Search the Community

NASA recently landed its InSight probe on Mars to study its interior. Tagging along behind are two CubeSats intended to record InSight during its landing sequence, and to act as a relay while the already-in-place Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is out of position. So, onto the challenge! This is my first time running one, so please let me know if anything seems unclear or whatever. Leaderboard Stock Parts Rank 1 @Xurkitree 57 points bonuses: +20 for lowest mass (2345 kg), +20 for lowest cost (24,775), +7 for science @Johnster_Space_Program 40 points bonus: +20 for lowest dV usage (3425 m/s) @PrvDancer85 10 points (console) @Mopoii 10 points @Kerbolitto 50 points (gatecrasher!) 10 points for Rank 1 0 points for not meeting Rank 2 or 3 requirements 40 points for a single launch manned base Rank 2 @RogerC 111 points bonuses: +40 for lowest mass (108 t) +40 for lowest cost (82,534) +1 for Ike flyby @Ultimate Steve 30 points Rank 3 @Will-ferret 106 points (console) bonuses: +1 for Ike flyby, +45 for full mission recovery @Death Engineering 89 points bonuses: +29 for flybys of Ike, Dres, Jool, and Tylo @The Aziz 60 points @Space Nerd 61 points bonuses: +1 for Ike flyby Rank 4 Modded Rank 1 Rank 2 @sturmhauke 30 points @Willer Kerman 30 points Rank 3 @Kerbiter 61 points bonuses: +1 for Ike flyby Rank 4 @dire 528.4 points, qualified by concurrent DOMA mission bonuses: +80 for lowest mass (678 t) +80 for lowest cost (685 k) +268.4 for science Allowed Mods And Other Rules Your submission should include screenshots or video demonstrating each important phase (launch, transfers, landing, science transmission, flybys, etc.). For Rank 2 and up, you must use CommNet at the default settings. Part of the challenge at higher ranks is to demonstrate the ability to build a network. Note that at Rank 1, you still need an antenna capable of transmitting science data back to Kerbin, even if CommNet is disabled. To earn a rank badge, you must meet the requirements of that rank and all the ranks below it (except where noted). So if you want that Rank 4 badge, you also have to fulfill Ranks 1, 2, and 3. Please note whether your entry uses stock or modded parts. No FTL or other super advanced or exploit-based propulsion (kraken drives etc.). No HyperEdit or other cheats for anything related to scoring (ok for testing or additional infrastructure unrelated to mission objectives). Autopilot and other flight assistant mods (MechJeb, Throttle Controlled Avionics, etc.) are ok, but it must be possible to fly all craft manually. The intentionally terrible VTOL craft in the TCA intro video would not be allowed, for instance. Planet packs should not alter the stock planets' parameters, for scoring purposes. If you are really enthusiastic about GPP or whatever, maybe we can work something out, but I'm not really familiar with those. Other mods allowed, as long as it's not too outlandish. No refueling. ISRU is allowed if you are attempting some sort of Jeb madness (see below). If you are playing for bonus science points, you may not use labs, contracts, difficulty settings, or other means to multiply the science gathered. Only default points from experiment + body + situation count. Primary Objective (Rank 1) Build an unmanned lander capable of reaching Duna's surface. The lander must include a thermometer, seismic accelerometer, and negative gravioli detector. It must also include sufficient solar panels and antennas to transmit its data back to Kerbin. The lander must be launched into LKO with a rocket, and then use a transfer stage to get to Duna. Secondary Objective (Rank 2) Meet Rank 1, plus the following changes: The lander only needs enough antenna power to reach Duna orbit. Build two identical mini-satellites, with sufficient relay antennas and solar power to extend the comm network to the landing site. These mini-sats must be launched together with the lander, as a single payload. Once reaching LKO, the lander and mini-sats must all travel independently to Duna. The mini-sats' trajectories should be arranged such that they perform a flyby of Duna at the correct time and place for the lander to transmit its initial data to one or both satellites. Bonus Objectives (Rank 3) Meet Ranks 1 and 2, plus the following changes: Duna Reconnaissance Orbiter: Before the main mission, launch a Duna Reconnaissance Orbiter satellite. This represents an earlier mission that InSight is taking advantage of. The DRO must be launched on a separate rocket and reach Duna orbit ahead of the lander, and have sufficient solar power and relay antennas to extend the comm network to the landing site. It must also carry one or more experiments suitable for unmanned orbital science (your choice). Mini-sat Extension: Extend the mission of the two mini-sats. Put experiments on them and collect more science, and/or flyby additional bodies. Jeb's Objectives (Rank 4) Meet Ranks 1, 2, and 3 (at least the DRO option), plus the following changes: Do something insane. Build a Duna colony, send 100 kerbals, use an SSTA, I dunno. Impress me. But whatever you do, you may not use any additional launches; you have to piggyback on the main mission launch or the DRO launch. Additional Objectives (Unranked) Retrieve the lander and/or mini-sats at the end of the mission. They can return under their own power, or you can launch a recovery mission, at your discretion. Compete on science, mass, cost, and dV usage. See the scoring list for details. Scoring Most scores are based solely on the entry's individual performance. Some are competitive scores, and can only be earned by one entry per category. These will be marked. +10 points for Primary Objective +20 points for Secondary Objective +30 points for DRO objective +40 points for each feat of awesome insanity successfully completed (involvement of Jeb optional but recommended) +10 points for tiebreakers in case of similar feats from separate entries (competitive, granted up to one entry per similar feat) For additional flybys of mini-sats (must still reach Duna in time for Secondary Objective) scores loosely based on flyby dV as calculated by Alex Moon's Launch Window Planner +1 point for Ike +7 points for Mun or Minmus (+8 for both) +9 points for Dres +11 points for Eve +1 point for Gilly +14 points for Jool +5 points per each Joolian moon +15 points for Eeloo +20 points for Moho Additional Bonus Scoring +15 points for safe retrieval of lander on Kerbin +15 points for safe retrieval of mini-sat on Kerbin (+30 for both) +(total science gathered / 20) points (please include a screenshot of starting and ending science points) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total launch mass (competitive, granted to one entry per category) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total mission cost (competitive, granted to one entry per category) +(20 * highest rank attained) points for lowest total mission dV used (please include screenshots of KER, MechJeb, or similar to demonstrate dV used) (competitive, granted to one entry per category) Badges full size:

