The "Duna Extended Research Program (DERP)"

[Death Engineering]

13 hours ago, Nich said:

ASCI Picard facepalming because I am an idiot  :/

That's great.. ASCII art. And I'm even old enough to appreciate that.

52 minutes ago, Nich said:

So I noticed that there is the option to increase production rate 10% for kredits.  Is this legal to use as long as we track the cost?

 

You can use it, but in my testing it didn't seem to actually do anything in Sandbox mode. If you're using a career and hacked in a nice round number as a budget and a bunch of science to unlock the tech tree, should be fine.

[Nich]

Sweet I figured out how to do it in career too if anyone is interested.

1.  Start a career

2. Assign your 10 points

3. use alt-f12 to open debug menu

4. hold alt for 10 seconds to get supper cheats

5. unlock all buildings and tech and give your self some funds

6. Hire a bunch of kerbals

7. In the persistence file copy the flights and career from an experienced kerbal from another save to all your kerbals in this save (this will get them that level)

8. set 
            FundsGainMultiplier = 0

and 
            FundsLossMultiplier = 0

This will keep you from gaining kerdits from world first

9. Clear funds and give your self 10 mil

10. At the end of the challenge your costs are 10 mil - final kredits

[magico13]

It might be a good idea to save that save file and upload it here as a starting point for everyone else to use. Either don't assign the 10 points (you can do that at any later time) or tweak the KCT data to trick it into thinking it hasn't been added to the save (or just don't install KCT yet)

[Nich]

so I created a new persistants file.  It is 1m into career with 10 mil and 72 max level kerbals available.  You should be able to apply your 10 points although for some reason sometime KCT offers me 11 just make sure you only use 10.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0iPRE-stt2CZHY4LUl2M3lJZ2s/view?usp=sharing

 

Edited February 15, 2016 by Nich

[Death Engineering]

5 hours ago, Nich said:

so I created a new persistants file.  It is 1m into career with 10 mil and 72 max level kerbals available.  You should be able to apply your 10 points although for some reason sometime KCT offers me 11 just make sure you only use 10.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0iPRE-stt2CZHY4LUl2M3lJZ2s/view?usp=sharing

 

That is AWESOME. Thanks.   Mind if I place that link in the OP?

[Nich]

np

[Jasonden]

7 hours ago, Nich said:

so I created a new persistence file.  It is 1m into career with 10 mil and 72 max level kerbals available.  

Awesome -- this would have made my present attempt way simpler to math!  Kudos!

[Nich]

I had an issue with flight planning.  I updated the persistent file.  Link is the same but if you downloaded it earlier you may have to fix it.

[Nich]

So I just finished my first window and thought I would share the progress so far.  Not really sure how I am going to attack the second transfer window yet.

I decided to go 6 and 4 in 2 SPHs.  This gave me .4 BP for each.  I created 2 identical heavyish lifters (50t max) with 2 extra long cargo bays.  The first one finished around day 215 and lifted a 48t payload of supplies and fuel for the upcoming transfer to Duna.  The second finished on day 235ish and contained 2 science labs to get the prestige around Ike and Duna.  In addition they have landers that can land 2 kerbals on Duna and Ike multiple times.  Turns out the Science lab transfer stage was a huge pain to dock to its supplies so they ended up leaving a day late which is fine as it turns out the transfer stage had 6000ish dv :0  I decided to take an expedited transfer so I have more time to land Kerbals on Duna and Ike and I am not racing the clock.  I will have a few less landings unfortunately but the transfer only takes 149 days for only 100ish dv from kerbin so probably need to add another 100-150 for Duna we will see.

 

[DBowman]

On 1/14/2016 at 10:45 AM, Death Engineering said:

SCIENCE LAB: A space station with any stock or mod "Science Laboratory", can generate power, has an antenna and docking port and capable of supporting at least 4 Kerbals. The station must have at least one Scientist on board.

KERBAL HAB: A surface base with any stock or mod "Science Laboratory", can generate power, has an antenna and must be capable of supporting at least 6 Kerbals. The base must have at least one Scientist on board.

I'm not sure how to read this. Originally I though 'the LAB/HAB has to be able to support [contain] 4/6 and as long as there is 1 scientist one board it counts as a LAB/HAB'. i.e. just one guy and just his LS is enough as long as there is space where you could put 4/6, any crew above the one scientist bring their own LS with them and are not integral to it's function as a LAB/HAB. On the other hand 'support' might mean actually have on board and 'life support' them and it's not a LAB/HAB without 4/6 on board.

4 hours ago, Nich said:

So I just finished my first window and thought I would share the progress so far.

Nice - the lifter looks pretty economical!

