Duna Permanent Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge

[TheBobWiley]

Ok, trying my hand at this challenge, still working on getting my interplanetary tug operational, but just redid my LKO vehicle and I can now put 20 tons up at a time (i tried building the "bob" like OP but I couldn't even get 16 tons up with it). All 3 sections of the LKO rocket are recoverable, the first 2 outer tanks drop off around 10,000m and use parachutes to land back at KSC, within 500m of the launch pad. They land on their engines and are ready for immediate reuse. The first center stage comes off and lands in the ocean east of KSC, also reusable. The third stage puts the payload into a circular orbit around 75km and with good timing will deorbit and land in the ocean just east of KSC.

The only part that would be considered "burnt up" is the payload fairings and the 2.5 extended payload decoupler, it doubles as a heat shield on reentry and never passes 700c. I use the deadly reentry mod and everything but the payload fairings land in reusable condition so far. Will post more as my mission develops!

Edited June 18, 2013 by TheBobWiley

[meyst]

After much effort I have come up with a 63%* reusable launch vehicle for the challenge.

I present the Gryphon launch vehicle.

Awaiting lift off for a reusable stage recovery test.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

After staging the first stage descends back to Kerbin on parachutes

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

A Gryphon first stage landed and awaiting recovery at KSC.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[table=width: 400, class: outer_border, align:center]

[tr]

[td]Section[/td]

[td]Mass, Wet [/td]

[td]Mass, Dry[/td]

[td]Delta V[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]First Stage[/td]

[td]52.9[/td]

[td]12.9[/td]

[td]1562[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Second Stage[/td]

[td]22.4[/td]

[td]6.4[/td]

[td]1539[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Third Stage[/td]

[td]7.9[/td]

[td]3.9[/td]

[td]1033[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Payload to LKO[/td]

[td]9[/td]

[td]9[/td]

[td] [/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]totals[/td]

[td]92.2[/td]

[td]32.2[/td]

[td]4134[/td]

[/tr]

[/table]

launch interval will be 13.5 days. (9 ton LKO payload capacity, times 1.5 Days)

Sounding Rocket capacity of 22.5 tons to 72,477M

I have also decided to use a Halcyon space craft, on a Hyperion launch vehicle for LKO crew transfers.

A Halcyon on a Hyperion launch vehicle ready for lift off.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

A Halcyon space craft in low orbit

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

*Lift vehicle wet mass on pad without payload 83.2 tons. First stage wet mass on pad, 52.9 tons. 52.9/83.2= 0.6358 or 63%

[TheBobWiley]

I think I have nailed down my interplanetary tug (IPT) and the interplanetary service and habitation (IPSH) modules, the IPSH's will be permanently connected to an IPT (unless they are damaged in some way, rentry, accident, etc.) Each IPSH is capable of carrying 4 kerbals for the long term mission between Kerbin and Duna. Each IPT has approximately 4900 m/s of Dv in a vacuum, hopefully this should allow for the 19.31 ton IPT's to tug the 19.71 ton IPSH's to duna and back before refueling.

The third craft which has yet to be fully built is the Crew and Service Vehicle (CSV) which is used to ferry the crew to the IPSH's while they are in orbit around kerbin, they also carry the fuel needed to refuel the IPT's. If weight permits they will also carry the fuel needed to fill the IPSH outboard containers, used not only for radiation absorption, but are used to refuel the Duna Descent/Ascent Vehicle (DDAV) that shuttles the crew between Duna and the IPSH's. Most likely a dedicated refueling vehicle will be developed to refuel the IPSH outboard tanks. The final part of the mission profile calls for a Duna Exploration Vehicle (DEV) that has yet to be developed. These vehicles will take a one way trip to Duna ahead of the IPSH's, along with the DDAV, and will set up a mobile base for when the kerbals arrive at a later window. I included a sketch of the mission profile, and I am currently looking at 6 launches (not including the undeveloped DEV's) that will form a 3 part journey to Duna. Each LKO rocket is fully recoverable and can launch a payload of roughly 19.7 tons, this allows me to launch every 29.55 (30) days. I have a theoretical mission value of 1200 (4 kerbals long term on Duna) and mission efficiency of 10.15. This number will decrease as I develop the DEV's and add their launches into the equation. I may even launch more IPSH's in order to get more kerbals to Duna before the 500 days and try to increase my score. As for now I am running into some sort of glitch that is causing me to lose control of my ships after they dock in orbit......

