Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'orion'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL





Found 40 results

  1. Constellation Moon Mission Pack Initially worked on after I saw the Constellation Mission Packs Discussion Thread, I had neglected the project part way through, with the Ares I and Ares V mostly completed (if I recall correctly, it may have been to a bug). After almost two years, I've finished the once unfinished business—it's out! Ares I and Orion Ares V with Altair Going Home Now that you've seen the landing and take off, let's watch the kerbals get home! It should be noted that fuel reserves tend to be quite low at this point—be efficient with how the fuel is spent... DOWNLOADS Ares I and Orion Ares V and Altair If you've found any issues or if you have feedback on ships, feel free to note them in the comments, I'd be happy to fix it.
  2. MacFran KASA Space Program Thread ================================ What this thread is about: I enjoy writing up mission profiles, playing the game beyond simply building, launching and landing crafts. I enjoy building the story around it all as well. It helps to tie everything together and give the game and the experience greater depth. I also enjoy reading good stories about KSP games, seeing well thought out builds that meet the challenge of complexity vs simplicity and effectiveness head on. I hate over-the-top, unrealistic and frivolous designs. I enjoy sharing my designs and getting criticism or comments on them. If you enjoy these kinds of things, then this thread is for you. It is a mish-mash of missions, some of low profile while others of great significance, with stories unfolding in chronological order, the first being the oldest. Although, since I only not too long ago started doing this sort of thing, I cannot go all the way back to the very start of it all. I do my best to maintain a balance between detail and length for both description and screenshots. There will always be at least one or two ''teaser'' screenshots below each post text followed by the rest of the album in the ''reveal hidden content'' dropdown. Enjoy! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Project Orion - KASA's program with the goal to extend kerbaled exploration to Kerbin's red neighbour When KASA announced its Orion project several years ago, a project with the daunting task of conquering Duna and ultimately seeing footsteps on the surface of the red planet, we new it would usher in a new ear of space flight, just like the Apollo program had when the challenge to set kerbals on the Mun was undertaken. For the first time, kerbals left Kerbin's sphere of influence and set out to another world. First, it was one mission, and then another, and then another, and then another. Not long after the program had started it ended with KASA having successfully flown and landed no fewer than 8 missions to the Mun and no fewer than 16 kerbals had left their mark on its grey powdery surface. Technology had been developed to meet the daunting challenges that lay ahead and with every subsequent flight so our understanding of the challenges, risks and potential rewards involved in space exploration grew ever more. For Orion, new technologies will also have to be developed. Bigger stronger rockets, inflatable habitat, extended life support systems, rovers, safe nuclear power sources are just a glimpse of what the KASA engineers and scientists will have to come up with in order for the conquest of Duna to occur. So far the program has not failed to impress in both its size and costs. Test flights have been performed, tech has been tested out and with it KASA's confidence in its ability to send the first kerbonauts to Duna has grown, as has also the impression left with each subsequent test flight that this is really happening: kerbals are headed to Duna in the not too distant future. The last time Kerbals left Kerbin was on Eagle VIII the last Mun mission where two lucky Kerbonauts left footprints on the Mun's surface for the last time. KASA administrator, Charles Bolden Kerbal has said that "the Orion mission designs are still evolving. Our test flights have confirmed a lot of important design features work as intended, but have also shown that some can be improved, and improve them we will". KASA has been under a lot of pressure from Congress to keep a close eye on mission costs and cost overruns. So far, Orion has been the most expensive single undertaking KASA has ever done. To be fair, it is also the most complex it has ever undertaken. Photo courtesy: KASA
  3. Re-creating the journey to mars with STOCK parts and i need help, ideas, and every craft will be able to be downloaded and will be as real as possible and i will update and post updates and images and videos (possibly) and i also do live in Huntsville Alabama so i do have a huge interest in Space and Rocketry i also space x and elon musk's stuff
  4. hey I am Orionthusiast (an Orion enthusiat). And I am going to do a lot of missions using the Orion capsule from EFT-1 Dawn to EM-2 Freedom. I want to see y'all's replicas. So lets do this I don't care if it a crew retrival rocket I want to see it!