[Nich]

8 hours ago, DBowman said:

I'm not sure how to read this. Originally I though 'the LAB/HAB has to be able to support [contain] 4/6 and as long as there is 1 scientist one board it counts as a LAB/HAB'. i.e. just one guy and just his LS is enough as long as there is space where you could put 4/6, any crew above the one scientist bring their own LS with them and are not integral to it's function as a LAB/HAB. On the other hand 'support' might mean actually have on board and 'life support' them and it's not a LAB/HAB without 4/6 on board.

Nice - the lifter looks pretty economical!

I read it the same way you did.  Only need 1 scientist and his life support.  However if you have the seats might as well add life support for 5 more and get credit for 30 points or 45 if you can shuttle them to Duna/Ike

 

Thanks I have not run the numbers on it yet as it was not designed to be ground breaking.  Hopefully it breaks the 100 funds/t mark.  What is really nice is the fact that it is pretty symmetrical front to back so I can take heavy loads and light loads without effecting the CG much at all.  It is also one of the most usable SSTO I have ever made as CG barely moves load/fulled to loaded/unfueled to unloaded/unfueled.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Nich

[Nich]

So I just realized the science labs have non retractable solar panels.  What would KIS require to change the panels into retractable?  All I really have to work with are the existing panels and some extra LF fuel tanks?  I think I would also have to edit the persistence file to give the engineers a screwdriver which definitely puts the hole missing into the he cheaty category.  Personally I can justify it because if I had KIS installed when I started engineers would have had tools.

[Nich]

So I just looked at KIS and KAS and realize you cant make new parts out of old parts.  But I could remove the solar panels before airbrake.  Now the only question is it cheating to give my engineers wrenches?

[Death Engineering]

21 hours ago, Nich said:

So I just finished my first window and thought I would share the progress so far.  Not really sure how I am going to attack the second transfer window yet.

I decided to go 6 and 4 in 2 SPHs.  This gave me .4 BP for each.  I created 2 identical heavyish lifters (50t max) with 2 extra long cargo bays.  The first one finished around day 215 and lifted a 48t payload of supplies and fuel for the upcoming transfer to Duna.  The second finished on day 235ish and contained 2 science labs to get the prestige around Ike and Duna.  In addition they have landers that can land 2 kerbals on Duna and Ike multiple times.  Turns out the Science lab transfer stage was a huge pain to dock to its supplies so they ended up leaving a day late which is fine as it turns out the transfer stage had 6000ish dv :0  I decided to take an expedited transfer so I have more time to land Kerbals on Duna and Ike and I am not racing the clock.  I will have a few less landings unfortunately but the transfer only takes 149 days for only 100ish dv from kerbin so probably need to add another 100-150 for Duna we will see.

 

Now, THAT is a very cool looking machine!!!  

17 hours ago, DBowman said:

I'm not sure how to read this. Originally I though 'the LAB/HAB has to be able to support [contain] 4/6 and as long as there is 1 scientist one board it counts as a LAB/HAB'. i.e. just one guy and just his LS is enough as long as there is space where you could put 4/6, any crew above the one scientist bring their own LS with them and are not integral to it's function as a LAB/HAB. On the other hand 'support' might mean actually have on board and 'life support' them and it's not a LAB/HAB without 4/6 on board.

Nice - the lifter looks pretty economical!

Labs/Habs need to have at least 4/6 seats but doesn't need to have that many kerb's on board (just the Scientist) to score.  As @Nich mentions below, the Lab/Hab requirement is to put everyone on the same playing field with the spacecraft, but it's up to you if you want to risk that many kerb's or be chicken cautious like me and only land a few in each. 

6 hours ago, Nich said:

So I just looked at KIS and KAS and realize you cant make new parts out of old parts.  But I could remove the solar panels before airbrake.  Now the only question is it cheating to give my engineers wrenches?

Can't really condone "cheats" without it being a Kraken visit or something similar. Can you go back to a earlier save and re-fly the mission(s)?  (I always do a save from the KSC after a major milestone with notations like "year1day232" so I can go back if needed.)  Good luck!  

edit: Something similar happened to my Duna lab.. I lost two of the three GigantorXL panels on aerobraking and on the next mission flew up a module with new solar panels.. would that work?

Edited February 16, 2016 by Death Engineering

[Nich]

Unfortunately Mission is bare bones so I could get it off the strip in time for the window.  Kerbals will run out of electricity and die if they lose 2 panels.  Unfortunately no saves before they left orbit or launched.  There only 45 minutes away from kerbin but if I kill the transfer it will be 60-70 days until I can get a refuel up there with a screwdriver and new parts.  It would be pretty tough to make the prestige window.  The crew has enough supplies for 3 years 100ish days so another option is a refuel mission but that will not be ready for 162 days.  My current miner design should have 6000 dv after a refuel at minimus in 700 m/s burst but I am probably looking at 200 days until I can launch that.  Being so far off the window how much dv would that take?