I love everything related to Space that why i bought KSP all that years ago Recently i watched fragment of new Episode of Vintage Space by Amy Shira Teitel, it was about new Apple TV alternative history where Soviets/Russian landed on Mun before American, my computer went into BSOD state when she announced that it would be spoilers so o decided that it's sign from heaven to watch series first From time perspective i think it maybe it would be good if Soviets, not American landed there first, you see I see American(and Brits too ) as very hard working smart people, but they do their best only if someone hurt their pride, so if Russian landed first maybe President Nixon would not call off Apollo 18,19 and 20, but instead go "All in" and to show that NASA is better than Soviet Space Program and chose to land people on Mars Before this century (XX century) will end we will send people to Mars, because it even harder than Moon . As for original question when i watch old NASA videos from 60's mission control look so modern all those flat screen in 60's and mission controller consoles have actual GUI (Graphical User Interface) wile even in late 90's in Polish schools we had computers run under MS-DOS and command line

Found a recent report on the development of the Z-2, and decided to make this thread to discuss it. Right now, they're working on a demonstration prototype they're calling the Z-2.5, which, for budgetary reasons, utilizes the existing EMU bottoms and arms. This demonstration article is supposed to fly to the ISS in 2023 for testing, and the data would be used in the final, full version of the suit. However, with Artemis wanting a Moon landing in 2024, this schedule will likely need to be accelerated. Especially because I'm fairly certain that old shuttle EMU leggings will not be up to the task of walking on the lunar surface. I seriously recommend skimming through the linked report. It's an interesting read; lots of neat technical data and engineering stuff.