Edited June 18, 2013 by TheBobWiley
image links changed

[Justy]

Kermrades, rejoice! The first simulation of our glorious first expedition has begun!

We salute the devotion of Kermrades-kerbonaut Jebediah, Bill, Bob, and Jorbart, who have presently committed themselves fully to an immersive test environment constructed in KSC2. We further salute the skill and bravery of Kermrades Patlorf, Lohat, Lemnand, Thomsby and Derlan, who were all instrumental in testing our nation's finest development, the life support recycling system on which our Duna explorers will depend, in surface operations on Minimus.

The realized version of our great vessel will differ somewhat from the simulation pictured above, but the following are certain to remain key advantages of our effort over those of other nations:

• A long spine, lightweight yet rigid, separating the atomic engine from crewed sections, allowing the main engine's fuel tanks to serve as an effective shadow shield;
  
• Quadruple-purpose transit habitat, descent vehicle, surface habitat and ascent vehicle, with additional protection from impact and radiation provided by conformal fuel tanks;
  
• A lander which will produce both fuels and oxygen on Duna, proving the ability of kermunism to provide plentiful bounty for all in any environment!
  

Workers of the world not yet experiencing the benefits of the kermunist revolution in their own nations should tune to frequent updates on the People's Voice Of Kerbin shortwave programme broadcast from the Central Kerplodistan Transmission Facility on a frequency of 6,160,000 warbles per second on an unpublished and random schedule.

[sturmstiger]

So I got back from my vacation...and we still don't yet have a completed entry:( But I guess I shouldn't be too surprised as a project of this complexity & scale tends to take time. So far we have Work In Progress posts from the following designers / architects (ordered by time of first post):

1. NeilC: Lifter, Interplanetary Tug & Mobile Hab Design

2. Wait, Was That Important?: Mission Concept, Lifter Design

3. misanthropia66: Delivery / Return Vehicle + Research / Hab Module Design

4. Rex_Reach: Mobile Hab Design

5. Justy: Mission Concepts from 2 Kermunists design teams

6. Highlad + FallingIntoBlack: Mission Concept & Schedule

7. meyst: Cargo Lifter & Crew Lifter Design

8. TheBobWiley: Mission Concept, Lifter, Interplanetary Tug, Interplanetary Service & Hab Design

Several of these WIPs showed great potential and will likely beat my scores once completed. A few others have expressed interest but have yet to post anything about their work. So please keep them coming!

Remember, for your entry to be considered complete and get updated on the leader board, you need to post:

(1) The mission concept / plan

(2) Pictures & descriptions of your lifter and types of spacecrafts / launched components

(3) The mission value & efficiency score, and "achievement" scores which you claim

You should post additional pictures & descriptions if they are necessary for others to understand your mission architecture. Pictures / report of actual mission execution is needed if you wish to claim any Mission Execution score.

[TheBobWiley]

Reporting on my recent successful trip to Duna and back; used an IPT to tug my redesigned DDAV to Duna, land, rendezvous with the IPT back in orbit, tugged the DDAV back to kerbin (in order to simulate the IPSH weight), and reestablished a 75km orbit around kerbin. Unfortunately my test run left me in a polar orbit around kerbin on my return and is not very effective for a rendezvous with my CSV or relaunching back to Duna. It says it will cost 3k dv to get back into a 0 degree orbit and I only have 700 dv left in the IPT........I may also need to redesign the IPSH as the "heatshield" is not very good. Here is a picture of the most likely final DDAV design, the 4 single lander-cans save .1 tons over the hitchhiker Only thing that may change is adding a few batteries/generator that I forgot about

Edited June 21, 2013 by TheBobWiley

[Flixxbeatz]

If I've only decided to continue

, then I could have submitted an entry for this challenge. Might as well re-do it once I've progressed further in my new save.

It was part of a 3-module base (hab, rover, fuel), and that was the centerpiece. Oh - and it can house 12 kerbals.

