Death Engineering

Duna Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge

Recommended Posts

@Death Engineering I realize I'm probably already pushing the envelope as far as mods go, but how do you feel about using cryogenics to freeze colonists en route?

I am fixing to have in excess of 100 crew capacity for my Wave 2 ships, which would meaning sending at least 50 colonists and in excess of 50,000 snacks (which to be fair is only 10.5 tons of tankage empty, so it's manageable I suppose). How much in excess, I am still working out. Launch 3 had a science lab with 20 bunks attached (22 seats) plus a rover that has 7 seats - 29 total seats for the launch. Launch 4 also has a science lab and a total of 52 seats, for a total between the two of 81 seats. Launch 5 could be a clone of Launch 4 (I don't need a third science lab, but I could swap it out for a big ISRU and keep everything else the same), and then Launch 6 would be engines, fuel and tankage to get everything over to Duna. Depending on how I design the freighter, that would be 29 + 52 + 52 + 3? = 134  seats, a total of 67 colonists and a food cargo of 67,000 snacks.

I could try to handle the food problem Elon Kerman style, and substitute more delta-V for a faster trip instead of more tonnage for snacks. On the other hand, every 4 kerbals I freeze would mean one less 3.75 meter snack tank I have to bring along.

Sorry if I'm rambling. It's late and I'm still chewing on my options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the concept of this challenge, so I'm in!

After some corporate IP theft from Elon Kerman & co calculations using Transfer Window Planner and Excel, I came up with the following graph to estimate the ideal NPM given the five  available launch windows and delivery cycles (it quickly turned out that a non-reusable SLV is not a viable option). 

QTtoe0H.png

So, as I don't think doing about 1,0000 1-ton launches will be very.... fun.... to play, I will go with the big spike up on the top right, which means my SLV will have to have an NPM of 37.5 tons to LKO, which coincidentally (or not, given that this must be an ideal payload given the graph) gives me a delivery cycle of 225 days, which is just short enough to make the very first launch window at year 1, day 235. 

So, with that part done, time to send those maths Kerbals home (for now) and bring in the rocket designers! 

By the way, I think this will be my modslist (using the latest version of KSP):

Spoiler

Flight Manager for Reusable Stages (FMRS) Continued (FMRSContinued 1.2.7.3)
B9 Aerospace Parts Pack (B9 1:v6.5.2)
B9 Aerospace Props (B9-props 1:v6.5.2)
B9 Animation Modules (B9AnimationModules v1.3.2)
B9 Part Switch (B9PartSwitch v2.5.1)
B9 Procedural Wings Modified (B9-PWings-Modified 0.3.2H)
Background Resources (BackgroundResources v0.13.11.0)
BetterBurnTime (BetterBurnTime 1.8.1)
ClickThrough Blocker (ClickThroughBlocker 0.1.6.9)
Community Category Kit (CommunityCategoryKit 4.0.0.0)
Community Resource Pack (CommunityResourcePack 1.0.0.0)
Community Tech Tree (CommunityTechTree 1:3.3.4)
Distant Object Enhancement (DistantObject v1.9.1)
Distant Object Enhancement default config (DistantObject-default v1.9.1)
Easy Vessel Switch (EVS) (EasyVesselSwitch 1.9)
Editor Extensions Redux (EditorExtensionsRedux 3.3.19.9)
EngineTweaks for MakingHistory (MakingHistoryEngineTweaks v1.1)
Ferram Aerospace Research Continued (FerramAerospaceResearchContinued 3:0.15.9.5)
Firespitter Core (FirespitterCore v7.11.0)
Firespitter Resources config (FirespitterResourcesConfig v7.11.0)
HullcamVDS Continued (HullcamVDSContinued 0.1.9.12)
Keep It Straight (KeepItStraight 1.0.5)
Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.9.1.0)
Kerbal Attachment System (KAS 1.1)
Kerbal Inventory System (KIS 1.16)
Kerbal Planetary Base Systems (KerbalPlanetaryBaseSystems v1.6.6)
MechJeb 2 (MechJeb2 2.8.1.0)
MechJeb and Engineer for all! (MechJebForAll 1.3.0.4)
ModularFlightIntegrator (ModularFlightIntegrator 1.2.6.0)
Module Manager (ModuleManager 3.1.2)
Near Future IVA Props (NearFutureProps 1:0.3.5)
Planet Wiki (PlanetWiki making_CKAN_happy)
Radar Altitude (RadarAltitude rel-121)
RasterPropMonitor Core (RasterPropMonitor-Core 1:v0.30.5)
RealChute Parachute Systems (RealChute v1.4.7.1)
RecoveryController (RecoveryController 0.0.3.3)
Reentry Particle Effect (ReentryParticleEffect 1.3)
Retractable Lifting Surface Module (RetractableLiftingSurface 0.1.5.4)
SafeChute (SafeChute v2.1.15)
SCANsat (SCANsat v18.9)
SmokeScreen - Extended FX Plugin (SmokeScreen 2.8.1.0)
StageRecovery (StageRecovery 1.9.0.3)
Stockalike Station Parts Expansion (StationPartsExpansion 0.5.3)
SXTContinued (SXTContinued 1:0.3.24.2)
TAC Life Support (TACLS) (TACLS v0.13.11.0)
TakeCommandContinued (TakeCommandContinued 1.4.12.2)
Toolbar Controller (ToolbarController 1:0.1.6.19)
Transfer Window Planner (TransferWindowPlanner v1.6.3.0)
TweakScale - Rescale Everything! (TweakScale v2.4.0.6)