  5. Due to being able to spot red squiggly lines and follow some guesswork when the temperature variables in KSP changed, I've stumbled into being the nominated code maintainer for Nyrath's USAFOrion. While I'm perfectly at home with modelling parts, I find myself a bit lost in this C# stuff the modules are written in. Part of the problem is that, instead of needing to update from 1.0 to 1.1 code, the code is actually dependent on some libraries from the dawn of time. I suspect KSP 0.25, as the UI elements never worked in 0.90 onwards (or was that 0.80, I forget). And now, there's no available source code for the 3rd party libraries that the source code I have is dependent on. So, I'd LIKE to clear out all the UI components of the code and rewrite them. The UI is pretty much completely new in 1.1 anyway, and all it needs is a window with some buttons. "How hard could that be?" he said... Initially, I really wanted to do this all myself. I wanted to wrap my head around how C# worked, and how the orion code worked, so I could maintain it properly. But, I find every time I look at stuff, I get lost incredibly easy. I can't figure out what calls to make or how to find variables to use from KSP libraries. I don't know what half the compile errors are suggesting and so on. I can follow the logic of the code just fine. I just never know which bits come from where. If you want to take a gander at the source before mentioning anything, it's at I'm happy with any level of assistance at this stage.
  6. Based on Project Orion from the 1950's, I built this Mothership to send kerbals to the Mun and Minmus in style! It carries 2 Mystery Goo Containers, Barometers, Thermometers, and Negative Gravioli Detecters. It also has 2 docking ports on the side to allow for landers, rescue craft, or refueling craft. Unfortunately, I cannot provide a download link as this craft is on Xbox. Here is the Imgur Album, I also made an Orion Mini so comment if you want to see that!
  7. The proposed Constellation program to return astronauts to the Mun has long been a subject of my fascination. I consider it as one of the two major missions that sparked my interest in space exploration (the other being the Mars Exploration Rover). Recreating the Constellation program has been on my KSP bucket list since I bought the game, so when I first saw the forum thread for @Majorjim's Duna Constellation Mission, I was amazed. Once the discussion thread started up I followed it with great interest, but refrained from participating because I was unsure if i would be able to make craft with low enough part count to be practical, and most of the craft I have released on the forums have been planes rather than spacecraft. After 1.1 was released, I began considering giving the lunar portion of Constellation a try, and I got to work on this project. I've encountered many obstacles, setbacks, and disappointments, but after nearly a month of work, I am proud to finally present my Constellation Replica Pack! Orion and Ares I Altair and Ares V Cargo Altair SPR Mission Profile Constellation was different than Apollo in that it followed an Earth Orbit Rendezvous profile. This means that Altair and Orion are launched separately and then rendezvous and dock in LEO before flying to the Mun. I recommend that you launch Altair and the EDS first to allow it to act as a target for Orion. Orion has the fuel to spare for a rendezvous, the EDS doesn't. Once the two spacecraft are docked, shut down Orion's engine and set the craft to be controlled from Altair's docking port (or the EDS's guidance unit). Plot and perform the Trans-Munar Injection (Free Return Trajectory advised but not necessary), then separate Orion and Altair from the EDS. Once at the Mun perform a course correction to lower your periapsis to around 15km (optional), and insert the craft into orbit at said periapsis. Videos seem to suggest that Altair would have been used for this, however I use Orion more often than not due to its overabundance of fuel. Once you have a circular orbit around the Mun, move the crew into Altair and detach it from Orion. Deploy the landing legs and communications antenna and land the ship. Jettison the drop tanks well before landing, so the don't land near your landing site (extra important if you're aiming for a Cargo Altair). You get bonus points if you choose a landing site on the mun's terminator so the Sun is rising, casting long shadows (the Apollo astronauts did this). Once landed, get your Kerbals out, plant a flag, drive the rover, do whatever you want. When it's time to go, launch in the Ascent Stage. It's a good idea to periodically change the inclination of Orion's orbit so that it passes directly over the landing site to avoid having to make a costly plane change in Altair. Once Altair and Orion are back together, move the crew back to the CM and jettison Altair. Perform the Trans-Kerbin Injection and wait for the ship to reach Kerbin. Shortly before reentry detach the Service module and Orion the craft so that its heat shield faces retrograde. From there it's pretty straightforward; reenter, deploy the drogue parachute at about 3,000m, cut drogue and deploy mains anywhere between 1,500 and 1,000meters, splashdown (or land if you're unlucky), celebrate successful mission. Extra Pictures Here are a few pictures that I decided to share. Altair landing on the Mun next to a Cargo lander. The entire stack in LKO waiting for the upcoming TMI burn. Altair lifting off from the Mun to begin the homeward voyage. If only the lander knew that it wouldn't be coming home... DOWNLOADS Altair + Ares V Orion + Ares I Cargo Altair + Ares V If you find a problem with the craft, have a suggestion for improvement, or harbor any other concerns, please feel free to tell me here. Any screenshots of your own missions with these craft are certainly welcome and encouraged. Feedback of any sort (as long as it is valid and not simply "u suk git gud skrub lel") is welcome and appreciated, so please tell me what you think of these craft. If this does well enough (or if I feel like it), I may start working on the Mars portion of Constellation to go with this. Thank you for taking the time to read this thread, and enjoy!
