 1? Someplace like... Gilly, perhaps?

[mellojoe]

Yes, but the purpose of this thread is discussing whether or not you can use ion engines to land the asteroid safely on Kerbin, not just divert its trajectory.

(Spoiler: you can't)

Ah, I was thinking ion engines plus attaching a boatload of parachutes. Ions to divert to collision trajectory, and parachutes for the actual landing. I didn't think about using the ions as landing thrusters. That would indeed be a challenge.

[cantab]

Considering Spaceplanes dont even need any engines to land, it'll just be a matter of sticking enough wings.

I suppose then the real challenge isn't landing the asteroid. It's taking off again using only Ion Engines.

From Eve.

[Starwhip]

I suppose then the real challenge isn't landing the asteroid. It's taking off again using only Ion Engines.

From Eve.

Seeing as Ions have a TWR less than 1 on Kerbin, I deem an Eve takeoff impossible.

Testing Strikethrough

[cantab]

A vertical takeoff, impossible yes. But a horizontal takeoff with wings? Not necessarily.

[Nicholander]

So no one actually attempted this challenge...

[Lerxst]

Hey, nice thread for a first post, eh? I've been making solar-powered ion shuttles for several months now and in order to land an asteroid... it would be nearly impossible. It's not the thrust of the engine or amount needed that's the obstacle, it's the electric charge needed that is. To make a plane that can take off and achieve very high altitude Kerbin flight, I've had to plaster the entire wing span with solar panels for the 9 thrusters installed in order to keep them at maximum thrust. For my orbital craft and Mun missions, I've used 6 retractable Gigantor arrays.

If that isn't problem enough, anytime you enter a shadow, you lose power. You need batteries... lost and lots of batteries to maintain thrust while the engines/panels are in shade. In addition to all of that, you need xenon gas containers. It might burn more efficiently than liquid fuel but you still need a whole lot of it. In a Mun-and-Back mission, I've burned through about 10,000 units of it.

Most of the craft would just end up being a mash-up of gas containers, solar panels and batteries. Anything left would be engines. And the more mass you take up with utilities, the more engines you need; the more engines you need, the more utilities you need.