meyst

This works very well, thank you! For anyone that wishes to save time the pad appears to be 72M above sea level. So your ships on pad altitude -72 meters = your ships height/length. I would change the topic to answered but I do not know how...

How tall is this spacecraft configuration from top to bottom? The combination will be put together as shown in space and tumble to create centrifugal forces (artificial gravity) for the crew during transit. I would like to figure out how much force would be created while keeping rotation down to a reasonable level (to avoid motion sick kerbals) but to do the maths one needs the distance from the center of mass to the taxi vehicle shown at the top and I have no idea how to get it. If I am getting numbers that show to low a centrifugal force with a RPM of 3 or less I will be adding spent liquid fuel tanks to lengthen the stack. As I may need to change the length, how to determine the length is what I am looking for. To assist with measuring I put large Ibeam parts to the right of the ship. Anyone know how long 3.5 of these placed end to end are?

On a spacecraft Rotating/tumbling to create centrifugal force, 'artificial gravity', how would the motion of the ship complicate communications? navigation? How would one mitigate any such issue? Many Science fiction ships and stations are depicted with 'rings' that rotate around the craft to create these forces for a crew while the ship proper does not seem to rotate in any meaningful way and thus eliminating this issue at the expense of perfect bearings, motors, thrusters, artistic license. Seeing as rotating/tumbling an entire ship seems (to me) to be relatively simple to engineer in a frictionless environment by comparison (thrusters, fuel and structure that can handle the stress). This brought up my question, how would one communicate/navigate such a craft given that satellite dishes seem to respond poorly to being pointed in the wrong direction. What would you use to communicate and or navigate with such a craft while it cruises between planets?

During his last update Sturmstiger said he has gotten very busy with real life things (I can relate) and said he will look in from time to time. I am in no rush and want to complete my end of the project scoreboard or not. I like to avoid part clipping as much as I can. Having said that though, more ideas could be interesting to see. Feel free to post your part clipping ideas, just don't expect them to see use. I also want to add, my booster/tug modules come in at a mass of 2 tons with 1 ton of internal fuel. The rest of the fuel loading for a transfer will be docked to the stack being pushed. This makes the fuel load fully customizable, a necessity (and planning nightmare) considering I will be using transfers to cycler orbits as well as Bi-elliptic and Hohmann transfers with a variety of cargo mass'.

Progress continues, a three module lander undergoing TPS testing.

Got some free time and made some progress. Both pictures are from lander testing. The lander is built from three modules, two of which are going to be used extensively in other capacities as well. Taxi module for short duration crew missions; Such as landing on Duna or crew transfer to a Cycler vehicle. Duna Landing Pack module for all the specialized kit required to land on Duna and return to orbit. Booster module primarily used as the engine for interplanetary burns and protection of payload during aerocapture maneuvers. A booster module is used on the lander to protect the craft during entry and slow the craft for final approach. Booster is jettisoned just before touchdown. Entry testing. From closest to furthest, right to left. Booster module, Duna Landing Pack, Taxi module Grounded on a 10 degree slope, fuel tanks almost completely full. I was able to do a landing test on Kerbin due to the redundant thrust from the engine out capability on the propulsive modules. With an engine out the craft suffers from reduced maneuverability making landing more difficult. With the loss of any engine the craft remains controllable with enough delta V to perform an abort to Duna orbit however. Also in the event of an engine failing after landing or during dust off the ship will still be able to make orbit. Lander can be equipped with additional fuel for the booster module to facilitate landings at high altitudes on Duna where parachutes do not function correctly and loiter capability to facilitate landings in difficult terrain (such as mountain tops and valleys) I am concerned about my lander being tall. Especially seeing as I would like to make at least one landing in the mountains of Duna. Kerbals however seem to enjoy jumping out of it even though it is not intended for use as a diving board.

Thanks Silverchain! I am still surprised how popular that rover has turned out being. I will be doing the missions without any mods. I did download and have a look at what KAS, Kethane and deadly re-entry among others had to offer. I normally play KSP without any mods and we already had plenty of examples that made great use of them, so I decided I would continue being a rebel and not use any. At this time I am favoring using an ' r' for the outbound trip. This is going to be dependent on the currently still in development Taxi vehicle however. The Aldrin cycler needs less cycler craft but is a high energy transfer so if my Taxi ship ends up heavy I will likely switch to an orbit more like (I flew a test but it was a serious challenge). This second option is more fuel efficient but would require MOAR cyclers and overall MOAR stuff. For the inbound trip I will most likely be flying just inside the orbit of Duna at its highest point and down to Kerbin at the lowest point. The cycler will orbit around the sun three times every two synodic periods. I may add minor propulsive maneuvers to manage the orbits to reduce the Taxi vehicles delta V requirements to that of a Hohmann transfer. That maneuver will depend on the relative mass and Isps of the taxi and cycler however. I could not find a video for this one. For using cyclers 1000 days is very short term and makes planning to get use out of them very challenging. This short term heavily favors shorter synodic period cyclers, such as the Aldrin cycler.