  8. NASA has been directionless since Constellation was canceled. This, combined with their low budget, seems to make picking an actual destination for Orion hard to figure out. It doesn't seem like EM-1 is going to be for at least 6 years, so we definitely have time to make a decision. I think that it will be long behind schedule, and it will eventually be used to service a space station at Earth-Moon L1/2. If (and that's a big if) it does get off the ground on time, it might be used to transfer crew to Mars transfer vehicles. What do you think?
  9. An independent safety panel, the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Council has recently published that it has growing concerns over "a continued and unacknowledged accretion of risk" in the SLS/Orion program, caused by schedule pressures and tight funding, and that there is an "apparent erosion of safety" in that program that could "put crews on future missions in jeopardy." One specific area of concern was the schedule for EM-2 (which has been stated by NASA to likely (70% chance) be delayed to 2022 or 2023), but that NASA is continuing to work to the 2021 date, which has 0 confidence of happening at 2021. The panel observed that NASA appeared to be making "safety trade-offs" to meet that date (though a test flight between EM-1 and EM-2 for SLS Block IB has been confirmed by NASA). The required development of the Exploration Upper Stage, which NASA is building for EM-2, and Orion life support testing were stated to be some of its concerns, along with changes to the heat shield, and "zero fault tolerent" Orion SM systems, such as propellant valves. The panel has suggested NASA keep Orion in LEO during EM-2, mitigating many of the safety risks - calling the current plan to test Orion/SLS in 2 missions (3 once the 'EM-1A' SLS Block IB test flight NASA now needs for EM-2 is approved by the govn't). Additionally, though SLS/Orion has received more money from Congress than what NASA has requested in recent years, the flat level of funding (the $1 Billion dollar NASA budget increase proposed by Congress has not yet been approved yet) Also, according to the Council, the budget for SLS/Orion is not layed out "to acheive needed design effort of a major program" (aka lacking direction). Speaking of direction, NASA's current "goals" for SLS/Orion has been critized for lack of detail, despite releasing a new report on how NASA plans to go to Mars and that more detail would do wonders to help it survive. Additionally, NASA's Commerical Crew Program was also studied by the Council, and has been given a much better view of it compared to previous years- where it was much more critical of it. According to them, there has been a "substantial improvement in openness and interaction"; on the other hand, there are still many challenges ahead, resulting in concerns over NASA accepting more risk, and that there is a "high likelihood of delays to the first test flights". Despite this, NASA has been recommended by the council to continue developing 2 vehicles for that program. One last thing, Orion now is using tiles instead of a monolithic heat shield. Let's see how this plays out... Let's hope this does not cause another "Challenger". If it does, at least we have a launch escape system...
  10. The best stock Orion craft I made so far... Upper stage is a bit overpowered but allows geosynchronous operations, for ppl with geosynchronous stations... And now with the Altair lander... Download: SLS - Orion: SLS - Altair :
  11. So I was fascinated by NASA's new Orion spacecraft and I thought to myself "I could totally do that in KSP". Turns out I could, but my first result was terrible. Don't get me wrong, it looked the part, but the craft itself was incapable of doing anything spectacular. I then decided to do a spinoff of the Orion, what I call the Artemis (hopefully you all get that), and this is what I came up with. Statistics: dV = 5,130m/s TWR (Kerbin) = 0.25 - 0.48 Acceleration = 2.45m/s2 - 4.70m/s2 Crew Capacity = 3 Mass (Dry / Wet) = 19,089 / 24,445kg Parts = 43 Mods: Kerbal Engineer, MechJeb, Kerbal Inventory System, Kerbal Attachment System, Pathfinder, Procedural Parts I am actually quite surprised with how this turned out. The Artemis is highly capable of interplanetary travel once in LKO, acting like a crew shuttle more than an exploration vehicle. Despite this, it comes equipped with a full set of science equipment and 2000L of storage (thanks to KIS and Pathfinder). I think I'll be using this vehicle for long-term interplanetary missions when I need to ferry crew or basic supplies back and forth. The mods I am using are only there to make my life easier or add a small feature I quite enjoy. The craft can easily be converted to stock parts only if you'd like. Let me know what you guys think, if there is something I could improve, whatever, I love feedback. Also, show me what crafts you've made similar to this, I'm quite curious .
