Space Station Diameter Preferences

[MisterKerman]

I just restarted my game. I want to try smaller more efficient builds if I can manage, including space stations maybe?

Is there a benefit to building small for a space station? Less torque and less fuel, but either of those issues can be solved with a well placed component engineered to accomodate that. I want to try, but I'd like to hear from you guys what size you normally use seeing as 2.5 is most common due to useful parts for space stations often being that size.

I can imagine 1.25m getting pretty wobbly.

[Cavscout74]

I typically use 2.5m - primarily for science labs (mostly for leveling up, they're ridiculously overpowered for science generation) & greenhouses for life support mods.   

If you aren't opposed to mods, I think there are some structural and/or station parts mods that have a nice range of parts in various sizes.  Also, there are at least 2 mods (MOLE & USI-Konstruction) that have weldable docking ports to make permanent connections once you dock parts together which should help reduce both part count & wobbliness.

[Geschosskopf]

I find stations useful only as unmanned orbital fuel depots so their size is a compromise between what I can lift and how fast I can fill them up given my mining set-up.  This, of course, is only for stations I build for my own purposes.  If I need the money, I'll build a station to whatever specs the customer desires. 

[Pds314]

5 meter segments is good. Except for the central hub which should be gigantic. Make your individual components bigger than ISS.

[The Aziz]

Yeah, 2.5. This size has a lot of useful modules in stock (cupola, science lab, hitchhiker pod, big docking ports that seem to be a bit more stable than smaller versions) and when you go into mods, oh boi, it's more than enough if I mention Stockalike Station Parts Redux? It has tons of parts in 2.5m size (smaller and bigger as well but that's not the point)

[cantab]

Another for 2.5. For a modular space station I'm wary of using smaller docking ports for stations. If I'm building an early-game station with the science lab and don't have Sr ports yet I'll make it a monolithic station, Skylab/Salyut style, with the smaller docking ports used for visiting ships and possible ancillary modules. (Usually solar, because the lab is a power hog).

I've also not infrequently used 3.75m fuel tanks, to store lots of fuel but keep the part count down. But the only other real use for such big parts is living space for a lot of Kerbals (with the Mk3 cabin).

Since there's no 1.25m lab and 1.25m tanks don't store so much fuel, there's not an awful lot of point in a small-diameter station in any game mode. It's not even worth using the small convert-o-tron in orbit because it takes 5 kg of ore to make 1 kg of propellant (whereas the big convert-o-tron turns 1 kg ore into 1 kg propellant), except in the niche case that you've grabbed an asteroid and taken it to your station.

This is with the stock parts of course.

[MisterKerman]

Basically my formula is make a small "train" of 2.5m components. Core, Habitation with lots of ports, Power Plant and utilities with some refueling ports, and the caboose is a big fuel tank.

I was just thinking aside from the hitchhiker cans and fuel tank, 1.25m should be fine for all my "needs". I just want to try to make something lightweight and industrial looking this time around.

This was the latest iteration of my fuel depot/tourism terminal:

 

Edited July 13, 2019 by MisterKerman

[Mahnarch]

You need to build big so your Kerbals have room to move around, stretch their arms and play bocce ball.

 

Or lawn darts - if it's Friday.

[AHHans]

1 hour ago, Mahnarch said:

Or lawn darts - if it's Friday.

I don't know about yours. But my Kerbals don't like playing lawn-darts.   (Too many bad memories  of being inside the dart I believe.)

But, yes! Some space to move around in is required, so 2.5m parts it is. Since the BG expansion I include a gravity ring in my stations, its current iteration is made from the 1.25m passenger cabin.

[steuben]

In career I build using the 2.5 chasis. But, in sandbox I use everything from the one-twenty fives, up to the mk3 hulls. 

[MisterKerman]

Seems pretty clear to me that 1.25m isn't being utilized for stations by practically anybody, but I'll still consider it as long as I can manage to figure out a way to both make it look nice as well as functional in regards to rigidity, but chances are the part count will be really ugly and I'll opt for the obvious/easier/practical choice instead.

Edited July 14, 2019 by MisterKerman

[DStaal]

I build a fair amount of stations in 3.75m, using Stockalike Station Parts and some other part mods.  But if I want more parts available I'll move down to the 2.5m size.

[fulgur]

I prefer mainly 2.5m for the labs and the medium-sized fuel tanks, though to be honest I prefer to use bases to refuel. I also like the DLC 1.875m parts because they are easier to carry into LKO.

[RealKerbal3x]

Usually for me it’s 2.5m all the way, but I’ve designed a few stations that use 1.25m or 3.75m parts (Nertea’s SSPXR has a whole host of parts that are useful for both of those).

I tend to roleplay quite a bit regarding the sanity of my Kerbals, so 2.5 strikes a good compromise between the internal diameter being just large enough for them to live comfortably, and being small enough overall for the module to be launched in a realistically-sized fairing or cargo bay.