In 2017, the competition for New Frontiers missions for launch in 2021 begins. New Frontiers missions have a cost cap of $1 Billion, and are used for medium class missions larger than discovery, but smaller than Flagship. Keep in mind that we know little about the design of these probes themselves, so this thread is more about where you would launch a mission. Missions may use an RTG or Ion Drive. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Frontiers_program There are 6 Mission proposals being considered currently: Titan/Enceledus Mission: NASA recently sent out a call for New Frontiers proposals to study Titan and/or Enceladus. Currently, little is known about what such a mission would look like. It could do multiple flybys of Titan and Enceladus (like Europa Clipper, though radiation is not an issue at Saturn), orbit either Titan or Enceladus, or land on Titan. Pros: - Both moons could harbour life, and are considered excellent scientific destinations. - Would be great for NASA publicity- almost as much as New Horizons. - A multi-flyby probe could help replace the lost science capability once Cassini ends its mission. - A RTG-powered probe would likely be able to launch on a smaller Falcon Heavy via a Jupiter flyby, but would have a more expensive probe, while a solar-powered probe (like Juno, but at Saturn) would require a Jupiter Flyby, and a SLS- but the probe would likely be cheaper. Both assume we use a direct trajectory to the outer planets, and not something like VEEGA, which would increase the transit time A LOT. Cons: - Probably better to reserve for a Flagship mission, as it has a higher of going over-budget and being cancelled than the other missions, due to the distance to Saturn (something none of us would want). - Would either need giant Solar panels or RTGs, due to the distance to Saturn. - An SLS, though it would not be included in the project costs (launch costs are not included in Discovery, Explorer, and New Frontiers missions), but would still cost an arm and a leg. So would an RTG. And a VEEGA-like trajectory would give us less science data due to the lower lifetime from having to linger around the inner solar system. - We know nothing about this mission proposal (so DON'T blindly choose this one!) Saturn Atmospheric Entry Probe: A Galileo-style entry probe carrying a carrier/relay spacecraft, which would carry the entry probe, and send data back to Earth. It would give scientists critical data about Saturn's atmosphere, including isotopic ratios, and noble gas abundances, which they apparently really want. The entry probe would survive to at least five bar, but would continue to operate until it is crushed by the atmosphere. Pros: - Highly important science data will be collected. Cons: - Mission will likely not generate any publicity. - Mission would last for very little time despite the approx. 7 year transit time to Saturn. (4 years transit for SLS) - Faces the same power problems as the Enceladus/Titan Mission, but with the added twist of needing a high-G entry probe- something that might be too much for the limited New Frontiers budget. Venus In-Situ Explorer: Similar to a comet probe-less VEGA, or a extended VERITAS also designed to land on Venus, Venus In-Situ Explorer would send a lander, and possibly an aero-bot or another kind of probe, to study Venus's entire atmosphere, especially of trace and noble gases. It would also study the crust and lower atmosphere in detail, something impossible from orbit. It would also obtain surface samples for study. Pros: - Would retrieve very high-importance science data. - Would have less of a chance of breaking the budget due to Venus being closer. - Venus In-Situ Explorer would make a great follow-up to VEGA. - We need to study Venus more. Cons: - It would likely be a relatively short mission-perhaps 2 days in length. - Power is likely limited to how much you can carry in your batteries. Trojan Tour and Rendezvous: The Trojan Tour and Rendezvous mission would likely be similar to an extended version of the proposed LUCY, and would study a completely new kind of object- a Jupiter Trojan. It would flyby two or more Trojan asteroids, then settle in orbit around one of them. Pros: - It would provide good scientific data on a completely unknown category of asteroids- Trojan Asteroids are thought to be very different than the ones closer into the solar system. - It might provide a SLS mission for the empty SLS launch manifest. - It would study multiple objects in the Trojans, getting more science data on a variety of objects there. Cons: - If Juno https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(spacecraft) is any indication, such a asteroid mission would need an SLS Block I or an RTG to reach the Jupiter Trojans, both which cost an arm and a leg. - Transit time is surprisingly 10 years, no matter if you launch on SLS or Atlas V + VEEGA. SLS would provide 6x the payload capacity, though. Comet Surface Sample Return: A Comet Surface Sample Return Mission would acquire and return to Earth a small amount of cometary material from the nucleus (by landing) of a comet in a way that preserves organic compounds in the sample. It may also get a sample from multiple locations on the comet, though obviously this increases cost. It would get important data on the condition and constituents of the early Solar System, especially water and organics. It has also been suggested such a mission land near an active cometary jet. This mission would also study the comet's structure, composition, age, texture, structure, regolith, and evolution as it passes close to the Sun. Pros: - Good Science data can be obtained from this mission. - Depending on the comet, and intercept location, can have less or greater risk of breaking the budget. - Can be a good follow-up to the Rosetta/Philae mission. - Gets cometary material not able to be obtained by the Stardust mission. Cons: - It might be better to wait until the next New Frontiers mission, where a Lunar space station, or Orion can retrieve the capsule- this will increase the sample size enormously, as it can ride on a much larger capsule, and reduce the mass of the spacecraft for moar! boosters!. A Lunar Space station would be especially advantageous, as it could be incorporated into the crew's mission without having to send a dedicated, expensive mission to retrieve it. Lunar South Pole - Aitken Basin Sample Return: A Lunar South Pole Sample Return Mission would return samples of the early Moon's deep crust(the Aitken Basin is an enormous, deep impact crater) - something the region targeted is thought to contain. It would also obtain previously unobtainable surface samples not biased by Near-side Impact basin formation at the South Pole of the Moon. Most of the science objectives, however, such as trying to understand Lunar thermal evolution, would be accomplished via the returned samples. Pros: - Good science data can be obtained from this mission. - The first lunar dust samples from the poles (and partially far side) of the Moon can finally be obtained- giving scientists an idea of what a human mission to the Moon might get at the poles/far side. - Probably less likely to break the budget. - Would test a NASA heavy lander (like Morpheus) that would help in building a manned lunar lander- it would launch on an Atlas 431. Cons: - Possibly better to wait until a Lunar Space Station (which is likely, due to the new deep space HAB work going on in NASA)+Orion can pick up the samples for Earth Return, which would increase the payload/ regolith the mission would return to Earth. An Io Orbiter and Lunar Geophysical Network are proposed for a later New Frontiers mission, and are not in this New Frontiers mission contest. Information on these can be found here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Frontiers_program#Io_Volcano_Observer So, which New Frontiers Mission would you choose for launch in 2021?

