Northstar1989

Glad you finally found a challenge to put your not-inconsiderable aircraft design skills to use... I think I've finally got a working SSTABK design, though. The final version of my 'Blackhawk', as I've named the final version, is probably my highest-lift small plane design ever- yet due to the very thick wings it is still in a very compact (and controllable) package. It has great maneuverability- and begins to hit its prime performance above 7800 meters on Kerbin- which not coincidentally is the air pressure equivalent of just about sea level on Duna... And, finally, it has a TWR of more than 2 when it activates its 5 LFO-fueled engiens (killing my framerate in the process) to get that last kick of speed out of the atmosphere. Here are some screenshots of it during its initial climb on Kerbin: It's currently running in the background, and is at 11,000 meters and climbing quite rapidly with a just 7 degree heading- so it won't be too long now before it reaches max altitude and I push it into orbit. After that, the rest is cake- it just needs to make a couple refueling pit-stops (one just after reaching orbit- which uses up all its LFO mix, and one in orbit of the Mun or Minmus before its transfer burn). *Shudder* I wonder what this design would perform like with an UPGRADED fission reactor, or a FUSION reactor! (I could increase my thrust by at least 50-100% with fusion- without adding any weight, though the reactor fuel doesn't last nearly as long- and the required tech node is very expensive and advanced. I'm able to finally see it now though- I just need 2000 more Science- which means sending some Jool-system probes most likely...) Anyways, my design will actually have to wait quite a while for its transfer window to Duna... The last one is pretty much just closing now (and it only can pack about 1200 Delta-V, not enough for anything more than a low-energy transfer with Aerocapture on Duna from Munar or Minmus orbit...) Regards, Northstar EDIT: By the way, I'm sorry if I sounded a little bitter before. It's just... You do realize I had a thermal turbojet plane design (the Eagle Mk2) already en-route to Duna with a 31,250 meter altitude ceiling on Kerbin and the capability to reach a speed of over 1000 m/s at that height (faster than orbital speed on Duna) when you posted that first, sickeningly-laggy 20-seat design that basically raped the Scoreboard, right? I was poised to sweep into first place, and then... Ughhh... The Eagle Mk2 would have to cruise at 14,000 meters on Duna just to meet that score (and, while it should be more than capable of that altitude form a TWR and lift perspective, its one giant atmosphere intake probably isn't nearly sufficient for the job now that KSP Interstellar nerfed the 1.25 meter level-2 fission reactor ISP...) Oh well. The Eagle Mk2 wasn't a SSTDABK, and she did handle a little poorly... My 'Blackhawk' design should take the scoreboard nonetheless- if you don't manage to swamp it with a 40-Kerbal mega-design my CPU would die simulating first...

I agree on the awarding Kerbal-capacity too much thing, but the rules and scoring guidelines were already set out, and I doubt he's going to change them. Though maybe, like I suggested, there could be new "categories"- like one for speedsters, one for heavy lifters, etc. Anyways, so did you get either of these designs to Duna legit- or did you just hyperedit them all there? I ask because I need to know what I'm trying to beat, of course. The Hummingbird (with its 7 propellers) pretty much pushed my CPU to its limits, so I designed this: Just getting her through her initial climb now (MechJeb, in the background- which can barely control her), but she can climb at less than 7 m/s at Kerbin sea level- so it looks like I was right about that whole wing-weight thing... This design pretty much focused on getting the highest wing weights and lift coefficients possible with one engine and a 1.25 meter fuselage... Once again, it looks like you might be ready to pull the more powerful computer trump-card though: my computer would pretty much DIE trying to run that many Firespitter propellers at once- and that's without even running FAR- which must make your game even more laggy... It does look a LOT like my earlier electric propeller designs though- before I moved to Thermal Turbojets. Which don't get as high TWR at low-altitude (up to the equivalent of about 5000 meters on Duna), but keep working into much thinner atmosphere... I challenge you to build something that will fly HIGHER, rather than carry more Kerbals, actually. *THAT* would be a better show of skill, rather than just computer-strength... (my computer pretty much caps out at 7 engines and 6 control surfaces- any more of either and I'm running in the red/orange...)

I present, the flight of the 'Hummingbird' She's a maneuverable little plane, and has a certain beauty. I'm definitely not done with refinements- but this model can cruise at 15,744 meters on Kerbin (heading East), at over 188 m/s which equates to: 4614.7 meters on Duna based purely on air pressure (4.3% of Kebin Sea Level) approx. 7000 meters on Duna when you factor in the 30% gravity (adds about one scale-height of 3000 meters) approx. 7500-8500 meters on Duna when you factor in the reduced planetary radius as well (and reduced effective gravity at speeds that are a significant fraction of the resultant lower orbital speeds- calculation assumes a slightly increased cruising speed at 7500 meters vs. 4000 meters) Of course, that's just numbers- but I look forward to putting this model, or an improved one, on Duna...

