Eve project

[septemberWaves]

If you aren't testing your Eve rocket by cheating it to Eve before you actually send it for real, you should equip it with a launch escape system so that the kerbals can return to the surface and await a rescue mission if it goes wrong. This isn't coming from doubt of your abilities exactly - even I do this sometimes*, and I test my Eve vehicles very extensively to ensure that they work perfectly. I'm suggesting to do it because on Eve, there is never much margin for error.

If you've based your rocket off of existing delta-v maps, you'll probably have only just enough delta-v to reach orbit, and anything that goes even slightly wrong during the launch will result in the inability to complete a circularization burn.
If you're going the stock route and building the rocket by guesswork, you also have the risk of lacking the required fuel to reach orbit, especially since it's your first attempt.
Otherwise, you may have over-built your rocket, and over-built rockets have their own risks (which you've probably encountered when launching large vehicles from Kerbin).

----------------------------------------------------------------

*Usually if I'm equipping an Eve rocket with a launch escape system, I'll have a small one-module surface base in orbit ready to be deployed in the case that the launch fails and the crew have to return to Eve's surface at a location too far from an existing base (though usually, if I've been taking my Eve program seriously, I tend to have well-equipped bases dotted around the planet within reasonable range of most points on the equator; my Eve rocket LES will usually also include small wings to glide closer to a base). But this is because I like to plan semi-realistic missions, and I don't like leaving kerbals stuck in a pod for much longer than the duration of a Minmus mission.

[eagle92lightning]

2 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

If you aren't testing your Eve rocket by cheating it to Eve before you actually send it for real, you should equip it with a launch escape system so that the kerbals can return to the surface and await a rescue mission if it goes wrong. This isn't coming from doubt of your abilities exactly - even I do this sometimes*, and I test my Eve vehicles very extensively to ensure that they work perfectly. I'm suggesting to do it because on Eve, there is never much margin for error.

If you've based your rocket off of existing delta-v maps, you'll probably have only just enough delta-v to reach orbit, and anything that goes even slightly wrong during the launch will result in the inability to complete a circularization burn.
If you're going the stock route and building the rocket by guesswork, you also have the risk of lacking the required fuel to reach orbit, especially since it's your first attempt.
Otherwise, you may have over-built your rocket, and over-built rockets have their own risks (which you've probably encountered when launching large vehicles from Kerbin).

----------------------------------------------------------------

*Usually if I'm equipping an Eve rocket with a launch escape system, I'll have a small one-module surface base in orbit ready to be deployed in the case that the launch fails and the crew have to return to Eve's surface at a location too far from an existing base (though usually, if I've been taking my Eve program seriously, I tend to have well-equipped bases dotted around the planet within reasonable range of most points on the equator; my Eve rocket LES will usually also include small wings to glide closer to a base). But this is because I like to plan semi-realistic missions, and I don't like leaving kerbals stuck in a pod for much longer than the duration of a Minmus mission.

I have a system set up where when I click abort it automatically decouples every thing.

[septemberWaves]

Just now, eagle92lightning said:

I have a system set up where when I click abort it automatically decouples every thing.

Sounds good, just make sure your pod has a parachute.

Actually I can see some potential risks with that system, but it's probably fine.

Edited October 23, 2016 by eloquentJane

[eagle92lightning]

Just now, eloquentJane said:

Sounds good, just make sure your pod has a parachute.

try six three drouges three mains.

[Vinhero100]

ya, Areospikes and vectors are good, but vectors eat up fuel like crazy. Areospkies would be my choice (even though there not as powerful). I even made o plane on eve propelled by Areospike

-Note: Karbonite engines are good to, i made a "glider" on eve, and it was crazy manuverable. It's just that they eat lots of fuel for "Air" Breathing engines. That cut the flight time by a lot, but I can eaily be refueling mid air to extend the time by 10/20 minutes 

 

2 hours ago, eagle92lightning said:

I have a system set up where when I click abort it automatically decouples every thing.

The decouplers are adding whieght that you dont want or even need, so if I were you, I would take off some decouplers and just decouple the junk. You wont need that many paracutes because the atmosphere is strong

Note: How many times in 1 sentence have I said decouplers or decouple? 