[Speeding Mullet]

I've taken an interest in this challenge. It's extremely well thought out, detailed, and gives me a long term goal to work towards. Most of my KSP time so far has been spent blasting unfortunate kerbals with poorly thought out craft and risky trajectories at solid objects, so this should also help fine tune my game play.

With that in mind I have been doing some testing and have got this far (I'm going for style as well as functionality to the possible detriment of weight and efficiency scores):

AVS Module with integral MDSM - Within the shroud is a fully fueled 4 man can capable of boosting 4 kerbals from duna surface to orbit. The MDSM deploys it's drogue shoots into the atmosphere, then when subsonic jettisons the fairing and drogue shoots before decoupling the 4 man can (which deploys it's own landing chutes) and deploying it's own main chutes. Little bit of efficiency here as the MDSM has a separate self contained RCS storage tank for supplies which is integral to the MDSM, so the fairing and drogue chutes are the only bits discarded. The MDSM also doubles as an emergency up-link to the Duna communications and observations satellite orbiting overhead.

I've been playing around with SSTO designs to use, and I remembered I had some luck on a SSTO challenge, so I loaded up the ship and modified it to contain another 4 man can. This SSTO can take off, reach orbit, dock, depart, and return to within a couple of hundred meters of the launch pad on a powered landing with no parachutes. Only issue is it has to enter the atmosphere head first so it doesn't turn it's engine to molten slag, and I think in the spirit of this challenge the whole thing doing a 180 once subsonic is a little unrealistic perhaps??

I'm working on a space-plane as that seems to be the way to go, but I haven't really had a lot of luck with space-planes recently, so it's at the back of my mind right now in favor of roughing out the design of the DTH, IPT, DEV et al.

I'm also working on what I want to achieve when on the red planet and hence my mission concept is lacking.

[meyst]

Only issue is it has to enter the atmosphere head first so it doesn't turn it's engine to molten slag, and I think in the spirit of this challenge the whole thing doing a 180 once subsonic is a little unrealistic perhaps??

Turning a 180 in mid air seems odd to me. I can see a craft going vertical and stalling as it converts to a vertical flight mode though. Like a stunt plane going vertical but instead of going back to horizontal flight you use a engine to counter the gravity drag and land slowly 'backwards'.

[TheBobWiley]

Not making much progress, decided to redesign most of my mission in order to get more stuff heading for duna by the first window. Attempting to launch my IPT and IPSH's together, using the IPT fuel tanks to circularize the orbit, and then refill them on my second launch with my CSV as I deliver my crew for the trip to duna. My IPT may have enough dv to launch as soon as my 30 day wait is up with my DDAV and head for duna following the crewed IPSH. Most of my new mission architecture is in my head, but my new IPT is almost done..... can only play for like 3 hours at a time before I start getting a headache/bored :\

[NeilC]

I've also stalled a bit on my mission plan. I had it mostly fleshed out, but this blew it out of the water:

No. Tanks of fuel are just a convenient stock-part representation of life support supplies / commensurable. Supplies cannot be converted from or to fuel.

I'm using Kethane, and had planned on using very small supply tanks that could be refilled. I don't have enough supplies to survive if I can't refill them with Kethane. No big deal if them's the rules, but I started redesigning my misison and then I read this:

To answer your question, you can use Ioncross mod to replace the supply rule, but not the long term hab space requirement.

Clearly I started trying to learn how to monkey around with Ioncross resources and Kethane resources and making them play nice together. And I'm still working on that. And getting frustrated with it because the mods keep updating faster than I can integrate them.

So I'd like a clarification about the supply rules with respect to in-situ resources (eg Kethane): can we assume, for this mission, that kethane = water? And that the kethane converter handles the electrolysis of fuel into rocket fuel (H2) and oxygen (for breathing or burning)? And that the raw keth-er, water can be used for drinking?

If so, our long term supplies should only consist of food, and should weigh much less than food+water+O2. Maybe 25% as much?

Basically: can we get some reduction to the supply rules by using in-situ resources (kethane) alone? Or do I really have to implement a hack-job of unionizing Kethane and Ioncross resources, and editing a hundred config files per this thread, in order to make this street legal?

Edited June 25, 2013 by NeilC

[sturmstiger]

I've taken an interest in this challenge. It's extremely well thought out, detailed, and gives me a long term goal to work towards. Most of my KSP time so far has been spent blasting unfortunate kerbals with poorly thought out craft and risky trajectories at solid objects, so this should also help fine tune my game play.

