Asking for opinions on coolest way to do an Eve return

[A_name]

Hello folks. I appeal to the wisdom of the forums once more. I'm designing an Eve return mission and hope to make a video to share with you all.  The mission is configured as a mother ship that will carry the crew, a lander and utilities to Eve orbit, then deploy the lander which will return to the mother ship for the trip back to Kerbin. I guess you could call it Apollo style in that sense. Anyway, what would you like more for the mission, for the lander to use ISRU at Eve for the return to Eve orbit, or to bring the fuel with us from Kerbin?  Both approaches have unique planning and execution challenges which may be interesting or not to some of you, so I ask your thoughts on this. I'm not looking what's most efficient, or practical, or easy, but what you think is the coolest and more impressive/interesting way to do it.

Edited January 10, 2018 by A_name

[Starman4308]

The most interesting method in my opinion? A stock helicopter bursting out from the surface of Eve's ocean, later shedding its wings upon a pillar of fire, finishing with a surprise ion thruster hidden in a service bay (idea shamelessly poached and slightly adapted from Stratenblitz's video).

Otherwise, I'd certainly call a non-ISRU mission generally more technically challenging thanks to needing to haul ginormous amounts of fuel to Eve, but ISRU can demonstrate a bit more finesse and precision targeting.

 

[Geonovast]

EPL + ISRU.  Probably the only way I'd ever pull it off.

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

Definitely no ISRU, if you're looking for "cool factor". And a direct ascent return is always awesome. No refueling or docking of any kind. It leaves you with a pretty good feeling of accomplishment.

2 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

EPL + ISRU.  Probably the only way I'd ever pull it off.

That was my first Eve return as well. It left me hungry for more. I wanted the full sea level ascent without refueling. That was even better. Than I wanted more Kerbals and the Mk1-2. It keeps getting more satisfying and I keep wanting to push it further. I think you will as well.

[IncongruousGoat]

Radiators. Lots and lots of radiators. Although, given the temperature of Eve's atmosphere, their effectiveness in making your ship cool is questionable.

All joking aside, bringing your own fuel is the best way to go, especially once you start considering the world of super-light (sub-20 ton) Eve landers. In my opinion, the best (read: only) approach is to design as light a lander as possible, strap decoupleable wings onto it, and fly it to Eve's tallest mountain in order to avoid the worst of the atmosphere. That said, I pathologically avoid ISRU and refueling in order to make my life difficult, so take my advice with a grain of salt.

[Human Person]

Have done both so far. It's far more challenging to re-enter and land a fully fueled craft, which is the hardest part of an Eve return mission in my opinion.

[Geschosskopf]

3 hours ago, A_name said:

what you think is the coolest

Disable reentry heat.  That's about as cool as you can get

 

3 hours ago, A_name said:

what you think is the ... more impressive/interesting way to do it.

The most impressive Eve mission I've ever seen was starting with a rocket mounted on a large crawler vehicle which then drove off the runway to the bottom of the ocean E of KSC.  The rocket launched from there, landed in Eve's ocean, sank to the bottom, then came back up to orbit.  And landed on both Gilly and Minmus on the way home.  All hail @hazard-ish.  This of course was without ISRU because all oceans are hardwired to have zero Ore.

 

Edited January 10, 2018 by Geschosskopf

[Foxster]

I'd say an important cool factor is to do the trip without an ISRU. As long as you keep the lander light then this is not that hard. That usually means a one-man crew. 

The other cool factor is to able to land and return from any elevation on Eve. Only being able to make it from several thousand meters is easy mode. 

[steuben]

The cool factor is not is a non-stop trip. The cool factor is not in the homestead approach. The cool factor is in style. The look of your ship.

Sure you can do it in stock in a clunked together set of parts that is minmaxed to do the job. But to paraphrase Doc Krown, "The way I see it, if you're gonna do an Eve return, why not do it with some style?"

If you have the tech and the resources to get there and back, don't just do it. Do it right. Do it with style.

