Jump to content

Mission Idea: Emulating Real Life in Kerbal Space Program [WIP] [Submit a Payload] [Become a Launch or Payload Provider]


Recommended Posts

 

Hello everyone, and welcome to my latest overambitious forum project:

EMULATING REAL LIFE IN KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM

This idea was conceived by me, @TheEpicSquared, and my friend, @Oliverm001x.

 

Description and information of this project

  Reveal hidden contents

 

CURRENT UNIVERSAL TIME OF SAVE
Year 1, Day 61, 0h, 0m

 

CURRENT LAUNCH MANIFEST

  Reveal hidden contents

 

RULES (IMPORTANT! READ CAREFULLY!)

  Reveal hidden contents

 

INFORMATION

LAUNCH PROVIDER INFORMATION

  Reveal hidden contents

PAYLOAD PROVIDER INFORMATION

  Reveal hidden contents

INFO REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT

  Reveal hidden contents

 

LIST OF LAUNCH PROVIDERS

  Reveal hidden contents

 

LIST OF PAYLOAD PROVIDERS

  Reveal hidden contents

 

CRAFT SUBMISSION THREAD

  Reveal hidden contents

 

KSP: EMULATING REAL LIFE YOUTUBE CHANNEL

  Reveal hidden contents

 

MOD LIST (SUBJECT TO CHANGE)

  Reveal hidden contents

 

CREDITS

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Thanks for reading this far. If you have any suggestions, they are gladly welcomed. 

Post it in this thread or PM them to me and/or @Oliverm001x, and we'll see what we can do. 

:) 

Edited by TheEpicSquared
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:10 AM, Thor Wotansen said:

I have a question about SSTOs.  Can we use them as launch vehicles?  Also I have never used Mechjeb and therefore have no idea how it flies.

Expand  

SSTOs... no, because realism. It could change, though. :wink: 

However, I'm not done putting all the info into the OP yet, so watch out for more clarifications later today. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could i provide my rocket early? Actually quite excited for this thread. I plan to use Kerbal Reusability Expansion for this.

Edit: Will there be a launch site rental price? Maybe you could use Kerbinside/kerbal Konstrukts and and at an additional price Launch companies could buy, sell and rent their own launch sites.

I am still a bit unclear about how we generate profit. So the PPs pay the LPs?  Or is it based on the cost of the satellite? How do PPs generate profit if at all?

Also, should we have one post for all launch vehicles? Are we expected to retire older vehicles? Could we use excess profits to speed up the R&D?

Sorry for question spam.

My long reply senses are tingling

Edited by Skylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a thought on the rule:  When a payload provider switches launch provider due to delays of operation, the launch provider should not lose the cost of a rocket.  They didn't actually launch the thing and I think making them pay for it would be silly.  I can understand a 30% fee for retrofitting it for a different payload though.  Also, where are the payload providers getting their :funds:from?  perhaps they should compete for GKO spots or Government kontracts for science missions and be awarded :funds:accordingly.  Obviously there would be incentive for PPs to develop versatile or modular designs to decrease development costs.  A company that wins a GKO spot would have to fill it in a certain amount of time and then they would gain revenue from it for a period of time based of the size of relay on the satellite.  Once the requisite period has passed their satellite gets deorbited and the slot goes into the hat again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:29 PM, Thor Wotansen said:

Just a thought on the rule:  When a payload provider switches launch provider due to delays of operation, the launch provider should not lose the cost of a rocket.  They didn't actually launch the thing and I think making them pay for it would be silly.  I can understand a 30% fee for retrofitting it for a different payload though.  Also, where are the payload providers getting their :funds:from?  perhaps they should compete for GKO spots or Government kontracts for science missions and be awarded :funds:accordingly.  Obviously there would be incentive for PPs to develop versatile or modular designs to decrease development costs.  A company that wins a GKO spot would have to fill it in a certain amount of time and then they would gain revenue from it for a period of time based of the size of relay on the satellite.  Once the requisite period has passed their satellite gets deorbited and the slot goes into the hat again.

Expand  

Mabye there should be a station/other destination in orbit and PPs could provide crew/cargo vessels to supply it. Also the station could be made up of vessels made by PPs, launched by LPs and sold to the government or used to speed up R&D or part development.