On a similar note, it also turns out that the maximal thrust values weren't actually reduced in the newest version of the KSP Interstellar mod. What actually WERE reduced were the ISP-ratings of the fission-powered thermal turbojets; and the TWR Limiter code was also made a lot more conservative. What this meant, in practice, was that my clamped-burn tests weren't producing as much thrust with the revised reactors because they didn't have enough intake area for stationary use- even though the resource bar showed IntakAtm was nearly full (I can thank the TWR Limiter revisions for that quirk). What it also means is that, due to the reduced ISP ratings (over 25% less) , I will probably still experience a drastic reduction in the altitude ceiling of the Eagle Mk2- which previously should have been able to escape Duna's atmosphere altogether solely on turbojet power alone, according to my latest calculations (it turns out, the reduced gravity adds roughly one scale height, 3000 meters, to the altitude ceiling of the craft, after being converted from Kerbin vlaues like in my earlier formula- all other things being equal. That's still *before* the effects of the reduced minimum orbital velocities- based on effective gravity on Duna when stationary, which is roughly 30% that on Kerbin.) THAT would have been very cool to see- especially since the vessel was equipped with a substantial amount of SAS torque (two Mk2 cockpits are nothing to sneeze at in that regard), which would have enabled it to still be controllable at very-high altitude, if admittedly more in the manner of an SAS-turned spacecraft than due to its control surfaces... Of course NOW, the turbojet engine will start experience thrust-reduction and then eventually, flame-out, long before that point- even with a 2.5 meter Atmospheric Intake on the front... I guess I'll need to load the Eagle Mk2 up with its 3-ton maximum of cargo if I want to get the most points out of it now, since its altitude ceiling will be limited by intakes rather than lift and TWR.. Finally, one last thing Geschosskopf. This goes back to when we were both still using solar-powered electric propeller-aircraft in our Duna plane designs, and yours was the only one that had managed to fly there yet (I eventually abandoned propellers in favor of turbojets, for their greater thrust in thin atmosphere- though with their latest downgrading in KSP Interstellar, I think I might be going back to electric propellers...) Back then, we both noticed that our planes actually could operate on less solar panel mass at higher altitude. I think we both ended up chalking it up to higher efficiency due to less atmospheric interference with the sunlight (especially on Duna- where the atmosphere scale height is less, as I pointed out). But it turns out, from some of my newest tests (this goes to the trick I figured out to improve propeller craft performance I'm still keeping a secret), that actually, there is an additional factor. You see, I'm sure you noticed that the electric propeller craft use ElectricCharge as a "fuel", and that like reaction-engines, the propellers have an ISP. Well it turns out, and I can't believe I didn't notice this before, that the main factor reducing the necessary panel area is actually reduced power DEMANDS. You heard me right- the elctric propellers require less ElectricCharge at higher altitudes, even when at full-throttle. This isn't due to an increase in the ISP values with height- actually, I think those decline. Rather, it is due to an enormous drop in thrust at high-altitude. As I pointed out before, propellers produce exponentially less thrust in thinner atmospheric pressures- eventually falling well behind thermal turbojets in terms of TWR despite their much lower weight (though, as I mentioned, this scaling is now less important due to a reduction in thermal turbojets' effective altitude ceiling). However, this reduction in thrust does have a silver lining, so to speak. The less thrust the propellers produce, the less ElectricCharge they use as "fuel", so to speak. What this effectively means is that they require less and less power as they can only move so quickly, and as the plane climbs, less and less strain is put on the electric engines to keep the propellers spinning at full speed (even if that full speed does produce a lot less thrust). Thus, in effect, a design built for thin-atmosphere flight requires a lot less generator mass, but a lot more weight in propellers, than one built for thick-atmosphere flight. And, as I already mentioned, there's also the air-deprivation that eventually cuts in as the engines start to run out of "FSCoolant"... Alright, I've given enough secrets of Duna plane-design for one day. Now to see if I can't build something that can break a few records! Regards, Northstar

I can't imagine the 20 EVA Kerbals were fun to deal with... At least you could still fly it though- my computer would (probably) have been in the red on a design like that... I wouldn't recommend Ubo's Welding Mod. It doesn't actually adjust all the config parameters correctly- especially not the drag coefficients, even on stock parts. It doesn't work hardly at all on most non-stock parts either- which greatly limits its usefulness... If you were thinking of larger wings, you're better of with Procedural Dyanmics. Larger fuel tanks- StretchyTanks. Larger static solar panels- the Multipanels mod. Longer fuselages- well that's against the challenge rules (see my discussions with Geschosskopf earlier in the thread). Anyways, I wish you the best of fun (but not of performance- I have to beat you somehow!) in your future Duna flying attempts... @ Geschosskopf By the way, I was thinking about this- and I think you should split the challenge into two "Categories". The first category, which would carry over all existing rules and entrants, and would be the "Light Plane" category. And a new, second "Heavy Plane" category. The Heavy Plane category would/should have several rule-changes that are more geared towards heavyweight planes: - An increase in minimum capacity: the plane needs to be able to transport EITHER 4 Kerbals, OR 2 Kerbals and at least 2 tons of cargo - An adjustment to altitude ceiling- perhaps a bit of lowering to 4750 meters, or conversely, an increase to 5500 or 6000 meters? - Most importantly (and the reason for the separate category) the plane doesn't have to land at over 2500 meters. While it must still be able to fly at reasonably high altitude (see above), so it's not stuck only flying in the valleys, it only needs to be able to land at, say, 1500 or 1200 meters after takeoff- and anywhere on the initial landing. I suggest the heavyweight category because really big planes simply can't takeoff or land on a dime in rough terrain at high altitude. They can't on Earth (or Kerbin), and they can't on Duna either. Their wing-loads are simply too high for it (even if their sometimes higher thrust and total lift from heavier wings allows higher-altitude flight than light planes). However, surely you can see the obvious utility in design of heavyweight strategic lifters? They would be a lot more useful for a long-term Duna colony IMHO than the kind of light scout-planes we've seen submitted in this challenge so far... (All that said- my latest Duna design is a lot more of a "scout" plane than all my others: due to the need for a rapid takeoff at high altitude) By the way, part of my reasoning behind the heavyweight category came from examining the configs in the Procedural Dynamics mod. You see, it comes with two wing variants- a lightweight and heavyweight one. At first when I saw the heavier variant, I thought- why would anyone ever use this? Doesn't it experience more gravity and drag? But then, when I examined the actual code behind the wing modules, it turns out that KSP overwrites the standard code for wing and winglet parts with a different aerodynamic one. In the aerodynamic code, lift is actually PROPORTIONAL to mass- so heavier wings produce more lift, even if they experience more gravity. The "lift" value is actually the lift-coefficient, much like the "drag" value is the drag-coefficient. Both affect the scaling- but it is ultimately mass that has the greatest say over total lift and drag. Seeing that the aerodynamic model worked in a completely different way than I thought it did has completely changed my perspective towards aircraft design. No longer will I be dividing the "Lift" value by mass to get an idea of lift-weight ratios: now I know that higher-Lift valued parts always produce more lift relative to their mass- and lift-weight ratio is what the "Lift" value represents... This also adds up to heavier-winged craft having higher altitude ceilings and cargo-capacity, but needing longer runways to get off the ground (they're slower to accelerate to their liftoff speed at a given altitude), like in real life. Of course, the longer-runway effect *IS* less substantial on Duna thanks to the reduced gravity.

