Ultimate Steve

Kerbin Collaborative Space Station

Recommended Posts

Here's what I have for docking pier designs to choose from:

Spoiler

1.25m-1.25m:

 DyFELJl.png

Fits into a Lyra (w/ custom fairing: 33,234). Could fit into a Z-1 but it's at the payload limit and that would also require a custom fairing. Attaches 5 medium docking ports (4 radial, one on the bottom) to the station. Power/control in service bay.

1.25m-1.25m (XL):

9Zs9HTn.png

Provides more clearance than the other one. Fits in a Lyra (33,994, custom fairing needed). Attaches 5 medium docking ports (4 radial, one on the bottom) to the station. Power/control in service bay.

2.5m-1.25m:

XtUKdhw.png

Can be launched with a Muon 6 (42,434). Technically should fit in a Lyra, but the fairing might be too big. Since a lot of the modules here are 2.5m, this might fit better than the 1.25-1.25 ones. Attaches 5 medium docking ports (4 radial, one on the bottom) to the station. Power/control in service bay.

2.5m-2.5m

OCVu8Dv.png

Can fit in a Muon 6 (50,302) or anything larger. Attaches 8 medium docking ports (radially) and one large docking port (on the bottom) to the station. Power/control in the service bay.

It seems like only one of these can be brought to the station, so if you don't mind I'll leave the choice of which to use up to you all.

Also, I made a docking tug:

Spoiler

XXxuSgI.jpg

Fits into a Z-1 (24,370) or a Lyra (23,370 + custom fairing). It can control itself, and has solar panels in the service bay for power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ultimate Steve this Is what I have so far today:

I have made an improved version of the fuel tug, here are the stats:

sEgPLw5.png

Mass: 15.3 Tons

Delta V: 3,382 m/s (Vacuum)

Launcher: Sky III

URGXFIW.png

I have designed a cheap science package, with some science experiments onboard:

Wxx9NF8.png

Mass: 0.93 Tons

Has: Clamp-o-Tron Docking Port (Can dock with fuel tug's 2 smaller docking ports)

Launcher: Z-1

psWJb8i.png

Now @Rover 6428 can add my name to the science package as well. Also its better than some stuff is cheaper now, and requires less time between launches.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GRS said:

What you guys could suggest about my part (i'm quite good in going big, i normally go big)

@Rover 6428 posted a possible list back, you could take something that isn't taken, or a better variant of something that exists, or something completely new. Also consider that big is not necessarily better, especially with the 600,000 fund budget.

4 hours ago, Alienwall said:

Here's what I have for docking pier designs to choose from:

Excellent job!

4 hours ago, Johnster_Space_Program said:

@Ultimate Steve this Is what I have so far today:

I have made an improved version of the fuel tug, here are the stats:

Also excellent job!

4 hours ago, Johnster_Space_Program said:

 

I have designed a cheap science package, with some science experiments onboard:

Be advised that, overall, the station needs: 

  • Have the materials bay, goo, thermometer, barometer, gravioli detector, seismometer, surface scanner, atmosphere sensor, sentinel telescope, and narrow band scanner on board.

As in Part II. Those last 2 science experiments might benefit from launching on something else, though. Be advised, these experiments also get a bit expensive.

Also be advised that you're submitting an awful lot of stuff.

 

To be honest, guys, this is already going a whole lot better than I'd expected it to! Great job to all, and I wish you continued success!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the crew vehicles we have to design, can they be SSTOs (if they don't use RAPIERs)? And would recovery change the budget?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, fulgur said:

For the crew vehicles we have to design, can they be SSTOs (if they don't use RAPIERs)? And would recovery change the budget?

Hmm, now that's something that I didn't consider, and it wasn't really intending for an SSTO to be proposed... But, I didn't consciously make any rules against it.

From the rules:

Man rating guidelines for crew vehicles:

  • Backup parachute
  • Backup electrical systems
  •  Can land on both water and land
  • Must possess a launch escape system that will work at any point during ascent
  • Must have a docking port
  • Must have full RCS capability
  • Must have an antenna
  •  Must not use EVA seats
  • Must be able to operate without a crew
  • Must launch on a man rated launch vehicle

If crew and cargo vehicles are reusable, the cost of that vehicle will be dropped to 33%.

End rules.

It looks like those rules would encourage a traditional capsule design, but if your spaceplane is cheap enough, because it is a lifter and a crew vehicle, it  *could* possibly drop the cost per flight to below the cost of a reusable capsule and an expendable lifter.

The only thing I have a problem with is the last bullet point, must launch on a man rated launch vehicle.

And this isn't part of the rules, but I said it earlier in the thread:

Quote

 

Just remember that whatever crew/cargo vehicles you design, they need to fly on existing rockets!