And yes PPs should get paid to have their Comsats used as relays, scanners used for...scanning...and also for tourist vessels to carry tourists, etc. 

Is there any problem with LPs launching their own payloads? They would be paid by tourists or the government to do science and ferry crew/cargo etc.

Edited by Skylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:33 PM, Skylon said:

Mabye there should be a station/other destination in orbit and PPs could provide crew/cargo vessels to supply it. Also the station could be made up of vessels made by PPs, launched by LPs and sold to the government or used to speed up R&D or part development

Expand  

Exactly, a financial incentive for PPs to put payloads up.  Also some LPs will also be PPs and therefore have cheaper operating costs.

Freaking forum merged posts

Well I've been preemptively designing some stuff for this, here's a pic to whet the appetite.

PnpRn8G.png

A Kerb-pod 5000 being boosted into orbit by the upper stage of a Tylo 1 lifter.

Edited by Thor Wotansen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'll be a LP. Two questions, is comnet on? If so, are extra ground stations on? Also, "No SSTO's". Are Rocket SSTO's allowed, or must they stage away while suborbital?

Edit: Oops, no rocket SSTO's. How is recovery possible of first stage unless you all but reach orbit? I'm not trying to be critical here, but seriously want to know how to do that. Mechjeb cant fly it unless it's in focus, right?

Edited by Brent Kerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my planned company (I will post my launchers/payloads here also when the challenge is ready)

I present to you.....

SkyTech Aerospace
Bringing the sky closer to you

Flag/logo planned, but I'm having trouble using an online generator, because when I convert it from .png to .jpeg it squashes it horizontally for some reason.

Edited by Skylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will you allow clipping of engines up to just before the bell? Can you also exclude landing legs from the width?

Also, in the part description of the vector, it says 'designed with very durable components...for high reusability'. Could this mean it is cheaper to refurbish? I hope so, that thing costs 18,000:funds:. And I know the IRL shuttle engines weren't cheap to refurbish

Edited by Skylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to be a launch provider for this, I just need to build a rocket to do this. If it's not up tonight than don't expect it for a while due to the fact I'm going to be very busy soon.

I will be running 18537 Tech!

Flag: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eMT8zRijNmN2RuczV6Nml5QWs

Flag may be updated as I go.

also: would I be able to also be a payload provider later on? 

Edited by 53miner53
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 1:50 PM, Skylon said:

Could i provide my rocket early? Actually quite excited for this thread. I plan to use Kerbal Reusability Expansion for this.

Edit: Will there be a launch site rental price? Maybe you could use Kerbinside/kerbal Konstrukts and and at an additional price Launch companies could buy, sell and rent their own launch sites.

I am still a bit unclear about how we generate profit. So the PPs pay the LPs?  Or is it based on the cost of the satellite? How do PPs generate profit if at all?

Also, should we have one post for all launch vehicles? Are we expected to retire older vehicles? Could we use excess profits to speed up the R&D?

Sorry for question spam.

My long reply senses are tingling

Expand  

1. Yeah, sure, you can post a KerbalX/Dropbox/whatever link early. It'll certainly help when organizing the OP.

2. I was thinking about that. I am using Kerbal Konstructs + Kerbinside, so maybe.

3. For now, we're only having the LPs getting budgets and having to make profits, to reduce complexity. That might change later, but for now, only LPs.

4. a) No, you can post your crafts as they build them. It'll be easier, since we won't have to look through pages to find your post.

    b) You don't have to retire older vehicles, but depending on how that affects your budget, you might want to. It's up to you. :wink: 

    c) Ooohhh, that's a hard one. Using money to increase R&D makes sense, but I think for now, no, since that would add a lot of complexity,                         something me and @Oliverm001x are trying to avoid as much as possible.

Also, don't apologize for many questions! Questions are a good thing! :) 

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:29 PM, Thor Wotansen said:

Just a thought on the rule:  When a payload provider switches launch provider due to delays of operation, the launch provider should not lose the cost of a rocket.  They didn't actually launch the thing and I think making them pay for it would be silly.  I can understand a 30% fee for retrofitting it for a different payload though.  Also, where are the payload providers getting their :funds:from?  perhaps they should compete for GKO spots or Government kontracts for science missions and be awarded :funds:accordingly.  Obviously there would be incentive for PPs to develop versatile or modular designs to decrease development costs.  A company that wins a GKO spot would have to fill it in a certain amount of time and then they would gain revenue from it for a period of time based of the size of relay on the satellite.  Once the requisite period has passed their satellite gets deorbited and the slot goes into the hat again.