D'OH! That probably should have been the first thing I thought of- maybe it was a vehicle-based difference! The testing vehicles weren't proper planes, but just fuselages with engines attached, but the testing vehicle in 0.7.4 *DID* in fact feature a MUCH larger intake (a 2.5 meter Atmospheric Intake- as opposed to a couple mall radial supersonic intakes from B9 Aerospace). I tried turning off the TWR limiter, however (setting it to "3" instead of "Prevent Flameouts") however that didn't really seem to do much- and the resource screen showed it had plenty of IntakeAtm to work with... So, my guess is that it's more a problem with the TWR Limiter code being too conservative in dense atmospheres like at Kerbin Seal Level- where plenty of atmospheric propellent is available- rather than an issue with the reactors themselves... The Thermal Turbojet description *DOES* say its ISP is related to core temperature, though, and I did also record a significant drop in engine ISP (to about 58, from 78 before) at sea level- and THAT shouldn't be adversely affected by propellant availability- so it does look like you (or the other mod devs) did reduce the effective altitude ceiling of the Thermal Turbojets when powered by fission reactors nonetheless... (a lower ISP means more IntakeAtmosphere is necessary to keep the thing running at threshold thrust- so the plane can't operate in as thin an atmosphere...) Additionally, switching over to thorium fuel can be an asset for an aircraft you plan to make regular use of. By doing so, you will see a 27% increase in thrust as well as an 8% increase in specific impulse. By doing both this and adding a couple more intakes, you should actually see a big improvement in un-upgraded nuclear flight compared to version 0.7.4. Yeah- seeing the much better performance of the fusion reactors- and the fact that I normally greatly reduce the fuel-loading before takeoff of the fission reactors for better performance anyways (using TAC Fuel Balancer)- I'll probably switch the designs to fusion reactors once those become available. I'm really not sure I understand exactly what you're saying about the energy requirements though- do they need a continued outside power source after startup, or would it be enough just to hook the plane up to powerful fission generator to "jumpstart" the reactor right before flight? Either way, I guess I'll have to figure it out- because I've got a lucky son-of-a-gun with a much more powerful computer than mine to beat, who could afford the CPU drain of strapping 20 Command Chairs to his design for extra Challenge points- so my points will have to lie in maximum Dunar altitude ceiling, or cargo-capacity on Duna instead...

Alright, so the changelog says: "Nuclear reactor temperatures and thermal rocket isp correlation adjusted (doesn't affect engine performance)" But the 1.25 meter Fission Reactors have CLEARLY been nerfed (reduced in capabilities) when it comes to powering thermal turbojets. In an effort to build a fleet of Duna-capable aircraft using thermal turbojets, I had extensively tested the 0.7.4 nuclear reactors and thermal turbojets in numerous possible configurations, and recording particularly relevant results. For instance, I got the following number for the thermal turbojets in clamped-burn tests on the KSC runway with solid-core reactors and basic thermal turbojets: 1.25 meter Reactor + Thermal Turbojet ISP = 78.0 Maximum Thrust = 19.1 kN 2.5 meter Reactor + Thermal Turbojet ISP = 78.0 Maximum Thrust = 59.7 kN With the 1.25 meter combination, at least (the workhorse of my plane designs, based on the much better TWR I observed on the runway), the thrust roughly doubled at high altitude flight to a maximum of around 38 kN. Once again, solid-core reactors, basic thermal turbojets. After updating to 0.8, however, I now see that my 1.25 meter reactors have been renamed to "liquid sodium core" reactors, or something like that (game's not open at the moment, so I'd have to check the exact wording, which is unimportant to me). However, I also was very upset to notice that the thrust for the Thermal Turbojets using a 1.25 meter reactor at pre-Fusion Career Mode tech level (with most earlier-level techs discovered, including Experimental Electrics) had been greatly reduced. I now observe a maximum thrust of 14.1 kN in clamped-burn tests on the KSC runway with my 1.25 meter reactors and thermal turbojets. This represents a 26% reduction in thrust- which I found very disturbing and annoying for a part that was already hard to use because of its low TWR, and after I had already gone through all the effort of sending up a couple copies of a plane utilizing the 1.25 meter Thermal Turbojets to Duna on the side of a rocket- for a challenge no less (the Flying Duna Challenge). I really don't think the thrust values should have necessarily been reduced. I can see maybe it is to give more incentive to use the new fusion reactors- but the fusion reactors are overpowered if you ask me, and unrealistically so (it's completely unrealistic to expect fusion power technology to develop to those kinds of efficiencies anytime in the reasonable future- the technology of controlled fusion has improved linearly, not exponentially- and will not yield those kinds of returns in net of power consumed to maintain the reaction at those kind of reactor weights for a LONG, LONG time- probably no for at least 70-100 years or more...) Regards, Northstar

I was thinking more along the lines of a thermal rocket nozzle or NERVA. Something that would work better for sustained periods of time... Then again, I might just go for a propeller-aircraft. You see, I just discovered a very important trick to their use that might really help me break my previous performance records with them... I'm going to keep it a secret for now, though, to see if I can use it to level the playing field a bit with Steven's more powerful computer (mine can't handle 20 Kerbals on lawnchairs- though to be honest, it didn't quite sound like his could very well either...) I already helped him enough by telling him how to cut his reactor mass in less than half... Regards, Northstar

I performed some tests, and it looks like it was worse than I feared. The new version of KSP Interstellar greatly reduces the thrust from level-2 1.25 meter reactor/thermal turboject pairs- from 19.1 kN at Kerbin Sea Level to 14.1 kN at Kerbin Sea Level... (the thrust reaches an approximate peak of double KSL thrust at low-pressures, like are found on Duna, whereas propellers fall off exponentially with decreasing pressure- which is why I opted for thermal turbojets originally) This is a 26% reduction in the thrust of my thermal turbojets! (slightly less if I use the new Thorium reactor fuel- which can get 14.8 kN- but requires regular EVA maintenance) That means that my existing turbojet designs might not even be able to fly on Duna any more- nevertheless outperform propeller-based aircraft! (which get much higher thrust at high atmospheric pressures, but perform poorly in thin atmospheres such as Duna's) The mod *DID* add more powerful, fusion-based reactors however- but these require an extremely advanced tech node (Fusion Power) I still haven't come even close to unlocking yet; and that won't help my poor existing Eagle Mk2- which is already en-route to Duna with a now-nerfed fission reactor! Geschosskopf, this is just a thought- but how do you feel about rocket-powered aircraft on Duna? My planes would still be held up by aerodynamic forces- but would just carry their own Oxidizer due to the lack of any significant amounts of atmospheric diatomic Oxygen (02) on Duna... (There is a *tiny* amount on Duna, like on real-life Mars, but you can only really detect it by examining the code. This tiny amount *is* used by KSP Interstellar to allow Oxidizer production at very low efficiencies on Duna, however...) EDIT: The WORST part- the changelog actually states that the revisions to the reactor don't affect performance at all. I call bull on that... All it took was a few tests of the engines clamped on the runway before (I wrote down the thrust values at the time) and after (I wrote down the new values) to prove that wrong...