Thanks! It was my first long-term project in KSP as well. Took me many nights of design, test flights and resigns, but it was an extremely rewarding experience.

With that in mind I have been doing some testing and have got this far (I'm going for style as well as functionality to the possible detriment of weight and efficiency scores):

That's good and I would totally encourage design decision that you believe enhances its functionality or "realism", even though it may reduce the scores and lowers the rank on the scoreboard. For example, in my own entry, all the "science & service payloads" do nothing to improve my scores (in fact lowers the efficiency score) but I still send them for their imagined value to the science mission. Maybe after we have a some number of submissions, I could start separate poll and ask people to vote for their favorite design, which can take into account all these factors difficult to score objectively.

I've been playing around with SSTO designs to use, and I remembered I had some luck on a SSTO challenge, so I loaded up the ship and modified it to contain another 4 man can. This SSTO can take off, reach orbit, dock, depart, and return to within a couple of hundred meters of the launch pad on a powered landing with no parachutes. Only issue is it has to enter the atmosphere head first so it doesn't turn it's engine to molten slag, and I think in the spirit of this challenge the whole thing doing a 180 once subsonic is a little unrealistic perhaps??

.

Realistically it would be very very difficult to design a rocket SSTO with any significant payload capacity (>5tons) to survive re-entry. SpaceX for example plans to build fully re-usable versions of Falcon 9, and only the small upper stage would need to survive re-entry. intends to In any case you'll typically only need to recover the first stage (more than 50% of liftoff weight) to qualify for the reusable launcher bonus.

Also it looks like the SSTO rocket in your pictures can lift little more than 5~6 tons to LKO. It would take you many many launches if you use that as your cargo lifter.

Edited June 25, 2013 by sturmstiger

[sturmstiger]

Basically: can we get some reduction to the supply rules by using in-situ resources (kethane) alone? Or do I really have to implement a hack-job of unionizing Kethane and Ioncross resources, and editing a hundred config files per this thread, in order to make this street legal?

I would really be reluctant to add / change any rule at this point. And allowing custom editing of config files would a big can of worms in terms of fairness, plus it would also be too burdensome for you. The current rules said:

10. ...You may also use life-support mods and re-entry damage mods to substitute Rule 5, 6, 7 & 8.

Thus if you use ioncross you don't have to carry any addition fuel tanks which represent supplies. I assume the additional equipment weight would balance it out. And if some versions of Kethane mod and Ioncross mod can work together without cfg modification, you can use in-situ replenishment for life support supplies. Don't feel too bad if you can't get that work - in-situ generation of fuel alone should give you a significant advantage in scores, compared to those who chose not to use ISRU.

Edited June 25, 2013 by sturmstiger

[Speeding Mullet]

Also it looks like the SSTO rocket in your pictures can lift little more than 5~6 tons to LKO. It would take you many many launches if you use that as your cargo lifter.

That SSTO is just my "free" kerbonaut delivery system to lift the brave veg to lko. I was trying to do something different than a spaceplane as I'm bad at designing them in general although I had some success last night. My actual cargo lifter can boost mid 20 tonnes on a terrible flight path, so I might be able to work out some more mileage there.

[vidboi]

After spending some time planning and re-planning an extended Duna mission, I've settled on a plan that I'm happy with, and plan to carry it out over the next week or so.

The mission will land 6 Kerbals on Duna around day 350, giving an early mission score of atleast 750, followed by a further 6 shortly after day 800 increasing the extended mission score to almost 5000. Although not as high as some of the Kermmunist proposals, the mission is designed to thorough and robust and plant the foundations of a Duna colony that can be extended well past the initial mission plan.