Expand  

1. That makes sense. I'll change the rule on switching launch providers.

2. For now, to reduce complexity, the PPs won't be proper "companies", managing their funds, etc. That might change in the future, though. 

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:33 PM, Skylon said:

Mabye there should be a station/other destination in orbit and PPs could provide crew/cargo vessels to supply it. Also the station could be made up of vessels made by PPs, launched by LPs and sold to the government or used to speed up R&D or part development.

And yes PPs should get paid to have their Comsats used as relays, scanners used for...scanning...and also for tourist vessels to carry tourists, etc. 

Is there any problem with LPs launching their own payloads? They would be paid by tourists or the government to do science and ferry crew/cargo etc.

Expand  

1. Stations are going to be in the save, and PPs are allowed to provide vessels to supply it. 

2. LPs can launch their own payloads. In that case, they'll have to follow the same rules as the regular PPs.

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:37 PM, Thor Wotansen said:

Exactly, a financial incentive for PPs to put payloads up.  Also some LPs will also be PPs and therefore have cheaper operating costs.

Freaking forum merged posts

Well I've been preemptively designing some stuff for this, here's a pic to whet the appetite.

PnpRn8G.png

A Kerb-pod 5000 being boosted into orbit by the upper stage of a Tylo 1 lifter.

Expand  

Looks awesome! But remember, Kerbalism is being used, so you might want to increase the living space. Just a tip. :wink: 

  On 4/6/2017 at 2:47 PM, Skylon said:

I think that tech level should also matter, since you could use a vector as a high TWR solution for your rockets, or an aero spike for higher efficiency.

Expand  

Clarification please? If you mean that early rockets shouldn't be allowed to have high-level tech, I disagree, because in real life, startup LPs could always have another experienced company build their engines.

  On 4/6/2017 at 3:11 PM, Brent Kerman said:

I think I'll be a LP. Two questions, is comnet on? If so, are extra ground stations on? Also, "No SSTO's". Are Rocket SSTO's allowed, or must they stage away while suborbital?

Edit: Oops, no rocket SSTO's. How is recovery possible of first stage unless you all but reach orbit? I'm not trying to be critical here, but seriously want to know how to do that. Mechjeb cant fly it unless it's in focus, right?

Expand  

Awesome that you'll be a LP! :) 

1. In the settings, CommNet and extra ground stations are on, but I think Kerbalism overrides the stock system with a system of its own.

2. Recovery of the first stage shall be completed with FMRS. I stage normally, fly the rocket to a parking orbit using MechJeb, and then switch back to separation using FMRS. I then let MechJeb recover the first stage (parachutes or otherwise), have FMRS auto-recover the craft when landed, and then switch back to the rocket+payload in orbit. Then I let MechJeb complete the mission. Hope that makes sense. :) 

  On 4/6/2017 at 3:28 PM, Skylon said:

Here is my planned company (I will post my launchers/payloads here also when the challenge is ready)

I present to you.....

SkyTech Aerospace
Bringing the sky closer to you

Flag/logo planned, but I'm having trouble using an online generator, because when I convert it from .png to .jpeg it squashes it horizontally for some reason.

R&D:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Where is the modlist? I hope tweakscale is there...

Also, 35m seems to be a bit tall for 1.25m rockets. It allows for roughly 8 full size 1.25m tanks including engines and fairings. Allows for just over five for 1.875m tanks (scaled up from 1.25m)

Expand  

Looks like you have a good start! :cool: 

Good point on the dimensions. What do you think would be a good adjustment? 20 meters tall and 1.25m in diameter (excluding legs, wings, fairings, etc)? @Oliverm001x what do you think? 

  On 4/6/2017 at 3:44 PM, Skylon said:

Will you allow clipping of engines up to just before the bell?

Expand  

Yes. Try to keep it realistic, though. Your Vector inside the hollow fuselage is fine, for example, but an engines clipped into each other are not. Same with fuel tanks. :) 

  On 4/6/2017 at 5:49 PM, 53miner53 said:

I'm going to be a launch provider for this, I just need to build a rocket to do this. If it's not up tonight than don't expect it for a while due to the fact I'm going to be very busy soon.

