Munar Module Separate Launch?

[ansaman]

I have found that it seems to make just as much sense in KSP to launch the Munar Module with its decent stage in its own launcher contained in a 2.5m fairing and the Command Module with its own launcher as trying to combine them in one launcher. Of course, the Command Module makes a rendezvous with the Munar Module after its landing and ascent to orbit. One does not even have to get beyond the 2.5m set of parts. I use a Delta IV configuration when I need extra delta-v. Anyone else?

[Jestersage]

well yeah -- the actual Saturn V replica in KSP can go all the way to Eeloo apparently...

Even in RL, there are 4 types of lunar landing:

1. Direct ascent - require really large rocket
2. Earth rendezvous - What is proposed with Initial Constellation, where the Orion Capsule would rendezvous with the Altair on Earth, and use the EUS to head to the Moon
3. Mixed Lunar rendezvous - what is used in Saturn V.
4. True Lunar rendezvous -- what is proposed for 2024 Lunar missions/Lunar Gateway

And since Kerbal is so much smaller, you can do it all with just 2.5m mission

EDIT: In theory, both method 2 and 4 can even be done with Falcon heavy/Delta Heavy

Edited June 5, 2019 by Jestersage

[Cavscout74]

Early in career, when I'm limited to 30 parts, I send them separately - typically on 1.875m launchers, since I usually don't have 2.5m stuff unlocked yet.   Later in career, considering how small the stock game is, I usually just go with a Direct Ascent lander.  The one exception I sometimes make is around Minmus, since the dV requirements are so low, I'll keep a purpose built lander docked at a station & use it to ferry personnel to/from ground bases.

The one time I did make a Saturn V replica, I skipped an entire stage on the launcher & IIRC the SM still had nearly half full fuel tanks when it was jettisoned for reentry.

[RealKerbal3x]

50 minutes ago, Cavscout74 said:

The one time I did make a Saturn V replica, I skipped an entire stage on the launcher & IIRC the SM still had nearly half full fuel tanks when it was jettisoned for reentry.

Yeah, because of how the fuel fractions are balanced against stock parts, Making History Saturn Vs are always massively OP in terms of dV.

(I mean, I assume you’re talking about building a MH Saturn V  Apologies if I’m mistaken.)

[Geschosskopf]

I myself don't see any advantage in using separate command and lander modules in KSP.  Just built a lander that can return itself and re-enter.  Not only does this reduce the amount you have to lift, you eliminate the time and hassle of docking and the need for monopropellant.

The limitation of this type of mission is that it limits exploration to the immediate vicinity of the lander.  That used not to be a problem as there was generally nothing to see anyway, but now there are surface features to hunt.  This still isn't a problem on Minmus, however, where the single 2.5m lander can have enough fuel to hop to all biomes and various points between (not to mention Kerbal EVA excursions) and still get home by itself.  But for Mun, if you want to do more than grab the Science! from a single biome and plant a flag, you need a more complex mission possibly involving multiple ships.  Rovers, refueling systems, science lab bases, etc.  It all depends on what you want to do.

NOTE:  Any comms relays you put in orbit around the target planet/moon aren't considered in the above.  Either you use them or you don't.  If you do, they should go on their own ship because it's cheaper that way and besides, the relays need to be in polar orbits and your main ships might not want to go there.

[Cavscout74]

54 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

I assume you’re talking about building a MH Saturn V

Correct