this thread is just a place to show off my historical (and current) mission and craft recreations this is an orbital version of a mercury redstone rocket dubbed the "Mercury Redstone Advanced"

May 5th 1961. Almost a month after Yuri Gagarin's loop around the globe, Nasa was finally ready for it's first rocket mission with human crew. Alan Shepard boarded his mercury capsule Freedom 7, strapped on a Redstone rocket and prepared for a Suborbital flight. Follow the instructions and recreate the mission, some parts are completely automated(stage separation, boostback and parachute deployment) Mercury-Redstone 3 at Launch Complex 5. Freedom 7 in space. Download here ---> https://kerbal.curseforge.com/projects/mercury-redstone-3/files

How is it possible that NASA lost its technology from the Apollo Program irretrievably? The Saturn V rocket project has been lost. Also, no new rocket can be built based on Saturn V. I'm starting to wonder if those crazy people who postulate that we have never been to the moon, maybe they are right? https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20190303101632AAFql0U

NASA's Explorer program is planning to launch the Spectro-Photometer for the History of the Universe, Epoch of Reionization and Ices Explorer (SPHEREx) satellite to search for water and organic molecules. Official website: http://spherex.caltech.edu/ Paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269722306_SPHEREx_An_All-Sky_Spectral_Survey

My Rockets 99% Mods, 1% Stock So these are some of my rocket recreations of real world rockets. These are just some of the recreations I do, the crafts I make use a few mods. Falcon 1 Boeing Starliner Soyuz MS Falcon 9 1.1 Falcon 9 FT Falcon 9 Block 5 Falcon Heavy Blue Origin New Shepard Mercury Redstone X-15 + B-52 If you've got any ideas on what else I should make, leave a comment! (They will be recreated and uploaded to my YouTube Channel) Thanks for reading!

