Ultimate Steve

Kepler, Hubble, and now Chandra... and at the rate JWST is being delayed and all of the problems it's facing... We've got TESS but that's a different kind of telescope entirely.

While this is the closest comparison we can make, Skylab and the ISS are two very different beasts.

Shelf life of the Soyuz... IIRC it's rated for 215 days in orbit and usually does 200-ish. Much longer than that and the fuel will dissolve the fuel tanks and other bad things will start to happen.

After I got over the "getting SAS" hump, science became much easier to get, although the exact position of the "hump" may have changed after V0.5. Once you have access to SAS you can get to Statmun and Graymun, and once you get antennas and upgrade the tracking station you can go to Kerbmun and the Derbin system. As far as the Vau base/Virtuoso mission goes, the experiments I had were the science bay, the mystery goo, barometer, thermometer, surface sample, eva report, and crew report, giving 7 experiments per situation... Land and water give us 14 experiments. Because you can't take a sample of the air, flying high and low both have 6 experiments, so that's 12, so that's a total of 26, of which I got 21, forgetting 5... Best not to EVA while re-entering! When I do bring Virtuoso home, though, I will need a rescue ship most likely... It was designed with the old Mesbin in mind, 3km/s to get back to low orbit, and the new one takes about 3.5-4. The science will be worth it, but I don't think it will fill the tech tree.

Hold on there, we've got to walk before we can run! I've just sent my first interplanetary probe. I'm on purpose not zooming in on the planets so I'm surprised when I see them. Actually, with the fact that it takes forever to go interplanetary... I think you did a great job with the Mesderbin system as there are 5 bodies to explore relatively close. Going interplanetary with crew is my main hurdle that I rarely pass in a career. Interplanetary in Whirligig is also a bit more intense than interplanetary elsewhere... 4km/s to Mesbin escape from low orbit. I did just unlock the nuclear engine, though. Anyway... Chapter 7 - Going Farther

You have to right click on the Kerbal and click Deploy Chute, or press "P."

So now we won't go flying off trying to land?

Loving the art style! Keep it up!

I am having a weird issue where if I exit the Mesderbin SOI I'm teleported to the far outer reaches of the solar system, super far away... Do you know what might be causing it? I'm going to try uninstalling Sigma Binary and see if it's fixed. EDIT: Removing Sigma fixed it.

The hole is on the orbital module, not the descent module. The orbital module burns up.

Another headache... An Emirati astronaut was supposed to launch on MS-12 and come down on MS-10. That's not happening now.

A 20 ton spacecraft... Wow. That's in the ballpark of Orion! I'm going to take a guess and say it's designed for lunar operations to some extent.

I'm pretty sure that unless you have a really old computer this will not affect you, so I think this will go over well. If you have a really old computer then you probably can't run KSP well in the first place...

I'm pretty sure that a 2 burn hohmann transfer is more Delta-V efficient than slowly spiraling out... Although using ion drives to spiral out would be more mass efficient due to their efficiency, but not as Delta-V efficient or cost efficient... The point is mostly moot as SpaceX's stage is not ion powered.

I realize that most of the items on my list were wildly impractical, risky, or in cases borderline impossible, but my intent was to cover all of the possible options, not the probable ones, so sorry if I made it look like I was seriously advocating most of that.