[AVaughan]

How about with a 9 ton rocket?  (9 tons on the kerbin launchpad, with refueling on Minmus and Gilly).  

 

[A_name]

Hey thanks for the input everyone. It seems like the general consensus is to go with an old-fashioned, bring-your-own-fuel-style mission. This mission is not maximized for efficiency but more for style, so I guess I'll leave the ISRU-ing for a later mission that will focus more on the efficiency. To reply to your individual comments...

19 hours ago, Starman4308 said:

Otherwise, I'd certainly call a non-ISRU mission generally more technically challenging thanks to needing to haul ginormous amounts of fuel to Eve, but ISRU can demonstrate a bit more finesse and precision targeting.

That's what I thought too originally, which is why I considered ISRU in the first place. But it seems like more people favor the old-fashined option. Mind, this is a mission I'm doing specifically to share and not just for me, which is why I'm so concerned with what other people think is cooler.

19 hours ago, Geonovast said:

EPL + ISRU.  Probably the only way I'd ever pull it off.

EPL is definitely out of the question for this mission, but I'll consider it in the future!

19 hours ago, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

And a direct ascent return is always awesome.

I hear you, it is. But for this case, I'm already settled on the Apollo-style mothership, mainly because my space program has a self-imposed habitation space requirement for interplanetary missions.

19 hours ago, IncongruousGoat said:

All joking aside, bringing your own fuel is the best way to go, especially once you start considering the world of super-light (sub-20 ton) Eve landers.

 

In fact, the lander is about 300 tons fully fueled!

18 hours ago, Physics Student said:

Have done both so far. It's far more challenging to re-enter and land a fully fueled craft, which is the hardest part of an Eve return mission in my opinion.

The lander is a behemoth so finding a way to reenter it without expending fuel was definitely one of the bigger challenges of the mission.

14 hours ago, Foxster said:

As long as you keep the lander light then this is not that hard. That usually means a one-man crew. 

The other cool factor is to able to land and return from any elevation on Eve. Only being able to make it from several thousand meters is easy mode. 

Actually we're sending a 3 man crew and they will ascend from Eve in a proper capsule!

We also have safety margins such that we can still make it even from sea level.

8 hours ago, steuben said:

If you have the tech and the resources to get there and back, don't just do it. Do it right. Do it with style.

That's the idea!

1 hour ago, AVaughan said:

How about with a 9 ton rocket?  (9 tons on the kerbin launchpad, with refueling on Minmus and Gilly).

Maybe next time when I focus on efficiency.

[Human Person]

@A_name I found the right post: look at this: 

 

[Ty Tan Tu]

22 hours ago, IncongruousGoat said:

Radiators. Lots and lots of radiators. Although, given the temperature of Eve's atmosphere, their effectiveness in making your ship cool is questionable.

LOL. You beat me to it! I was sitting here trying to think of a solution that uses some combination of O-10 Puff mono- propellant engines and an array of  Ion Dawns.  If you were really patient, that might get you to Eve, and then you could use parachutes to get you to the surface. Getting off of Eve is the heat problem. Maybe you could use  R.A.P.I.E.R.s with lots of radial mounted radiator panels to keep the temperature down for your 'cool' return mission?

[Ty Tan Tu]

Remembering that I am an old anthropologist and not an engineer. You land the craft on Eve, and then on the surface separate out the heavy elements in the atmosphere from the lightest ones, pumping the light gas in to attached balloons. You then separate your command module with the balloons to float into the upper atmosphere. You wait until the rotation of Eve increases your orbital velocity. After separating the balloons,  you use mono-propellant to achieve orbit and circularize it. That would be cool...

[septemberWaves]

I think it depends on your definition of "coolest" or "most impressive". Certainly a crewed Eve return mission is one of the most impressive accomplishments in KSP, regardless of how it is pulled off. It's always going to be one hell of an engineering challenge (unless you use some really overpowered mods), and if you do something clever or big that could be considered pretty cool whether you use surface refueling or not.