[eagle92lightning]

1 hour ago, Vinhero100 said:

ya, Areospikes and vectors are good, but vectors eat up fuel like crazy. Areospkies would be my choice (even though there not as powerful). I even made o plane on eve propelled by Areospike

-Note: Karbonite engines are good to, i made a "glider" on eve, and it was crazy manuverable. It's just that they eat lots of fuel for "Air" Breathing engines. That cut the flight time by a lot, but I can eaily be refueling mid air to extend the time by 10/20 minutes 

 

The decouplers are adding whieght that you dont want or even need, so if I were you, I would take off some decouplers and just decouple the junk. You wont need that many paracutes because the atmosphere is strong

Note: How many times in 1 sentence have I said decouplers or decouple? 

I mean on my mid flight launch abort system. And that is on my reentry tester mission okay.

Edited October 23, 2016 by eagle92lightning
misspell

[Vinhero100]

3 minutes ago, eagle92lightning said:

I mean on ny mid flight launch abort system. And that is on my reentry tester mission okay.

Oh ok

[eagle92lightning]

1 minute ago, Vinhero100 said:

Oh ok

it okay.

[Vinhero100]

This might be off-topic, but after I kolonize duna, should I go to Eve, Or jool?? (laythe, vall)

[eagle92lightning]

1 hour ago, Vinhero100 said:

This might be off-topic, but after I kolonize duna, should I go to Eve, Or jool?? (laythe, vall)

well you can't land on jool and you can't even colonize it. So I say go for less travel time

[Starhawk]

I'm currently working on a rescue mission from Eve's surface.

We will land five Kerbals on Eve to rescue one.  The ascent vehicle lands empty and has ISRU equipment allowing it to refuel.  There is also a glider/rover that will pick up the rescuee and bring her to the ascent vehicle while collecting science along the way.

Six Kerbals will ascend from around 1 km elevation and fly to orbit in a ship equipped with two Mk1-2 Command Pods, 9 Vectors, and 8 Aerospikes.

At least that's the plan.

See my sig.
 

Happy landings!

[eagle92lightning]

12 minutes ago, Starhawk said:

I'm currently working on a rescue mission from Eve's surface.

We will land five Kerbals on Eve to rescue one.  The ascent vehicle lands empty and has ISRU equipment allowing it to refuel.  There is also a glider/rover that will pick up the rescuee and bring her to the ascent vehicle while collecting science along the way.

Six Kerbals will ascend from around 1 km elevation and fly to orbit in a ship equipped with two Mk1-2 Command Pods, 9 Vectors, and 8 Aerospikes.

At least that's the plan.

See my sig.
 

Happy landings!

I would make the spacecraft a drone with room for 1 kerbal because 5 for 1 is just do a cost/benefit analysis on that.

[Foxster]

I'd use almost anything other than very over-weight Mk1-2 capsules. 

A Mk2 crew cabin and a Mk2 cockpit springs to mind. 

[Starhawk]

1 minute ago, Foxster said:

I'd use almost anything other than very over-weight Mk1-2 capsules. 

A Mk2 crew cabin and a Mk2 cockpit springs to mind. 

But the shock of landing in a high gravity environment!

The pressures!  The temperatures!  I need to protect my Kerbals!

Seriously, though.  I mostly do it for the challenge of it.  And a bit of RP.

The real trick here is that the craft was designed and originally tested in 1.1.3.  The changes to Eve's atmo (however slight) have not been kind to the ship.  And to make matters worse, the bug where the thermal system thinks the drills are extended through the heat shields was reintroduced during pre-release and ended up in the release.

I think the ship can still make it back to orbit if I can get it to the surface mostly intact.

Here's a shot of one of the simulated landing attempts.

We shall see.  Hopefully I will have ...

Happy landings!

[Vinhero100]

5 hours ago, Starhawk said:

I'm currently working on a rescue mission from Eve's surface.

We will land five Kerbals on Eve to rescue one.  The ascent vehicle lands empty and has ISRU equipment allowing it to refuel.  There is also a glider/rover that will pick up the rescuee and bring her to the ascent vehicle while collecting science along the way.

Six Kerbals will ascend from around 1 km elevation and fly to orbit in a ship equipped with two Mk1-2 Command Pods, 9 Vectors, and 8 Aerospikes.