Okay, let's talk about implications... If Soyuz is not cleared for flight before December (or early January if we want to be a bit risky) then the fuel tanks of Soyuz MS-09 will be dangerously corroded by the fuel they carry and the crew will have to come home, which is not good for the station, as a lot of the crew's work is maintenance. Also this isn't as important but I think we'd all like to keep our streak of having someone in space at all times. So we need to keep the station constantly manned. We have a few options. Generally the list becomes more impractical as you go further down, but that's a trend, not a rule. 1 - Just send Soyuz MS-11 according to schedule. Soyuz is really reliable. If the investigation is finished in time, or even if it's not fully concluded, the failure is probably a related to a manufacturing defect. Increasing inspections at the factory should be sufficient. Chances are that MS-11 will not fail. But the chance is there. 2 - Send Soyuz MS-11 on schedule but unmanned. If we're being really risk averse or the investigation takes too long, MS-09 will have exceeded its warranty and will need to be jettisoned. An unmanned MS-11 could serve as a return vehicle and a buffer until more crew could arrive, although the crew of MS-09 would be in for a really long mission. And it would cause more crew scheduling issues, notably a big wave for the crew lineup and pushing of the last American bought seats to later flights. 3 - Jettison MS-09 and wait with no escape ship. There has not been an incident on the ISS causing need for an evacuation. There have been a few close calls, though. Simply waiting for a spacecraft with return seats to arrive is an option, the chances that something catastrophic will happen are rather low. This also extends the MS-09 crew mission time. And also will make the officials wary. 4 - Jettison MS-09 and wait with CRS-16 as an escape ship. Wait for unmanned MS-11 to return the crew. Dragon 1 is a proven re-entry platform with 15 CRS re-entries and IIRC 2 test flight re-entries with no failures (but possibly some parachute anomalies). In the event that the crew need to go back while waiting for a proper return module, they could borrow CO2 scrubbers and oxygen replenishers from MS-09 if they can get them out and rig up some padding for use as seats. They might not even need extra oxygen if they can land quickly enough. But Dragon 1 was never intended for crew, this will again make the officials wary. If needed, instead of only being used as an emergency descent vehicle, CRS-16 could be the planned descent vehicle, but there is no way that would clear NASA review. If this does, then it could also be fitted with seats and scrubbers before launch. 5 - Jettison MS-09. Keep an escape ship on standby (Dragon 1), send MS-11 manned, return crew of MS-09 on MS-11, MS-11 on MS-12, and MS-12 on DM-2. Same idea as 4, but chaining the Soyuz return times until DM-2, with its up to 7 seats, would arrive with only 2 on board, providing ample return room. Same cons as 4. Dragon 2 will have been tested on DM-1 and the inflight abort so it will be proven by now. 6 - 4 but with DM-1 as an escape ship. Slightly better than 4, actually, as Dragon 2 was designed to carry crew, but will not have undergone a re-entry test. 7 - 5 but with DM-1 as the return ship. The daisy chaining of Soyuz descent flights could be ended earlier using DM-1 as the planned return pod. Same cons as 6. 8 - Fast-track commercial crew and launch a replacement crew on DM-2 or the second flight of Starliner. Very possible, Boeing was in talks for this before the launch failure even happened. Both Dragon and Starliner can seat 7 if need be. You'd have to get them up before 2019 (not happening) or else use an interim spacecraft as an emergency descent pod, like in option 4. It could be CRS-16 or DM-1. If the need extremely arises, the inflight abort could even be launched as DM-2. Boeing isn't doing an inflight abort, and SpaceX did a pad abort already, although that was ages ago. 9 - REALLY fast-track CC and launch a replacement crew on DM-1 or Starliner flight 1. Not happening. Legislation and common sense will not allow SpaceX or Boeing to fly crew on the first flight of an unproved vehicle. 10 - Vent propellant tanks on Soyuz MS-09 and refuel later. If the problem is corrosion and the spacecraft can last longer if it weren't for the fuel, either vent or burn all of the fuel (ISS hyper-reboost?) but keep it attached and refuel it later. I don't know if this is possible. It certainly wasn't designed for in-orbit refueling so I doubt this will be considered. But, if the Soyuz/Progress ports are androgynous then you could use another Soyuz or Progress to de-orbit MS-09. 11 - Ask China to launch a Shenzhou. I read that the docking ports on Shenzhou are similar to the APAS-89, which are similar to the APAS-95, which are similar to the IDA... I think. I could be wrong. If (very big if) the Chinese have a Shenzhou lying around, then the docking port might be able to be ripped out and replaced with an ISS compatible one, or even modified. An adapter could also be built, going Chinese port on Shenzhou -> Chinese port -> Adapter structure -> ISS compatible port -> ISS. But at this point I'm grasping at straws, and IIRC NASA is banned from collaborating with China. China would also need to be paid somehow. And Shenzhou can only carry 2. 12 - Launch Orion on a Delta-IV Heavy with crew to replenish ISS crew. REALLY not going to happen, but if aliens came and told us to do this or the world would be destroyed then we could pull it off... I know that the Orion for EM-1 is at least somewhat near to being done, but I don't know how close the next D-IVH is... And D-IVH is not man rated. But it has gone its whole life without a big failure and has carried Orion (albeit without a service module - a big deal, probably can't dock without one) before. The service module for EM-1 is in storage IIRC, and you could launch it with only a little bit of fuel as to not overwhelm D-IVH. 13 - Launch Orion on D-IVH with 1 or 0 crew. Same as the above but just as a return vehicle for the crew of MS-09. 14 - 12 but with Falcon Heavy. Advantages: the next FH is probably going to be ready before the next D-IVH. Disadvantages: FH is not man-rated (although F9 will be), FH has only flown once, and FH has not carried Orion, nor was it designed to. 15 - 13 but with Falcon Heavy. Self explanatory. 14 - Launch crew on CRS-16. Like the options for using CRS-16 as a return ship, except modifying it on the ground to add seats, basic ECLSS, and other basic amenities, many of which can probably be ripped from Dragon 2. It's better than crewing DM-1 because it's a proven platform, but worse than crewing DM-1 because it wasn't designed for this. I think I covered most of the possible options... Almost none are actually practical, though given all the unwillingness to take risks (not necessarily a bad thing). I know more than half of these are utterly ridiculous, but thoughts?