@Death Engineering hope these are 'allowed'. If not, I still have time to take out some.

Cheers!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yoochem said:

I love the concept of this challenge, so I'm in!

After some corporate IP theft from Elon Kerman & co calculations using Transfer Window Planner and Excel, I came up with the following graph to estimate the ideal NPM given the five  available launch windows and delivery cycles (it quickly turned out that a non-reusable SLV is not a viable option). 

QTtoe0H.png

So, as I don't think doing about 1,0000 1-ton launches will be very.... fun.... to play, I will go with the big spike up on the top right, which means my SLV will have to have an NPM of 37.5 tons to LKO, which coincidentally (or not, given that this must be an ideal payload given the graph) gives me a delivery cycle of 225 days, which is just short enough to make the very first launch window at year 1, day 235. 

So, with that part done, time to send those maths Kerbals home (for now) and bring in the rocket designers! 

By the way, I think this will be my modslist (using the latest version of KSP):

  Reveal hidden contents

Flight Manager for Reusable Stages (FMRS) Continued (FMRSContinued 1.2.7.3)
B9 Aerospace Parts Pack (B9 1:v6.5.2)
B9 Aerospace Props (B9-props 1:v6.5.2)
B9 Animation Modules (B9AnimationModules v1.3.2)
B9 Part Switch (B9PartSwitch v2.5.1)
B9 Procedural Wings Modified (B9-PWings-Modified 0.3.2H)
Background Resources (BackgroundResources v0.13.11.0)
BetterBurnTime (BetterBurnTime 1.8.1)
ClickThrough Blocker (ClickThroughBlocker 0.1.6.9)
Community Category Kit (CommunityCategoryKit 4.0.0.0)
Community Resource Pack (CommunityResourcePack 1.0.0.0)
Community Tech Tree (CommunityTechTree 1:3.3.4)
Distant Object Enhancement (DistantObject v1.9.1)
Distant Object Enhancement default config (DistantObject-default v1.9.1)
Easy Vessel Switch (EVS) (EasyVesselSwitch 1.9)
Editor Extensions Redux (EditorExtensionsRedux 3.3.19.9)
EngineTweaks for MakingHistory (MakingHistoryEngineTweaks v1.1)
Ferram Aerospace Research Continued (FerramAerospaceResearchContinued 3:0.15.9.5)
Firespitter Core (FirespitterCore v7.11.0)
Firespitter Resources config (FirespitterResourcesConfig v7.11.0)
HullcamVDS Continued (HullcamVDSContinued 0.1.9.12)
Keep It Straight (KeepItStraight 1.0.5)
Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.9.1.0)
Kerbal Attachment System (KAS 1.1)
Kerbal Inventory System (KIS 1.16)
Kerbal Planetary Base Systems (KerbalPlanetaryBaseSystems v1.6.6)
MechJeb 2 (MechJeb2 2.8.1.0)
MechJeb and Engineer for all! (MechJebForAll 1.3.0.4)
ModularFlightIntegrator (ModularFlightIntegrator 1.2.6.0)
Module Manager (ModuleManager 3.1.2)
Near Future IVA Props (NearFutureProps 1:0.3.5)
Planet Wiki (PlanetWiki making_CKAN_happy)
 Radar Altitude (RadarAltitude rel-121)
RasterPropMonitor Core (RasterPropMonitor-Core 1:v0.30.5)
RealChute Parachute Systems (RealChute v1.4.7.1)
RecoveryController (RecoveryController 0.0.3.3)
Reentry Particle Effect (ReentryParticleEffect 1.3)
Retractable Lifting Surface Module (RetractableLiftingSurface 0.1.5.4)
