Duna Permanent Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge

[vincespeedmk2]

Man I need to make time for this challenge. It sounds awesome

[Sauron]

Question: I heard someone threw together some code to handle this challenge's specific life support requirements (?) Where was that again--I want the hard-coded information

[Progressm]

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Some testing of the long term habitat rovers as a teaser...launcher to be improved as well. I will post a schedule soon but ironing out some of the vessels first.

I can get 2 rovers up within my 30t reusable launcher payload limit, each has long term stay capacity for 4 kerbals and supplies for 375 days. Feedback/thoughts welcome.

[vosechu]

I just wanted to pop in and say that this challenge was the single thing that kept me so fascinated with KSP for so long. I don't know what it is about the challenge, but to me it's absolutely perfect. I've spent 400 hours on steam in (distracted) pursuit of this challenge and yet I've still never posted a screenshot of my progress. I've gotten about half of the challenge done, but each time I find something terribly wrong or screw something up miserably (or just kill everyone by missing two windows).

So massive props to the OP and congratulations on coming up with something so inspiring and wonderful.

Also, has anyone considered doing this challenge with MKS? I'm not sure whether it's in keeping with the spirit of the thing or not. My feeling is that it ends up making the thing significantly more difficult so I figured it would be okay. Thoughts? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79588

Edited December 10, 2014 by vosechu

[meyst]

I don't know what the balance is like for that mod having never tried it but it does look interesting.

[vosechu]

Sauron, I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about, but TAC-LS and Deadly Reentry should pretty well cover the requirements.

TACLS - https://github.com/taraniselsu/TacLifeSupport/wiki/Download

DRE - http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54954-0-25-Deadly-Reentry-v6-3-2-Beta!-Nov-25-2014

Good luck!

[vosechu]

I'm officially starting my attempt at this challenge. I'm still in the testing and development phase, but I'm going for a truly permanent colony using MKS/OKS. I have no idea about the balance of the mod, but it seems quite challenging so far.

Here's some of the hardware I'm playing with:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Some of the balance affecting mods I'm going to play with:

TACLS - Full life support tracking.

Deadly Reentry - Pushing through atmosphere really does explode things.

MKS/OKS - Fully contained life support system for on planet and off-planet adventures.

KAS - Attachable nodes (just in case I can't get the MKS Habitrails hooked up correctly).

MechJeb - Naturally. I can launch and land on my own, but it's a pain and it's not enjoyable for me.

Procedural Fairings - Since I'm using DRE and not using FAR/NEAR, I'm wondering if I should skip this. But maybe I'll try NEAR again.

Edited December 15, 2014 by vosechu

[vosechu]

And then we had an update.

So, I'm out of planning for a couple weeks until things settle down. MKS and TACLS are currently broken until possibly after the holidays. Oh well, other things to do!

[Kiwa]

The 24-77 engines on your head might run into thrust problems - they are obstructed by the MKS part below. (And from what I understand, DRE might give you heat issues as well, in case you really fire them towards the MKS part.)

[vosechu]

The 24-77 engines on your head might run into thrust problems - they are obstructed by the MKS part below. (And from what I understand, DRE might give you heat issues as well, in case you really fire them towards the MKS part.)

Wow. I'm really glad you mentioned that. I haven't really had problems with it yet but I think that's because I haven't tried to get two launches to land next to each other. That would have been seriously disappointing to get all the way to Dina the second time only to find out the my maneuvering doesn't work. Thank you!!

[vosechu]

After much deliberation, and five other somewhat catastrophic attempts, I have experienced moderate success!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

In fine Kerbal form:

Attempt 2 flew straight and true, until it didn't and sunk into the blue.

Attempt 3 swiftly grew immense, but wiggled and shifted as the atmosphere grew dense.

Attempt 4 had an epiphany, launched, landed, and ended unsatisfactorily.

Attempt 5 has not yet been planned, but when it is, success or I'll be damned.

My new plan:

Goal 1: Survival

Goal 2: Permanence

Goal 3: Science

My first goal will be to ensure that no matter where things go wrong, every kerbal can make it home. This will include redundant escape options at the expense of a full life support circuit in the first couple launches. The first launches will now be more about getting hardware out to Duna with enough life support to make it home if later launches, including the life support circuit, ultimately fail.