When I wrote the "man rated launch vehicle" requirement I was not thinking of spaceplanes, so because it's sort of a grey area...

Sure, but just this once.

New rule:

  • Overall, one SSTO can be accepted for either a crew vehicle or a cargo vehicle. The government is intrigued by this idea and will pay for it to be man-rated if it follows these guidelines:
    • Can go-around on landing
    • No solids except in abort system
    • At least some margin
    • Adhere to all of the normal crew vehicle guidelines
    • I will make the final decision on man rating and will provide suggestions, etc.

You may propose it, but it's up to everyone else if it gets in. Luckily, there isn't much competition in that department yet.

EDIT: There is a new requirement for man rated capsules. It must be able to operate without crew.

Edited by Ultimate Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Plan:

1) Control (Administrative) module [@VA7NFH]

2) Habitation Module 1 [@Rover 6428]

3) Power Array 1 [@MSA]

4) Laboratory Module [@Rover 6428]

5) Science Package [@Johnster_Space_Program]

6) Docking Pier [@Alienwall]

7) Communication Tower [@VA7NFH]

8) Escape pods [@Barzon Kerman]

(First Crew arrives [@Barzon Kerman])

9) Fuel Depot Module [@Johnster_Space_Program]

10) Laboratory Module 2 [@Rover 6428] (Piloted by @Alienwall)

11) Habitation Module 2 [@swjr-swis]

12) Cupola & EVA Modules [@GRS] (Piloted by @Barzon Kerman)

13) Power Array 2 [@MSA]

(Second Crew arrives [@fulgur)

14) Science Package [@Johnster_Space_Program] (Piloted by @VA7NFH)

If you have issues or suggestions on other modules, dm me.

This also applies to the order of launches.
Also, It would be nice if the crew members would be named after the participants (like in collaboration station)

Edited by Rover 6428

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Rover 6428 said:

So far this is the plan:

 

Again, I would like to stress that the limit is 2 modules per person. While some people have suggested more than two modules (which is fine) only two per person can be on the final list. thank you for taking the time to organize the plan, though!

Edited by Ultimate Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Again, I would like to stress that the limit is 2 modules per person. While some people have suggested more than two modules (which is fine) only two per person can be on the final list. thank you for taking the time to organize the plan, though!

Some modules are the same. There is just multiple of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rover 6428 said:

Some modules are the same. There is just multiple of them

Correct, and I'm sorry if I'm being confusing, but there can only be two modules launched per person and 2 modules accepted per person, regardless if they are the same design or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Correct, and I'm sorry if I'm being confusing, but there can only be two modules launched per person and 2 modules accepted per person, regardless if they are the same design or not.

This is the only way so far to build the station that fits the requirements with this amount of people. I can say that other people will fly my modules, but that still would not be enough. If I were you, I would consider softening the rules a little bit in order to make the challenge possible with the given amount of participants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rover 6428 said:

This is the only way so far to build the station that fits the requirements with this amount of people. I can say that other people will fly my modules, but that still would not be enough. If I were you, I would consider softening the rules a little bit in order to make the challenge possible with the given amount of participants.

...Alright. I would prefer if you didn't utilize this, but I guess separating designs from launches could be alright... The limit is now 2 designs accepted and 3 modules launched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

...Alright. I would prefer if you didn't utilize this, but I guess separating designs from launches could be alright... The limit is now 2 designs accepted and 3 modules launched.

Now it's perfectly feasible. We only need one independent designer for Stage 12 and we are ready for liftoff. Do you want to participate by any chance?

Edited by Rover 6428

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rover 6428 said:
8 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

 

Now it's perfectly feasible. We only need one independent designer for Stage 12 and we are ready for liftoff. Do you want to participate by any chance?

I'm not supposed to.

Also there's still the crew/cargo vehicles, budget considerations, and a general plan of what will dock to what, but you are almost done with the proposal and module planning phase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ultimate Steve said:

I'm not supposed to.

Also there's still the crew/cargo vehicles, budget considerations, and a general plan of what will dock to what, but you are almost done with the proposal and module planning phase.

I think it would be okay it people just dock to wherever they can. Budget will be worried at the last moment, as I don't know the total sum of the cost of all the vehicles so far. (due to some of them not being made yet)

9 hours ago, GRS said:

What you guys could suggest about my part (i'm quite good in going big, i normally go big)

could you do iva & cupola?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rover 6428 said:

I think it would be okay it people just dock to wherever they can. Budget will be worried at the last moment, as I don't know the total sum of the cost of all the vehicles so far. (due to some of them not being made yet)

Budget thing understandable. I would really like if there was a docking plan, however, once the modules are all designed. Can you imagine what would happen if the ISS was built without a docking plan...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Budget thing understandable. I would really like if there was a docking plan, however, once the modules are all designed. Can you imagine what would happen if the ISS was built without a docking plan...