I have an update on my slow challenge progress. A cycler ship. (Crew transfer ship docked to it in the picture) Cycler Mass 11.6 Tons Thrust to Weight ratio 0.01 The cycler ship is designed to rotate to create centrifugal force (artificial gravity) for the crew in the habitat. I created a simple (not very good) slide show so you can see for yourself if you are so inclined (I recommend clicking through the picture menu at the bottom because I had no idea what I was doing ... and it shows). Pictures above are the result of construction testing. I constructed it in orbit from a specialized cycler habitat module, three supply modules and an orbital solar array. The five components require three launches of my four ton capacity rocket. I sent up a Kerbal in a crew vehicle to assemble it and was pleased to discover the ship was capable of self assembly. Everything even went together right the first time! The craft is equipped with enough supplies for a full return trip all the way back to Kerbin if needed. Communications gear, balanced RCS (so the cycler is capable of being the active craft for docking to improve safety). Plenty of electricity provides power for the habitat and three ion engines (One aft and two on the habitat that are angled slightly away from the hull to prevent fouling of the rest of the craft). I ended up favoring electric drive for three reasons, safety, thrust to weight requirements, resupply. As cyclers are expected to operate in deep space for years at a time and far from... everything, the fewer moving parts represent a significant risk reduction. In addition the fuel is not highly corrosive and no radioactive materials are required on board to make it work. Once up to speed, the orbit a cycler vehicle will be operating on requires only minor propulsive maneuvers, with plenty of time to do them. The low thrust on ion engines is adventurous when setting up multiple gravity assists, in which precision is important. Anything being delivered to a cycler needs to be brought up to the velocity of the cycler, a significant and exponential investment. The high Isp reduces fuel mass considerably and ultimately creates significant savings. In addition the nature of the xenon fuel would eliminate fuel losses due to the boil off real world cryogenic fuels such as hydrogen and oxygen would be prone to.

I have some hardware I wanted to share. This is the ship I am testing for use as a cycler (Crew transfer ship docked in the picture) The cycler ship is designed to rotate to create centrifugal force (artificial gravity) for the crew in the habitat. I created a simple (and not very good) slide show so you can see for yourself if you are so inclined (I recommend clicking through the picture menu at the bottom). Pictures above are the result of construction testing. I constructed it in orbit from a specialized cycler module, three supply modules and an orbital solar array. The five components required three launches of my four ton capacity rocket. I sent up a Kerbal in a crew vehicle to assemble it and was pleased to discover the ship was capable of self assembly. Everything even went together right the first time with no unplanned rapid disassemble, oversights or reports of Kraken attacks. The craft is equipped with enough supplies for a full return trip all the way back to Kerbin if needed (the jet fuel aft of the habitat). Communications gear, a balanced reaction control system (so the cycler is capable of being the active craft for a docking maneuver). Plenty of electricity provides power for the Kerbals entertainment system and three ion engines (One aft, two on the habitat that are angled slightly away from the hull to prevent fouling of the rest of the craft). I ended up favoring electric drive for three reasons, safety, thrust to weight requirements, resupply. As cyclers are expected to operate in deep space for years far from home, the fewer moving parts represent a significant risk reduction. In addition the fuel is not corrosive and does not require radioactive materials on board. Once up to speed, the orbit a cycler vehicle will be operating on requires only minor propulsive maneuvers, with plenty of time to set them up. The low thrust on ion engines is also adventurous when setting up multiple gravity assists, in which precision is very important. Resupply is going to be a challenge for any cycler craft. Anything being delivered to a cycler needs to be brought up to the velocity of the cycler, a significant and exponential investment. The high Isp reduces fuel mass considerably. In addition the nature of the xenon fuel would eliminate fuel losses due to the boil off real world cryogenic fuels such as hydrogen and oxygen would be prone to.

kookoo_gr, it looks like you are attempting to figure out your score after that efficiency because it needs that score to calculate, example. Early mission scoring (day 500 and prior) Landed on day 356, crew left after cut off for early score. Day 500 minus the last day with no kerbals, 355, gives us 145 days with Kerbals on Duna before day 500. For the 145 days you had 3 Kerbals on Duna, so 145 X 3 for an early mission score of 435. For early mission efficiency your early mission score is divided by your launches times lift capability. 435 (early score) divided by [6 (launches) times 50 tons (lift capacity)] or 435/(6X50) = 435/300 = an early mission efficiency score of 1.45 kookoo_gr, I don't like to be the bearer of bad news but you have a problem with your overall plan not being ambitious enough First crew landed on day 356 and left at day 583 Second crew landed at day 678 and left at day 934 I know managing those hand offs and having sufficient supplies to do so keeps making a mess of my draft entry plans.