In terms of achievements, the plan is designed to achieve a maximum of 12 achievement points if everything goes well. All base modules will be self-mobile and capable of operating independently, and smaller exploration rovers will be delivered during phase 4, ensuring all Duna crew have maximum mobility. The mission vehicles are designed with multiple redundant life support systems and backups, with the Duna transports capable of performing both Kerbin-Duna and Duna-Kerbin transfers on their own with delta-v to spare as well as being emergency Duna landers, and other mission vehicles (Duna lander, light Duna tug) are capable of replacing their propulsion systems in the event of failure. Kerbin-Duna transfers will be done in two parts with the use of nuclear powered boost tugs, and an unsuccessful insertion burn should be safely recovered from. A refuelling station will be placed in Duna orbit in phase 1 with enough fuel alone to refuel the lander and provide enough fuel for both of the Duna transports to return to Kerbin even if completely empty, and this will augmented in further missions with additional fuel and Kethane refining facilities.

Launches are split into 3 categories: minor (green), major (yellow) and critical (red). Loss of a vehicle during launch or Kerbin orbit operations will result in a replacement launch taking the place of a less important launch (i.e. a minor vehicle) in order to successfully complete the phase of the mission, and all phases have minor launches to ensure this is possible. Loss of non-critical vehicles at Duna will not seriously affect the mission, with major vehicles being replaced as soon as possible (hopefully within the next launch vehicle). Loss of a critical vehicle however may put the entire mission in jeopardy, and therefore will result in a replacement being launched at the next possible launch opportunity and then being propelled to Duna on a non-optimal trajectory by the Duna boost tug 1 that will remain in Kerbin orbit in case of such a situation.

Overall, the mission is planned to be both safe and productive, with a very low chance of overall failure.

Onto the vehicles themselves:

Launches will be performed by the as yet unchristened single use, 3.5 stage, 15 ton launcher AL015t:

Although it's far from the efficient launch vehicle I wanted something that could fairly reliably heft payload into a 100km orbit and be fairly interesting at the same time (hence the over the top staging).

Phase 1 comprises of two parts: the first being a light nuclear tug with mapping satellites and a rover-skycrane combo used to decide on an optimal landing site for the main base:

and the second part being a refuelling station for Duna orbit:

These two launches will be docked together and travel to Duna as one.

Phase 2 starts with the launch of a fuel station of the same design of that launched in phase 1. This will provide refueling facilities for vehicles in Kerbin orbit and a place to collect and assemble the stacks of modules to be transferred together.

The next launch is the Duna boost tug used to put the two stacks of modules into a highly elliptical near-escape orbit around Kerbin. The tug will aerobrake back into Kerbin orbit using the shields around it's engines and refuel at the station for the next transfer.

The two Duna transports are launched unmanned and use their own power to circularise. They will each carry three Kerbals to Duna, and their engines are used to perform the second transfer burn to put them into a Duna transfer orbit after the initial boost. They carry all the hab space and life support needed for transfers between Kerbin and Duna and vice versa.

The Duna Lander is used solely to transport Kerbals between Duna orbit and Duna surface. It is initially planned to make two trips (refuelling at the supply station launched in phase 1) and will remain on the surface of duna for rapid evacuation in emergency. The remaining crew will be rescued either by a second trip or an emergency landing by a Duna transport, depending upon the urgency of the situation.

The Duna station provides addition fuel, habitation and life support systems to remain in orbit around Duna. This can effectively support all the Kerbals on the mission at any time in case of emergency with habitation space in the transports, but will mainly just provide more fuel and short term hab space.

Last but far from least are the Duna surface modules. These will land, unmanned, separately and then join together before the crew take the lander down to their new home for the coming years. The modules are designed to be fully functional independently with individual life support facilities, with extended capabilities when joined together. Modules are landed via parachutes and single use retro rockets.

The vehicle used to transfer crew to and from Kerbin orbit is the Atmos L orbiter launched on top of a cost-effective 2 stage launcher. The crew will be launched in the days shortly before the transfer window in order to prevent depletion of supplies and limit stress to the spacecraft systems, with prior testing done remotely.

Phase 3 and 4 vehicle designs have yet to be finalised, however many of them will be the same or very similar to the phase 2 vehicles.

Mods to be used:

-Mechjeb 2

-KW Rocketry

-B9 Aerospace (structural parts)

-Crew Manifest

-Kethane

-Ioncross Crew Support

-ISA Mapsat

Now it's just time to finish testing and start the actual mission...

[sturmstiger]

After spending some time planning and re-planning an extended Duna mission, I've settled on a plan that I'm happy with, and plan to carry it out over the next week or so.

