Kiloton Club

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#26
That was some fancy flying, you're pretty good.

Anyway, here is (slightly more than) 7 kilotons.

View attachment 39758

Engines on! Frames per second turns to seconds per frame.
View attachment 39759
View attachment 39760 View attachment 39761
2nd stage in orbit. Barely enough fuel! Could have had more fuel left, but it was hard to fly efficiently with so much lag.
Oof! BIGGEST 1ST STAGE EVER!!!
224 Titan engines!
Even the Spartan I made to leave Jupiter "only" had 105!
 

Blazer Ayanami

Space Shuttle enthusiast // Retired Admin
Forum Legend
Registered
#27
This is exactly what Didn't want to turn the challenge in: SPAMMING OF BOOSTERS UNTIL PHONE DIES.

Now I can't try it because my phone can't take all the Boosters needed to bring 7kt to orbit.
 

Horus Lupercal

Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
Registered
#29
Sounds like the challenge is supposed to be most efficient 1 kiloton rocket?
Or the most interesting method.

Instead it's turned into a pissing 'who can spam the most boosters' 'who has the most RAM' lifting contest.
 

Earl

Builder of Stupid Rockets // Pres Ben //|**|\\
Fly me to the Moon
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Registered
#30
Honestly, it was just to get a kiloton into orbit, not really a competition to get the most efficient rocket. However, I guess that's what the challenge has turned into.
 

Bananas

Mr. Nice Moderator
Registered
#32
You should probably try and be creative for this challenge here, engine spam isn't impressive at all.
 
Last edited:

Earl

Builder of Stupid Rockets // Pres Ben //|**|\\
Fly me to the Moon
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Registered
#33
You should probably try and be creative for this callenge here, engine spam isn't impressive at all.
While that is true, it's really the only way to get a kiloton into orbit. I mean you could hide the engines, but that's kind of it.
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#34
I tried to redo it efficiently this time. And finally it's possible to do it without an excessive number of engines.

Here is the main core with its payload (1000 tonnes):
Screenshot_20200617-011528_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
6 Frontier engines, 660 tons of fuel tanks, 1701.3 tons in total

And the booster (×2):
Screenshot_20200617-011649_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
5 Titan engine, 1020 tons of fuel, 1081.67 tons in total.

For the whole launcher:
overall mass: 3864.7 tons
Thrust: 4600 tons
TWR: 1.19
Engines: 10 Titan, 6 Frontier

The flight itself:
Screenshot_20200617-010727_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-010847_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-010924_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-010956_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-011212_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-011255_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
The advantage of that architecture is that all engines are lighted on ground, so there's no engine to turn on in flight, which is usually a common cause of loss of efficiency if there are a lot of them.

Now if you want to send x kilotons to orbit, recreate that launcher and:
- multiply the number of engines by x
- multiply the number of fuel tanks by x

The flight is exactly the same (except for the lag :rolleyes:), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
 

Horus Lupercal

Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
Registered
#35
I tried to redo it efficiently this time. And finally it's possible to do it without an excessive number of engines.

Here is the main core with its payload (1000 tonnes):
View attachment 39798
6 Frontier engines, 660 tons of fuel tanks, 1701.3 tons in total

And the booster (×2):
View attachment 39799
5 Titan engine, 1020 tons of fuel, 1081.67 tons in total.

For the whole launcher:
overall mass: 3864.7 tons
Thrust: 4600 tons
TWR: 1.19
Engines: 10 Titan, 6 Frontier

The flight itself:
View attachment 39800 View attachment 39801 View attachment 39802 View attachment 39803 View attachment 39804 View attachment 39805
The advantage of that architecture is that all engines are lighted on ground, so there's no engine to turn on in flight, which is usually a common cause of loss of efficiency if there are a lot of them.

