Where best to put an MPL?

[eddiew]

Hey peeps,

Sorry, going to ask a dumb question   Is it better to have an MPL in Kerbin orbit, in Mun/Minmus orbit, or on-site at the body you're processing data from?

I feel like the rules have changed since I last paid attention... Wasn't there a thing back in 0.90 or 1.0.5 whereby the distance between the data source and the lab, and between the lab and Kerbin would add a multiplier to the science return? Was that ever a thing/is it still a thing?

[Sharpy]

First, massive multiplier added by being in SOI/orbit of wherever the science originated.

Second multiplier (about +10%) added by being on the surface of that body. (except Kerbin)

The lab in Kerbin orbit makes sense only for Kerbin data.

If you're going for low-gravity world like Minmus, you're best off hauling the lab and experiments to the surface, and biome-hopping with the thing - experiment delivery is bothersome.

For worlds with heavier gravity, leaving the lab in low orbit makes sense, though landing it at a location "near to many biomes" and collecting science with a robust rover is also a good idea.

Also, for purpose of multipliers, location of where science is processed into data matters. Bring your Duna mission lab into LKO, add a bunch of Kerbin experiments, then send it on its merry way to Duna. Kerbin multiplier applies, even though most of research is in Sun's SOI.

It just doesn't make sense to ferry e.g. Eve experiments to a lab on Gilly - Eve's multiplier won't apply, nor will Gilly's.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Sharpy

[eddiew]

Thanks @Sharpy!

So is it fair to say that my plan for a science station that all return flights stop off at is sub-optimal? I tend to send a lot of probes out (and back) when the destination is a bit of a stretch for a crew. In these cases where a lab on-site is impractical, would I be better with a lab in orbit around Mun or Kerbin to come home to? Either way it's still at least 5x better than just parachuting the experiments down, but if Mun would make it 6x better then I'd make the effort  

(I should probably just test it. I can go get an experiment from Minmus, send a copy to Kerbin and Mun orbital labs and see whether one produces more...)

*edit*

I did some tests with Hyperedit, took a temperature reading around Duna and moved it around a bit. I think the return value would have been 22 science. (Rald is a moon of Kerbin and replaces Minmus in my install.)

Location	Data value	Science output
Duna orbit	28	140
Duna surface	31	155
Kerbin orbit	22	110
Mun orbit	22	110
Rald orbit	22	110
Rald surface	25	125

It looks like you get ~25-30% bonus for being in orbit in the relevant SoI, rising to ~40% if landed there. 

If you can't do an on-site lab, or simply prefer to return data home, then a surface base on Mun/Minmus/anywhere is slightly better value for money than an orbital one, but obviously it's harder to get to. With regards to stations in LKO or around one of Kerbin's moons, there seems to be no difference, so if you prefer orbital labs, then LKO is the way to go.

But in all cases you get at least 5x better returns than just parachuting the data home  

Edited August 28, 2016 by eddiew

[Sharpy]

Definitely suboptimal. You won't be getting any location bonuses, and these tend to be huge. You'll get the standard conversion, but that's hardly worth the effort when Minmus soil sample picked from under the lab's landing gear yields good 1000+ data.

 

[eddiew]

4 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

Definitely suboptimal. You won't be getting any location bonuses, and these tend to be huge. You'll get the standard conversion, but that's hardly worth the effort when Minmus soil sample picked from under the lab's landing gear yields good 1000+ data.

Dammit, ninja'd! I just edited my post above with some numbers for recovered orbital science ^^;  Might go do some for surface samples...

(I'm playing with my science multiplier at 40% though, so I doubt I'll ever get a 1000 points from one sample. This was before I realised how ferociously hungry for science KRnD can be  )

[Laie]

7 hours ago, Sharpy said:

If you're going for low-gravity world like Minmus, you're best off hauling the lab and experiments to the surface, and biome-hopping with the thing - experiment delivery is bothersome.

Agreed, for different reasons. If you are going to biome-hop anyway, you may as well bring the lab with you. Especially on low-gravity worlds.

Basically it's a question of when the extra effort for building a bigger rocket becomes more bothersome than the hassle of dealing with a separate lander. Adjust this by personal preferences -- in other words, do not drop the lander from your mission plan if you enjoy it.

[eddiew]

4 hours ago, Laie said:

Agreed, for different reasons. If you are going to biome-hop anyway, you may as well bring the lab with you. Especially on low-gravity worlds.

That does seem to be the conclusion, aye  

In some ways it's freeing to discover that it doesn't matter which body the lab is at, unless it's at the one where the science came from. In other ways, I liked the idea of a permanent Mun/Minmus base that any and all homebound traffic would go to ^^;

[Norcalplanner]

Maybe I'm just old school, but I don't bring a science lab down to the surface unless it's going to be part of a large surface base.  I like to keep them in my orbital stations - sort of helps to give the station a reason for existing.  I sort of like the drill of sending a crewed biome hopper down to a few biomes, grab all the science it can, then head back to the station to drop off the nuggets of knowledge and have the crew take a breather.  It just feels right to me.

Now that I think about it, it also makes managing power easier.  As long as you have enough batteries to keep the lab running as it traverses the shadow of the body it's orbiting, you can keep it running with "free" solar power.  One of the things that turned me off of RSS was the need for my Moon base to power itself in the dark for two weeks at a stretch.  It got old pretty fast, and makes me understand why some have proposed to put a RL Moon base at one of the poles.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Norcalplanner
typos

[Sharpy]

7 hours ago, Norcalplanner said:

  I sort of like the drill of sending a crewed biome hopper down to a few biomes,

Well, I sort of like sending the drill of a crewed biome hopper down into surface of a few biomes.

An ISRU on board will sustain the lab through the night on fuel cells.

[magnemoe]

21 hours ago, eddiew said:

That does seem to be the conclusion, aye  

In some ways it's freeing to discover that it doesn't matter which body the lab is at, unless it's at the one where the science came from. In other ways, I liked the idea of a permanent Mun/Minmus base that any and all homebound traffic would go to ^^;

Note that the other bodies give an so high multiplier the loss of not being in the same SOI is more of an benefit. Surface samples and gravity scan tend to give over 2000 data so you need to almost empty the lab before adding them 

[Laie]

16 hours ago, Norcalplanner said:

One of the things that turned me off of RSS was the need for my Moon base to power itself in the dark for two weeks at a stretch.

Badly OP, but: one of the "Near Future" packs holds several nuclear power sources. Even the smallest would suffice for a sizable base, and at ~1200kg it's still bearable.

Don't know how modern plans look like, but well into the 70s a moon base would have been nuclear powered as a matter of course.