Base Stations

[Chads]

What is generally the proper way to fulfill a "Base Station" contract on Minmus, the Mun, etc?  De-orbiting a space station, I suppose, could be one way, but that doesn't seem like the best of ideas.

Do people generally land stations in parts, and then dock them together?

Thanks!

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

This is one of those "depends" questions. You can land individual modules and then move them around with a rover to connect them together, or you can land the whole thing in one piece. Ask yourself what you need the station to do. If you just want to complete the contract, give them the bare minimum, while also trying to make it useful to you. Remember that if it has to "support six Kerbals", you just need six seats on the base. You don't need six Kerbals. At the very least, if I'm going to set up a base, I send an engineer and a couple scientists. With a MPL and ISRU and drills, this will at least make sure I get some use out of it.

If you're putting it together on the ground, it's good to also make your rover a fuel transport. You can use it to refuel a dedicated refueling shuttle, or just to refuel individual landers that visit your base. For my space program, if I can get multiple uses out of something, it becomes much more valuable to me.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Cpt Kerbalkrunch

[OhioBob]

Most contracts say that the vessel must be new, so landing an existing space station probably won't fulfill the contract requirements.  Assembling the base in parts is typically allowed by the contract system, so you can certainly do it that way if you want to.  How you do it depends on how much capability you want the station to have and how big it is.  I always favor the fewest launches possible, so if I can land it in one piece, that's what I do.  Only when the single launch approach is unfeasible do I start to break it down into smaller dockable parts.

Something you can try doing is to build everything you need to fulfill the contract into the first part so you get all your money right away.  But at the same time make it so you can expand and build on to the part.
 

Edited July 27, 2017 by OhioBob

[Aegolius13]

There are a lot of ways you can potentially do it.  Some general concepts are below.  Some are potentially easier/faster/cheaper, but all of these should be doable in some form if they sound interesting.  

1.  Treat the base as a big lander.  Launch in one piece, and land on legs like a you would a lander.  This is probably the easiest way for most base contracts if you just want to keep things simple.  If the contract requires a lot of parts, and your lander would be too tall and narrow if built in a single stack, you can always have a couple stacks attached radially.  

2.  Launch on one piece, but have the base land on its side.  I call this the "log" approach, and it's pretty common approach for bases that need to be wheeled.  Two particular challenges: first, if you have wheels or landing legs on one side only, that may create aerodynamic / center of mass issues on launch.  Second, you may need to have some engines pointing toward the "bottom"  of the base, which is perpendicular to the direction you launch from.  This also requires making sure those landing engines match the center of mass, which can be a little tricky.  On lower-gravity bodies, you may be able to get around this by having the thing land in the normal fashion, and then tip over on its side using reaction wheels, RCS, etc.

3.  Launch components into orbit, assemble in orbit, then land together.  This might be useful if you want a very wide base, which would be un-aerodynamic to launch on its own.  But there are a couple potential complications.   First, you have to go through the regular rigmarole of docking each module.  Second, you may need to do some fine docking work to sure parts are lined up correctly (i.e., rotated the right way when they land).  Third, you may need to make sure the engines of your completed base line up with its center of mass.  

4.  Land base modules separately but near each other, and use a mod like KAS to join them.  This works fairly well once you've gotten the hang of precision landings (which can be pretty tough at first).  And it works nicely if you want a "village" look to your base, with a bunch of individual structures.  But it requires modding, and the little pipes KAS uses are not the prettiest.  

5.  Land base modules separately but near each other, and use Alt-F12 to complete the contract once you have all the parts.  This could be considered cheating, but might get the job done if you want one of those "village" bases without using mods.  However, such a base won't be able to share resources. 

5.  Land base modules separately, then use Klaws to join.  Aside from the precision landing issue, this should not be too tricky.  But the Klaws look kind of ugly in my opinion.  And you may need wheels on your components to get them where they need to be.  

6.  Land base modules separately, then use docking ports to join.  This can make very nice looking modular bases, but it can be extremely difficult to get those docking ports aligned perfectly.  This is somewhat feasible if you're operating on the Minmus flats, but might be near impossible in rocky terrain.

 

 

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

Here is my first station on Mun; along with the rover I used to put the modules together. The rover was then used as a fuel truck for the station.