Ummmm, took a look at that mod, and you really should have started off by mentioning you used it... It completely re-writes ("re-balances") a lot of the stock parts- including many of the ones you used in your plane. Now, the author says it makes it "harder"- so I'm assuming it didn't help you much- but it might have been a nice detail to drop for anyone trying to reproduce a similar design... (yours gave me a couple ideas to work on myself- though Firespitter propellers currently seem to be crashing my game...)

I actually tried the Microwave Transmission with my Advanced Spaceplane design if you look earlier in the thread... Geschoss came pretty close to banning/disallowing it when he saw what I was doing, but just barely allowed it for the Kerbin system only. What's more, it produced VERY little power relative to the size of the station- I set up a station with 8 of the NearFuture Mod's super-large solar panels (they're four times as large as the Giagantor XL's), and it only transmitted about 460 kW (460 EC/s) at closest approach from a Low Kerbin Orbit (128,000 meters)- and was only overhead for a couple of minutes. Most of the time it was active, it was only about 20-100 kW... Speaking of KSP Interstellar, I have a MAJOR problem now... I fell the need to be dramatic- so "Houston, we have a problem..." I updated to the latest version 0.8, and it changed the model and collision box (as well as the specs) for the 1.25 meter nuclear reactor. It seems to have retroactively applied the change to my existing designs- so basically, now I have a model with a new COM, a reactor that is floating between two parts instead of connecting (and might break from the plane with the first puff of Duna air as a result), and a new thrust value for the plane (it's either a lot higher or a lot lower- I haven't tested the new reactor yet...) So, there's a good chance I'll need to rebuild and resend my Eagle Mk2 (or a better model) all over again... Just because KSP Interstellar updated the 1.25 meter reactor (and I didn't make a backup before updating- so there's no going back now). Regards, Northstar

Mind if I ask, though, Steven- what are those narrow tubes behind the electric propellers? They seem to make nice wing engine-mounts- but I've never seen a part that looked quite like that in the editor, and I'm running a lot of mods (including Firespitter, B9 Aerospace, and Novapunch2). So, I'm guessing its either from a mod I don't have, or it's a part I somehow missed when designing my planes... I've had a lot of trouble finding good engine-mount parts for my front-mounted propellers... (A note- if you reverse the directionality before takeoff using Action Groups, you should be able to actually turn electric "puller" propellers into "pusher" propellers- though I've never actually done this- or use front-mounted ones to slow down before landing...)

A sufficiently big rocket will basically ignore a small plane like that Sirine. That whole thing has about three-quarters to two-thirds the lift of one of my Eagle Mk2's (it's a heavier design thanks to its internal cockpits and twin nuclear reactors- though probably capable of much higher altitudes on Duna thanks to its much more powerful thermal turbojet propulsion system), and I strapped TWO of them to a 5-meter rocket (about the same power as the four 2.5 meter stacks he used there) and it just shrugged them off like it was nothing... Regards, Northstar

That's a NICE ship- though it makes me sad that you've probably permanently taken the first-place slot I was vying for permanently out of my reach... I realized a long time ago that in challenges like this where you get a point per-Kerbal, you can usually get a lot more points with a bunch of lawnchairs than with enclosed cabins- but discovered (when building a 72-Kerbal Kerbin-Circumnavigating airliner for the Airliner Challenge) that my game absolutely FREAKS when I have so many Kerbals outside (in lawnchairs) at once- and basically dies of lag (it seems to work FINE if the same number are safely indoors, however- especially if they're in cabin types from mods that don't show a face pop-up in the corner). Since Duna is all about TWR and wingload- there's no WAY I could build a 20-Kerbal plane with all the Kerbals inside... (at least, not with the part-count limits my weak computer imposes) Anyways, congrats on the challenge! I probably shouldn't be pointing this out to you, considering we're sort of in competition (though, as I pointed out, I basically no chance at beating you unless a brand new computer showed up on my doorstep tomorrow), but if you use KSP Interstellar mod, you can get at least 1152 EC/second with just one of the upgraded .625 meter nuclear reactors and a un-upgraded .625 meter generator (2880 EC/s if noth are upgraded). If you use TAC Fuel Balancer to reduce the UF6 loadout to a more reasonable level than the default 100% (or just transfer some of the UF6 to another ship that's been running a reactor a few months and used up enough of its supply if you don't use TAC...), it'll also weigh a lot less than a Near-Future reactor too... The cost of this is higher part-count, and the need for a separate radiator part somewhere in the design (which, once again, doesn't add much weight if it's upgraded). You can upgrade KSP Interstellar parts one of two ways- with a Science Lab in Sandbox Mode, or by working to discover the appropriate extended tech tree node in Career Mode (trust me, some of the mod's extra nodes aren't cheap- I *STILL* haven't discovered several of the mod's most advanced tech nodes, and I've almost filled out the whole stock part of the tech tree at this point...)

While I try and figure out how to get this on the surface of the Mun with only engines that I can detach without leaving pieces behind: I overclocked my unmanned LiquidFuel Tanker design a bit (read: added MOAR BOOSTERS! Also, more engines to the upper stage for shorter/ more efficient burns, and a sustainment stage between the ascent and orbital stages since the boosters gave it a better TWR on the launchpad), and sent a copy on a SLOW (108-day) trajectory to Duna with the help of a Munar gravity-assist... I would have liked to send it on a faster route, of course, but as is it should only have about 400-500 Delta-V left after stabilizing its orbit to rendezvous with whatever other ship I have waiting for it by that time. I'm sure by just over 3 months (game-time) after the arrival of the first ship (the Science Module) my Duna colonists will be hungry for a little more LiquidFuel- seeing as the only fuel they will have had in that time is what they brought with them and what they can mine and refine from Kethane... If they're not so fuel-hungry, then maybe I'll just use it to start preparing a mission from Duna to Jool or Sentar... Finally, last but not least, I set up a new depot/space station at about 350,000 meters like I was writing about before. I forgot to give it a Spacedock Identifier, so it's not actually a spacedock- but it is a GIGANTIC fuel depot (thanks to a HUGE Stretchy Tanks 9000-type tank) with plenty of RocketParts storage capacity (what looks like a Rockomax Jumbo-64 is actually a large Orbital Construction warehouse- the mod borrows stock textures, as it doesn't yet have its own), a reasonable nuclear power-supply, and two Science Labs (which require 5 MW of power each to run at full capacity- so only run at about 80%) for research and nuclear fuel-reprocessing as well... The current researchers/fuel attendants are Lury (who if you remember, was part of my earlier storytelling- and had been reassigned to my Heavy Scrapper Ship from my Duna crew) and Malman Kerman (who had been sitting idle in one of the extra seats on the Early Spacedock): I might add a bit of storytelling on that crew reassignment later, but at the moment I'm too tired/busy. Regards, Northstar