Sadly I have not had much progress lately due to 'real life stuff' but I do have some modest hardware progress. I present the Duna orbital power and communications satellite. These satellites will propel themselves to Duna using witchcraft (Ion drive technology) and maximization of the physics exploit known as 'the Oberth effect'. A propulsive capture will be used to get into orbit of Duna to support ground based mission assets. Once in orbit a satellite will operate as a communications relay between Kerbin and the Kerbals on the surface of Duna. They will also provide electric power by 'harvesting' photons of light from the Sun and 'beaming' the energy to the ground based assets. Our engineer caution this could allow rovers to make really cool jumps and think it would be better to store the energy using batteries for other uses. Such as running nightlights to keep our brave exporters safe from nightmares.

Yes Armokh, you are restricted to only the one type of launcher. Only exception being your crew to low Kerbin orbit vehicle.

Good to hear you are doing well well Sturmstiger

Sturmstiger has not posted on the forums since August, I hope he's okay.

This is my all stock 3 ton probe ballistic cycler attempt. High energy burned for Duna. Uploaded with ImageShack.com On day 37 I did my last burn, onto a ballistic cycler trajectory. Uploaded with ImageShack.com I got a closest approach of 715 000 KM after a kerbin fly-by, only took 1401 days from the last burn... and should repeat about every 1438 days (4 years)... But is that close enough? Uploaded with ImageShack.com

Cyclers can and do work in KSP, I know this because I have been testing them out for use in an architecture challenge. The common perception of cyclers is that of the ballistic cycler that requires no propulsion. While these exist in the literature and should be possible in KSP they have a significant disadvantage. Most Earth - Mars ballistic cycler set ups require at least 12 cycler vehicles to cover all the conjunction opportunities, unless your willing to wait 15 years before missions. In addition those that utilize gravity assist (all of them that use under 14 vehicles) require precise control, this is a challenge in the real world (esp when solar winds can be pushing a cycler off course). In KSP navigation is skewed by floating point errors during SOI changes that require course correction maneuvers as well. As 12 to 14 cycling vehicles would be expensive to build, put up to speed and maintain most plans looking at cyclers in the literature for Earth -Mars transit have at least intermittent propulsive requirements. As an example, the trajectory of the Aldrin cycler using only gravity assists on it's fly bys would take it 100's of KM's below the earth surface, this is mathematically correct but challenging for space craft. This makes propulsion to make up the difference favorable. Electric propulsion (ion drive) has favorable mention in many papers. Of course that creates the challenge of calculating, "optimum non-impulsive propulsive gravity assist maneuvers". apparently the computer used in the testing of that took up to 20 minutes to find a solution to a single maneuver. I was not aware of this when I attempted my first Kerbin - Duna cycler probe by following an Aldrin cycler style trajectory of one orbit every synodic period while attempting to use gravity assists. Initial test probe encountered excessive atmospheric drag and broke upon entering the Kerbin lithosphere.

borisperrons I'll give that a shot. Short answer; No. Long answer; Yes, you can use it If; All craft dock themselves or are docked by ferries that are lifted within your plans restrictions. All received refills of fuel/mono propellant etc used in the plan are lifted in the plan, ie not already on the station. The station does not preform meaningful propulsive maneuvers while mission assets are docked. Station is not pushed to Duna or otherwise used for hab space beyond LKO.

I have finished working on craft that will supply my long term mission. While it is possible to fly the supply ship direct to Duna from Kerbin using an optimum Hohmann transfer it will instead be transported to Duna as cargo. Transporting it as cargo allows the rocket engine to be used to redeploy the craft to keep pace with mobile scientific operations. In the assembly building. The jet fuel tank represents 110 Kerbal days of supplies, would last just under a month for 4 Kerbals. Uploaded with ImageShack.com Entry, Descent and landing pictures (in order) Uploaded with ImageShack.com Uploaded with ImageShack.com Uploaded with ImageShack.com Uploaded with ImageShack.com No disposing any parts off the lander, such as the heat shield, greatly reduces risk of debris strikes on previously positioned assets. Controlled powered landing (with significant reserves) allows for landings at higher altitudes that are not practical for parachutes and rougher areas with smaller safe landing sites (such as mountain range landing sites).