[Right]

Greetings all! I'm currently working on a submission. I'm running into an issue though. According to my observations using MechJeb's advanced transfer utility, I'm seeing transfer windows ~913 kerbin days apart with the first windows being on day ~230. This contrasts pretty starkly with the suggested windows.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Right

[Jasonden]

Greetings all! I'm currently working on a submission. I'm running into an issue though. According to my observations using MechJeb's advanced transfer utility, I'm seeing transfer windows ~913 kerbin days apart with the first windows being on day ~230. This contrasts pretty starkly with the suggested windows.

Kerbin-days vs. Earth days. Back when this challenge was first hatched the game didn't use Kerbin's 6-hour day, using Earth's 24-hour day instead.

[Commissar]

I feel like EL seems pretty fair, as it still takes resources and time to build stuff, whether it be in orbit, or on duna

Edited January 7, 2015 by Commissar

[Jonboy]

Definitely want to do this when I finish Death Engineering's Constellation challenge.

[Doc]

Wow. I'm really glad you mentioned that. I haven't really had problems with it yet but I think that's because I haven't tried to get two launches to land next to each other. That would have been seriously disappointing to get all the way to Dina the second time only to find out the my maneuvering doesn't work. Thank you!!

I stick my 'thrust around heatshield' engines out on Infernal Robotics telescoping pistons. I extend them to thrust, then retract for re-entry. Works pretty good.

[Slam_Jones]

Hiya, nice challenge, just got a question about rule #7 (life support). I use TAC-LS, and wanted to know if you have a way to score for that?

Thanks!

[MathigNihilcehk]

*I had forgotten about you...

*I thought you had forgotten about me...

*You may have thought me crazy, arrogant, or lazy...

*Back then you were right...

*You are still correct today...

*But now after all this time...

My name is on the front page under incomplete?!?

(My fault for that )

*Soon...

*Or perhaps never, but probably soon...

*I will return...

*And I will finish...

Duna Permanent Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge

(This is just some early prototypes of my first payload with launcher. Once I finish testing the components, I'll get started on the report. I just wanted to say "Hi, I'm back, and working on the challenge again, for now.")

Test Results: The Alpha module shown failed horribly. After some adjusting, all alpha testing is completed. All that remains is to find a good recording software that works with my computer, and attempt the challenge itself. I'm still debating doing video or pictures... I'm anticipating a very long challenge, either way. Some 12 launches of 350 parts each, 20 minute burn times, and 70 separate landings. Only 4 landings, 3 docking maneuvers, and 2 launches are unique, but I'd hate to not go all the way, after all this time.

Edited January 18, 2015 by MathigNihilcehk

[DBowman]

sturmstiger,

This looks like and interesting challenge, already I'm finding it pretty compelling, after seeing some of the entries I'm thinking about how to approach it.

I've also been interested in playing with KAS. Is it okay to use KAS for things like moving fuel around? For example dropping fuel supplies and then transferring it to ascent craft via the 'pipes' thingy rather than 'docking' the fuel supplies to the craft. The 'pipes' seem more 'realistic'. I guess you could do the same thing for 'supplies'; 'in real life' they'd be able to be piped or moved by hand through airlocks. Also I might want to use winches to move things around - is that okay?

[Death Engineering]

Hiya, nice challenge, just got a question about rule #7 (life support). I use TAC-LS, and wanted to know if you have a way to score for that?

Thanks!

As far as I know, TAC-LS is considered a fair/balanced mod and is acceptable in this challenge. LS on its own isn't really "scored" except as it may pertain to "Crew Safety" and "Mission Robustness" - in which case any extra supplies will factor in to your payload to LKO.

*I had forgotten about you...

That looks like a single launch.. wonder what your lifter's nominal capacity and minimal interval between launches is? Cool looking, though!

sturmstiger,

This looks like and interesting challenge, already I'm finding it pretty compelling, after seeing some of the entries I'm thinking about how to approach it.

I've also been interested in playing with KAS. Is it okay to use KAS for things like moving fuel around? For example dropping fuel supplies and then transferring it to ascent craft via the 'pipes' thingy rather than 'docking' the fuel supplies to the craft. The 'pipes' seem more 'realistic'. I guess you could do the same thing for 'supplies'; 'in real life' they'd be able to be piped or moved by hand through airlocks. Also I might want to use winches to move things around - is that okay?