OK, not a crazy amount going on in this update. I decided that now, while I wait for my Duna flotilla to arrive, would be a great time to clean up the orbits around Kerbin a little more. So, I put my Heavy Scrapper Ship to good use salvaging debris and abandoned ships. You can see it unloading its collected scrap in the last image: I also took this opportunity to move my Early Spacedock to a higher orbit above Kerbin. I did this for three reasons: (1) I will experience a lot less lag trying to dock other ships with it there. (2) I am about to commission a newer, higher-capacity, lower part-count spacedock at that altitude for permanent use. The existing spacedock is needed to construct the new spacedock. (3) I am eventually headed to the Mun with the Early Spacedock- where I will place it into a relatively low orbit, build another spacedock, and then decommission (drain of all resources, transfer out all Kerbals, and then recycle the dead hulk) the Early Spacedock. The eventual plan is to use the Mun Spacedock I will be constructing as a combined depot for LiquidFuel hauled from Kerbin (or eventually, refined from Munar Kethane deposits), Oxidizer electrolyzed from the Mun's regolith, and Rocketparts from Kerbin and perhaps even Munar ore-mining/refining operations I might set up on the Mun's surface... Being in a low Munar orbit, it will also be conveniently within range of 100% reusable vessels propelled solely by Aluminum-Hybrid engines refueled on the Munar surface- which will eliminate the need to utilize more valuable LFO mix for transporting LFO and RocketParts produced on the Mun. The Mun will form my main departure points for other points in the solar system; and while I wouldn't exactly call it a hospitable enough environment to consider my operations there a full-fledged "colony"- I will eventually establish a fully self-sufficient outpost capable of constructing rockets in orbit (and on the surface) destined for more distant locations like Duna and Jool... Everything is almost in position to begin Munar base-building at this point. I'll have RocketParts hauled on-board the Early Spacedock- which also serves as a large mobile construction platform; a couple extra Kerbal crew members onboard the Early Spacedock to staff new rockets with; and a decent amount of LFO mix I'll soon be hauling from the Munar surface (onboard the Munar Science Module- which will then be recycled, the eventual base to be constructed out of lower part-count structures without integrated engines or even command modules, except for a central command module for the entire base- which will all be interlinked by KAS connections.) the Munar Science Module is almost full of Oxidizer at this point, by the way, and ready to lift-off the Munar surface again when the Early Spacedock reaches orbit overhead. Here's an image where you can see the resource screen of the Munar Science Module: Regards, Northstar

I've taken to playing Career Mode only, and yes, my probes never come home. This is mainly because the types of data small probes can collect (temperature, gravity, barometric, seismic, and atmosphere science) all transmit with relatively high efficiency (usually 60%)- whereas the types of data I collect on a heavier (usually manned mission) such as lab results, surface samples, goo data, and EVA reports, all don't transmit nearly as well. So I have no motivation to return the probes home, whereas I do have motive to return the heavier missions. Crew reports being the exception (with their 100% transmit efficiency) of course. All in all, though, I prefer to roleplay (see my Mission Reports thread if you're interested: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/57509-Kerbin-and-Beyond-a-Maturing-Space-Program )- so I try to eventually return my Kerbals to Kerbin whenever possible- whereas I don't see the point with probes. I you don't roleplay (at least a little), what's the point of the game most of the time anyways? Seeing how big of an explosion Jebediah can make with the ship?

Barwise carefully inspected the navigation console. "Are you SURE we're in the right position?" he asked. "I'm positive" replied Enrick. "Ok, let's do this then" came Barwise' reply. The crew of the Duna Science Module had decided to try something different. Something that Kerbals had never tried before. They were going to pioneer an advanced for of gravity assist based on gravitational shadowing (OOC: I'm not really sure if this is the correct term for this IRL, but it *IS* an advanced technique used by some space agencies...) Rather than simply plotting a curve around the Mun such that they would borrow a small portion of its energy while curving around it, the Duna Science Module would first curve around the Mun, but then fire its thrusters with a component of their direction TOWARDS the Mun on the way out- while still firing in the direction of their eventual target (Duna). If done correctly, this would keep them in the Mun's gravitational influence for an extended period of time, enabling them to borrow a much greater amount of energy from it for their eventual final trajectory. Further, to minimize gravity losses on the way out, for the final part of the maneuvering, the Duna Science Module would thrust AWAY from the Mun on its way out from the body- reducing return of some of that borrowed energy to the Mun on the way back out. After a long and careful set of maneuvers, the plan had worked perfectly. "Give me a high-five!" Enrick exclaimed- holding up his stubby hand for Barwise to meet. After a moment's delay, Barwise met Enrick's gesture. "That was awesome!" was Barwise' reply. "We've pioneered an entirely new technique for gravity assists! I only hope Mission Control learns a thing or two from this!" Back at Mission Control, Northstar Kerman was ecstatic. "You mean to tell me they managed to plot a precise high-speed trajectory nearly exactly towards Duna *AND* borrow a significant amount of their energy for it from the Mun?" "That's right sir." "If they make it back to Kerbin, we'll have to give them sort of medal. After the Crew Module's foolishness, they might have just saved the mission!" "We'll take note of it" was the only reply. OOC: I hope you guys liked this little segment. True to my description, I made use of a rather advanced form of gravity-assist for this transfer burn. It took very careful timing, and a bit of luck, but the rewards in Delta-V savings were significant. Which is good, because I had the Duna Science Module go for such a high-speed trajectory to Duna that it will arrive more than a day BEFORE any of the other modules- despite being the last to depart Kerbin. The DSM expended all but about 3600 of its initial Delta-V budget of over 12,000 doing this (although I did accidentally dump quite a bit of fuel and oxidizer into space, not properly balancing the fuel tanks with TAC Fuel Balancer and letting the engines flame-out a couple times), but its transfer time after leaving Kerbin's SOI will only be about 18 days (for a total Mission Elapsed Time of about 29 days- the DSM spent quite bit of time in Low Kerbin Orbit)- which is awesome from a roleplaying perspective. My Kerbals won't have to spend too long in dangerous interplanetary space, getting bombarded by tons of solar radiation (and, if it were implemented yet in this version of KSP- risking getting hit by dangerous solar flares... Oooh, that's going to be FUN to see in a later version...) Also, here's a nice picture of the orbital map showing my entire flotilla of four gigantic ships (and my tiny damaged SensorSat from before- on far right) en-route to Duna. From left to right they are: Duna Science Module Duna Crew Module Duna Heavy Equipment Deployment Platform Eagle Transfer Stage (to Duna) SensorSat II (the damaged probe from before) Finally, I still haven't forgotten about the Munar Science Module, or my planned Mun base. I'll probably be working on that a bit while I wait for the Duna flotilla to arrive at its destination- mainly as a pit-stop and launch point for future missions to Duna... (I'm planning on sending relief crews for at least some of the Kerbals eventually...)