SafeChute (SafeChute v2.1.15)
SCANsat (SCANsat v18.9)
SmokeScreen - Extended FX Plugin (SmokeScreen 2.8.1.0)
StageRecovery (StageRecovery 1.9.0.3)
Stockalike Station Parts Expansion (StationPartsExpansion 0.5.3)
SXTContinued (SXTContinued 1:0.3.24.2)
TAC Life Support (TACLS) (TACLS v0.13.11.0)
TakeCommandContinued (TakeCommandContinued 1.4.12.2)
Toolbar Controller (ToolbarController 1:0.1.6.19)
Transfer Window Planner (TransferWindowPlanner v1.6.3.0)
TweakScale - Rescale Everything! (TweakScale v2.4.0.6)

@Death Engineering hope these are 'allowed'. If not, I still have time to take out some.

Cheers!

That is a very nice graph. Have you considered doing it out past 40 tons? I've seen some people argue that a very large payload (eg 150, 1500) is potentially more efficient than a small or medium payload. As an extreme example, two payloads of 600 tons each will get almost twice as much mass to Duna as 20 payloads of 35 tons each. In other words, the efficiency graph becomes spikier over time, and eventually with sufficiently large payloads becomes a linear increasing progression.

Also launch one starts on day 40, so your launch2 should be on day 265. That probably affects your numbers a bit.

Edited by dire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarified and cleaned up the wording on a few points (in red).  Not rule changes:

Habitation

  • Any crewed mission exceeding 10 days will require extra habitation space for the crew to work and maintain their senses. This means short trips like launches to LKO, trips between Duna's orbit and surface and brief excursions on Duna's surface do not require any extra space. However, trips between Kerbin and Duna and long-term stays on Duna's surface will require extra habitation space for each crew member. 
    • Crewed mining, rescue/contingency missions in Kerbin/Duna/Sol orbit also need habitation space if their missions exceed 10 days.

Other rules:

  • The continuously Kerballed outpost requires a minimum of two Kerbals on Duna at all times after the initial landing of four Kerbals. If a Kerbal is left at the outpost alone (for any reason) for more than 10 days, they suffer 'Over-stressed crew' penalty.
    • A Kerbal may be left alone at the Outpost without suffering from "Over-stressed crew" penalty, as long as there is another Kerbal within driving distance.
    • This rule can be ignored once "Contingency Plans" is achieved, permitting the outpost to be remain 'crewed' by one Kerbal.

 

Thanks to @dire for mentioning Kerbal-pops as a way to move crew around. This is a new rule affecting mods that render Kerbals inert during transit:

Habitation

  • Mods that render Kerbals inert (i.e. "DeepFreeze") as an alternative way to move crew around effectively turn Kerbals into cargo:
    • Crew in this state do not accumulate "Mission Value" points.
    • Crew in this state do not count towards requirements for the "Interplanetary expertise" achievement.
    • Freezer pods (parts that store the Kerbals) do not count towards any Achievement or as Habitation space.