Now if you want to send x kilotons to orbit, recreate that launcher and:
- multiply the number of engines by x
- multiply the number of fuel tanks by x

The flight is exactly the same (except for the lag :rolleyes:), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
Ha, I like how you've said 'fuck gravity' and gone with about half the numbers of Frontiers you'd need for a positive TWR after booster separation.

Space Stig cares not about your gravity. He launches what he likes and the cold hands of Tsiolkovsky pushes it into orbit.
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#36
Ha, I like how you've said 'fuck gravity' and gone with about half the numbers of Frontiers you'd need for a positive TWR after booster separation.

Space Stig cares not about your gravity. He launches what he likes and the cold hands of Tsiolkovsky pushes it into orbit.
Oops, you're right! My TWR is 0.44 after separation. :rolleyes:
That's kinda an Ariane 5 style launcher: the boosters provide 86% of the thrust, propell the main core at high speed on an ascending trajectory, and then the "small" engine does patiently its job.
But in such a case you'd better be on a good trajectory when you drop the boosters, because you won't be able to make large corrections after that.
 
T

TtTOtW

Guest
#37
Some say, he has a secret x3 thrust button up his left sleeve, and that he once actually taste tested the moon - which turned to cheese instantly out of cold fear... all we know is...
 

Horus Lupercal

Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
Registered
#38
Oops, you're right! My TWR is 0.44 after separation. :rolleyes:
That's kinda an Ariane 5 style launcher: the boosters provide 86% of the thrust, propell the main core at high speed on an ascending trajectory, and then the "small" engine does patiently its job.
But in such a case you'd better be on a good trajectory when you drop the boosters, because you won't be able to make large corrections after that.
Ha, wonder why you went for Ariane 5...

Yeah, you never clear 0.6 TWR, even at fuel burn out. By the looks of it though, you're riding quite a wave just before booster separation (them boosters should be cracking 25-30m/s in a climb at that point) and should have plenty of time afterwards to get to speed before you crest it.
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#39
Not because I had, but just because I could, I did a cleaner version of that launcher:
Screenshot_20200617-150753_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

That's quite a massive one. It's bp-edited, I used this to access some fuel tanks that are not available otherwise, and I assembled all parts in a single bp. The engines are untouched, and none of them has been hidden.

Here are the payload and the full blueprint:
Screenshot_20200617-150530_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-150606_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

Let's go!
Screenshot_20200617-150804_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-150926_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

Then, booster separation; now my TWR will be shit until the end of the flight :p
Screenshot_20200617-150953_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-151004_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

That ship is easier to fly than the earlier version. Reaching orbit is a formality:
Screenshot_20200617-151229_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200617-151316_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
1 kton in orbit, easy!

Just for fun, I made it reenter. What's very unusual is that because of its high weight, it's less affected by drag:
Screenshot_20200617-151841_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

For those who would like to give it a try, I've shared the blueprint. The rocket is relatively easy too fly, I've included several capsules in the payload to give it enough torque. An advice, because it's less affected by drag than an usual launcher, you can make your gravity turn earlier. It's important to start building your horizontal speed very early!
 

Attachments

Mooncrasher

(Pink!)
Staff member
Admin
Discord Staff
Voyager Quest
Forum Legend
#40
If fuel efficiency and ease of assembly and ease of flying are the important priorities... Seems like Altaïr wins the 1000t challenge. o_O
That rocket actually looks like something you could use for most launches.
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#41
If fuel efficiency and ease of assembly and ease of flying are the important priorities... Seems like Altaïr wins the 1000t challenge. o_O
That rocket actually looks like something you could use for most launches.
No more contestants? :p
I think I'll try to make a more generic version of that rocket, it will be helpful for heavy builds.

Just for fun, I compared that rocket to a more traditional one (my recent Curiosity mission):
Screenshot_20200618-205345_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
It's really a different scale.

Also, I tried to deorbit the payload and use it as a bunker buster:
Screenshot_20200618-142010_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg Screenshot_20200618-142013_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg

BOOM!!!