Sorry to post this out-of-order, but it looks like you made your post while I was busy writing in my next story-update. I usually write them in the editor since Microsoft Office Starter isn't working on my computer at the moment... I was talking about the percentage of vessel mass that is useful payload, rather than cockpit or electrical generation equipment. But heavier lifters are actually more efficient too- you can more carefully optimize their thrust and staging to fall closer to terminal velocity (which is the ideal ascent speed) at all times. Lighter lifers have the nasty tendency to start accelerating at 3, 4, or even 5 G's before they're even out of the atmosphere- even when they were only pulling 2 G's on the launchpad. The more careful optimization with heavy lifters is possible mainly because a wider lifter can also safely be a taller lifter- which leaves you more space for vertical staging... Perhaps- but isn't the sky an Earth-like blue on Kerbin? That would imply it's an Oxygen-Nitrogen mix atmosphere (the particular elements making up an atmosphere determine its coloration. Very few other element-mixes can reproduce that particular shade of blue.) The VAB and SPH are both quite clearly open to the outside air. Just look out the huge hanger doors. Plus, if you watch carefully, the Kerbals seem to get a little loopy when flying at high-altitudes in standard airplane cockpits (the Mk1 and Mk2 stock cockpits- their eyes bulge and their heads wobble)- which would imply they are getting loopy from the greatly-thinned density of something in the atmosphere- probably Oxygen. Trust me, I've seen enough of it- I've done a lot of high-altitude flying with the not-fully-pressurized cockpits with my Kerbals... Besides, Kerbal civilization would have had to evolve from cave-Kerbals, like humans. How could they have had space suits before they invented fire? Regards, Northstar

Obwise sat fiddling with the navigation computer on the Duna Crew Module. He had been at this for over an hour. "That's it! I think I got us a route to Duna that will get us there in under a month!" After the previous incident with the failed gravity assist from Minmus, and getting sick of OBwise' incessant "I told you so" altitude, the crew of the DCM had decided to hand the navigating over to Obwise this time. It turns out it was a smart move. After Sheprim was unable to plot any intercepts that would take fewer than close to three months, and Jebediah was unable to figure out a course that took less than 90% of their remaining fuel (we, need, MOAR SPEED!)- even if it did get them to Duna in less than two weeks- the crew had handed the controls over to Obwise (Jennard wisely decided to let the blame fall on somebody else if all this didn't work out). Now, the crew was going to reap the benefits of trusting a scientist to make their nav calculations. Obwise' planned maneuvers were a little convoluted to be sure- to break up the burns into more reasonable lengths, and ensure they remained on-target, the crew and vessel were going to need to make as many as four separate maneuvers. But the results were worth it. In just under 24 days, and using a little over 40% of their remaining LFO fuel mix, Obwise' course would safely deliver the crew, their ship, and its heavy cargo of kerosene (LiquidFuel)- to be mixed with Oxygen separated from Ike's regolith by the Science Module- to Duna, and on a trajectory that would only require very slight adjustments for an aerocapture maneuver AND a gravity-brake from Ike. Mission Control had of course needed some convincing to trust the DCM's crew to plan its own maneuvers again, but when they saw the course that Obwise had plotted, they were more than happy to leave the DCM with its autonomy... (OOC: I'm sorry you guys can only see two of the maneuver nodes in the images- but it ended up being about four in all. When I realized how long the first node was taking [over 12 minutes], I decided to cut it into about thirds, and make three separate maneuvers to ensure the DCM remained on-target... It cost about 2500 Delta-V in all due to the *very* slow extremely-high-orbit starting speeds I was making the burns from- transfer burns from low orbits benefit greatly from the Oberth effect, and cost far less Delta-V.) Hours later, the burns complete, the crew of the DCM sat safely back- confident that they were on their way to Duna... "We'll remember to leave the navigating up to you next time Obwise" commented Jennard. "Don't put too much pressure on me. Maybe I just got lucky this time." was all Obwise had to say in reply... OOC: I hope you guys liked my bit of storytelling again. If it's not really doing anything for you one way or another, I can revert back to my matter-of-fact discussions of what happened- it would save me a lot of time too. But, if you're enjoying this so far, let me know. Hopefully I'll have more exciting stuff to report on, like the landing of the first colonists on Duna (in the Eagle Mk2 from before) soon. Regards, Northstar