At least that's the plan.

See my sig.
 

Happy landings!

use a probe core with a mk1 command pod to save weight!

[septemberWaves]

Since we're talking about Eve mission ideas, here's what I'm going to do in my next major playthrough (which will include XPC, which adds 2 moons to Eve amongst other things).

Very early on - I'll aim for the first adequate Eve transfer window - I'll be sending 2 kerbals to fly by Eve and return to Kerbin. Using the low-energy transfer window at a similar time (which I think will be slightly before the one used for the crewed mission), I will send 4 small communications satellites and a larger interplanetary relay to the Eve system. This mission will mainly use technology from the Mark One Laboratory Extensions mod, and will basically serve as a test for that technology being used on interplanetary missions. There will also be a similar mission to Duna with the same level of technology.

The next adequate transfer window will take 4 kerbals to orbit Eve with the same level of technology, and will land 2 of them on each of its 3 moons. They will then return to Kerbin. A similar mission will take the same amount of kerbals to Duna at the right transfer window, and will land 2 on Duna and both of its moons. None of the missions described so far will involve reusable infrastructure.

After this point, the Eve and Duna programs will diverge in terms of their goals, so I'll only describe the Eve program here.

A large interplanetary transport vehicle (based mainly around 2.5m parts rather than the 1.875m of M.O.L.E.) will be constructed in Kerbin orbit. This will be a reusable transfer vehicle propelled by nuclear thermal engines. I'll be using KR&D in this playthrough, so different modules will eventually be switched out for more advanced ones (including switching to VASIMR propulsion in the late-game). This vehicle will be able to serve as an orbital habitat for up to 8 kerbals, and will also be equipped with a lab, science equipment, and a cargo truss.

The first use of the interplanetary transport will be a mission to land several kerbals (probably 4) and a rover on each of Eve's moons. This will use a single-stage lander that will be able to be refuelled and reused on future missions. The transport will also carry a large autonomous lander, which will return the first science from Eve's atmosphere and oceans.

The next time, the transport will carry 4 modules of a permanent station to be constructed in Eve orbit (centrifuge hub, structural truss, and 2 solar arrays). It will also take enough fuel to refuel the moon lander so that it can be used again to gather science.

By the following transfer window, I should be sufficiently advanced to create a basic Eve ascent vehicle for 2 kerbals. This will be transported to Eve orbit independently of the interplanetary mothership, and will dock with the station. The mothership will take 5 new station modules (4 centrifuge habitats and a communications module) and 8 kerbals to Eve orbit (4 of whom will stay on the now-usable station until the next window). 2 kerbals will land on Eve, gather data, and return. The science data will be processed on the mothership.

The next transfer window will involve the first surface base. It will be transported independently, and will consist of a 4-kerbal habitat, a lab, and a service module, as well as a rover to assemble the modules. The mothership will transport the next 8-kerbal crew (4 of whom will stay at the new surface base whilst the other 4 will stay on the station until the next window). It will also transport a descent vehicle for the surface base crew, more fuel for the moon lander, and a science module and microgravity habitat for the station. When it returns to Kerbin, it will take with it the initial station crew.

This is as far ahead as I have planned specifically, but I aim to have a significant Eve infrastructure by the end of my playthrough, and to gather science data from every biome on Eve and all 3 of its moons. Eventually, I anticipate that KR&D will allow me to create some single-stage Eve transports with relative ease, but that will be far in the late-game. I'll focus mainly on partially reusable vehicles (which consist of an expendable launch stage and a reusable upper stage with crew module), which I quite enjoy designing for Eve.

My main aim is to explore Eve with style - something which many people don't believe is possible due to the immense difficulty of leaving the planet's surface.

[Raycrate]

just did a surface return mission to eve yesterday with the new science container. no mining, no orbiter. could be possible with some small changes to return a kerbal with this rocket i think.