Λ uɹnʇɐS ʎʇɥƃᴉW ǝɥ┴ uooW ǝɥʇ oʇ ɥʇɹɐƎ ɯoɹɟ ʍǝlɟ ʇI ǝɯᴉʇ ɹᴉǝɥʇ uɐ sɹno ɹoɟ ǝuᴉɥɔɐɯ snolǝʌɹɐɯ ɐ puɐ 'ʇɐǝɟ ƃuᴉɹǝǝuᴉƃuǝ ʎʇɥƃᴉɯ ɐ sɐʍ Λ uɹnʇɐS ǝɥʇ 'ƃuᴉɹǝǝuᴉƃuǝ ɟo ʇɥƃᴉɯ ∀ ¡ɟɟoʇɟᴉ˥ pu∀

We build one base station with a few modules, enough to give shelter to 6 astronauts/cosmonauts and enough fuel to fly to Mars and return to Earth. We add the Mars lander to the station. We send the crew in several capsules to dock to the station. When everyone is there, we send the whole to Mars. When the station is in Mars orbit, some of the astronauts go to the lander, and land on Mars, do their job, and those who have been in orbit help in the analysis of the data. After some time they start from Mars, dock to the station, but do not reject the lander. They are waiting for a transfer window to Earth, when they are again in orbit around the earth, they land on Earth in capsules in which they arrived at stations. The transfer vehicle itself and the Martian lander could be refurbished and used multiple times, and maybe even capsules too I think the real scientist probably figured it out a long time ago, but that was my thought when I played Surviving Mars

Replicating Gemini, without MH.

as above

Hello everyone, It's Trekkie148 here, I'm just wondering on how to make my space shuttle stable, get to orbit, rendezvous, docking with an object, maybe mun orbit, and mostly mk2 and mainly mk3. I am using the mod Kerbal Engineer Redux and for visual Planet Shine to see the ship from the dark side of a celestial body. When ever I make a orbiter that looks like and supposed to act like the NASA space shuttle and I also empty out the tanks of the orbiter and put on the CoM and CoL indicators and sometimes CoT all standing for Center of Mass, Center of Lift, Center of Thrust, and I try to make the CoL closer to the CoM, I seriously do not know about what is happening what is happening with my design because it keeps on flipping my spacecraft either while landing or Reentry. This thread will be updated tomorrow on Thursday November 22 2018. Stay tuned, But do tend to give me help and reply. This helps out a lot. Thank you everyone. Also Happy Thanks Giving!

It would be officially released in Poland in October 19. When I first time peeked on trailer, I thought it's some new sci-fi, until i realized that tech is not very much sci-fi Does the movie is good? PS Neil Armstrong is my childhood hero along with Yuri Gagarin even though I like watching Pete Conrad Apollo 12 landing video than Apollo 11, not know why

REAL SPACE: THE MISSIONS “The universe is probably littered with the one-planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there's no good reason to go into space - each discovered, studied, and remembered by the ones who made the irrational decision.” ― Randall Munroe Pop Chart Labs Join us, @DiscoSlelge, @HooHungLow and me in a journey trough the history of man's space exploration!! This is a series about real space exploration missions complemented with their history, objectives and details about the boosters who launched them. Missions from the past, present and future are planned, always trying to be accurate but without exhausting details, and also keeping stock-alike aesthetics. Guide: Chapter 1 LEO communications - the TDRS Network Mars and Phobos observation - Phobos 2 Operation Paperclip: The German Connection

The Gemini Replica Thread Here is a place to put all your Gemini replicas, as well as unused propoals (i.e. Big Gemini) An excerpt from the Wikipedia page about project Gemini: Project Gemini was NASA's second human spaceflight program. Conducted between projects Mercury and Apollo, Gemini started in 1961 and concluded in 1966. The Gemini spacecraft carried a two-astronaut crew. Ten Gemini crews flew low Earth orbit (LEO) missions during 1965 and 1966, putting the United States in the lead during the Cold War Space Race against the Soviet Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gemini ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is my list of Gemini recreations! (All stock) This is one is one of my first. Not exactly first, but, it is the first time I used the Communitron 88-88 as a sort of "Multi Layer Inlusation Foil". This is one is orbiting the Mun, as part of a contract to get science data from around the Mun. Onto advanced Gemini, we see here a Centaur upper satage docked with Gemini. As Kerbin is a little bit small, this craft would be overkill for a Mun orbit and landing. Instead I sent it to Duna, and land there instead. (Note that I did put an SPS engine in the back) Since KSP models planets a lot smaller than in real life (what is that?), the Titan II that I recreated had enough Delta V to send a Gemini capule, adapter tank and engine to the Mun. So technically it actually is a Gemini Direct Ascent craft . And the Titan II craft which delivers most of my Gemini craft into low orbit. I remember there was a thread about the Titan rocket family, but forgot where it went. I should post the link at the bottom when I find the thread. And Finaly, the last image, showing a Gemini rescuing a stricken Lunar Ascent Stage being rescued by a Gemini Space Craft (No Anti-Aliasing, so all pictures look like MS-DOS games)