I will be running 18537 Tech!

Flag: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eMT8zRijNmN2RuczV6Nml5QWs

Flag may be updated as I go.

also: would I be able to also be a payload provider later on? 

Expand  

Awesome! And yes, you can be a PP too. 

Glad to have you on board! :) 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea what FMRS is, and can Kerbalism be turned off in a save game? I use snacks and I can turn it off for this challenge, but when I install Kerbalism can I turn it off in my other saves? On the other hand, would a separate install be better? I have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement and my rockets might not work as well without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:04 PM, Brent Kerman said:

I have no idea what FMRS is, and can Kerbalism be turned off in a save game? I use snacks and I can turn it off for this challenge, but when I install Kerbalism can I turn it off in my other saves? On the other hand, would a separate install be better? I have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement and my rockets might not work as well without it.

Expand  

FMRS

I'm going to keep hold of the save, for less complexity, so you don't have to worry about turning off Kerbalism. Oh, and unfortunately you can't, by the way. Not in specific saves. :( 

Also, you can't use Snacks, since that's not part of the mod list (I'll post it below)

MOD LIST:

Addon Version Checker by cybutek
Community Resource Pack by RoverDude
Community Terrain Texture Pack by CaptRobau
CustomBarnKit by sarbian
DangIt Continued by linuxgurugamer
Easy Vessel Switch by IgorZ
Firespitter Core by Snjo
Flight Manager for Reusable Stages Continued by linuxgurugamer
HullCam VDS Continued by linuxgurugamer
HyperEdit by Ezriilc
Interstellar Fuel Switch by FreeThinker
Kerbalism by ShotgunNinja
Kerbal Alarm Clock by TriggerAu
Kerbal Construction Time by magico13
Kerbal Engineer Redux by cybutek
Kerbal Konstructs by Ger_space
Kerbal Reusability Expansion by EmbersArc
KerbinSide by AlphaAsh
Kopernicus by Thomas P
KW Rocketry Continued - Graduated Power Response by linuxgurugamer
MagiCore by magico13 
Maneuver Node Evolved by DMagic
MechJeb2 by sarbian
Modular Flight Integrator by sarbian  
Near Future Solar Core by Nertea
Outer Planets Mod by CaptRobau
PorkJet’s Part Overhauls by PorkJet
Persistent Rotation by MarkusA380
Procedural Fairings by e-dog
RealPlume by NathanKell
RealPlume Stock Configs Continued by Nhawks17
RetractableLiftingSurface by linuxgurugamer 
SmokeScreen by sarbian
SpaceY Heavy Lifters by NecroBones
SpaceY Expanded by NecroBones
Stock Extension Continued by linuxgurugamer
New Tantares by Beale
New TantaresLV by Beale
Trajectories by Youen
TundraExploration by tygoo7
TweakScale by Biotronic

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:08 PM, Skylon said:

Can upper/any stages use the payload's guidance (probe core). I don't think this is realistic so I am assuming no.

Expand  

You are correct. It's not realistic, so no. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:15 PM, Brent Kerman said:

OK, I will definitely make a new install, I will never remember what parts are from the correct mods. I notice you have Dangit and kerbalism, kerbalism has random failures already.

Expand  

Oh, ok. Thanks.

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:30 PM, Brent Kerman said:

Wait, what version are we using here? Some mods are 1.1.3, others 1.2.2. I only have 1.2.2

Expand  

We're using 1.2.2. I've made sure every mod on the list works in 1.2.2. Mind pointing out the ones that you think don't? Thanks. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:38 PM, Brent Kerman said:

Kerbal Konstruction time [1.1.3]. Can you put together a pack on somewhere like dropbox so we don't have to search for all of these? Half don't come up in forum search.

Expand  

Ah. A dev build of KCT works fine in 1.2.2.

Due to licensing stuff, I might not be allowed to redistribute mods, but I'll provide a link for every mod in the OP so you can find them easily. :) 

  On 4/6/2017 at 6:40 PM, 53miner53 said:

Anyone have any idea why mechjeb was pushing for orbital velocity at 35 km and nearly horizontal? I didn't change any of the settings on it.

Expand  

Probably because the rocket's out of the thick lower atmosphere by then, and so horizontal velocity becomes more and more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...