Jump to content

Apollo Alternate Architectures Challenge


DAL59

Recommended Posts

In addition to the normal Munar/lunar orbit rendezvous(MOR/LOR) architecture, NASA studied several other approaches, that involved 2 rockets.

Type 1: Earth/Kerbin Orbital Rendezvous(EOR/KOR)

Launch an unmanned lander into LKO, then dock a MK1 pod to it and perform an Apollo-style mission from there.  

Or: Launch an unmanned booster into LKO, and dock a direct-ascent lander to it(that can land on the Mun and get back to kerbin.)

My mission was that kind.

Type 2: Joint Lunar Obit Rendezvous

Launch an unmanned lander into lunar/munar orbit, then send a MK1 pod to it and perform an Apollo-style mission from there.  

Scoring:

Start with 200 points for completion.  Subtract 1 point for each part used.  Subtract 5 points for each tech node you use.  That is too hard, but if you go low-tech, you'll get the "impress me" 3x bonus.

Bonuses:

Use RSS or resized kerbin: X2

Bring a rover: X2

Lander is two stage: +10

You couldn't redock in lunar orbit and had to EVA: Divide by 2

Used Mechjeb during flight(OK in VAB): Divide by 2

Use RO: X2

Use KOS: X2

Use any Life Support Mod: X2

Use Asparagus Staging: Divide by 2

Land on minimus: Divide by 2

Instead of using a MK1 pod, used a small shuttle: X2

No fuel transfer at all: X2 

Impress me: X3

For example, if you launched a 50 part lander(parts include launcher!) and a 60 part command module, with life support, mechjeb, and asparagus staging, your score will be 45.

Leader boards

Type 1(EOR/KOR):

1. sevenperforce- 1044 points

2. DAL59- 140 points

3.

4.

5.

Type 2(LOR/MOR)

1. mk1980- 1304 points

2. sevenperforce- 316 points

3. 53miner53- 268 points

4.

5.

6.

Remember, you must launch two rockets.

Good Luck!

Edited by DAL59
More bonuses again
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/4/2017 at 9:57 PM, DAL59 said:

Actually, you can use it, but remember, you lose 5 points for every tech node it requires.

Expand  

I think I will do it just for giggles. Although it will probably land me at the bottom of the Heap in terms of score.

Actually, given that it's more than 300 parts, I'll be starting off in the negatives.

Edited by linuxgurugamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've often thought that two expendable Falcon Heavys and a rebuilt Dragon 2 could pull off a Joint Lunar Orbit Rendezvous with landing, if the Falcon 9 second stage could be equipped for extended restarts.

Anyway, the Mun in KSP is much closer, so I'll do this with two single-stick launchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/4/2017 at 8:45 PM, DAL59 said:

Instead of using a MK1 pod, used a small shuttle: X2

Expand  

what's your definition of "small shuttle" for this challenge? simply a craft with wings & plane landing gear instead of a parachute?

can it drop part (droptanks/transfer stage) after reaching orbit?

does it have to land at KSC? (if a splashdown in the ocean is acceptable, it wouldn't even need landing gear, ie. essentially just a capsule that uses wings instead of a chute)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished! 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eMT8zRijNmb1oycUVYTWJqekk

edit: scoring in progress, forgot to do that:P

edit 2: 200-(39(shuttle)+37(lander))=124, 124+10(2stagelander)X2(shuttle)=268

Does not factor in Tech tree nodes, as I don't know what parts are in which node.

Edited by 53miner53
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right, here you go.

First launch:

  Reveal hidden contents

Val takes flight:

  Reveal hidden contents

Cismunar activity and landing:

  Reveal hidden contents

EVA and return:

  Reveal hidden contents

What's my score?

200 to start, minus 52 parts used, +10 for a two-stage lander, x2 for the rover. Should come to 316 points, minus whatever tech tree deductions you want to make (I'm not sure how you're doing this).

Question: the original Earth Orbit Rendezvous plan was actually EOR to Direct Ascent and would have required ten launches:

Apollo_Earth_Orbit_Rendezvous_-_10_launc

If I fly the EOR version, can I do it this way instead? This has higher dV requirements because there's no redocking in Mun orbit; you take everything down to the Mun surface with you.

Also, you should consider adding some kind of bonus for LES that would make it worth the part count.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 9/5/2017 at 1:04 PM, mk1980 said:

what's your definition of "small shuttle" for this challenge? simply a craft with wings & plane landing gear instead of a parachute?

can it drop part (droptanks/transfer stage) after reaching orbit?

does it have to land at KSC? (if a splashdown in the ocean is acceptable, it wouldn't even need landing gear, ie. essentially just a capsule that uses wings instead of a chute)

Expand  

Yes.  A shuttle cannot have a parachute.  There cannot be any decoupler drop tanks, but docking a booster stage is allowed.  

  On 9/5/2017 at 5:19 PM, sevenperforce said:

All right, here you go.

First launch:

  Reveal hidden contents

Val takes flight:

  Reveal hidden contents

Cismunar activity and landing:

  Reveal hidden contents

EVA and return:

  Reveal hidden contents

What's my score?

200 to start, minus 52 parts used, +10 for a two-stage lander, x2 for the rover. Should come to 316 points, minus whatever tech tree deductions you want to make (I'm not sure how you're doing this).

Question: the original Earth Orbit Rendezvous plan was actually EOR to Direct Ascent and would have required ten launches:

Apollo_Earth_Orbit_Rendezvous_-_10_launc

If I fly the EOR version, can I do it this way instead? This has higher dV requirements because there's no redocking in Mun orbit; you take everything down to the Mun surface with you.

Also, you should consider adding some kind of bonus for LES that would make it worth the part count.

 

Expand  

  There was also another EOR plan that involved docking a Gemini capsule to a small lander.

 

 

http://www.astronautix.com/g/geminilunargemini.html

  On 9/5/2017 at 1:04 PM, mk1980 said:

does it have to land at KSC? (if a splashdown in the ocean is acceptable, it wouldn't even need landing gear, ie. essentially just a capsule that uses wings instead of a chute

Expand  

No, but to count as a shuttle, it has to look capable of land landing.

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...