While Neil Armstrong was certainly the greatest and most inspiring human being that lived on earth but why this name changing?

THE ORION CREW MODULE CONSTRUCTED BY HUMMINGBIRD AEROSPACE This beauty is my take on the Orion Crew Module, a next-generation orbiter capable of Mars/Duna orbit. Of course, the Orion Crew Module in real life can handle 4 crew, Hummingbird Aerospace had to sacrifice an extra seat for a souped-up herbal entertainment system, with all the KerbNet channels. That way, your Kerbals will be able to make year-long journeys to the red planet without getting bored for a single moment! This baby has 3,372 m/s of that sweet, sweet Delta-V, and weighs a hefty 30t. It is filled to the brim with Liquid fuel and Oxidizer to keep your campfires burning long enough. It is made out of 35 parts and is 13m in height. Although it has the Delta-V to reach LKO without a launch vehicle, it does not have nearly enough TWR to get off the ground. Warranty void if used without compatible launch vehicle. Here is the freshly-baked craft file, warranty void if craft is eaten. https://kerbalx.com/Hummingbird_Aircraft/Orion-Crew-Module See you on Duna!

According to a few articles, an amateur astronomer named Scott Tilley, while searching for ZUMA, spotted some errant radio signals coming from the location of the IMAGE satellite, which failed about ten years ago. https://gizmodo.com/over-a-decade-later-nasas-long-dead-image-satellite-ma-1822479068 The best speculation I've seen suggests that IMAGE was briefly eclipsed by the Earth, draining its batteries, and once outside of Earth's shadow, went through a full system reboot, and cleared whatever error state had shut it down in 2005. Also reported was that the telemetry suggests at least one of its six instruments is functional, and NASA is apparently digging through its archives trying to figure out if they can restore communication with IMAGE. While the scientific return would probably not be huge, since IMAGE's primary mission had been a complete success, it could definitely be a neat story. And if they do bring it back online? Hey, free science satellite!

W.I.P. Ver. 1.3.1 Nasa Spaceshuttle X 99 VTOL start. The Rocket stage is from the great reDIRECT Mod. Give me a Feedback !

So I was thinking about my favourite real world rockets yesterday, and got curious, what are your favourite rockets?(specifically the booster stage, not the payload). I quite like the Soviet R7, an ICBM repurposed as a spacecraft? Hell yeah!

What do you think about Space Shuttles both the US ones and the unflown Soviets one? in comparison to more traditional approach? Soviet did only unmanned flight, on their Shuttle the BURAN Some people consider Space Shuttles to be a poor investment of money that could be invested elsewhere, something more practical, some consider it to be one of the best inventions in human history, so where is the truth?

No body like the pedants but sometime we bend of "special" pedant such as Dr. Wernher von Braun [Video removed by moderator] I have deep respect for dr. Von Braun even through pedant run havoc in my country (Poland)

Anyone interested in working for NASA in California? The work involves developing advanced flight sims for manned and unmanned aircraft. You have to have an engineering degree, a masters degree is best. If you're really good it might be possible to overlook the degree requirement, but you'd need a lot of software development experience. Skill requirements: 3D graphic programming, C/C++ (w/shell scripting, like bash or powershell), good network skills (UDP), OpenGL, Python, Git. Some knowledge of Qt is a big plus. Having game experience (like Unity or Unreal) would be important here too. These are full-time jobs with top benefits in an amazing work environment. Shout out if you're interested. Feel free to spread the word. These jobs will fill quickly.