It would be nice though if I wasn't the only one doing the homework. I have REAL one to do BTW.

total budget is :funds:4200000 btw

Edited by Rover 6428

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rover 6428 said:

It would be nice though if I wasn't the only one doing the homework. I have REAL one to do BTW.

total budget is :funds:4200000 btw

@Johnster_Space_Program You are pretty invested in this challenge, any suggestions for the program?

As in 4.2 million is what the cost is currently at? Ouch. 18 launches (14+4 vehicles) means 233k per flight... There's got to be some way that can be optimized... Maybe I was being too restrictive with 600k, as that means 33k per launch... I also didn't anticipate 14 modules, or as many large modules, though... If you can't get it down then I might help you out, but only if y'all make an effort to reduce costs and can't get it to the budget.

And @Rover 6428 don't feel like you have to do everything. I'm sorry if I'm making you feel like that, that was not my intent. Best of luck on your homework!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

As in 4.2 million is what the cost is currently at? 

no, that's the overall budget for the program (Excluding GRS's money) I didn't count up the cost yet

Edited by Rover 6428

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rover 6428 said:

no, that's the overall budget for the program (Excluding GRS's money)

Where are you getting that number from? The budget is and always has been 600k, although I may increase that due to the amount of challenge participation. It's 600k overall and not per person, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

It's 600k overall and not per person, sorry.

oh ... that will be problematic

 

If somebody counts up the cost of each rocket * number of launches (look at plan), that would be helpful.

Edited by Rover 6428

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarification! Will continue designing tomorrow GMT. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Rover 6428 said:

If somebody counts up the cost of each rocket * number of launches (look at plan), that would be helpful.

I can do that on a google spreadsheet and recommend changes to bring down cost for everyone in total under 600k. I recommend we have at least 50-75k in funds left out of the 600k in case a bad random event where we have to pay funds or something else bad happens... 

 

Edit: Here is the first look at it, currently has stats for all launch vehicles:

llf6zWM.png

 

Edited by Johnster_Space_Program

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rover 6428 said:

could you do iva & cupola?

I think i'll find some references from internet, for the Cupola ones, about "IVA", i think you probably meant "EVA".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ultimate Steve and @Rover 6428 I have made this google spreadsheet to help out with figuring out costs like rover 6428 said someone should do, number of launches, current plans, etc.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1a-bhkzUqAgszINbBj0dLyvn2UGxF_EBI-Y3NJv5S9K8/edit?usp=sharing

If you have anything to add to it that would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have begun R&D for the reusable Wisp 1 SSTO. Here's the Launch Escape System (LES) tests.

Spoiler

bLstsG5.png

The Wisp 1 is probe-controlled, has a cargo bay full of supplies and solar. It has one retractable antenna and two 1x6 solar panels. There are 2 backup fuel cells and a tank of monoprop. The twin side pods are the Launch Escape System.
 

Spoiler

PfSBQEg.png

Liftoff with the emergency [7] Procedure (Abort is parachutes).

2trJCTF.png

And we begin to flip over backwards. Ah well...

JY1ebU2.png

Detaching LES.

gJxbh7f.png

Parachutes out...

c2miQVa.png

And safely down.

Next, we attach it to a solid rocket missile, for more LES testing.

Spoiler

I4r5UIA.png

We attach it to a Vector missile.

TVu5KGK.png

SPEEED IS KEEEY! (Voyager, the Final Warning by Ultimate Steve)

JG5HTPU.png

And we escape the launch! (I turned the Vector off and the decoupler on with [7]) and escaped. It's behind the KER readout.

MlzfXJ6.png

Parachutes out...

IpnQqhq.png

And deployed!

MN5sSAS.png

Home safe.Well, apart from an explosive fuel tank. Nobody cares about those though right?

Next, we attach it to a bigger suborbital missile to test heating.

Spoiler

6XL5smK.png

But it doesnt go very fast and I'm bored of testing this now so the mighty power of [F12] is invoked to send it into orbit so I can test heating.

0oUTj2C.png

Deorbiting over KSC

8G8m39q.png

It doesn't want to point retrograde! AAAAAAAAAAA

4T1K8jM.png

Nevertheless, the Mk2 parts are very heat resistant and nothing explodes!

ouzzLTP.png

'Chutes out...

85tO13t.png

And deployed! We're safe!

Now we have to build a cheap Mk2 SSTO. And add docking capability.

Question: do I have to add a command pod or can it be probe controlled?

@Johnster_Space_Program: The Wisp 1 preliminary test vehicle is estimated to cost 46.6k funds. 33% off due to re-usability.

Edited by fulgur
more precise cost estimate, due to testing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.