 

Everything looks fine with those mods @Yoochem. That graph definitely says a lot thanks for posting!

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Death Engineering said:

Welcome to the challenge and to the forum BTW.  :)

If you can, try to post some pics of your work so far.. it's always cool to have a look at where others are taking the challenge. :cool:

Other than TAC, what other mods are you thinking of running?  I see that most of the top kolonization type mods are already on 1.5.x and I'm still using 1.4.2 on my DOMA attempt.  :\ 

I might take a week or two break from KSP- busy with work and such, unfortunately.

 

However, I'm running:

Mechjeb: I use it to tune maneuvers, usually. The automation is kinda busted.

KER: Self-explanatory.

TAC: Lot simpler to run life support than simulate the ore stuff, no offense.

Stockalike station parts: Expands station parts, adds a bunch of cool stuff that's not too "moddy". I use it for the storage components and such, really nice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dire said:

That is a very nice graph. Have you considered doing it out past 40 tons? I've seen some people argue that a very large payload (eg 150, 1500) is potentially more efficient than a small or medium payload. As an extreme example, two payloads of 600 tons each will get almost twice as much mass to Duna as 20 payloads of 35 tons each. In other words, the efficiency graph becomes spikier over time, and eventually with sufficiently large payloads becomes a linear increasing progression.

Also launch one starts on day 40, so your launch2 should be on day 265. That probably affects your numbers a bit.

Thanks for checking the graph! I didn't realise until now that the first launch is indeed on day 40, not on day 1, so yes, that does affect the numbers. Another mistake I made was to round down the launches per launch window and forgot that any 'unused days' for the delivery cycle carry over to the next launch window... So the updated graph does differ a bit:

2dndWTK.png

Up to 40 tons, a 36t NPM turns out to be the most effective now! But to answer your other comment... Well, check out this:

XKMEaW6.png

Clearly, you're right when it comes to bigger launches becoming more efficient. The last value on the graph shows the highest NPM possible when you are still able to do two launches in 10 years time. After that, the graph just increases linearly as you are limited to only one launch. So it's possible to get 2009t to LKO in two launches, or any infinite amount in just one launch.

So I devised a new plan: strap some boosters to Kerbin and launch the entire planet to Duna (we'd solve global warming as a bonus!). 

However, after checking with some experts on Kraken, 2-body physics, and computational power, I realised that this plan has some flaws. I'll probably stick to 36 tons.... 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yoochem said:

So I devised a new plan: strap some boosters to Kerbin and launch the entire planet to Duna (we'd solve global warming as a bonus!). 

However, after checking with some experts on Kraken, 2-body physics, and computational power, I realised that this plan has some flaws. I'll probably stick to 36 tons.... 

Haha what a nice project :p

Only problem is that you have to find a compromise to earn mission value points, and small efficient design doesn't need to weight a lot to fullfill requirements!

Personnaly I failed and went with a 87.5Npm because I first thought years had 400years only ... But even if it's not perfect, it was possible to send a lot of small components and there's always a rocket available before each transfer window. I'm a partisan of bigger payloads!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my 31 ton NPM because a) a lot of math that I enjoy less was already done for me by other 31-ton NPM folks (thanks!) and b) it allows me to make mistakes and allow my strategy to evolve as I learn, which I think is important and is a big reason I just jumped in feet-first rather than trying to plan everything out. I know my Wave 2 is going to be much, much more efficient than my first wave was, and my third wave is likely to be more efficient still.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm recovering my launch system by hand, it's not too bad but my aim is awful. Missed the launchpad by 500 km in one direction on launch 2 and then 600 km in the other direction on launch 3. I'm getting better with it but I don't think it's worth practicing enough to get really good yet.

