Kerbal7

Hi Folks! I try not to over engineer my crafts and make them as low cost as possible to get the job done. I also run a lot of tourism contracts for $$$. The cheapest way for me to fly around 3 people, er, Kerbals, has been a MK1 Crew Cabin stacked on a MK1 Command Pod. Even after research and unlocking the MK1-2 Command Pod, that holds 3 Kerbals, the cheaper payload is the former. I can't find a reason to use the 3 seater, MK1-2 command Pod from a financial angle. Am I missing something? Here is a pic to show what I mean. <img src='https://i.imgur.com/DNtMTUP.png' />

Thanks for all the advice. I give them a go and find what works best for me.

Hi gang! I am not having much luck with building surface bases. I can't figure out how to connect surface modules together and manipulate ground objects. If I land 3 or 4 surface modules close together on the mun, for example, how do I move them around and connect them all together? And, if I have 10 Kerbals standing around an object, can they pick it up and move it into position? Any helpful, introductory links, to base building would be appreciated. I can only find advanced tutorials that skip the basic knowledge that I'm looking for. Thanks.

It would be near miraculous if it happens by mid-century. If it would happen, it would take a government effort, and that government would be Chinese. No NewSpace effort would be able to put that together, braggadocio notwithstanding. I don't see how. Apollo was a program that topped off with a tiny capsule that 3 people squeezed into. It went to the moon. BFR is supposed to carry 100+ people all the way to Mars and back. I think that's the idea for BFR? That's bucu $$$.

I'm not sure about that. I think DDE was right when he said... Rich people are very risk averse and like their privilaged lifestyles. What rich person wants to be isolated, living in a tin can on extremely dangerous Mars, when they could be in the French Riviera, or some other exotic place, enjoying beaches, sunshine, and beautiful people?

That's about the only good it's doing. Everything else up there could be done much cheaper without people. They are lab rats. I don't understand the necessity of such experiments. Subjecting crews to long distance space flights in health compromising zero G to save $$ doesn't seem ethical to me. So why the extended experiment? It's bad for humans, we already know this. Every long distance, deep space, craft, should be required to have a gravity wheel. But I think the primary reason for the ISS is political. It was born out of the fall of the Soviet Union. No idea. I've never looked at the necessay details of such a machine.

So there is money for building colonies on Mars, but no money for a tiny, spinning, artificial gravity module, on the ISS. Tsk...Tsk. (rolls eyes) Pipe dreams.

Every time I see the people floating around in the ISS, I ask myself, why on earth don't they create a spinning section so these people don't have to suffer the I'll health effects of weightlessness! I read it was because of money. Creating artificial gravity by rotation, 2001 style, would cost too much. Well hell's bells. People are talking about setting up colonies and interplanetary trade routes, when there isn't even enough money to make a spinning artificial gravity module on the ISS! Some folks got the wagon a few light years in front of the horse!

There will be no colonies, for a myriad of reasons. One being, humans evolved to live at earth's gravity. Humans living in low G and weightless environments is very, very, very bad, for human health.

Yes. Human spaceflight is a stunt. A gimmick. It sucked for me coming to that conclusion because I love manned spaceflight, but logic took me to that conclusion. For example, with the $$ of one manned Mars mission, you can send dozens and dozens and dozens of probes that can do much more for science. There is no scientific reason to send people to Mars unless you can terraform Mars. Mining on Mars? Its surface could be covered with gold bars and diamonds and you wouldn't make a profit going to get the stuff. A human colony on Mars? Forget about it. Colonizing Antarctica , the Sahara and Gobi desert would be far easier, safer, and cheaper! People's ambitions are WAY ahead of the technology. No Star Trek. The future of space exploration will be advanced robots. But!!, a vacation resort on the moon or LEO, space tourism, that's a very low % possibility.

I said "most" of the US space program is about items of a military purpose and aerospace subsidies. Pork. I did not say "all." Crumbs will fall from the table. Even the pinnacle of the US space program, Apollo, was for the Cold War. It was running up the hill and planting the flag as a rallying symbol and demonstration of power. It was dominoes falling in South East Asia. It was the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis. It was the fear of looking weak against the Soviet Union in front of the world. So when it boils down to it, the Apollo program was a military program as well. Sure, a little science, poetry, and nice symbology came out of it too, but that wasn't its mission. It's easy for us to dismiss the volatile political context of Apollo 50 years later. Everyone talking about Moon bases, Mars bases, space stations, exploring space, etc., during and after Apollo, forgot why all this space business took/takes place.