My latest acquisition, the Sylph Fodder. This supply craft is intended to hitch a ride to Duna, using the forward docking port, so it lands with plenty of fuel to be redeployed. It is possible to fly the ship direct to duna using an optimum transfer and direct to Duna launch profile, this however leaves no fuel for ground operations and is not intended for standard deployment (saved some time for testing though) In hanger Uploaded with ImageShack.com On Duna Uploaded with ImageShack.com More picture available in my mission report thread

Likely these ideas have already been discussed by your team internally but I will present them as the need does exist for them. I think it would be a good idea to have the first couple tutorials (how to build a rocket and first flight) integrated with the starting parts for career mode. I think it would be a great help to new players starting off. An option to select tutorial/hits on or off when starting a career mode game should keep this from annoying more advanced players. I also think some quick hints or a short how to science tutorial would be a good idea. I have a brother that also plays KSP that was unaware how to do science until I showed him how. He was not aware that he needed to right click on the pod and EVA Kerbals to bring up the menus to science, as it is not obvious to him he needed to right click these. He was also unaware of the new hidden recovery button that becomes available after landing a ship. The recovery button is an excellent addition, however a quick tip bubble for that after landing the first time would have been very useful for him and other newer players to make them aware of this feature. Overall I have been enjoying 0.22, keep up the great work!

That's an interesting idea, I don't know if the game is set up to track how many total launches you have made and what would be involved in doing that. I think another interesting option is to add a node in the science building to the left or above the starting parts that a player could hit to convert science to more money for parts. Would be interesting to give players the choice of 'more parts' and 'newer better parts'.

I did experiments for a Kebin to Duna cycler orbit, aiming for a duration of 1 synodic period using a solar Ap of 31 305 244 000M and Pe of 13 599 840 256M with an orbital period of 227:09:07:12. Basically a simple free-return trajectory using a gravity turn at Kerbin to align the next leg. I learned a few things; Cyclers do work. Aerobraking to make an aggressive gravity turn cost far less then I expected, the sharper turn also increased gravity assist gains. Minor propulsive correction maneuvers at the same points on the orbit where reasonable to manage (inclination Ap, correction after Kerbin). Solar orbit rendezvous with a cycler craft was ridiculously easy. Cycler craft are great for heavy spacious transit habitats for crew transfers. They are worthless for delivering supplies and hardware. Hohmann and bi-elliptic transfers are far superior for this. Ion drive is an attractive option on operational cyclers due to low propulsive requirements and ease of making precise corrections. As for what counts as a 'real cycler', people much smarter than I am have been putting out papers comparing ballistic and powered cyclers.

I registered on the spaceport and uploaded the Sylph Tarriance, it should be downloadable on the spaceport. You can also downloaded it at mediafire if you prefer. Replace the payload for any payload desired and Enjoy! For engine out capability do not exceed a 4 ton payload. Mine required manual intervention. I think even a real one would require some minor manual course corrections to maintain the cycler orbit as any error at all would compound over a long enough time. On a real one even solar wind would need to be corrected for at some point. In my case I found that to make cycling orbits work I had to make very aggressive turns, such that I needed to fly through Kerbin's atmosphere. I suspect this may be due to the SOI system used for KSP gravity, outside of which the planets gravity has no influence on the space crafts course and/or my lack of a PHD in orbital mechanics.

I have finished work on a combination Rover and Habitat. Additional information and pictures can be found in my mission report thread.

I am finally satisfied with my habitat and rover tests. Bob testing out the new rover. Comes fully equipped with high quality head lamps, extra science do dads, space seats for four and ample batteries for your Duna driving needs. All on a very rugged chassis with a low center of mass for outstanding stability even during high speed testing. Not intended for tomfoolery and really cool jumps. Kerbal not included! Uploaded with ImageShack.com The Habit is assembled in orbit by using three launches and docking the components. Uploaded with ImageShack.com The habit and rover are landed together to operate as a group. Each combination is intended to house two Kerbals and work with a second identical rover/habitat combination for increased safety. The combination comes with a Delta V of almost 1200 M/S, even after landing on Duna this will leave more than enough to handle any inconvenient obstacle blocking scientific endeavors. Uploaded with ImageShack.com The Rover can be undocked from the Habitat and offer increased mobility for short range missions. Each rover is equipped with four seats but only being assigned a crew of two will be able to rescue a stranded crew. Operating in the vicinity of habitats that are self mobile (on rockets) allows for expanded contingencies and rapid response capability in an emergency situation. Uploaded with ImageShack.com The Rover/habitat combination can be re-docked while grounded to use the rover to mobilize the habitat over relatively gentle ground, greatly expanding the potential area of operation and allowing rocket fuel to be saved for when it is of the most value. Uploaded with ImageShack.com Once a habitat has been driven to a desired location the rover is easily freed up for independent use. Uploaded with ImageShack.com I have made some very minor improvements for the final versions, however they will operate in the same manner, no pictures of this yet because I have not felt the need to test the minor changes.