KSP 1.2 - returning a probe from Eve's surface - 2,4k science - no mods - no mining - no orbiter

Edited October 25, 2016 by Raycrate
fixed link

[EvermoreAlpaca]

I am currently two parts into my Eve colonization mission.  Praise the purple giant.

https://youtu.be/IXZNxzSTivk   - Establishment of mining bases on Minmus, Gilly, and Eve, plus an SSTO Eve spaceplane

https://youtu.be/LSWMLkek_OE  - Electric prop cargo plane, plus a fully reusable prop/rocket orbiter system

 

Edited October 24, 2016 by EvermoreAlpaca

[McQuacker]

On 24/10/2016 at 6:41 PM, EvermoreAlpaca said:

I am currently two parts into my Eve colonization mission.  Praise the purple giant.

https://youtu.be/IXZNxzSTivk   - Establishment of mining bases on Minmus, Gilly, and Eve, plus an SSTO Eve spaceplane

https://youtu.be/LSWMLkek_OE  - Electric prop cargo plane, plus a fully reusable prop/rocket orbiter system

 

An Eve SSTO?! And with Mammoth engines, no less. You should make a showcase thread of just that craft!

[eagle92lightning]

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 7:41 PM, eloquentJane said:

Since we're talking about Eve mission ideas, here's what I'm going to do in my next major playthrough (which will include XPC, which adds 2 moons to Eve amongst other things).

Very early on - I'll aim for the first adequate Eve transfer window - I'll be sending 2 kerbals to fly by Eve and return to Kerbin. Using the low-energy transfer window at a similar time (which I think will be slightly before the one used for the crewed mission), I will send 4 small communications satellites and a larger interplanetary relay to the Eve system. This mission will mainly use technology from the Mark One Laboratory Extensions mod, and will basically serve as a test for that technology being used on interplanetary missions. There will also be a similar mission to Duna with the same level of technology.

The next adequate transfer window will take 4 kerbals to orbit Eve with the same level of technology, and will land 2 of them on each of its 3 moons. They will then return to Kerbin. A similar mission will take the same amount of kerbals to Duna at the right transfer window, and will land 2 on Duna and both of its moons. None of the missions described so far will involve reusable infrastructure.

After this point, the Eve and Duna programs will diverge in terms of their goals, so I'll only describe the Eve program here.

A large interplanetary transport vehicle (based mainly around 2.5m parts rather than the 1.875m of M.O.L.E.) will be constructed in Kerbin orbit. This will be a reusable transfer vehicle propelled by nuclear thermal engines. I'll be using KR&D in this playthrough, so different modules will eventually be switched out for more advanced ones (including switching to VASIMR propulsion in the late-game). This vehicle will be able to serve as an orbital habitat for up to 8 kerbals, and will also be equipped with a lab, science equipment, and a cargo truss.

The first use of the interplanetary transport will be a mission to land several kerbals (probably 4) and a rover on each of Eve's moons. This will use a single-stage lander that will be able to be refuelled and reused on future missions. The transport will also carry a large autonomous lander, which will return the first science from Eve's atmosphere and oceans.

The next time, the transport will carry 4 modules of a permanent station to be constructed in Eve orbit (centrifuge hub, structural truss, and 2 solar arrays). It will also take enough fuel to refuel the moon lander so that it can be used again to gather science.

By the following transfer window, I should be sufficiently advanced to create a basic Eve ascent vehicle for 2 kerbals. This will be transported to Eve orbit independently of the interplanetary mothership, and will dock with the station. The mothership will take 5 new station modules (4 centrifuge habitats and a communications module) and 8 kerbals to Eve orbit (4 of whom will stay on the now-usable station until the next window). 2 kerbals will land on Eve, gather data, and return. The science data will be processed on the mothership.

The next transfer window will involve the first surface base. It will be transported independently, and will consist of a 4-kerbal habitat, a lab, and a service module, as well as a rover to assemble the modules. The mothership will transport the next 8-kerbal crew (4 of whom will stay at the new surface base whilst the other 4 will stay on the station until the next window). It will also transport a descent vehicle for the surface base crew, more fuel for the moon lander, and a science module and microgravity habitat for the station. When it returns to Kerbin, it will take with it the initial station crew.

This is as far ahead as I have planned specifically, but I aim to have a significant Eve infrastructure by the end of my playthrough, and to gather science data from every biome on Eve and all 3 of its moons. Eventually, I anticipate that KR&D will allow me to create some single-stage Eve transports with relative ease, but that will be far in the late-game. I'll focus mainly on partially reusable vehicles (which consist of an expendable launch stage and a reusable upper stage with crew module), which I quite enjoy designing for Eve.