Funnily, Curiosity survived...
Screenshot_20200618-142034_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
 

Mooncrasher

(Pink!)
Staff member
Admin
Discord Staff
Voyager Quest
Forum Legend
#42
Okay, I took a shot with an unaltered (as possible) version of my favourite rocket...
Screenshot_20200622-144113.png
Yes, there's a Titan on the second stage, and I'm transferring fuel over. Not exactly realistic.
Despite that, the rocket inches off the pad. Not good!

Screenshot_20200622-145527.png
Long story short, didn't make it. :confused:



After many iterations...
Screenshot_20200622-152956.png
Modifications as flown: two more titans on the booster and 10 tonnes more fuel in the second stage. Now the second stage is inert until the booster runs out.

Screenshot_20200622-153155.png
Screenshot_20200622-153445.png
Flying a low and pitched up trajectory...
Screenshot_20200622-154041.png Screenshot_20200622-155403.png
YES! 1003t to LEO with 4.3% to spare.
The confusing part: the previous launch attempt with the exact same rocket ran out with ~50m/s to go. The trajectory you pick really does make a difference...

Screenshot_20200622-155728.png Screenshot_20200622-155734.png
Full disclosure: I used bp editing to combine the otherwise unedited booster and second stage in one blueprint. Previously I was assembling via 0-G assembly, but I hate that. :p If that disqualifies this, too bad, but I'll understand why.
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#44
Okay, I took a shot with an unaltered (as possible) version of my favourite rocket...
View attachment 40251
Yes, there's a Titan on the second stage, and I'm transferring fuel over. Not exactly realistic.
Despite that, the rocket inches off the pad. Not good!

View attachment 40252
Long story short, didn't make it. :confused:



After many iterations...
View attachment 40253
Modifications as flown: two more titans on the booster and 10 tonnes more fuel in the second stage. Now the second stage is inert until the booster runs out.

View attachment 40254
View attachment 40255
Flying a low and pitched up trajectory...
View attachment 40256 View attachment 40257
YES! 1003t to LEO with 4.3% to spare.
The confusing part: the previous launch attempt with the exact same rocket ran out with ~50m/s to go. The trajectory you pick really does make a difference...

View attachment 40258 View attachment 40259
Full disclosure: I used bp editing to combine the otherwise unedited booster and second stage in one blueprint. Previously I was assembling via 0-G assembly, but I hate that. :p If that disqualifies this, too bad, but I'll understand why.
Well done!

But what you did is no different of what I did in the end. We just assembled all parts in a single blueprint instead of assembling on pad.

I hab broght payload 1000 Tons to kerbin orbit kerbin atmosphere is 36 km height
View attachment 40260 View attachment 40261
Sorry but it seems you're below 1kton:
Screenshot_20200622-190249_Spaceflight Simulator.jpg
By the way we would appreciate to see your launcher, your flight... That's the challenge after all. Even your last stage is not visible on your screenshots, what would have it costed to make a screenshot before clearing debris? :confused:
 

ARMANT

Registered
#45
1593780764340.png

20.7kt, 4500 t to leo, tanker, 2 stage, double core. ships up top 2275 each, have to be redocked in orbit in order to boost furter.
 

smol

Registered
#46
Hi guys, any room for the rookie?

I decided to throw my python app at the kiloton challenge. For most of a day I tried to see if it could be done in a single build (e.g. no launch pad assembly, no BP editing). I could not get it done. The suggested builds varied from requiring 155-175 horizontal lines of fuel tanks alone, and the build area itself is only 160 horizontal lines tall. I tried as many as five stages without success.

I've never done a launch pad assembly before (and my Mission Control is an iPad, so no BP editing for me), so this was a chance for me to learn some more. I built the payload and stage 3 together, with some RCS thrusters for easy maneuvering in a fully-cheated environment. Moved it aside. Built stage 2, picked it up and moved it aside. Built stage 1, maneuvered my assembly on top.

