camacju

I took an orange tank to Moho and Minmus. [there was some glitch with the fuel meter - I have a bunch of fuel still]

@Quincunx I forgot about this mission Here's my Moho + Minmus landing. Moho might even be possible on a single stage. In VAB Starting takeoff run. I tried to minimize wing area so I need a longer takeoff run Some wings detached, climbing to 20 km Accelerating with the Rapier In orbit with almost 7000 dv Mun assists to eject from Kerbin First Kerbin assist already plotted Second Kerbin assist Third Kerbin assist gives me an Eve assist First Eve assist gives me a fourth Kerbin assist Second Eve assist brings orbit down, third Eve assist gives a plane change and brings orbit down further Moho assists and deep space maneuvers will reduce relative speed Second Moho assist Third Moho assist Fourth Moho assist Circularizing around Moho Moho descent Landed Moho ascent Moho escape burn Fourth Eve assist Eve flyby Kerbin aerocapture Minmus encounter Minmus landing Minmus ascent Aerobraking Landed

Here's my Aesthetics submission: Main launch: 148k funds Crew launch: 26k funds Total cost for three missions: 226k funds Mining rigs are expensive...

@jinnantonix Would this hab, reentry module, and skycrane count for aesthetics points? It's pretty hard to get a 4 kerbal crew module that doesn't look ugly and this is the best I managed to do.

Ok, so I'm not going to be able to cut costs below my non-mining submission using a mining submission. Here's the original Vulkan spacecraft: Here's the cheapest with-mining setup I could get: And here it is without the mining rig: The minimal mining rig costs almost as much as the entire Vulkan spacecraft including all the fuel needed for three missions. It's cheap enough to just launch more fuel in KSP that mining just isn't economical for a mission this small. edit: Actually, if the booster is smaller also, this might be competitive. I'll try flying it and see how I end up doing. second edit: Overall the mining version might be a couple thousand funds cheaper, but not enough that I'd want to fly it unless I find something significantly better. Instead, I'll try to get the aesthetics bonus.

No - you have to pack the lander in cargo containers and then unpack it in orbit. Won't give any advantage that way. I basically use EVA construction because 0.1 EVA propellant is a lot lighter and cheaper than a decoupler, so detaching used fuel tanks is easy

I feel like it's due to deltav-time tradeoffs. Cosmic rays scrambling computer memory, etc

All you need is enough for a Moon transfer and you're good to go anywhere probably (Wow I typed Mun by instinct at first )

I simply don't get that low Ah, I see you haven't visited Laythe or Eve yet

Yes - EVA construction was used for this

I highly doubt that - seems more like you are running into kraken effects. I've done -100m Jool dives before and experienced no loss of control, as well as -2km submarine dives.

Guessing they've got atmospheric occlusion cranked up

@JacobJHC Jool 5 in 17635 funds, with a bonus journey to the bottom of Laythe's oceans. This mission is basically the same as the other one but stripped down a lot further. Launch and gravity assists Laythe and Tylo The other moons Return

I forgot that I had been trying to do another low cost Jool 5 - this is my newest attempt: I use a much smaller Terrier stage and a larger Spark powered fuel tanker, as well as stripping down the landers significantly. I have three different landers now. I haven't flown the full mission yet but I should be able to do everything with a good amount of fuel left over.

update: just by removing extra fuel I got it to 29 tons. If you permit gravity assists I can reduce the needed mass by a lot but under 30 tons is still pretty good for a direct Tylo mission with no ions

Awesome! What's the total cost?

This challenge was pretty fun. SSTO carrier plane brings the Tylo lander suborbital over Tylo. Upper stage of Tylo lander serves as return module. Seats 3. Overall mass 34.4 tons and could be a good deal lighter. Probably 25-27 tons possible just iterating on this design. Journey to Tylo Back to Kerbin

Does "no orbital assembly" mean no rendezvous or docking at all? For example would this preclude an Apollo style mission?

Direct ascent Jool-5 has been done before - direct to Tylo should be pretty simple in comparison. Are gravity assists allowed?

https://streamable.com/2rva1n

The mk1 crew cabins have a hatch at both ends, that's why I have a 3/4 ring and leave one of the corners open. The kerbals exit the hatch, climb up the struts to the top of the hab, then climb the ladder back into the return vehicle

Is the Hitchhiker module allowed? Not sure whether it counts as a crew cabin and it's not a command module

I think it's just that the RA-2 is a small relay antenna

I forgot about that. Here you go: Large fairings are actually pretty expensive. Three Duna missions total 108.7k funds now. (And with that, I think I'm definitely under QF9E's Terrier based architecture, assuming a fourth launch is needed to put up probes and the orbiting space station) That won't be too difficult. The three probes are really small so they can hitch a ride wherever - I have enough margin for it. I'd just move one probe onto each of the two resupply missions at no change to total cost That will barely make a difference to my mission - the Nerv is pretty efficient anyway so mass ratio won't change much. That won't be hard to do - I was well within heat margins even with the lander cans so a deeper aerobrake will be fine. I'll just need to use a little more fuel to adjust the trajectory of the tug and orbital habitat.

Wow, relay probes are really expensive. Good thing my launcher has enough margin that they can hitch a free ride. Even cutting out all possible costs from the other modules, the main mission is 80k funds. I got the resupply missions quite a bit cheaper however - 16578 funds. DLC parts are pretty good for saving costs. Cost for three missions: 113132 funds