Playing without Ore Refueling

[Serenity]

Hey everyone, i am considering to start a save without the ability to convert ore to fuel.

I am just wondering how far can i go and how hard it will be.I like the idea of limiting myself to current space technology but i am afraid of how

hard this challenge would be.

Edited July 28, 2017 by Boyster

[Van Disaster]

We used to go everywhere before there was any ISRU, it won't be hard.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

You can go anywhere in the stock game without refueling of any kind. Where it gets difficult is when you want to visit multiple bodies and make multiple landings with the same vessel. It's a lot of fun, but much more planning is needed. In both your route and your design.

[Serenity]

I ll give it a try then,I want fuel to be a problem again and not just a trivial task.

[Blaarkies]

Start by sending fuel tankers to all the major destination(major, as in the vicinity of where your biggest burns will happen).

Going to Moho, leave a tanker in low kerbin orbit and one at Moho(for fuel to get back to kerbin). If you use Eve as a stepping stone, then don't stop(into orbit) around Eve...that defeats the Oberth effects. For simplicity, go straight to Moho. Make the fuel tankers have lots of fuel(biggest fuels drum that is reasonable), and the smallest amount of batteries and dry mass parts

For Eeloo, same thing. You could use Jool as a stepping stone, but don't stop/capture into a circular orbit at jool(that makes the planning more complex)

[Aegolius13]

2 hours ago, Blaarkies said:

Start by sending fuel tankers to all the major destination(major, as in the vicinity of where your biggest burns will happen).

Going to Moho, leave a tanker in low kerbin orbit and one at Moho(for fuel to get back to kerbin). If you use Eve as a stepping stone, then don't stop(into orbit) around Eve...that defeats the Oberth effects. For simplicity, go straight to Moho. Make the fuel tankers have lots of fuel(biggest fuels drum that is reasonable), and the smallest amount of batteries and dry mass parts

For Eeloo, same thing. You could use Jool as a stepping stone, but don't stop/capture into a circular orbit at jool(that makes the planning more complex)

Tankers are certainly feasible,  but I'm not sure they make big interplanetary trips easier.   That fuel will weigh the same amount,  and cost the same delta-v, whether you send it on a tanker or as part of your main ship.  And doing a rendezvous and docking will use up some extra fuel as well. 

[Spricigo]

48 minutes ago, Aegolius13 said:

Tankers are certainly feasible,  but I'm not sure they make big interplanetary trips easier.   That fuel will weigh the same amount,  and cost the same delta-v, whether you send it on a tanker or as part of your main ship.  And doing a rendezvous and docking will use up some extra fuel as well. 

Also think is pretty much shifting from "how I fuel my Interplanetary vessel" to "how I supply my refuelling depots" But there is some advantages, mostly related to the fact the Interplanetary vessels can be smaller. Some becomes more relevant if there is also life support to deal with. 

Example: A big unkerbaled tanker goes to Moho,  it takes a gravity assists from Eve and several passes around Moho to finally capture years before departure.  The crew comes later in small(ish)  vessel and a direct trajectory sacrificing deltaV to get there faster (so using less LS supplies) 

 

[Zhetaan]

Pre-v1.0 grand tour flights were once the pinnacle of achievement in KSP.  I suppose they still are, but they are easier now.  If you find doing a no-ISRU grand tour too easy, then you can try to simulate a pre-v0.23.5 grand tour and do it without 3.75-metre parts.  Once upon a time, we had to do Jool-5 missions with nothing larger than orange tanks.

Multiple-body gravity assists are also a challenge and worth the time you spend studying how to do them.

[Spricigo]

3 hours ago, Boyster said:

I ll give it a try then,I want fuel to be a problem again and not just a trivial task.

Personally I don't think removing ISRU from your gameplay will change much, as other stated even without refuelling you can go anywhere in solar system* and not even require complex trajectories.

I'd consider a mode like Real Fuels (not update to 1.3 yet, promised to be provided soon). Issues like fuel boiling off can bring more challenge to the task then simple the need to launch more fuel from Kerbin.

 

*kerbolar system?

[Aegolius13]

7 hours ago, Spricigo said:

Also think is pretty much shifting from "how I fuel my Interplanetary vessel" to "how I supply my refuelling depots" But there is some advantages, mostly related to the fact the Interplanetary vessels can be smaller. Some becomes more relevant if there is also life support to deal with. 