Wow, vidboi! That's a very well thought-out and the most detailed entry so far! I am particularly impressed by all the safety and redundancy features in your design. And you clearly made many design choices which lower its "efficiency score", but made it a lot more realistic & practical. And because you invested a lot in infrastructure early on, such as the Kethane operations on Ike and the Duna orbital station, I believe it will be a productive & efficient mission in the long term.

Looking forward to see the remaining mission hardware & finalized mission value / efficiency scores.

Also, I love your boost tug

[Justy]

Although not as high as some of the Kermmunist proposals, the mission is designed to thorough and robust and plant the foundations of a Duna colony that can be extended well past the initial mission plan.

If I'm honest, neither Kermunist design team is having much progress. Kermichev produced and perfected a carrier rocket with reusable boosters, the UR-180. The outer boosters cross-feed to the inner core and parachute to splashdown. The carrier rocket lifts a 18t payload to 100km LKO with just enough dV left over to deorbit itself, or the same 18t payload plus the Blok-T upper stage for about 500 m/s dV for on-orbit assembly. The base UR-180 is 57% reusable, the UR-180 + Blok-T is 53%.

(The design is meant to emulate the real world UR-500, itself the basis for Russia's "Proton", and the intended follow-up UR-700, both of which really used [or would have used] crossfeed between outer & inner boosters, as well as poorly remembered images of upper stages. I thought I was doing Blok-D, it turned out closer to Fregat. In any case I'm actually quite proud of the UR-180, it's the best working and best looking I've ever made.)

To get the resources to build the rocket he is so proud of, Kermichev found his already ambitious promise to get three kerbonauts to Duna in the first launch window had suddenly expanded to SIX. That meant finding a way to launch an atomic tug, an ISRU plant, and two habitats, all on just three rockets. The atomic tug and ISRU lander would have to be on a single rocket. That went beyond the lift mass for the UR-180, so the atomic tug would have to coast to the edge of the atmosphere before completing its own burn into orbit. That required a stronger but less efficient engine to complete the burn before it fell back to Kerbin. That consumed so much fuel that, while it was left with enough to make the burn for Minimus, it would swing right past without enough fuel to make orbit.

Worse yet, the State Space Committee's own teams keep revising the landers. Combining the roles of transit habitat, lander, surface habitat, ascent vehicle, and return transit habitat, they have more than doubled in mass, and each one now weighs 17.5 tons with mostly empty fuel tanks, just barely within the limits of the carrier rocket. In simulations, the ISRU lander's engines turned out to be dangerously underpowered, underfueled, and too unstable for the sort of precise landing required to ensure the landing site is both kethane-rich and cliff-poor. Fixing this only worsens the mass problems of launching it with the atomic tug.

About the only thing that did go right was the production of an inflatable heat shield. Simulations showed there really isn't a need to protect the landers themselves, but a shield is essential for the complex's initial aerocapture into Duna orbit.

So it's been a rough couple of weeks at Kermichev, but let me tell you, it's been even worse at Kerbolyov. The continent is littered with the wreckage of his 9t and 20t 1.5STO (drop-engine) prototypes. They worked quite well on their own, but once complicated by kethane mining equipment, they tended to be nose-heavy on reentry, which makes for a very unstable tail-landing rocket. One partial success became a very nice deep sea research station, dubbed Single Stage To Ocean. The curling match to decide where the rocket would refuel ended without a clear result once it became evident the State Space Committee would go with Kermichev's rocket, and Kerbolyov has turned its attention to winning the production of the lander modules.

Westerners may have read the article in Antiquing Week & Space Technology accusing the Kermunists of self-delusion or even outright lying about their productivity and efficiency estimates for their Duna mission plans. Well, nobody is saying that back home! It's possible many are THINKING it, mind you, but the job of resolving that has already been handed to the secret police.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Justy

[NeilC]

vidboi, where the heck did you find that greenhouse part?? It's SO great, I want one! But I've got all the mods you list installed, and I can't find it.

[NoMrBond]

vidboi, where the heck did you find that greenhouse part?? It's SO great, I want one! But I've got all the mods you list installed, and I can't find it.

I think that comes up every time there is a picture of it

You can locate it with a forum search for z_greenhouse

[Edit] MF Link for the mod

[NeilC]

Thanks! Time to get building...