The US space program does not have the capability to put people into space. It hasn't for years. Americans pay Russians to take them into space. If space missions of a military nature required manned capable spacecraft, the US space program would have one. That says what the US program's priorities are and it isn't exploration and science for humanity's sake.

Couldn't agree more. The truth be told, The US space program is mostly about spy satellites, other national defense projects like missile defense, and aerospace industry subsidies. Pork. Manned Mars missions is nowhere to be seen.

There are no reusable rockets for a Mars program either. There are no reusable rockets in serious developement for a Mars program. Because there is no real Mars program. Because the price for such a program would be gargantuan. Zubrin, and no one else, is putting flags and footprints on Mars for 30 billion. If these people want to put an earnest program together they are going to need 10 times that. They talk about going to Mars, show us the 300 billion-ish. Somewhere around that number. Then we'll know they're going somewhere beyond pipe dreams.

Robert Zubrin is smoking dope if he seriously believes a colony could be put on Mars for 30 billion. Apollo cost more than that. The ISS in LEO is what, 130 billionish? And we are putting a colony on Mars for 30?? Not happening. Everything you need to survive on Mars would have to come from earth. And after you did get setup, things break through normal wear and tear. And you'd need more things sent to you, forever. So you don't die.

Why would anyone put a colony on Mars?? It a freezing, red desert, incapable of supporting human life. Cockroaches could not survive on Mars. And you want to see something out of this world? Look at what such a useless money pit would cost. It would be astronomical. You would never get away from Earth's influence. You'd need constant support to not die.

What could possibly be on Mars to make mining there profitable? If Mars was covered in gold dust it wouldn't be profitable to go get it and bring it back.

Space tourism is the only viable business model I see for putting people in space. If something is not profitable, it's not going to happen. Manned space flight is INCREDIBLY expensive. Grandiose visions like Mars missions and colonies, etc., are pipe dreams. They are not going to happen. No matter how much I wish they would. Sure, NASA, and every other space agency would love a crack at putting people on Mars! And they enjoy toying around with different ideas on how they'd do that with dramatic press releases that get a rise out of all the geeks. But NASA, and the other space agencies don't write the cheques. As soon as the people with the money see the sticker price on these visions they balk, and Mars, etc., gets kicked down the road another 20 years. Over and over. It's all hat and no cattle.

What you said, 100%. I highly doubt even any manned Mars mission will ever take place. Hmmm, 5% chance. And if one does it will be by China and for political reasons.

Hmmm. What great mods you're looking for would depend on your skill level. If you are a new player I don't think you'd have much use for an advanced colonization mod. But anyways, I'd suggest... Docking Port Alignment Kerbal Engineer ...to get you started. After a person got some experience and knew up from down I'd suggest getting the Umbra Space Industries stuff to expand their world and challenge. The Colonization and Life Support stuff for sure. Link. https://umbraspaceindustries.github.io/UmbraSpaceIndustries/ I'm new and this is what I've been using. I also have some strobes and lights but that's mostly 4 eye candy I like. I'd say you should get Chatterer too, as it seems to add a lot of good flavor to the game for everyone.

ISRU operations. Great. Thanks for sharing the knowledge!

A quick question. I'm halfway through the tech tree and have never used Radiator Panels, seemingly without ill effect. I have not found a use for Radiator Panels. What are the Radiator Panels used for? Thanks.

If you have ANY interest in space flight you want to buy KSP now. Gotta get the PC version for the mods, updates, and online community.

Sorry. Not that I'm aware of.

I think If anyone goes back to the moon and on to Mars it will be China. It will be around mid-century or before and mainly for political reasons. A symbolic move to display the falling of one great civilization and the rise of another to top dog. I don't see giant spinning space stations, colonies and space mining panning out. Too difficult and too expensive to be profitable or practical.