Example: A big unkerbaled tanker goes to Moho,  it takes a gravity assists from Eve and several passes around Moho to finally capture years before departure.  The crew comes later in small(ish)  vessel and a direct trajectory sacrificing deltaV to get there faster (so using less LS supplies) 

 

Fair point.   And even without life support,  you could save some gameplay time by doing only one long,  complicated set of gravity assist maneuvers with a big tanker. 

[Serenity]

My problem is that i have my refuel stations and because i already did like 1k refuel dockings i just use HyperEdit to max out fuel in each vessel that can refuel.

And now i sit to a point that my ship designs are so small compared to the real deal because they just need to have enough to reach the fuel station.

Dont get me wrong, i know that mining and producing fuel is not far from becoming a reality but i came to the point that except if i want to make

something shiny to enjoy it looking it all the rest are just the same parts...

Edited July 29, 2017 by Boyster

[Alshain]

I barely use it to this day.  ISRU is a, relatively speaking, newer feature in the game.  We had all the planets long before it was added and we got around just fine.

[Gargamel]

Consider adding a life support mod.  That gives you something else to account for.  No longer can you just fling Kerbals off into the space willy nilly and expect them to be alive 1 year later. 

[Serenity]

After some thoughts i decided to continue my save as it is but i will enforce myself to create an

''emergency'' vessel for each destination that can go back and forth

without refueling, in case there is a ''critical'' failure in one of the production sites.

Tnx for all the posts i am always so happy to see such an active community.

As for the life support mod i am fearing the cpu impact

cause my pc is already struggling with mechjeb lol.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Boyster

[Gargamel]

9 hours ago, Boyster said:

After some thoughts i decided to continue my save as it is but i will enforce myself to create an

''emergency'' vessel for each destination that can go back and forth

without refueling, in case there is a ''critical'' failure in one of the production sites.

Tnx for all the posts i am always so happy to see such an active community.

As for the life support mod i am fearing the cpu impact

cause my pc is already struggling with mechjeb lol.

I use Snacks! and I see little to no difference in performance.  If it does, it's at the bottom of things I'm worried about.  I too use MJ to help with the lag issues, so I can feel your pain.  But honestly, I found adding a LS mod added a whole other dimension to the game.  Having enough fuel is one thing, but it doesn't get used up when you're coasting through space, but food supplies and such will.  So then you have to consider recyclers and greenhouses to maintain a light weight food supply, or a huge cargo bay full of food.  It can be a pain, but it's way more fun than without IMO. 

[Serenity]

I ll give it a try.Lately i used my imagination of how often i need to refuel or rotate but its a bit tedious and immersion is off.

[Regor]

I have never used ISRU

 

[Van Disaster]

I use ISRU ( Kethane and then Karbonite and ... not sure what I'll do in a new install, something more complex than stock at least ) just for a process to be involved with, rather like lifesupport mods; otherwise literally everything boils down to launching from KSC & planting a flag.

[Serenity]

I am surprised there is no planning to implement a life support mod in official release.I mean one of the major problems is how to keep astronauts healthy and alive in long

trips.But then again i am not expecting any major improvements to the game, the ideas and codes written by the team will probably used in different projects.

[Blaarkies]

On 7/28/2017 at 5:12 PM, Aegolius13 said:

Tankers are certainly feasible,  but I'm not sure they make big interplanetary trips easier.   That fuel will weigh the same amount,  and cost the same delta-v, whether you send it on a tanker or as part of your main ship.  And doing a rendezvous and docking will use up some extra fuel as well. 

OP was not sure if a one-launch design to the farthest planets were possible. I suspect they are not comfortable with massive many stage ships, and that is fine. But the cost due to using a refuel ship method will definitely cost more fuel, time, and money...at least is a solution well withing their grasp to achieve, and maybe even master.

[Scarecrow]

You can go anywhere you like.  I've tried using ore mining after it was introduced but just found it too much hassle to set up, so have played without it ever since.  Before it was introduced I sent manned missions to all the landable planets and moons and safely returned everyone.  As far as I am concerned it is just a feature to add variety to the game but isn't a necessity.  That may be different for someone who wishes to visit more than one planet on any particular flight, rather than simple out and return flights.  In that case you may want to include refuelling via a mining operation somewhere.