[TheBobWiley]

Glad to see others are still making headway on this, been busy painting my house the last couple of days and probly the next few. I have an LKO capable of lifting 30 tons to 75kmx75km. This allows me to launch two times before the transfer window is lost (45 days between launches as rocket is fully recoverable). I have integrated my IPT into the 2rd stage of my rocket. My 2nd stage has 2 configurations, and they seem plausible to me to be switched between in real life. I have tried to base my rocket design off of the SLS (space launch system) Block 1A Cargo variant. The first stage has six dual nozzle engines, allowing for a maximum of 3 engines to cut out. The first stage is accompanied by 2 solid boosters that burn for 152 seconds (the sls's bossters burn for 124 seconds) and lift the rocket to roughly 10km. The 2nd stage block 1 variant has 5 engines, and allows for up to 2 engines to cut out and still achieve circular orbit. This stage will be used to deliver the CSV to LKO in order to refuel the new IPSH and deliver crew for the trip to duna. My current CSV may seem a little unrealistic, but im taking a page out of sturmstiger's book, the payload fairings will not detach from the CSV and will be used as a heatshield on reentry from LKO. The entire assembly will land in the ocean east of KSC for reuse. The CSV can hold 4 kerbals short term for Kerbin -> LKO/LKO -> Kerbin.

The 2nd stage block 2 variant is the same as the block 1, but has 2 nerva engines installed for the interplanetary burns between Duna and Kerbin, once the 5 orbital engines shutdown and the nervas come online, they will not be used again except for extreme emergencies. My DDAV will also receive a revamp in order to be mobile, and may have an attach point so that it can be towed by the future DEV.

On a side note, I really didnt want to use the 3.75m parts from kw rocketry, but the 2.5m parts just couldn't match the efficiency of launching fewer times and combining a couple of my vehicles together. Can't wait to see how the other projects develope, now if only i could get more than 4 to duna at a time :\

[Syhrus]

THIS is a challenge I like. Actually planning this out before doing it sounds like some pretty good old fun. Anyway, I have a question regarding reuse of lifters: I have developed an entirely reusable lifting stage (all parts are recoverable within 1km of the KSC, including the final stage that comes complete with a heat shield). Does that get any extra relaunching advantage over the minimum 50% rule described, or have I just made a showboaty lifter?

Otherwise, I'll get to work on this later this weekend!

EDIT: Disregard my question. I reread the rules and 50% of original weight is probably close to what I have anyway seeing as most of the ship is fuel.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Syhrus
Re read the rules!

[TheBobWiley]

Ok, I need a clarification from OP, since we need 1 unit of supplies a day for long term missions, can I keep kerbals on duna for the entire 1000 days or w/e while using fewer units of supply? Basically my bases on Duna will be resupplied each time the IPSH comes from kerbin, it would have additional tanks that "transfer" to the DDAV and then can refill the supply tanks on the duna mobile bases. Can I do this, or do I have to have enough supplies to last for the full time?

[SDIR]

I think you are allowed to resupply the Duna outpost, from what I've read, as it is nearly impossible to store ALL of the supplies needed for a colony.

[sturmstiger]

Ok, I need a clarification from OP, since we need 1 unit of supplies a day for long term missions, can I keep kerbals on duna for the entire 1000 days or w/e while using fewer units of supply? Basically my bases on Duna will be resupplied each time the IPSH comes from kerbin, it would have additional tanks that "transfer" to the DDAV and then can refill the supply tanks on the duna mobile bases. Can I do this, or do I have to have enough supplies to last for the full time?

You don't need to have enough supply to last until day 1000 when you first landed on Duna. The minimal requirement is to just keep the Kerbals on Duna alive until the arrival of the next scheduled resupply mission. Obviously just fulfilling the minimal requirement is going to be risky as a delay with the resupply mission will kill your Kerbals, so it will be good to keep some contingency supplies for various parts of the mission. The actual act of resupply is modeled abstractly - if you can land you resupply near your outpost, it is assumed you'll be able to "refill" any tank / module in the vicinity; if you also have long range mobile elements that carry supplies, it is assumed you'll be able to transfer supplies between all Duna outposts (if you have more than one).

Does that answer your question?