  12. A huge meeting was recently conducted by NASA to its employees in the VAB this January, provided an update on KSC's current and future initiatives. There were a few hard truths stated in this meeting- the first being its employment. NASA currently employs about 14,500 people directly- with Software and IT workers making up 22% of NASA's workforces, Aerosciences at 15% (the original NACA section of NASA) and less than 50% being involved in Space. A call was made- "It's time to make decisions, no just collect more data." Also, NASA's workforce is aging- the average age of its employees having gone up from 42 to 49 years old- which can affect its influx of new ideas. To counter this, NASA is now to target new hires out of college, with half of NASA's new hires to be from "GS-11 or below". Another hard truth told was regarding NASA's budget- which is surprisingly in turmoil now, despite NASA getting another $1 Billion in funding compared to last year- the amount of money NASA will need to fund its Congressional obligations (it's "to-do list") has also increased to $3 Billion due to the addition of new obligations, such as the Europa Clipper probe lander, and a new start on Orion HAB work. However, NASA's budget pressure may ease once JWST launches in 2018, and Commerical Crew becomes operational in 2017 (development is more expensive than operation). But for the meantime, NASA is in between a rock and a hard place with its budget. As usual, a large segment of NASA's funding is going to the SLS/Orion (the "Senate Launch System"). Though it has been (consistently) better off in its development than Ares I, it still lacks a manifiest beyond EM-1. Though NASA has created numerous planning manifiests, the public has still been only given the vague "[we are] visiting an asteroid by the mid 2020s and Mars by the mid 2030s"- protraying a future that lacks definition (a major critcism of this program.) NASA has cited this to numerous factors, most particularly funding- something that is a common NASA problem. NASA has also confirmed the ICPS and Block I SLS will not be man-rated, with a desire to use the launch hiatus from 2018 - 2021 to develop SLS Block IB, the projected (at least early) SLS workhorse. This will save $250 Million; however, such a switch has affected the original plans for SLS/Orion. Originally, the EM-2 mission was intended to be a manned repeat of EM-1, a manned Orion/SLS Block I test flight, sending Orion to flyby the Moon before returning to Earth. Now, EM-2 will launch on Block IB, sending a Orion crew to Low Lunar Orbit and back. However, this means another SLS unmanned test mission must be undertaken between EM-1 and EM-2. This mission will be a cargo mission- though an unmanned spacecraft is almost certainly going to hitch a ride as well due to the high cost of an SLS launch. NASA hopes this will be Europa Clipper, but that is still simply speculatory (and in any case, is likely too soon to launch then). Thus, EM-2 will become the 3rd SLS flight, and will now launch NET (no earlier than) 2022. The 4th flight (of the so far confirmed manifiest) is the manned segment of the Asterod Redirect Mission, sending a Manned Orion to a Asteroid Boulder in Lunar Orbit to study it, and return samples. This SLS/Orion Mission is now confirmed to occur NET 2024, as had been suspected for quite some time. One last note is that SLS Block II is not expected to be developed until 2028, with Manned Mars landings aiming for 2039 (something I think is an unlikely goal for numerous reasons). However, even this manifiest is subject to change, as a new political administration in charge next year may (and has, previously) affect plans signifcantly, for better, or for worse. NASA has also stated SLS requires launching at least once a year to be viable- something that is implied to require a larger influx of money (and goals) for the Orion/SLS program. TL;DR: NASA's "budget increase" of 1 Billion has a lot of strings to it. SLS now has a somewhat solid near-term manifest: EM-1: Orion & SLS Block I test, carrying "all up" Orion on a Lunar Flyby Trajectory. (2018) EM-1A: EUS & SLS Block IB test, carrying unspecified unmanned payload. (2021) EM-2: Manned Orion & SLS Block IB test, sending Orion into a Low Lunar Orbit and back. (2022) EM-2A?: (probable, but unconfirmed): SLS Block I, sending Europa Clipper to Jupiter. (2023) EM-3: Asteroid Redirect Mission, manned. SLS Block IB sending, Orion to captured boulder in Lunar Orbit (2024) Speculative: EM-?-?: Lunar Space Station/Long Duration HAB Missions? (2024-?) (NASA got funding and a requirement from Congress to start a commercial competition for Orion HABs, somthing which will need to be tested in Cis-Lunar space. However, this portion is still speculative, as NASA literally just began working on this.) EM-2B? ESA's JUICE on SLS? (2023)