The problems with that approach are: (1) I have tons of fuel left in the transfer stage. So I'd be throwing a lot away doing that (although, I believe I put a probe core on the transfer stage- so maybe I'd be able to re-stabilize the orbit remotely after detachment: I'll have to check) (2) I have no experience in safely re-entering spaceplanes in an atmosphere that thin (over 2500 meters on Duna). Generally, on Kerbin, my spaceplanes tend to either (a) enter a tailspin that I don't completely pull out of until low altitude because I try to keep the nose too close to the horizon (instead of pointing into the dive), or ( enter into a dive that I can't pull them out of until low altitude. Either way, the problem is I don't think I'd be able to pull the Eagle out of its re-entry dive before it hit a mountain (some are over 5000 meters tall) or the ground at that altitude (over 2500 meters). That was why I wanted to land at my sea-level landing site first, and THEN, after quicksaving (which can't be done while in atmospheric flight), takeoff again and land at 2500 meters. The intention was never to leave the plane at 2500 meters- but rather to simply make its initial landing there where the atmosphere is thicker. This is why I took issue with your restriction of the initial landing being at over 2500 meters. No real space program would take excessive risks at making an initial high-altitude landing if they were worried about a spaceplane's ability to pull out of its re-entry dive on time. I could, of course, just re-enter targeted at the low-altitude site I picked out, and not actually land (just perform a flyby). I should be able to pull out of the dive on time that way, and then go and make my initial touchdown at over 2500 meters... That would waste my time, and risk my having to revert to a pre-reentry quicksave if I botched the landing (you said to expect a couple failed attempts before a successful landing)- but since you insist on my making the first touchdown at over 2500 meters, technically that would meet the requirements (even if my altitude would probably dip below 2500 meters while in-flight)... All that is, of course, if I can't get a good skycrane design working (KAS attachments have a nasty tendency to spin and wobble wildly when thrust is applied- which is why I would need to use at least 2 attachments, probably 4 to 6- and on top of that I'm also concerned about a skycrane's thrust damaging the Eagle's wings...) Finally, I should note, I plan to build my main base at the sea-level site I picked out. This is mainly because I need a large enough flat space to build a runway (for my heavier plane designs- which will most likely be built on Duna itself- the Eagle is only going to be my first-generation Duna plane), and also because it's safer to try and land planes (especially some of the strategic heavy-lifters I plan to build) at that altitude... Finally, there's also the fact that I can drop heavier cargo-loads for my colony with fewer parachutes if I build at that altitude. My Kethane fields will probably mostly be at higher altitude, however (the solar panels that will power them will work better with less atmosphere overhead- plus, low-altitude Kethane will probably be a rare find). So whether it's my initial landing, or a later rendezvous with my first landers and cargo-drops, the Eagle *WILL* be landing at that site at some point...

Alright, so I've become really worried about how to get my working copy of the Eagle Mk2 down to the ground as it approaches closer to Duna... What are the rules for adding extra KAS ports for attachment of a specialized skycrane descent craft from orbit? The ports would be coming off again before any actual flying around would occur if I did this- so I wouldn't be "adding to or subtracting from what will actually fly around on Duna". Skycraning also clearly falls under what is explicitly allowed under the rule after that- though it doesn't mention adding or removing temporary connector ports for skycraning. Currently, the craft only has one radial KAS port on the underside (for UF6 reprocessing and adding/removing LFO and Argon as cargo.) At least two widely spaced radial connector ports on the topside (one on the nose and one on the tail) would be needed to allow for a stable skycrane attachment that wouldn't wobble around during descent through the atmosphere... I can add these via EVA activity very easily- and once again, they would be coming back off before the craft does any flying around. Think of it as tying a harness around the plane using cables- like they do when loading an Apache for skycraning in real life. I'd do this if there were a way- but I have to add actual connector ports instead since there isn't a cable-tying mechanism. And, as said, I'd remove them again on the ground before flying...

Well, this is embarrassing. Somehow I managed to duplicate the post before this. Since I don't know how to delete it, I guess I'll just make use of it with a little more storytelling... Meanwhile, Mission Control was in a raucous. "They did WHAT?!" the mission control head, Northstar Kerman, asked. "You mean to tell me that they headed all the way out to EIGHTY-TWO THOUSAND KILOMETERS before they made their transfer burn?!" "That's what they did sir" replied one of his subordinates. "That's UNBELIEVABLE. Do you have ANY idea how much fuel they wasted?" "We're more than aware sir" came the reply. Northstar Kerman was angrier than he had been in as long as anyone at Mission Control could remember. Fortunately for the Kerbals of the Duna Crew Module, he was also well-known for being quick to calm down... "Alright," said Northstar, rubbing his temples "How much fuel do they have left- and what's their trajectory? Patch me through to the Duna Crew Module on the double." Northstar had worked long and hard to oversee the design and construction of the Duna Colonization Flotilla. It was supposed to be Kerbalkind's finest hour- not only their first putting boots on the ground of, but also their first settlement of another planet or moon outside the Kerbin system. The last thing he wanted to see was this effort go up in smoke, after all the effort he and so many others had invested in it. He also wasn't sure the Kerbal Space Program could ever afford another set of missions like this if this effort ended badly. Everything was riding on the mission's success. Fortunately, after a long talk with the Kerbals on the Duna Crew Module, it was clear both to them and to Mission Control that the mission still had a robust chance at success- and that no more of the kind of the foolish impatience that had led to this mess would be tolerated...

Ok, I meant to have this post up sooner, but a *cough* friend came to visit me at my apartment, and so I was busy with her for a while... Briefly: I decided to show her KSP a bit before we got to *other things*, and performed a really quick suborbital flight to the polar ice caps as a demonstration for her (I was also lucky enough to land in the hard-to-fin "Tundra" biome- and rack up a few Science Points- though it looked just like any other part of the ice caps to me.) Since that was really quick, I'll start off with a screenshot of that: Anyways, since my last post I got the Duna Heavy Equipment Deployment Platform on its way. Since it was unmanned, I'm not doing any storytelling for that- but here are the screenshots: As you can see, I performed a Mun-Minmus double gravity-assist to escape the Kerbin system. It worked out perfectly. Which was good- because even after that, I only had a little over 600 Delta-V left in the thing after I plotted my escape trajectory (the DHEP had the least Delta-V of all my ships, due to its very heavy payload of RocketParts- 60 tons in all). This left me a little cocky of course, which as you'll see shortly, got me into a little trouble with the Crew Module: "Shep, are you SURE that this is a good heading to try a Mun slingshot?" asked Obwise. "I know that the DHEP managed to get an impossibly perfect double-slingshot to Duna before- but that doesn't mean we still don't need to plan our maneuvers carefully." "Nonsense" said Sheprim Kerman- "If Minmus isn't in the right position when we make it out close to that altitude, we'll just hang out at a higher altitude until it makes its turn around Kerbin. It's not like we don't have plenty of supplies for a little bit of a delay in our trip." "But I thought the whole point of the slingshot was to save time" interjected Jennard- "If we waste time waiting in a high orbit just to get a double slingshot then what's the point of trying for one at all? And with this trajectory, it looks like our elliptical orbit will be pointing in entirely the wrong direction- AWAY from Duna." This gave Sheprim pause for a moment, but Obwise jumped in "To save fuel of course. You can never be too careful with that- I just think that we should wait here in low orbit a little longer until the Mun is in a better position. Besides- it's safer here, with Kerbin's magnetic field protecting us from all that solar radiation. We won't have that up past Minmus." "Let's just go!" exclaimed Jebediah. "Mission Control gave us the authority to maneuver however we see fit- a nice bit of independence for one. Now why don't we just haul our tail out of here and stop arguing? Sheprim- begin the insertion." And with that, Sheprim dialed up the throttle, and the ship's weak (yet efficient) engines began to rumble for the long, slow burn. Exasperated, Jerbo retired to a corner. Several hours had passed, and now Obwise had a smug look on his face. "Just don't say- I told you so" Sheprim sighed. "What would you prefer I say?" asked Obwise. "Now we're high above Minmus, and we've lost the possibility of a gravity assist with Minmus. Mission Control said something about our intercept trajectory being no good because Kerbin's gravity would be too weak to curve us back in towards the second moon, and directed us just to go straight for Duna. We're going to waste a lot of fuel, and we're not going to get to Duna nearly as quickly either." Sheprim just sighed again, ad creased his brow. In fact everyone, with the exception of Obwise, looked rather disappointed. Mission Control had given them a bit of independence, and they had blown in. They probably couldn't count on being given such freedom again in the future seeing the result... (OOC: I totally blew my planned double-slingshot utilizing both the Mun and Minmus with the Duna Crew Module. I was overconfident after the DHEP, and just took the first gravity slingshot with the Mun that presented itself. The result was that Minmus was nearly on the opposite side of Kerbin by the time I got out near its altitude. I tried to fix it with an intercept trajectory that took me nearly an hour of trial-and-error [when not busy with real-life distractions] to plot without wasting too much Delta-V to make it not worthwhile: but then discovered that while KSP had no problem showing me an intercept orbit with an Apoapsis at 87,000 km; Kerbin's Sphere of Influence would cut out abruptly at around 84,000 km- leading to my loading the quicksave and just circularizing the orbit at 84,000 km for a straight transfer burn to Duna without utilizing Minmus. Not very efficient- I certainly won't be benefiting from the Oberth Effect on this one- but at least my heading will stay right on top of the maneuver node for the entire burn at that altitude... Oh well- I've got plenty of Delta-V to spare in the Crew Module...)