 

 

My next few stations, on Minmus, Ike, Gilly, and Pol, all followed the same general pattern; just a different arrangement of modules. I grew tired of putting the stations together, and began using the all-in-one version instead.

 

 

It looks crazy cuz I had to even the stacks out as best I could to launch without it pulling to one side. I'm definitely in agreement with OhioBob, I'm a single-launch guy these days.  I don't know if it's just my impatience, but I don't like assembling rockets in space or bases on the ground anymore.

 

 

And once it's on the ground (this one on Bop), you can see it looks quite a bit more like a base.

 

 

Here on Moho, I made the whole thing mobile. A base can look pretty much like whatever you want it to look like. As long as it gets the job done, it's a good base.

 

[Alshain]

Docking on the surface is a pain.  It's that simple.  If you are going stock you have two basic options

 

1. Land a fully assembled base (wherever you choose to assemble it... in orbit or in the VAB)

2. Have a huge headache. 

If you are playing with mods, KIS fulfills the contract system quite nicely and frankly is the only way I bother with surface bases.

Edited July 28, 2017 by Alshain

[OhioBob]

13 hours ago, Aegolius13 said:

6.  Land base modules separately, then use docking ports to join.  This can make very nice looking modular bases, but it can be extremely difficult to get those docking ports aligned perfectly.  This is somewhat feasible if you're operating on the Minmus flats, but might be near impossible in rocky terrain.

I want to add one further comment about this.  Not only can the terrain make it difficult to dock components together, but also the difference in gravity between one body and another can mess things up.  For instance, suppose you build all your components and test them on Kerbin and it all works perfectly.  You now fly them to Minmus and try to assemble them on one of the flats.  What you now discover is that landing gear and rover wheels are not compressed by the same amount as they were on Kerbin because of Minmus' lower gravity.  So what lined up before might not line up now.

One thing you can do to prevent this is to hack Kerbin's gravity using ALT+F12, making it the same as the body on which you plan to land the base.  You can then test everything in conditions that simulate the final destination.  Also be sure to reduce fuel loads to account for any burn off you might have prior to landing.  If you don't get the weights correct, you could have some docking port misalignment.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

2 hours ago, OhioBob said:

I want to add one further comment about this.  Not only can the terrain make it difficult to dock components together, but also the difference in gravity between one body and another can mess things up.  For instance, suppose you build all your components and test them on Kerbin and it all works perfectly.  You now fly them to Minmus and try to assemble them on one of the flats.  What you now discover is that landing gear and rover wheels are not compressed by the same amount as they were on Kerbin because of Minmus' lower gravity.  So what lined up before might not line up now.

One thing you can do to prevent this is to hack Kerbin's gravity using ALT+F12, making it the same as the body on which you plan to land the base.  You can then test everything in conditions that simulate the final destination.  Also be sure to reduce fuel loads to account for any burn off you might have prior to landing.  If you don't get the weights correct, you could have some docking port misalignment.

Found that out the hard way at Minmus. Didn't know the reason so I did it again at Ike and even Gilly (that was a blast). Each was a painstaking ordeal involving extending and retracting landing legs and landing gear to raise or lower the module to try to connect it to the other. It worked, but it was a pain. And if I wasn't at work, I'd post a shot my station on Pol (it looks extremely funny). I knew what the problem was by then, but I had built new modules and forgot to test them with the rover. They were way too short. I very nearly gave up. Instead, I pushed them to a hill and then did the retract and extend thing again. This time, though, I had to quickly switch to the rover (while the module was still raising up or lowering down) and push the other module forward to connect them. It finally worked, but it was so tedious I said I wouldn't do it again. I still think they look better when assembled on the ground (cuz you can put them together any way you want), but it's much easier to launch and land in one piece.

A quick note on the Pol station, though. It actually became a lifeline of sorts for my Jool operations for a long time. Many stranded Kerbals came to see the Pol Fuel Shuttle as a savior. It's one of the reasons that I say any base that's useful is a good base. Even if it's ugly. 