  13. Congress has provided Fifty-Five Million to develop a Habitat Module for deep-space Orion/SLS expeditions- a module which would be tested in Cis-lunar space, becoming the 'Cis-Lunar Space station' that was one of the primary contenders for a Orion/SLS mission. In other words, NASA is actually finally working on a payload for SLS/Orion. However, one concern is if this funding would survive the 2016 elections and actually lead to a Deep Space HAB. Call the NextSTEP Contracts, NASA has given contracts to Bigelow, Boeing, LockMart, and OrbitalATK for study HAB designs, and for Dynetics, Hamilton Sundstrand, and Orbital Technologies (not the same corporation as Orbital Sciences) to develop support systems for these HABs. Each company has been given $1 Million each to do so, and eventually, this will lead to a prototype module (built by the company selected to build the module), which is supposed to be completed by 2018. LockMart has proposed a Thales Alenia Space-Subcontracted module, based off Thales' ISS modules (as the HAB module), and LockMart's Orion Spacecraft and its planetary probes (to build the service module.) Bigelow has proposed to use their BA-330 as a deep-space HAB. OrbitalATK has proposed to use a Cynus-Derived modular HAB, using Cygnus Spacecraft with stretched pressurized sections (which also may be attached to node modules to make modular HABs.) Boeing's is a solid (non-inflatable) HAB, but has revealed nearly nothing on what it will be like. Typical Boeing. NextSTEP will likely be accelerated due to the extra funding provided, and the requirement to produce a prototype module in 2 years. NASA may also build the HAB modules internally, instead of giving it out to commercial companies, though this seems unlikely. Who should build the HAB module? Will this survive to become an early SLS/Orion payload?
  14. Over the years, there have been many proposals to give ESA its own Crew Launch Capability- something that (in my opinion) ESA may be closer to this capability than ever before (even closer than the Hermes Era). However, budgets are cramped (as expected), so my proposal attempts to make this as cheap as possible to develop: Note: things in BOLD are the baseline proposal. My proposal would use a minimal-modification ESA Orion Service module as the base (and service module), launching fully fueled on an Ariane V ECA or ES (or Ariane 6 w/ 4 SRBs)- all which have a payload capacity of 21T to LEO, (however, a burn of the Orion CM does the final, orbital insertion burn, along with rendezvous and deorbit burns). The other components, the Launch Escape System (LES) and the Command Module (CM) would be basically European-made clones of the Orion CM and LES, respectively. (Building these parts in the US, is also an option, but would probably be a lot less politically palatable). This would be used in a few flights to the ISS, before moving to a new, European Space Station, based of the Columbus MTFF proposal: but (ASSUMING INFINITE THE MONEY IS AVAILABLE) be built with a front docking port (which would have a node-like adapter with a total of 6 available berthing ports (2 with adapters for crewed spacecraft, 1 for cargo deliveries, 1 by the connection to the Columbus Module, and 2 ports used by the airlock and an unpressurized experiments bay). Its crewed module would be a modernized Columbus module of the ISS, and use a Orion SM as its service module, located at the space station's aft (but with larger solar arrays and with radiators), which is also used for re-boosts (along with the crewed ESA-Orion and Cargo Vehicle) and life support. This space station (I call it the MTFF-2) would be launched fully fueled by a single, expendable Falcon Heavy (the MTFF-2 being 53T in mass)- in the case of mass overruns, the fuel would be launched separately, in cargo spacecraft. The Cargo Deliveries would be done by a newly-produced ATV, by a Progress Spacecraft (both which would require adapters to dock to the space station) or by a Cygnus. One question, despite all this would be if it could be funded. If S*** hits the fan, the ESA Crewed Spacecraft would be used for SpaceLab-like Science missions, with unpressurized science experiments located between the spacecraft adapter jettisoned panels and the Service Module. If money is somewhat more available however, the MTFF-2 would launch, but lack the node, airlock, unpressurized experiment bay (they would have to be carried next to the Orion SM if needed), only one docking port, and no cargo resupply vessels, and the space station would instead launch on a Reusable Falcon Heavy. THIS IS MY BASELINE PROPOSAL. Good, Dumb, or Impossible? Comment below!