Kiloton Club
- Thread starter Earl
- Start date
Horus Lupercal
Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
Altaïr
Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
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):
6 Frontier engines, 660 tons of fuel tanks, 1701.3 tons in total
And the booster (×2):
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:
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
), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
Here is the main core with its payload (1000 tonnes):
6 Frontier engines, 660 tons of fuel tanks, 1701.3 tons in total
And the booster (×2):
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:
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
), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
Horus Lupercal
Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
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), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
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
), there are still only 2 separators to trigger.
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
Oops, you're right! My TWR is 0.44 after separation.
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.
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.
Horus Lupercal
Primarch - Warmaster
Deja Vu
Swingin' on a Star
ET phone home
Floater
Copycat
Professor
Oops, you're right! My TWR is 0.44 after separation.
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.
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.
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
Not because I had, but just because I could, I did a cleaner version of that launcher:
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:
Let's go!
Then, booster separation; now my TWR will be shit until the end of the flight
That ship is easier to fly than the earlier version. Reaching orbit is a formality:
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:
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!
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:
Let's go!
Then, booster separation; now my TWR will be shit until the end of the flight
That ship is easier to fly than the earlier version. Reaching orbit is a formality:
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:
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!
Altaïr
Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
If fuel efficiency and ease of assembly and ease of flying are the important priorities... Seems like Altaïr wins the 1000t challenge.
That rocket actually looks like something you could use for most launches.
That rocket actually looks like something you could use for most launches.
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):
It's really a different scale.
Also, I tried to deorbit the payload and use it as a bunker buster:
BOOM!!!
Funnily, Curiosity survived...
Okay, I took a shot with an unaltered (as possible) version of my favourite rocket...
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!
Long story short, didn't make it.
After many iterations...
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.
Flying a low and pitched up trajectory...
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...
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. If that disqualifies this, too bad, but I'll understand why.
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!
Long story short, didn't make it.
After many iterations...
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.
Flying a low and pitched up trajectory...
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...
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.
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
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.
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. If that disqualifies this, too bad, but I'll understand why.
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.
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.
If that disqualifies this, too bad, but I'll understand why.
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.
Sorry but it seems you're below 1kton:
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?
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:
Here's the payload (1000T fuel, plus four RCS thrusters):
Here she is fully assembled:
I admit, this beast is brutalist and I'm no artist.
Here is my flight. Launch in a great ball of fire:
Stage 1 spent (a.k.a. how quickly can I light 9 damn engines?):
Stage 2 spent:
and orbit!!!
So... can somebody sponsor me for membership?
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 she is fully assembled:
I admit, this beast is brutalist and I'm no artist.
Here is my flight. Launch in a great ball of fire:
Stage 1 spent (a.k.a. how quickly can I light 9 damn engines?):
Stage 2 spent:
and orbit!!!
So... can somebody sponsor me for membership?
Altaïr
Space Stig, Master of gravity
Staff member
Head Moderator
Moderator
Veteran
Modder
Deja Vu
Under Pressure
Atlas
Forum Legend
Hi and welcome to the forum ARMANT
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now
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.
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now
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.
Hi and welcome to the forum ARMANT
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now
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.
Nice entry there, you just have to fly it now
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.