[Nich]

Actually looking at porkchop plots it looks like I found my window.  It will be cutting it close on dv and supplies for everyone.  Should be lots of DRAMA

Departure Year 1, day 425 at 0:00:00

Arrival Year 3, day 219 at 1:40:48

Time of flight 1 years 220 days 1:40:48

Phase angle 328.79°

Ejection angle 137° to prograde

Ejection inclination 0.60°

Ejection Δv 1254 m/s 

Ejection burn details 

Prograde Δv 1,076.9 m/s 

Normal Δv 28.3 m/s

Heading 88.49°

Transfer periapsis 13,338 Mm

Transfer apoapsis 27,379 Mm

Transfer inclination 0.06°

Transfer angle 253°

Insertion inclination -0.09°

Insertion Δv 1,733 m/s

Total Δv 2,988 m/s

[Northstar1989]

May I suggest allowing Flight Manager for Reusable Stages as an alternative to Stage Recovery?

Flight Manager for Reusable Stages is a far superior option to Stage Recovery (for those players who want to put in the extra effort) because:

(1)  You can rely on landing methods other than parachutes- increasing your design flexibility.  You can rely on wings (and perhaps a few drogue chutes) to glide back to the KSC, or better yet, you can land vertically using a launch stage's launch engines SpaceX Falcon 9 style (trust me, I've done it many, many times before in FMRS, it's easily possible...) which is a much lighter/cheaper option for landing medium and large launch stages than parachutes...

(2)  You actually are able to CONTROL the landing of your dropped stages.  This is critically important when you build in the ability to guide dropped stages back to the KSC rather than simply dropping dumbly on the suborbital trajectory you ejected them at (for instance, if you add a probe core and some batteries to a dropped launch stage, you can perform a short boost-back burn like the Falcon 9 does and end up landing right back on the Launchpad...)

It also increases the realism- craft have to actually LAND.  This means designs that would fall over and break upon splashdown/touchdown because they are tall, lack landing legs, and are designed to land vertically won't work, for instance.

 

Regards,

Northstar

[magico13]

4 hours ago, Northstar1989 said:

is a far superior option to Stage Recovery

Ooh, right in the heart 

 

I actually really like FMRS because for the situations in which it was designed, it does a great job. It's a huge PITA when you're just dropping SRBs and don't really want to spend a bunch of time watching them descend on parachutes. That's why I went out of the way to make sure StageRecovery is compatible with it: when FMRS is off SR runs, but when FMRS is on SR won't try to recover anything. That way you can get the best of both worlds.

I'd also like to mention that StageRecovery does support powered landings, not just parachute based ones. Sure it's an abstraction of the process and doesn't require physically landing the vessel, but when you're focussed on the main mission and have landed your stage 100 times already it's kind of annoying to have to go back and land it again and again and again.

 

I second the motion to allow FMRS. You can just as easily keep track of costs (I'm pretty sure you still get recovery screens, if not then just keep track of when your funds change) and it requires more physical effort in return for diversified launch vehicles.

 

PS: Don't use FMRS with KCT's simulations. Bad things apparently happen.

[Nich]

 So bad news apparently even with the funds set to 0% some world firsts still gives money in the career.  I failed to track all these so I am going to have to restart. On the plus side my mission that was critical was able to land once each and have enough dv to return. Sadly due to a mix up at launch one science lab was un occupied. And the other science lab had to Eva durning the landing because even though it had solar panels without a batterie they had no charge :'( So I have some things to fix

[sdj64]

1 hour ago, Nich said:

 So bad news apparently even with the funds set to 0% some world firsts still gives money in the career.  I failed to track all these so I am going to have to restart. On the plus side my mission that was critical was able to land once each and have enough dv to return. Sadly due to a mix up at launch one science lab was un occupied. And the other science lab had to Eva durning the landing because even though it had solar panels without a batterie they had no charge :'( So I have some things to fix

If you really want to use career, fly a ship to Duna and Ike and back to Kerbin with infinite fuel on.  It will trigger all of the world firsts, and make sure you plant a flag to get that world first too.  Then copy them into a fresh career so you start at year 1, day 1?

[magico13]

11 minutes ago, sdj64 said:

Then copy them into a fresh career so you start at year 1, day 1?

Or just set the UT back to 0 in the save file and reset the funds back to 10 million or so. Same effect but only requires changing two lines rather than copying a bunch of stuff.

[DBowman]

Do I understand right using career is just to open up being able to buy upgrade points? maybe it's simpler to tweak the preset to have more points and then account for the $ that would cost? On the other hand maybe you found all the kinks now.