Am thinking I will send wave 2 without deepfreeze installed just to prove I can do it, giant snack logi containers and all, and then wave 3 I'll probably install deepfreeze. I feel like adding more mods over time kind of simulates my kerbals innovating over time as they discover new problems, like "Gosh  it takes a lot of snacks to keep a bunch of people fed," and then solving those problems "Ker-popsicles don't need to eat!"

Edited by dire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am already well under way with a 100% stock DOMA entry, with no part mods other than standard TAC-LS, so cannot / will not use the deepfreeze option.  Puts me at a slight disadvantage I think.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jinnantonix said:

I am already well under way with a 100% stock DOMA entry, with no part mods other than standard TAC-LS, so cannot / will not use the deepfreeze option.  Puts me at a slight disadvantage I think.

Sounds like fun!

Edited by dire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Kerbolitto said:

Haha what a nice project :p

Only problem is that you have to find a compromise to earn mission value points, and small efficient design doesn't need to weight a lot to fullfill requirements!

Personnaly I failed and went with a 87.5Npm because I first thought years had 400years only ... But even if it's not perfect, it was possible to send a lot of small components and there's always a rocket available before each transfer window. I'm a partisan of bigger payloads!

True, that's why I'll have a look at my overall mission plan as well in order to make a well-balanced choice.

23 hours ago, dire said:

I like my 31 ton NPM because a) a lot of math that I enjoy less was already done for me by other 31-ton NPM folks (thanks!) and b) it allows me to make mistakes and allow my strategy to evolve as I learn, which I think is important and is a big reason I just jumped in feet-first rather than trying to plan everything out. I know my Wave 2 is going to be much, much more efficient than my first wave was, and my third wave is likely to be more efficient still.

Hey as long as you're enjoying your challenge! I just ended my latest career mode campaign after killing more than a dozen kerbals and achieving a -99% reputation score... Granted, I was playing with Kerbalism for the first time (quite a few Kerbals died of radiation and CO2 poisoning!) but it was also my impromptu play style which ended the program prematurely. My personal challenge is to plan ahead a little more and of course leave some room for improvisation where necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yoochem said:

True, that's why I'll have a look at my overall mission plan as well in order to make a well-balanced choice.

Hey as long as you're enjoying your challenge! I just ended my latest career mode campaign after killing more than a dozen kerbals and achieving a -99% reputation score... Granted, I was playing with Kerbalism for the first time (quite a few Kerbals died of radiation and CO2 poisoning!) but it was also my impromptu play style which ended the program prematurely. My personal challenge is to plan ahead a little more and of course leave some room for improvisation where necessary.

This challenge was actually my first trip to Duna in KSP. For some reason I just never got around to really leaving the Kerbin SOI, mostly because I feel like playing without a life support mod for interplanetary trips is kind of cheating. Hence, my first craft were grossly over-engineered and still managed to almost not make it :p  So if I can borrow someone else's interplanetary expertise for my efforts, I definitely should because that is how a newbie like me succeeds instead of winding up with a bunch of stranded (or dead) colonists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mission 2, (Duna Transit Vehicle 2) is complete at Year 4 Day 250.  New habitation ring and resources, with 16 new Kerbal colonists (total 28 on the surface of Duna).  Also docked is the Duna Space Bus, the SSTO Duna ascent vehicle with 9 seats, shown drilling for ore, and converting to LOx ready for the first ascent test flight, to Ike and return to the Duna Space Station.  The DSS includes Emergency Ascent Vehicle, and with the DSB docked includes 28 pressurised seats.  Positive uplink includes 4 relay satellites, one in Ike polar orbit, one in very high Duna ecliptic orbit, and two in highly elliptical polar orbits over Duna's poles.  The large space tug is docked at the DSS with enough fuel for return to Kerbin.  Two Kerbals (Jeb and Bill) returned safely to Kerbin's surface on the previous transfer window, and the small NERVA tug which delivered them is on Minmus, fully fueled ready for Mission 3.

aBqptfr.png

kIAFcWL.png

nHsaipN.png

 

Edited by jinnantonix
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now