In my case, I want to design an Eve mission architecture that is not only functional but also looks good, which will certainly provide some additional difficulties for me to overcome (most of my previous designs worked but looked horrible, and the best-looking so far only worked because of what I have since concluded must've been a weird bug). What I'm going to do will not simply use a single huge ascent vehicle, but will also involve surface bases and rovers, a full communications network, a command station in Eve orbit, and at least one dedicated interplanetary transport (though it will be some time before I work out all the details). Once I've designed all of that and tested it to perfection (or at least near enough to perfection that I'm satisfied) then I will consider it done.

But to be honest there's not really any "best" way to do an Eve mission, and the same can be said for any other mission. Set your goals for yourself and accomplish those goals in a way you're happy with; that's really the best advice that can be given unless you ask for help doing something specific.

[RizzoTheRat]

On ‎11‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 3:36 AM, Ty Tan Tu said:

Remembering that I am an old anthropologist and not an engineer. You land the craft on Eve, and then on the surface separate out the heavy elements in the atmosphere from the lightest ones, pumping the light gas in to attached balloons. You then separate your command module with the balloons to float into the upper atmosphere. You wait until the rotation of Eve increases your orbital velocity. After separating the balloons,  you use mono-propellant to achieve orbit and circularize it. That would be cool...

That would be quite cool, and it's possible...

 

[magnemoe]

On 10.1.2018 at 11:12 PM, A_name said:

Hey thanks for the input everyone. It seems like the general consensus is to go with an old-fashioned, bring-your-own-fuel-style mission. This mission is not maximized for efficiency but more for style, so I guess I'll leave the ISRU-ing for a later mission that will focus more on the efficiency. To reply to your individual comments...

That's what I thought too originally, which is why I considered ISRU in the first place. But it seems like more people favor the old-fashined option. Mind, this is a mission I'm doing specifically to share and not just for me, which is why I'm so concerned with what other people think is cooler.

EPL is definitely out of the question for this mission, but I'll consider it in the future!

I hear you, it is. But for this case, I'm already settled on the Apollo-style mothership, mainly because my space program has a self-imposed habitation space requirement for interplanetary missions.

In fact, the lander is about 300 tons fully fueled!

The lander is a behemoth so finding a way to reenter it without expending fuel was definitely one of the bigger challenges of the mission.

Actually we're sending a 3 man crew and they will ascend from Eve in a proper capsule!

We also have safety margins such that we can still make it even from sea level.

That's the idea!

Maybe next time when I focus on efficiency.

ISRU helps a bit especially with an large lander, I have tend to go for smaller rockets, I used an in system ship from my Gilly base for topping up the lander, it also held crew. 
Now one interesting option with Eve ISRU is using it on an rocket plane for moving around faster than an rover. 

I assume the plane would be an separate payload, this might even be an benefit as you could explore between the plane drop point and accent stage. 

[Brainlord Mesomorph]

Kergarin made an Eve SSTO rocket:

He called it "Monolith"  It uses all of its fuel landing and take three years to ISRU refuel.  There's a 7km plateau that's easier to land and return from that sea level.  There are videos on Youtube  (Q: how do I embed you tube here?)

My goal is to steal that design scale it down a bit, and pair it with an ISRU base already at the landing site and with an orbital tender that can carry it to another ISRU base on Gilly. Then I have an Eve colony  with totally reusable, sustainable, regular shuttle service to orbit and then home.

[Zosma Procyon]

I have yet to accomplish an Eve surface return. I'm starting to think that a converter might be the best way.

[magnemoe]

13 hours ago, Zosma Procyon said:

I have yet to accomplish an Eve surface return. I'm starting to think that a converter might be the best way.

I you go for an kerbal in a seat an 1+2+2 asparagus with aerospike and long 1.25 meter tanks, upper stage inside fairing, spark and the short 1.25 m tank. 
Good margin even from sea level. thinking I might fit two kerbals on it.

[Guest]

I always adored maccollo's Venus return vehicle, being a solid rocket. Nothing fancy, just gigawatts of chemical energy.