I was torn between optimizing for a smol build (least tonnage in the final assembly) and just throwing something together to apply to the club. I went with the latter. My parameters (for no particular reason) were three stages, each one flies 1/3 of the delta-V budget of 3100m/s (I'm not very good at flying this thing), stage 1 has a maximum of one row of engines, stage 2 has a maximum of 2 rows of engines, and stage 3 has a maximum of 4 rows of engines. Once again, I feel like my python program is stymied by an artificial limitation of maximum engine count per stage. I feel I have to introduce some limitations because otherwise I can get a solution with 55 frontier engines or something. Based on some other entrants, maybe I should throw caution to the wind and start building with 55 frontiers???

Anyway, this was the output of my program given the (artificial) constraints I gave it:

Code:
Stage three Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    1 x probe
    2 x docking-2w
    1 x honking payload
    4 x RCS-thruster
    5 x Titan engines
    695.0 tons tanks
  total weight 1758.58 tons; deltaV=1034m/s (>1033); thrust=2000.0T; TWR(earth)=1.14 (>1.00); burn time=75s (>75)

Stage two Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    2 x docking-2w
    1 x (stage three 1758.58T)
    9 x Titan engines
    1220.0 tons tanks
  total weight 3086.96 tons; deltaV=1034m/s (>1033); thrust=3600.0T; TWR(earth)=1.17 (>1.10); burn time=73s (>73)

Stage one Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    1 x (stage two 3086.96T)
    1 x docking-2w
    17 x Titan engines
    2147.5 tons tanks
  total weight 5438.65 tons; deltaV=1033m/s (>1032); thrust=6800.0T; TWR(earth)=1.25 (>1.20); burn time=68s (>68)
Here's the payload (1000T fuel, plus four RCS thrusters):

IMG_0090.png


Here she is fully assembled:

IMG_0080.png


I admit, this beast is brutalist and I'm no artist.

Here is my flight. Launch in a great ball of fire:

IMG_0085.png


Stage 1 spent (a.k.a. how quickly can I light 9 damn engines?):

IMG_0086.png


Stage 2 spent:

IMG_0087.png


and orbit!!!

IMG_0089.png


IMG_0088.png


So... can somebody sponsor me for membership?
 

Mooncrasher

(Pink!)
Staff member
Admin
Discord Staff
Voyager Quest
Forum Legend
#47
Sweet 1 kiloton rocket. :)
It's beautiful in my eyes.
I can't wait to see you make a lighter lifter!
 

Altaïr

Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
#48
View attachment 41184
20.7kt, 4500 t to leo, tanker, 2 stage, double core. ships up top 2275 each, have to be redocked in orbit in order to boost furter.
Hi and welcome to the forum ARMANT :)
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now :p

Hi guys, any room for the rookie?

I decided to throw my python app at the kiloton challenge. For most of a day I tried to see if it could be done in a single build (e.g. no launch pad assembly, no BP editing). I could not get it done. The suggested builds varied from requiring 155-175 horizontal lines of fuel tanks alone, and the build area itself is only 160 horizontal lines tall. I tried as many as five stages without success.

I've never done a launch pad assembly before (and my Mission Control is an iPad, so no BP editing for me), so this was a chance for me to learn some more. I built the payload and stage 3 together, with some RCS thrusters for easy maneuvering in a fully-cheated environment. Moved it aside. Built stage 2, picked it up and moved it aside. Built stage 1, maneuvered my assembly on top.

I was torn between optimizing for a smol build (least tonnage in the final assembly) and just throwing something together to apply to the club. I went with the latter. My parameters (for no particular reason) were three stages, each one flies 1/3 of the delta-V budget of 3100m/s (I'm not very good at flying this thing), stage 1 has a maximum of one row of engines, stage 2 has a maximum of 2 rows of engines, and stage 3 has a maximum of 4 rows of engines. Once again, I feel like my python program is stymied by an artificial limitation of maximum engine count per stage. I feel I have to introduce some limitations because otherwise I can get a solution with 55 frontier engines or something. Based on some other entrants, maybe I should throw caution to the wind and start building with 55 frontiers???