My main aim is to explore Eve with style - something which many people don't believe is possible due to the immense difficulty of leaving the planet's surface.

try kspi it is awsome it has fusion engines and even a warp drive!

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 2:15 PM, Starhawk said:

But the shock of landing in a high gravity environment!

The pressures!  The temperatures!  I need to protect my Kerbals!

Seriously, though.  I mostly do it for the challenge of it.  And a bit of RP.

The real trick here is that the craft was designed and originally tested in 1.1.3.  The changes to Eve's atmo (however slight) have not been kind to the ship.  And to make matters worse, the bug where the thermal system thinks the drills are extended through the heat shields was reintroduced during pre-release and ended up in the release.

I think the ship can still make it back to orbit if I can get it to the surface mostly intact.

Here's a shot of one of the simulated landing attempts.

We shall see.  Hopefully I will have ...

Happy landings!

happy landings! And good look i burned up a ion probe in orbit.

[septemberWaves]

10 minutes ago, eagle92lightning said:

try kspi it is awsome it has fusion engines and even a warp drive!

I know about that mod, but it's not really my style. It's good for going to other star systems, but for missions within the Kerbol system it's a bit over the top. Early missions to the Eve system can even be done with chemical propulsion, since it doesn't require a huge amount of delta-v to get a flyby and return to Kerbin. Plus, when I do make reusable interplanetary transports, I'll have access to Nertea's various propulsion methods from Near Future Propulsion and Kerbal Atomics, which include some incredibly high-efficiency engines perfect for interplanetary missions.

[eagle92lightning]

2 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

I know about that mod, but it's not really my style. It's good for going to other star systems, but for missions within the Kerbol system it's a bit over the top. Early missions to the Eve system can even be done with chemical propulsion, since it doesn't require a huge amount of delta-v to get a flyby and return to Kerbin. Plus, when I do make reusable interplanetary transports, I'll have access to Nertea's various propulsion methods from Near Future Propulsion and Kerbal Atomics, which include some incredibly high-efficiency engines perfect for interplanetary missions.

okay it's just I plan on making warships with that mod.

[Racescort666]

On 10/23/2016 at 2:15 PM, Starhawk said:

The real trick here is that the craft was designed and originally tested in 1.1.3.  The changes to Eve's atmo (however slight) have not been kind to the ship.  And to make matters worse, the bug where the thermal system thinks the drills are extended through the heat shields was reintroduced during pre-release and ended up in the release.

UGH! that's still a bug? If I remember right, the small drills didn't have that problem but if it got fixed, then un-fixed, it could affect the small drills as well. The only workaround was to extend your heat shields way past the drills but that lead to a bunch of new problems for me. I like the look of your ship though. 

@eagle92lightning My thoughts from past experience: 

• If you want to use 1 pod, use the Mk3 cockpit, it's the lightest, best performing single pod. Alternatively, Mk2 Crew Cabin with a probe core and reaction wheels would work and be lighter than a lot of other options. (I think I might try this)
• If you want to use pods (not lawn chairs) but don't care, use 4 Mk1 Lander Cans, they are a good way to go with Kerbals as pilots.
• Lawn Chairs in a cargo bay/service bay is the absolute lightest way to go.
• Asparagus staging is your friend, use it liberally.
• The higher you launch from the better. I've done a few missions from low in Eve's atmosphere (1500 m or so) and as your launch altitude goes down, the amount of rocket you need goes up exponentially.
• IIRC, you need about 7km/s of dV. This varies a bit depending on where you launch from (altitude) 
• You need to get very high before beginning your gravity turn. Other people have probably worked it out better than me, I don't think I started it until 20 km - 30 km. You basically go straight up at some absurdly slow speed, 100 m/s -125 m/s, for what feels like forever. Then you pick up speed really fast in the upper atmosphere and run out of fuel.
• Use MechJeb or KER if for nothing else but dV and TWR readout when you're building your ascent vehicle. They include TWR adjustments for the performance hit that the engines take. 
• Don't worry too much about having a high initial TWR on your upper stage, it's mostly just for raising your Pe and circularizing. 
• Landing isn't terrible but it's harder than it looks, especially with a big ship. Drogue chutes and big chutes work pretty well. Ditching your heatshields at the right time is tricky.

