Panel

Alright, so this wouldn't work with a single launch. How much mass would the lander need to have? Altair was so big because it was used for lunar orbit insertion.

I ran some numbers based on data I could find online and some rough estimates. I think that an SLS could be used to send Orion and a 20 metric ton lander to the moon by using a NTR as a third stage. The block 1B SLS will be able to lift 105 metric tons to orbit. I guesstimate that the NTR stage could have a dry mass of about 10 metric tons. An Isp of 850 and the mass of the fuel at 40 tons, Orion spacecraft and a twenty ton lander could be propelled into lunar orbit entirely using this stage. Storage of cryogenic fuels over three days would give a test opportunity for NASA, who could the tech developed for this on a trip to Mars. The lander could be, at maximum, 20 tons. I think this is easily doable for the support of 4 crew during a 14 day lunar surface stay. This would allow for a deep study of the surrounding area on earlier missions, later ones being used to build and resupply a base. Also, it would allow for polar landings, since a new return window opens up every 14 days. The lander would launch from the surface, and dock with Orion in orbit. The lander would be discarded, and Orion could return to Earth under it's own power. 3 days there, a stay of 14 days, and 3 days back adds the total mission time to 20 days, within Orion's planned capabilities. Does this seem plausible for a return to the moon? I definitely had very rough estimates when I couldn't find good info on the mass of a dry NTR tank and engine.

Would anyone be interested in doing a set of community fixes, like with HGR? I don't have any modding experience, so it probably couldn't be me. I know that lot's of people use this mod, including me, and I'd love to see it working in 1.1.

I liked the crasher stage on the LK. It seemed like a very kerbal way of doing things.

Well first of all, you made an error in the number of people the LK could hold. It only held one cosmonaut. Also, LK-700 was a direct ascent method that was the only use of the UR-500k. That means that the entire spacecraft would land on and lift off of the moon. I can't find very much information on it, but I doubt they considered it for very long. Apollo did have some direct-ascent plans too, but it was found that the lunar rendezvous method would be safer.

The parachute fires with the bottom engine due to a staging error. Jeb tumbles through the air, grinning. As the person turned to run, the monster broke free of its restraints...

I don't think that crashing asteroids into Mars would increase its gravity by any significant amount. Asteroids are minuscule compared to a planet, and it would probably take millions of years to bring up the mass enough. Besides, there would probably be a lot of problems with composition.

I don't think that hydrogen could stay cool enough long enough for a mining operation. You would need a lot of hydrogen to inflate a balloon, and using leftover cooling fluid probably wouldn't be enough.

I think chemical rockets will be used for a long time in space travel. They provide high thrust, and are somewhat efficient.

Damn good

Some sort of 3.75 meter storage capsule. I'd like to make space stations like Skylab that function, but the lab is too wide to go on top of a hitchhiker can and look the part.

I think it would be a good idea to change the Mun's inclination. As others have pointed out, it's still large enough to capture you at 3 degrees. This would also help with the fact that solar powered missions will be eclipsed for long periods during transfer.

How much would it cost to restore one of them to museum condition? It could make a great exhibit.

It would be extremely difficult to do surface mining on Venus. The temperatures wouldn't really allow mining equipment to run, and even if we could solve that problem, we still have to deal with getting the materials back up. Balloons could be used to lift it, but getting it to the colony would be very difficult. Adding an engine would be extra mass to lift. If everything is already moving with the wind, sails won't work. I can't think of any other light means to return to the cloud colony.

"Cthulu" on a tablet using my foot and my eyes closed: Tstvfvg

6/10 Can it really fly?

You would certainly need a lot of battery for the solar panels. I could see the RTG being the better option, despite weighing over 4 times more than solar panels alone.

That sounds pretty cool, but doesn't sound like it's been funded. Soft robotics is still pretty unresearched anyway, so I think that we won't have something like this until the 2030s at least.

These are interesting. What causes them, and how strong are they?

Edited the poll to add asteroids.

Alright. Sorry for all the screenshots in the dark, I didn't think the launch was going to go as well as it did. There. As you can see, I lost a wing, the nosecone, and one engine.

What elements does the Mars surface have to offer? Could we materials from Mars that we couldn't from asteroids?

Breathing air is still has the advantage of being able to walk around in it, eliminating the need for seperate balloons.

What about ascent from Venus? I can't imagine it would be easy to build something that could take off in the air and reach orbit.

I think that just reading through that gives a good argument for Mars. Venus support is complicated, and complicated systems will often fail. In the meantime, Mars would only need a ground base and a fleet of rockets for the exchange of colonists.