[Death Engineering]

23 hours ago, Nich said:

Actually looking at porkchop plots it looks like I found my window.  It will be cutting it close on dv and supplies for everyone.  Should be lots of DRAMA

Departure Year 1, day 425 at 0:00:00

Arrival Year 3, day 219 at 1:40:48

Time of flight 1 years 220 days 1:40:48

Phase angle 328.79°

Ejection angle 137° to prograde

Ejection inclination 0.60°

Ejection Δv 1254 m/s 

Ejection burn details 

Prograde Δv 1,076.9 m/s 

Normal Δv 28.3 m/s

Heading 88.49°

Transfer periapsis 13,338 Mm

Transfer apoapsis 27,379 Mm

Transfer inclination 0.06°

Transfer angle 253°

Insertion inclination -0.09°

Insertion Δv 1,733 m/s

Total Δv 2,988 m/s

That's a pretty good transfer window. As far as I'm concerned, anything under 1300m/s for a Duna transfer is reasonable. Let's not forget Oberth and Mun assists, too.  

 

14 hours ago, Northstar1989 said:

May I suggest allowing Flight Manager for Reusable Stages as an alternative to Stage Recovery?

Flight Manager for Reusable Stages is a far superior option to Stage Recovery (for those players who want to put in the extra effort) because:

(1)  You can rely on landing methods other than parachutes- increasing your design flexibility.  You can rely on wings (and perhaps a few drogue chutes) to glide back to the KSC, or better yet, you can land vertically using a launch stage's launch engines SpaceX Falcon 9 style (trust me, I've done it many, many times before in FMRS, it's easily possible...) which is a much lighter/cheaper option for landing medium and large launch stages than parachutes...

(2)  You actually are able to CONTROL the landing of your dropped stages.  This is critically important when you build in the ability to guide dropped stages back to the KSC rather than simply dropping dumbly on the suborbital trajectory you ejected them at (for instance, if you add a probe core and some batteries to a dropped launch stage, you can perform a short boost-back burn like the Falcon 9 does and end up landing right back on the Launchpad...)

It also increases the realism- craft have to actually LAND.  This means designs that would fall over and break upon splashdown/touchdown because they are tall, lack landing legs, and are designed to land vertically won't work, for instance.

 

Regards,

Northstar

I'd not heard of that MOD - I will update the OP to allow it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!  

 

9 hours ago, Nich said:

 So bad news apparently even with the funds set to 0% some world firsts still gives money in the career.  I failed to track all these so I am going to have to restart. On the plus side my mission that was critical was able to land once each and have enough dv to return. Sadly due to a mix up at launch one science lab was un occupied. And the other science lab had to Eva durning the landing because even though it had solar panels without a batterie they had no charge :'( So I have some things to fix

From the OP:

Yes, one could edit the 'persistent.sfs' file and hack in SCIENCE and funds, but you'd also have to keep track of the massive number of funds gained as a result of the 'Worlds First' records. 

(I tried this in playtesting the challenge.. it was a pain      )

8 hours ago, sdj64 said:

If you really want to use career, fly a ship to Duna and Ike and back to Kerbin with infinite fuel on.  It will trigger all of the world firsts, and make sure you plant a flag to get that world first too.  Then copy them into a fresh career so you start at year 1, day 1?

I wonder if there is a way (cheat menu/mod/???) to disable the World Firsts...

1 hour ago, DBowman said:

Do I understand right using career is just to open up being able to buy upgrade points? maybe it's simpler to tweak the preset to have more points and then account for the $ that would cost? On the other hand maybe you found all the kinks now.

To be frank (actually my name is Chuck), I really think 'Sandbox' is the easiest way to play this challenge. I build a very basic Google DOC sheet to keep track of every simulation, build and launch/recovery. It was really easy.. am I possibly missing something?  (very possible)

[Nich]

Hhmmm... How do you use porkchop plots?  I just can not seem to find this route.  I keep getting the 245 day transfer.  Think it is time to get precise node :/

Departure Year 1, day 231 at 0:14:24

Arrival Year 2, day 7 at 2:16:48

Time of flight 202 days 2:02:24

Phase angle 38.68°

Ejection angle 152° to prograde

Ejection inclination 0.49°

Ejection Δv 1,058 m/s 

Transfer periapsis 13,337 Mm

Transfer apoapsis 20,816 Mm

Transfer inclination 0.02°

Transfer angle 137°

Insertion inclination N/A

Insertion Δv N/A

Total Δv 1,058 m/s

[Jasonden]

10 hours ago, Nich said:

Hhmmm... How do you use porkchop plots?  I just can not seem to find this route.  I keep getting the 245 day transfer.  Think it is time to get precise node :/

OMG yes.  How have you ever lived without it?  Seriously, dude