That quote was in reference to an earlier failure from several decades ago. My numbers are from the launch simulation.

That is an understatement. SpaceX certainly aren't the only ones focusing on looks!

Okay, some people on the NSF forum did the math... Judged by the very next few frames of the CGI, a few seconds after the failure, the rocket was travelling at about 1.8km/s at an altitude of about 50km at an angle of about 24 degrees... Which unfortunately nets an apogee between 70 and 90 kilometers, dependent on drag and other sources of error. So that means that Nick Hague is not an astronaut.

I'm pretty sure the tiny fairing LES that they used was solid, but not 100% sure.

On the Soyuz it is a tradition to hang one or two soft objects from the ceiling as gravity indicators. I wonder if we'll ever get the full cockpit view, it must have been bouncing like crazy!

Alright, I'm probably going to have to cancel my attempt, unfortunately. I got the drop pod and the reusable second transfer stage done and 90% tested, but then I took out KJR and the game does not like it when there is 1000 tons pressing down on a single 2.5m joint... I tried a few different autostrut options, and no luck. Before physics even starts, it seems, the entire drop pod falls and phases through the rest of the ship. I can't use heaviest part autostrut, because the heaviest part is a fuel tank, and when the drop pod is decoupled it's an ore tank, meaning two different configurations have to work. I can't do root part because the root changes. I still can experiment with hundreds of normal struts, but this top section is already around 350 parts, not counting the first half of the transfer stage or the launch vehicle... It might end up too big for my computer to handle. Also my internet went out so I'm using my school laptop at school, so I don't have pictures right now. And that's just trying to make it withstand 1g, during the Laythe landing profile I had the accelerometer pegged at 15g...

Okay... I've looked on NSF and they are saying the landing site is about 260 miles away from the launch site. So the question remains, did they briefly enter space? NSF is saying that was an old version of the profile, in this version the LES is jettisoned about 3 seconds before separation.

The moment my internet goes out so I can't see a launch, something interesting happens...

Okay, call me crazy... I might not finish this, but I'm attempting to do 1000 tons of ore to Laythe. I just want to check and see if this mission profile is okay - can I keep the main mothership in orbit and drop the "container" full of ore down to the surface? Also, I still have KJR installed, but I'm going to take it out soon, I want a proof of concept before I have to take it out and add 8 bajillion struts... Progress on the drop pod: