Ideal Local Mining Operation?

[Pthigrivi]

Another of those perennial questions. Obviously everyone will have their preferred method but curious to see how folks are rolling these days. Right now I've got an all-in-one lander that harvests and processes on the surface and ships fuel up to orbit. From there I transfer to an aerobraking tanker that drops it down to LKO to fuel up dry modules, interplanetary missions, crew busses, etc. Its pretty good, initially designed for low-overhead and minimal rendezvous but I've been thinking its not as efficient as it could be. Some thoughts:

- The time I've spent harvesting from asteroids has wasted lots of time and fuel capturing for low overall returns. Similarly the dV to the surface of the Mun and back makes Minmus the obvious choice. 

- Im sure I could save fuel by not carting the convert-o-tron around, but where to park it? I could put a mining/processing rover on the surface and back it up directly to a landing tanker that takes the fuel up to orbit, or I could put drills on a ore tanker and bring it up for processing at an orbital station. 

- What seems to settle the surface vs orbital processing question is that you cant burn ore. This means instead of carting the convert-o-tron you're carting your landing and lift-off fuel plus the drills and power supply to and from orbit. This comes at the trade off of having to land more or less precisely near your rover and dock on the surface rather than in orbit. 

There are some additional questions about fueling up interplanetary missions in LKO vs Minmus orbit, but I think thats more of a tanker question than a strictly mining question. How are you folks solving this problem? Any fun tricks you've learned? Pics encouraged!

Edited November 13, 2018 by Pthigrivi

[Phreakish]

I played with this a bit, so I don't have the hundreds of hours into it that some do, but I figure if my convert-o-tron is dwarfed (in mass) by the amount of fuel I haul away, then who cares about having to cart it around? Using 4-8 nukes I can get quite a lot of fuel into orbit from Minmus. 

If I recall correctly, one of my test tankers was 3 or 4 mk3 fuselages with an ISRU, 4 drills, and all associated hardware and probe cores. Easy to fly and land, hauls plenty of fuel around for my uses and allows me to extend missions and reuse very large ships in my carreer save without incurring massive relaunch costs. 

[Nich]

Time is money.

I refuel in orbit of minimus

My tanker takes everything up and down and uses LFO because it only needs 300ish dv.  It was something like 650t wet. takes about 7 years to fill up but I have only payed long enough to refill it once before a new version of KSP comes out and I start over.

[Gargamel]

I usually prefer bringing a couple big asteroids into KSOI.  One around the mun so I can refuel there, a standard minmus operation, and one in high LKO, so my mother ships have a place to fuel up when they get back home. 

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, Gargamel said:

I usually prefer bringing a couple big asteroids into KSOI.  One around the mun so I can refuel there, a standard minmus operation, and one in high LKO, so my mother ships have a place to fuel up when they get back home. 

Madness! Im sure I've been wasting energy on asteroids too small to be worth it. What class do you usually shoot for? You must be holding out for roids with low inclination? 

[Gargamel]

6 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

What class do you usually shoot for?

D & E's.....   but I've been lucky in my recent career saves that I've been able to capture them fairly easily and early on, and then I'll just do some burns, and then wait a while for the tanks to top off again.   Once I have them stable, I'll lose the engine stack, and put up a docking port/mining/converter rig.  

But that's my ideal setup....  I can't always do that so easily....

Edited November 14, 2018 by Gargamel

[Superfluous J]

I've done all 3. I used to only process on the surface and have a dedicated fuel tanker/shuttle to deliver to an orbiting platform. This was a pain due to landing on docking ports or futzing with KIS/KAS. I still miss when KAS was just KAS and you didn't need screwdrivers or power tools. The last time I tried it I used Simple Logistics and that was pretty nice.

Then I tried transporting just ore. The downside is it's not efficient, but the upside is you can do orbital assembly with EPLP*.

The last time I did this sort of thing though, I just did everything on the surface and then launched to meet whomever needed fuel in space. It was much easier - no docking on the ground or mucking around with pipes.

But really I haven't set up a mining operation in... 2 years? Maybe a bit less, I did set one up on Gilly but that was just for funsies and I never even used it.

 

*I never remember if it's ExtraPlanetary Launchpads or Extraplanetary LaunchPads. So I'm making it ExtraPlanetary LaunchPads.

Edited November 14, 2018 by 5thHorseman

[FinalFan]

I have been using the Mun because it's a shorter trip than Minmus, but that was predicated on the moon in question being the refueling point.  (And really, Mun orbit seems to this noob like an all-around more sensible staging point than Minmus orbit for interplanetary operations with its shorter orbital period and lack of inclination.)  The extra fuel spent shuttling the miners to and from the surface wasn't a big loss for me since they weren't exactly operating at capacity anyway.  However, if we're talking about filling a tanker that goes to LKO with no tight schedule, then clearly Minmus operations are better.  I haven't been doing that—not systematically, anyway—but it seems like a good plan.  Time to start shifting gears in my operations. 

[Pecan]

Miner drills ore, launches to processing-station when full.  Station fills transfer tanker as required*.  Tanker takes fuel where needed.

(*I never need as much fuel as I think I will.  My stations used to have two orange tubes and I never emptied them).

[Fearless Son]

13 hours ago, FinalFan said:

I have been using the Mun because it's a shorter trip than Minmus, but that was predicated on the moon in question being the refueling point.  (And really, Mun orbit seems to this noob like an all-around more sensible staging point than Minmus orbit for interplanetary operations with its shorter orbital period and lack of inclination.)  The extra fuel spent shuttling the miners to and from the surface wasn't a big loss for me since they weren't exactly operating at capacity anyway.  However, if we're talking about filling a tanker that goes to LKO with no tight schedule, then clearly Minmus operations are better.  I haven't been doing that—not systematically, anyway—but it seems like a good plan.  Time to start shifting gears in my operations. 

Same.  I mean, I haven't got my mining operation started up yet, but I was planning on the Mun over Minmus.  I figured that was a better place to start when doing a slingshot around Kerbin because of the matched orbital inclination.  Not technically as much delta-v saved, but a lot more options for timing.

[magnemoe]

I would eiter process on surface or low kerbin orbit. you can mostly produce that you need and launch to orbit but LKO is so far away its nice to be able to produce that you need as its a bit hard to predict use in the future. 
My LKO station has lots of oxidizer but is low of fuel because more LV-N powered crafts than estimated. 

You can cut travel time to minmus down to 3-4 days with 2-300 m/s extra. 

[Phreakish]

Minmus is easier than mun because it's basically the same DV to get to minmus, and the inclination isn't hard to match with a mid-course correction, or with a well timed launch (I always do a midcourse correct). 

Minmus then has the added benefit of lower local gravity which makes it an easier landing, and less thrust is necessary to get decent TWR, meaning less dry mass tied up in engines. From there, you can send large tankers back to LKO ready to rendezvous with your ships/stations in orbit there. 

Processing in orbit means having to haul more weight back into orbit and back down to LKO - I'd rather drag the ISRU and drills with me and have adequate tank size to offset the dry mas of the mining. This also negates the need for precision landing or surface docking. Minmus also has very large flat areas which are easy to land on, and easier to keep a large ship upright - versus mun which has fewer flats and lots of craters which means needing a ship that has very wide gear or wheels. 

Just my $.02. 

[magnemoe]

On 11/15/2018 at 9:20 PM, Phreakish said:

Minmus is easier than mun because it's basically the same DV to get to minmus, and the inclination isn't hard to match with a mid-course correction, or with a well timed launch (I always do a midcourse correct). 

Minmus then has the added benefit of lower local gravity which makes it an easier landing, and less thrust is necessary to get decent TWR, meaning less dry mass tied up in engines. From there, you can send large tankers back to LKO ready to rendezvous with your ships/stations in orbit there. 

Processing in orbit means having to haul more weight back into orbit and back down to LKO - I'd rather drag the ISRU and drills with me and have adequate tank size to offset the dry mas of the mining. This also negates the need for precision landing or surface docking. Minmus also has very large flat areas which are easy to land on, and easier to keep a large ship upright - versus mun which has fewer flats and lots of craters which means needing a ship that has very wide gear or wheels. 

Just my $.02. 

Yes, Minmus is the industrial heart of any space infrastructure.  
However sending ore to an huge fuel dump in LKO can be smart as its hard to predict the fuel / oxidizer ratio you need. This assumes ore rather than fuel carriers downwards or better an mix.

[DerekL1963]

36 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

However sending ore to an huge fuel dump in LKO can be smart as its hard to predict the fuel / oxidizer ratio you need. This assumes ore rather than fuel carriers downwards or better an mix.

My system is built around a mobile miner carrying a converter that fills it's tanks with LFO and then boosts into Minmus orbit with a load of ore.  A tug then carts the ore to a depot/converter station in Mimus orbit.  At the depot it can then be refined into LF, LFO, or mono...  and then dispatched around the Kerbin system as needed.

Edited November 17, 2018 by DerekL1963

[magnemoe]

Makes me think of my mobile Munar lander. 

Fuel and ore tanker at left of Minus main base.

Duna ship with an science lander to the right. 
This was undersized for the Jool push 

 

[SlinkyMcman]

 

First time posting images hope this works. I have a all in one mining platform for moving Ore around. It's rated for the Mun, just don't bring as many ore containers. It simplifies my Mining processes, and since pretty much all my interplanetary engines are nukes, using ore helps limit unused mass/volume in the form of Ox tanks. There is something like 12t of machinery that it moves around but it's minmus payload is 168t (32+24tanks* 3t per tank) so it's not significant enough to justify provoking the kraken attempting surface docking.

Stacking decouplers like the minmus example  makes the ship bouncy when loaded, and autostruts only kinda help. I recommend not being quite as modular as I made it.

It's also pretty amazing for contracts. You can use an adapter to fit a ore container that can fit in a Space Plane/Shuttle for Kerbin downloading without needing to send up a dedicated drop-pod.

Edited November 19, 2018 by SlinkyMcman
better math

[OHara]

I want two votes.

1) Processing on the surface is simplest with a single-piece processor and tanker,  
or docking a tanker on the ground on Minmus is not too hard, and then the tanker with tiny Terrier engine has plenty of fuel to get where you need it.

 

 

3) If you catch a big asteroid in solar orbit, you can adjust its course to have Kerbin Pe on the equator, then after capture remove the inclination at a high Ap to get a fuel depot in equatorial orbit. 

Placing short Poodle-powered tugs with claws on the asteroid lets you push through the center of mass without wobble.  In the stock game, fuel transfers through the claws from the mining rig -- if you are willing to imagine the connecting fuel lines, or just not worry about how fuel flows through the rock.

Edited November 17, 2018 by OHara

[Sharpy]

I did more of that than reasonable.

Two fundamental factors to consider. 1. How much work is it to get a tank of fuel into LKO (where it's needed). 2. How much of that fuel will be left once you finish.

Orbital processing is right out. Hauling ore into orbit is a terrible chore, and then you still need to bring the fuel *somewhere*.

A surface installation with a good tanker is doable... but you end up with relatively little extra in LKO if you need to return the tanker to Minmus.

A good asteroid mining tug is the cash. Don't bother with class A-C. Only class E, or mod the game for even bigger. A good class G asteroid in LKO is superb.

The two alternatives are hauling the ISRU with your mission, refueling on the surface of wherever you land (and possibly leaving the ISRU behind), and Extraplanetary Launchpads; a base somewhere - Minmus, Gilly, Bop? - and just building ships there.

Let me just say if the refueling job requires more than one round-trip with the fuel, ore or whatever, you'll get thoroughly sick of it fast. While "on paper", taking different solutions, you may find some more or less optimal, don't underestimate the value of your own time and patience. I made some wondrous refueling solutions. By the time I finished them I was too sick of them to ever want to use them.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

My general solution now is a klaw-equipped rover with all of the mining equipment waiting on a light moon. The craft lands, and the rover meets it to refuel. Simplest solution I could find.

Within Kerbin SOI I don't do miner refuels except for rescue purposes, I find it much less time-consuming to just launch up a boat of fuel from KSC.

[Tyko]

14 hours ago, Sharpy said:

A good asteroid mining tug is the cash. Don't bother with class A-C. Only class E, or mod the game for even bigger. A good class G asteroid in LKO is superb.

Can you share the code you use to create larger asteroids?

[Sharpy]

11 hours ago, Tyko said:

Can you share the code you use to create larger asteroids?

The 4th post in this thread:

...but don't use the parameters I used. Bump them by some 30% from defaults, like 1.25 - 1.6. Reason:

(that's the same type of tug as in the previous picture. I made a mistake thinking these are mass multipliers. Nope, these are radius multipliers.)

[theJesuit]

52 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

(that's the same type of tug as in the previous picture. I made a mistake thinking these are mass multipliers. Nope, these are radius multipliers.)

I don't know, this seems ligit...

Peace.

[Tyko]

1 hour ago, Sharpy said:

The 4th post in this thread:

...but don't use the parameters I used. Bump them by some 30% from defaults, like 1.25 - 1.6. Reason:

(that's the same type of tug as in the previous picture. I made a mistake thinking these are mass multipliers. Nope, these are radius multipliers.)

Do you have problems with the colliders when you rescale them? Last time I fooled around with this I had way too many cases where the visible surface was well above the collider.

[Pthigrivi]

On 11/18/2018 at 8:26 AM, Sharpy said:

A surface installation with a good tanker is doable... but you end up with relatively little extra in LKO if you need to return the tanker to Minmus.

There are a few things you can do about this. First is just an economy of scale, making sure the tanker's payload fraction is as high as possible. Next it helps to time your deliveries to arrive at and leave from Minmust at its AN and DN to avoid inclination burns. The most important is aerobraking on arrival back at Kerbin so your only burns are getting off the surface of mimus, falling back to Kerbin and a finish-off circularization. I usually clear 70-80% of my fuel at lift-off from Minmus back to LKO including return fuel, (or about 9k LF with this tanker, (almost everything I use runs on nuclear rockets)) and Im sure that could be improved upon.

Edited November 19, 2018 by Pthigrivi

[Sharpy]

46 minutes ago, Tyko said:

Do you have problems with the colliders when you rescale them? Last time I fooled around with this I had way too many cases where the visible surface was well above the collider.

I had that problem without rescaling them too. Rescaling does exacerbate the problem - in exactly linear way, asteroid twice as big = skin:collider offset twice as deep. Not a big problem with my tugs as they are *big*, but yeah, if you plan infrastructure on the surface it gets in the way of aesthetics.

One thing more: undock and redock periodically as you drain resources, especially if you autostrut 'to heaviest'. The asteroid *shrinks* as you deplete it, unload (go to KSC or other vessel), then come back -  but the attachment point remains fixed - after a time it's way off the surface, and that creates some awfully strong strain that can really break stuff or eject you hard.