[OhioBob]

@Cpt Kerbalkrunch, I learned the lesson the hard way as well.  I had a similar situation to yours, where I had a Mun base (landed in one piece) and a separate rover that was suppose to dock to it.  Fortunately the misalignment wasn't too bad and I found that if I just kept trying, I could eventually get them to dock.  It was a good way to learn a lesson without totally losing my mission.

This makes me think of an idea for a new part.  Landing gear that include jacks to raise, lower, and/or level the part after it has been set in place.

[Chads]

I appreciate the responses.  

 

Follow up question-many of the responses talked about a 'fuel truck' type device.  But, they also talk about some of the intrinsic problems, like the effect of gravity on the various parts, such that your ports may not line up.

Wouldn't a fuel rover suffer the same problem?  Or, is there something I'm not thinking of here?

Thank you!

[Spricigo]

6 minutes ago, Chads said:

I appreciate the responses.  

 

Follow up question-many of the responses talked about a 'fuel truck' type device.  But, they also talk about some of the intrinsic problems, like the effect of gravity on the various parts, such that your ports may not line up.

Wouldn't a fuel rover suffer the same problem?  Or, is there something I'm not thinking of here?

Thank you!

Yes, the rover suffer the same problem.

An option is to not use docking ports, but use something else to move the fuel. Some alernatives: The Klaw , Kerbal Attachment System and EVA Transfer. Personally I prefer the last, is a light mod that give just the functionality that I want.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

7 hours ago, Chads said:

I appreciate the responses.  

 

Follow up question-many of the responses talked about a 'fuel truck' type device.  But, they also talk about some of the intrinsic problems, like the effect of gravity on the various parts, such that your ports may not line up.

Wouldn't a fuel rover suffer the same problem?  Or, is there something I'm not thinking of here?

Thank you!

I forgot to call attention to it, but that's why I made sure to get a couple rovers in the pics I posted. Tougher to see in the first pic, but all my rovers have a Klaw on one side and a docking port on the other. I do my testing on Kerbin to make sure everything lines up. If the docking port lines up with the ports on my base modules, then I know it'll work everywhere else, because the Klaw doesn't need an exact alignment. In fact, it doesn't even need a docking port at all. The Klaw can grab onto most other parts. It's extremely useful. Especially on rovers and fuel shuttles.

[Chads]

On 8/1/2017 at 6:19 AM, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I forgot to call attention to it, but that's why I made sure to get a couple rovers in the pics I posted. Tougher to see in the first pic, but all my rovers have a Klaw on one side and a docking port on the other. I do my testing on Kerbin to make sure everything lines up. If the docking port lines up with the ports on my base modules, then I know it'll work everywhere else, because the Klaw doesn't need an exact alignment. In fact, it doesn't even need a docking port at all. The Klaw can grab onto most other parts. It's extremely useful. Especially on rovers and fuel shuttles.

I am trying to build a rover similar to yours, but I can't get the wheels to work properly.  I get them so they either both turn in or out.  I can't get them to synchronize left to right.  I typically disable the rear wheels for steering, but they are doing the same thing.  I added them individually.  Not really sure what the problem is.

 

Full disclosure, I don't have Advanced Motors unlocked yet, so I don't have the largest wheels.  Nonetheless...

 

Thanks for the tips about the Klaw.  That's a huge help.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

7 minutes ago, Chads said:

I am trying to build a rover similar to yours, but I can't get the wheels to work properly.  I get them so they either both turn in or out.  I can't get them to synchronize left to right.  I typically disable the rear wheels for steering, but they are doing the same thing.  I added them individually.  Not really sure what the problem is.

 

Full disclosure, I don't have Advanced Motors unlocked yet, so I don't have the largest wheels.  Nonetheless...

 

Thanks for the tips about the Klaw.  That's a huge help.

No problem. Any time.

 

For pretty much all rovers, build them in the SPH and (this part's really important) attach the wheels (and the entire wheel assembly; meaning any parts the wheels connect to) using mirrored symmetry. This will basically give you front and rear wheels. Then just disable steering on whichever are the back wheels like you said. Make sure you have a rovemate probe core somewhere on the rover. Also, when you go to drive it, it'll usually have the wrong orientation and won't steer correctly. Just right-click on the Klaw or the docking port (whichever you want to be the front) and select "control from here". Now it'll drive normally.