You're missing out on a lot of potential efficiency then. Even the largest ships still only need one cockpit- which saves on mass- and with the nuclear reactors of the NearFuture or KSP Interstellar mod you get economies of scale- with larger reactors producing more power relative to their mass. That's *IF* you still need as much power relative to the total vessel mass, of course (you often don't.) Bigger ships often need a few more struts- but that mass is usually negligible compared to, say, the mass of an entire cockpit or nuclear reactor. I don't know, how realistic CAN it be? Most of our knowledge of biology is derived from observation of life here on Earth (the only planet or moon to support life that we yet know of), and personally, as a Biologist myself in real life, I am of the school of thought that most life elsewhere would also have similar metabolisms. This is a result of the chemical properties of different elements- only a few have the necessary qualities to enable their use in construction of molecules that could support life. That is, after all, why science fiction usually has Silicon or Nitrogen-based life if it's not based on Carbon- because those are the only two other elements that could even come close to the versatility of Carbon in constructing organic molecules (trust me, take a year of college-level Organic Chemistry and a year-and-a-half of college Biochemistry classes and labs, and then you'll understand...) So, it's far more likely than not that any other life out there is also based on Carbon- and Kerbals are, after all, human-analogues... As for the spacesuits, a number of the EVA reports from Kerbin's surface ask "Do you think a Space Suit was really necessary to get here?", and the Kerbal ground crews in both the VAB and SPH wear no space suits- which would imply Kerbals do just fine on Kerbin's surface without them... The burn times depend on how you get to the higher speed. If you perform one or two gravity assists on the way to your target (keep an eye out for my next post- I performed a double gravity-assist with both the Mun and Minmus for the Duna Heavy Equipment Deployment Platform; and having already performed a Mun gravity assist for the Duna Crew Module, and am also planning to perform one with Minmus shortly...) then you can (and in fact should) break up the acceleration to escape Kerbin into multiple shorter burns. The best places to perform these burns are usually at a Periapsis with one of the gravitational bodies you encounter- due to the Oberth effect (you gain more energy from your thrust when you burn while moving at higher speeds). Especially if you perform a multiple-assist, you can end up with not just two or three, but four or more Periapsis points at which to ideally perform a burn. This is because the gravity assist with a body such as the Mun can easily slingshot you back towards a relatively close Periapsis with Kerbin given your speed- before you shoot out again towards the system's edge, with even higher speeds than when you left for the Mun... So,you can get great efficiency if you let gravity do the turning for you, and realize you don't always need to burn towards your final target (in fact, often it is advantageous to simply be burning prograde- even if that's in the opposite direction. If you plan it correctly, gravity will end up turning around the direction of that velocity for you)- after all, energy is conserved. Any energy you lose in kinetic energy (velocity) you will gain back in potential gravitational energy- assuming you don't enter any atmosphere... As for the entry angle and speed- that's entirely based on your transfer path. Even a very "slow" transfer will have a lot of relative speed to the planet if it comes in at a 90-degree angle. On the other hand, a properly-angled high-velocity transfer can actually arrive with very little speed relative to the target. The ideal angle is around 45 degrees- and varies based on your velocity- too much less than that, and you will arrive with very little velocity relative to the target- which will mean you will need to accelerate just to avoid a direct collision. Too large of an angle, and you will shoot through the system at very high velocity- which will make it hard to slow down or plot an aerocapture maneuver (if your trajectory isn't already pointed towards one). Of course, the higher the velocity of your transfer orbit, the shallower your angle should be, and vise-versa. The Hohmann transfers most players love so much are actually quite terrible in this regard. They tend to arrive at the target with very slow speeds relative to the Sun at that solar altitude (if moving outwards from Kerbol- very fast if moving inwards) AND very shallow angles relative to the target. The combination of these two factors means a VERY high velocity relative to the planet when you enter its Sphere of Influence (the planet is moving in the same direction, but much faster/slower than you)- exponentially more so the further away the planet is from Kebin... All that being said, I do prefer to come in at a relatively fast velocity to the target- but pointed straight towards the planet so it's easy to do an aerocapture. That does put a lot of G's on my ship- bu I've never had a ship fall apart on me doing it yet... Usually, if the ship can survive ascent from Kerbin, it can survive an aerocapture on Duna- I've so far found... Of course, one of my Eagles *DID* snap in half during ascent- so I might use some of my rather huge Delta-V budget and thrust on the Eagle's transfer stage to slow down first... As for the colonization ships- I'll probably use a combined aerobrake with Duna and gravity-brake with Ike (which also happens to be my initial landing target for the Science Module), if I can line it up right... (I've done it a couple times before, but it's definitely one of the hardest maneuvers to perform correctly)...