Anyway, this was the output of my program given the (artificial) constraints I gave it:

Code:
Stage three Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    1 x probe
    2 x docking-2w
    1 x honking payload
    4 x RCS-thruster
    5 x Titan engines
    695.0 tons tanks
  total weight 1758.58 tons; deltaV=1034m/s (>1033); thrust=2000.0T; TWR(earth)=1.14 (>1.00); burn time=75s (>75)

Stage two Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    2 x docking-2w
    1 x (stage three 1758.58T)
    9 x Titan engines
    1220.0 tons tanks
  total weight 3086.96 tons; deltaV=1034m/s (>1033); thrust=3600.0T; TWR(earth)=1.17 (>1.10); burn time=73s (>73)

Stage one Report:
  Bill Of Materials
    1 x (stage two 3086.96T)
    1 x docking-2w
    17 x Titan engines
    2147.5 tons tanks
  total weight 5438.65 tons; deltaV=1033m/s (>1032); thrust=6800.0T; TWR(earth)=1.25 (>1.20); burn time=68s (>68)
Here's the payload (1000T fuel, plus four RCS thrusters):

View attachment 41185

Here she is fully assembled:

View attachment 41186

I admit, this beast is brutalist and I'm no artist.

Here is my flight. Launch in a great ball of fire:

View attachment 41187

Stage 1 spent (a.k.a. how quickly can I light 9 damn engines?):

View attachment 41188

Stage 2 spent:

View attachment 41189

and orbit!!!

View attachment 41190

View attachment 41191

So... can somebody sponsor me for membership?
Well done, that's quite a beast indeed. That can surely be optimized, but for a first try this is a good one.

I don't think you could lift 1 kton without pad assembly indeed. The latest launcher I made was this one:
Not because I had, but just because I could, I did a cleaner version of that launcher:
View attachment 39829

That's quite a massive one. It's bp-edited, I used this to access some fuel tanks that are not available otherwise, and I assembled all parts in a single bp. The engines are untouched, and none of them has been hidden.

Here are the payload and the full blueprint:
View attachment 39830 View attachment 39831
It was quite optimized (I had little extra fuel when reaching orbit), but still, no matter how you rearrange it, that won't fit into a full build space. A build space can be filled with 3600 tons of fuel tanks, and that launcher weighs 3860 tons. And 1000 tons in orbit for 3860 tons is already a good performance, it will be hard to go below.
 

Earl

Builder of Stupid Rockets // Pres Ben //|**|\\
Fly me to the Moon
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Registered
#49
Hi and welcome to the forum ARMANT :)
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now :p


Well done, that's quite a beast indeed. That can surely be optimized, but for a first try this is a good one.

I don't think you could lift 1 kton without pad assembly indeed. The latest launcher I made was this one:

It was quite optimized (I had little extra fuel when reaching orbit), but still, no matter how you rearrange it, that won't fit into a full build space. A build space can be filled with 3600 tons of fuel tanks, and that launcher weighs 3860 tons. And 1000 tons in orbit for 3860 tons is already a good performance, it will be hard to go below.
Actually, I think I know of a way. You can build horizontally instead of vertically. Just select a long vertical fuel tank and rotate it. It'll clip out of the build screen but not get deleted. The rocket surely wouldn't look pretty, but it could work
 
T

TtTOtW

Guest
#50
Actually, I think I know of a way. You can build horizontally instead of vertically. Just select a long vertical fuel tank and rotate it. It'll clip out of the build screen but not get deleted. The rocket surely wouldn't look pretty, but it could work
Earl you bugger... You and Danny really are brothers in tech. Guess you are the natural successor?