sevenperforce

I thought there was virtually no sunlight on Eve's surface.

I used Tweakscale without penalty earlier.

I mean a burn during entry. "There are also some significant differences between the vehicles, most notably the aerodynamic control surfaces used to help guide New Glenn's first-stage in for a landing. Reportedly, that negates the need for a re-entry deceleration burn." https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/07/blue-origin-shows-how-new-glenn-rocket-will-fly-and-land/

Precisely. We didn't go to the moon because we had a Saturn V; we built a Saturn V in order to go to the moon.

Someone just needs to invent a quantum supercomputer (or a cold MHD fusion reactor) that can only work in microgravity. Then sit back and watch the money pour in.

I have a few thoughts.... The issue of payload capability goes hand-in-hand with the issue of launch cadence. The reason SpaceX promises success with reuse is that it can loft payloads which are in high demand: specifically, large comsats to GTO. Something like 70% of SpaceX's launch manifest is commercial, and GTO missions compose the majority of those. Ideally, a super-heavy lift vehicle would be able to sustain a high enough launch cadence to avoid bankrupting due to downtime. So the ideal solution to the super-heavy payload problem is a combination of payloads and cadence. All that to say: commercial payloads are really needed to enable the optimal use of SHLVs. But what heavy commercial payloads are there, really? Is there any commercial viability in sending a bunch of really ridiculously large comsats to GTO? I kinda doubt it. Is there any commercial value in going to the moon? Not really. What about asteroid mining? That's promising, but it wouldn't support a high launch cadence. If you can figure out a way to fund a network of commercial space stations, on the other hand...

I'll give it a shot. Bonus: you don't even need chutes, since you can autorotate down. Dry mass would be a touch high--you'd need a bunch of RTGs inside a fixed fairing and a ton of reaction wheels. Alternately, you could skip the RTGs and use fuel cells.

Here's Part 1 of my entry: So far: Build an SLS Block 1B + 25 points Ore scanner! + 5 points Power-crazy + 10 points Science!!! + 20 points Probe Extravaganza! + 100 points Early Concepts (partially completed) + 50 points Looking forward to the Jool departure and the rest of the mission! EDIT: Is there a reason you did Laythe rather than Vall? Vall is more similar to Europa...

As a followup to this mission report and satisfaction of Mission III in this challenge, I submit: Laythe Clipper! Phase 1: Design, Construction, and Launch The trickiest thing, other than packing all the correct components onto the spacecraft, was getting it all to fit inside the 3.5-meter fairing. But I managed! Exploration Upper Stage, powered by four LV-T45s and using two separate tanks inside a fairing to match the design of the EUS. A peek under the hood at Europa Clipper itself. Looks pretty cluttered, I know. It has its own propulsion and RCS, two survey scanners, a large relay antenna, assorted instruments, tweakscaled solar panels, four RTGs, heat management, four ion-powered cubesat probes, a large bipropellant-powered atmosphere-skimming probe, and a lander. Yes, I know the current Europa Skipper does not include plans for a lander, but I went with one of the earlier plans. Majestic on the pad. SSME ignition. Liftoff! Nice shot under the engines. Not the most efficient ascent, but I have fuel for days. Europa Clipper and the EUS, though large, are small enough that I could get into orbit on the boosters+core alone. At least it's nice to have a ton of control authority on the engines. Booster separation! Way steeper an ascent than I'd like, so I'm going to nose over quickly and then jettison my fairing. Fairing away! Second star to the right, and straight on till morning. MECO while my periapsis is still low enough for booster disposal. Safe periapsis for disposal! Separation and firing up the EUS. Orbit achieved! That was easy. Honestly I probably could have done this with the ICPS. Shot of the core post-separation -- note the support column for the EUS. Silhouettes are always nice. Back on the daylit side, verifying systems. Closeup of the EUS; note the octagonal thrust structure. All systems go, ready for Jool departure!

Unrelated: any idea about how BO is going to manage entry without an entry burn on the NG?

Oh shoot! Now I have to redo it. Completely messed that up.

If you go back to my last two missions, you'll note that I made careful use of Tweakscale to get more realism at quite a few levels. The RL10s on the EUS are going to push upwards of 450 seconds of isp; I'd rather use a tweakscaled Rhino for the better ISP and more similar appearance. Is this okay? Another thought -- you can do additional requirements for the lander, like battery-only.

4 sets, unless they can make a new set in under 2 weeks---just to have a spare in case of a failed landing. The joke being that they won't have failed landings.

I'm excited! This will be my first time going to the Jool system. A few questions: Are we required to use LV-T45s for the EUS, or is the requirement merely to use four engines? I'd like flexibility with what engines I put on the EUS. Is a fly-by defined as entry into the Laythe SOI? The real Europa Clipper mission will conduct 45 fly-bys of Europa. I see an opportunity for additional points here; can it be "at least 5 fly-bys, 15 points, 1 additional point for each additional fly-by, max 45"? You'd also want to add that the photography element is only required for the first five flybys, as you'd otherwise end up with rather oversized albums. I will use the Early Concepts for extra points, but can you elaborate on the Later Concepts element for other people? Is there a launch vehicle requirement?

Amusing thought I saw on another forum: Now SpaceX only needs two sets of grid fins, one set for each coast. At least until FH flies.

...still not a meaningful challenge, I'm afraid. Most of my KSP launch vehicles are pushing 2 km/s well before they leave the atmosphere.

What exactly is the part list on this?

100,000 miles? So...circumnavigate Kerbin forty-two times?

Okay, here's my entry. I did use Tweakscale to make the structural fuselage large enough to match; hope that's okay. I had to keep nerfing parts with tweakables because otherwise I was getting into orbit on my first and second stages. Anyway, there you have it!

Elon said that RTLS would have been pushing the envelope (since CRS-7 was carrying BEAM, which weighed down Dragon a bit), while they were much more optimistic about an ASDS landing in comparison. In any case, somewhere between 7 and 10 tonnes is probably the cutoff.

Seems straightforward enough. I'll do it! I love replication challenges. One thing you can do to make them more interesting, though, is to list off the various characteristics of the given vehicle and assign scores to them. For example, for Sparta+WRESAT, point-contributing attributes could be any combination of these: Three stage Cone-shaped, battery-powered satellite Satellite does not decouple from third stage Enough battery power for five days Polar orbit At least two scientific instruments Unmanned Single-engine, non-gimbaling liquid first stage Aerodynamic guidance only on first stage Solid-fueled second stage Solid-fueled third stage Just something to think about!

When do we get to start on Europa Clipper or EM-2?

Well, they did apparently get a nozzle into it by the end....

Falcon 9 definitely can't pull RTLS for any LEO flight. If you'll recall, the very first booster to be reflown was from a CRS mission, and it landed on OCISLY. I don't know the exact number, but I think it's somewhere around 7 tonnes to LEO; anything below that can reserve enough propellant for RTLS; anything above that needs an ASDS. An Iridium constellation launch weighs in at 9.6 tonnes. Also, the Iridium sats go a bit higher than most LEO payloads, and the polar inclination doesn't help.

Right, that's what I meant. The Vandy landing pad is under construction and will be ready quite soon. Then again, the Block 3 booster + Block 4 US combo doesn't have margin for an RTLS with Iridium constellation launches anyway.