It is my understanding that if KAS is used for resource management it will not violate the "orbital construction" rule. If anything, I think it makes the challenge more complex and realistic as precision landings will be required for supply drop missions.

Several months ago, I expressed my intent to run the challenge a third time, this time incorporating KAS and I didn't see any negative feedback on the thread so I'd say go for it unless anyone else feels KAS violates the 'mods' rule.

[DBowman]

It is my understanding that if KAS is used for resource management it will not violate the "orbital construction" rule. If anything, I think it makes the challenge more complex and realistic as precision landings will be required for supply drop missions.

Several months ago, I expressed my intent to run the challenge a third time, this time incorporating KAS and I didn't see any negative feedback on the thread so I'd say go for it unless anyone else feels KAS violates the 'mods' rule.

I tried some KAS stuff, some of the winch attaching stuff seems a little flaky (could be just me). I'll assume KAS for resource management for now, though I'm not looking forward to 'precision landings' - usually I'm content to be able to walk away.

If you do a 'cluster drop' of landers and separate them just before chute open then you should get a tight grouping. From my reading the game engine does not really support that, does anyone have any hints/pointers/advice?

If it's true that 'other craft' outside the physics bubble get destroyed as debris, and my flights did that - then can I forgo any mission points for 'actually flying all flights' and use the good landing of one craft of each time to 'prove the mission architecture'?

[Laie]

If you do a 'cluster drop' of landers and separate them just before chute open then you should get a tight grouping. From my reading the game engine does not really support that, does anyone have any hints/pointers/advice?

On Kerbin, semi-deploying parachutes at 0.3/0.4/0.5atm pressure will create sufficient spread that the pieces are like 80m apart; there's absolutely zero risk of any of them leaving the physics bubble. On Duna, semi-deployment will probably not suffice. But deploying drogues 100m apart should do the trick. You won't get a "cluster", however: the pieces will be strung out along a line.

[MathigNihilcehk]

If you do a 'cluster drop' of landers and separate them just before chute open then you should get a tight grouping. From my reading the game engine does not really support that, does anyone have any hints/pointers/advice?

If it's true that 'other craft' outside the physics bubble get destroyed as debris, and my flights did that - then can I forgo any mission points for 'actually flying all flights' and use the good landing of one craft of each time to 'prove the mission architecture'?

It is true that any craft outside the physics bubble, and inside a planets lower atmosphere disappear due to magic. I don't think you need to perform all flights to complete the challenge. In fact, I think you only need to do one of each to show that your architecture is plausible or something. You get bonus points for flying everything.

If you don't want to risk lots of explosions, I'd recommend Mech-Jeb. Some times it can help you land exactly where you wanted, within 80 m. Warning, at other times it will fly your craft into deep space, because it "feels" like it, and it will often waste fuel spinning 360's because magic. Seriously, it can run an entire mission perfectly and then it'll suddenly decide "for this ONE landing, you fail. Time to use all your fuel 500 m above ground so we can descend at 0.1 m/s.".

[Death Engineering]

I've had some decent success on Duna with dropping rovers and other support gear during the final landing stage. While the intent was to lower the mass of the lander and reduce chances of coming down too fast, lately I've been using a powered decent approach and deploying equipment on the ground. This is a little bit safer but also reduces the need to have a trained engineer around for every landing (those wheels break easy).

Not sure what the factors are in regards to removing craft, but I've never had it negatively affect me. This example of how forgiving the system is shows some chutes coming down. They were jettisoned from the lander at 3km above the surface and took a long time to come down.. so long I had completed the powered descent landing, planted the flag and done the surface EVA science. Was a little startled to see them still descending while I was packing up to leave already.

That said.. last night I did a high-speed flyby of a Duna base about 200m off the surface. While close to the base, I switched from the plane to the base to watch the flyby and housekeeping picked that plane out of the air FAST! Like, it was gone in seconds.

Tried to capture the plane flying past.. got a glimpse then it was *gone*..

[DBowman]

Thanks guys, a 'string of pearls' works fine for me, I'll try the sequential parachute approach. At the moment I'm fiddling with the aerocapture using a fairing and how to pack my modules.

Death Engineering's drone looks cool.