[eagle92lightning]

56 minutes ago, Racescort666 said:

UGH! that's still a bug? If I remember right, the small drills didn't have that problem but if it got fixed, then un-fixed, it could affect the small drills as well. The only workaround was to extend your heat shields way past the drills but that lead to a bunch of new problems for me. I like the look of your ship though. 

@eagle92lightning My thoughts from past experience: 

• If you want to use 1 pod, use the Mk3 cockpit, it's the lightest, best performing single pod. Alternatively, Mk2 Crew Cabin with a probe core and reaction wheels would work and be lighter than a lot of other options. (I think I might try this)
• If you want to use pods (not lawn chairs) but don't care, use 4 Mk1 Lander Cans, they are a good way to go with Kerbals as pilots.
• Lawn Chairs in a cargo bay/service bay is the absolute lightest way to go.
• Asparagus staging is your friend, use it liberally.
• The higher you launch from the better. I've done a few missions from low in Eve's atmosphere (1500 m or so) and as your launch altitude goes down, the amount of rocket you need goes up exponentially.
• IIRC, you need about 7km/s of dV. This varies a bit depending on where you launch from (altitude) 
• You need to get very high before beginning your gravity turn. Other people have probably worked it out better than me, I don't think I started it until 20 km - 30 km. You basically go straight up at some absurdly slow speed, 100 m/s -125 m/s, for what feels like forever. Then you pick up speed really fast in the upper atmosphere and run out of fuel.
• Use MechJeb or KER if for nothing else but dV and TWR readout when you're building your ascent vehicle. They include TWR adjustments for the performance hit that the engines take. 
• Don't worry too much about having a high initial TWR on your upper stage, it's mostly just for raising your Pe and circularizing. 
• Landing isn't terrible but it's harder than it looks, especially with a big ship. Drogue chutes and big chutes work pretty well. Ditching your heatshields at the right time is tricky.

I think I know how to do this and I will not use asparagus staging it is not realistic!

[crackerbal]

On 26/10/2016 at 4:57 PM, Racescort666 said:

@eagle92lightning

• If you want to use 1 pod, use the Mk3 cockpit, it's the lightest, best performing single pod. Alternatively, Mk2 Crew Cabin with a probe core and reaction wheels would work and be lighter than a lot of other options. (I think I might try this)
• If you want to use pods (not lawn chairs) but don't care, use 4 Mk1 Lander Cans, they are a good way to go with Kerbals as pilots.
• Lawn Chairs in a cargo bay/service bay is the absolute lightest way to go.
• Asparagus staging is your friend, use it liberally.
• The higher you launch from the better. I've done a few missions from low in Eve's atmosphere (1500 m or so) and as your launch altitude goes down, the amount of rocket you need goes up exponentially.
• IIRC, you need about 7km/s of dV. This varies a bit depending on where you launch from (altitude) 
• You need to get very high before beginning your gravity turn. Other people have probably worked it out better than me, I don't think I started it until 20 km - 30 km. You basically go straight up at some absurdly slow speed, 100 m/s -125 m/s, for what feels like forever. Then you pick up speed really fast in the upper atmosphere and run out of fuel.
• Use MechJeb or KER if for nothing else but dV and TWR readout when you're building your ascent vehicle. They include TWR adjustments for the performance hit that the engines take. 
• Don't worry too much about having a high initial TWR on your upper stage, it's mostly just for raising your Pe and circularizing. 
• Landing isn't terrible but it's harder than it looks, especially with a big ship. Drogue chutes and big chutes work pretty well. Ditching your heatshields at the right time is tricky.

1. when u say 7km/s deltaV, u mean read landed on eve ? actually with like half of this i'm only lacking 600m/s to circularisation burn

2. when u speak about ascending, u mention a slow speed. actually i occur some serius issues with my twr and acceleration. Starting with 1.2 twr landed around 2km from sea lvl, i gain speed realy quick witch results on losing this " acquired / overpowered speed " when i separe the first stage at around 10km ( i'm never exeding 1.7 twr during ascend and finish with a thrust around 10% ). what's wrong here ?

3. looking for efficiency : i'm actually starting gravity turn around 40-45km, is this too hight ?