Duna Permanent Outpost Mission Architecture Challenge

[meyst]

A great deal has been added and changed in the game since this challenge. I don't think a score from an entry now is directly comparable to the original entry scores.

Instead of getting a mode to update the original post scores I think it may be better to start a refresh of the challenge and take advantage of the opportunity to updated the rules.

[DBowman]

A great deal has been added and changed in the game since this challenge. I don't think a score from an entry now is directly comparable to the original entry scores.

Instead of getting a mode to update the original post scores I think it may be better to start a refresh of the challenge and take advantage of the opportunity to updated the rules.

I agree with you meyst. A lot of the rules I like, even dividing the completions by ksp version would be interesting / useful. Did you see vosechu was working on a 'Realism Overhaul' 'Real Mars' challenge which includes a 'Stock Duna' component.

I started evaluating if I should switch my current 'in progress' to 1.0. So far I've figured a way I can work with the new overheat and explode or run at 30% thrust nukes. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/113541-DeeplyDuna-Permanent-Outpost-Mission-Architecture-8-1-0-or-not-1-0

[Jonboy]

This was an awesome challenge, I was really sad when I accidentally deleted my save halfway through my attempt.

It would be really cool if we could see a new challenge for 1.0 that incorporated the new ISRU in an interesting way.

[VASMIR]

Would it be okay if I have a Crew LV and a Cargo LV?

[DBowman]

Would it be okay if I have a Crew LV and a Cargo LV?

The way I read the rules that would be fine - as long as you fit into the Kerbin launch constraints (you can put whatever you like on the launcher) and remember the scoring counts 'Kerbal days on Duna'.

[Death Engineering]

Would it be okay if I have a Crew LV and a Cargo LV?

If I may add to what DBowman mentioned, you're fine as long as the only thing that leaves LKO that went up on the Crew LV is the crew - no other supplies or equipment from the Crew LV can leave LKO other than the crew, unless it counts as one of the launches covered by the launch vehicle rules. Good luck and welcome to the challenge!

[DBowman]

I'd read LV as 'landing vehicle' - but 'launch vehicle' make just as much - or more sense.

If you have doubts then maybe it's a good idea to post your plans for the first few launches (day, mass, payload description) so it's clear what you intend.

[VASMIR]

I'm doing a IMIS 1968 style mission. Saturn MLV is almost ready.

[MathigNihilcehk]

Well, I've finally started the challenge, after months of breaks... Yesterday I did about 10% of the execution...

I actually got nauseous and had to stop playing. Where did that happen, might you ask? While piloting the darned rover, I built. I forgot to include an SAS module, so landing it was a pain, and I ended up 100km+ away from the landing site. I had saves to reload, but that would've meant landing again. It was incredibly light weight, but also incredibly likely to flip over on the slightest bump on the road. I tried going 10m/s, but it'd flip over within 1km. Eventually I tried going 3m/s, and it seems to work fine... but by then I was too sick to keep playing. I ended up turning on MechJeb's auto-pilot (which likes to flip over too) for 3m/s on 4x time acceleration and I left the room.

Unfortunately for me, I don't have just one rover to do, but 10. Note to anyone attempting this challenge. ADD SAS TO YOUR ROVERS!

[MacGamer04]

I'm thinking about doing this, and I was wondering if I could change the amount of SRB's on my launch vehicle. The core and upper stage is constant, but I don't want an overpowered vehicle for light loads, and I don't want and underpowered vehicle for heavy loads

[VASMIR]

The IMIS mission will not qualify for the challenge, sadly. Still, the Martian looks fun to try. Only problem is that the cargo probes require separate launchers.

[MathigNihilcehk]

Several weeks, 55 hours of recording, and 181 Gigabytes later, and I've FINALLY finished recording my attempt at the challenge.

I've compeleted everything by the rules, with the possible exception of flame effects. Considering how the new game rules seem far harsher, in regards to displaying flame effects, AND since the new rules will actually destroy your craft, if you suffer too much re-entry heat, I'm going to kind of ignore the "absolutely no flame effects" rule.

Theoretically, if I had done a gravity assist off mun to get to duna, I'd have had enough extra fuel to deorbit burn myself, instead of letting the atmosphere do it for me. I don't mind losing points on the execution, if we assume I completely failed (didn't try) the gravity assist, and therefore the plan is good, but my execution doesn't count. If I were doing the points, I'd consider this a different version of KSP, deserving slightly different rules. Since the game can destroy your craft quite easily, if it doesn't actually burn up in the atmosphere, it didn't burn up in the atmosphere. That's up to the OP, though, not me. Heck, if the OP doesn't count my attempt at all, I probably won't care. I'm happy with my attempt, at least.

Oh, and the Kerbals might have to ration their food a bit. Probably not, and definitely not according to my proposal, but perhaps on the actual mission. The dates given for duna transfer burns didn't exactly work for me. I'll have to double check the timing, though.

It'll be a few more weeks for me to take a look at editing this footage into... I don't know, something. I'm thinking of cutting this into one succesful continuous video, and highlights of various failed attempts. Perhaps 5x-10x speed, correcting for time dilation, with overlayed commentary... Bah, I'm no entertainer. I'll think of something, though. The straight-up recording was so boring, that even I didn't watch it, while recording it.

Anyway, just saying that I will enter my attempt eventually... probably. It won't top the leader-boards, but it's on the order of 10,000 points, and there is a good reason I didn't have room for "heatshields".

[Findthepin1]

You have just been appointed as the Deputy Administrator of KSC for Missions to Duna and Other Celestial Bodies which Start with "D"

Does this include Dres?

[MathigNihilcehk]

Finally, I've posted the first video discussing my plan. If you prefer text, I've included it here. The video is

. I'll post some of the execution videos once I finish post-commentary and editing. It shouldn't take nearly as long as the opening video, as I won't edit as much. Enjoy!

Overview:

This is my entry to the challenge. Included is a theoretical, and practical analysis of the challenge, a detailed design description of each component, a detailed mission outline for each mission, and a detailed report of the execution of each mission. I will also attempt to create a YouTube series that animates this to some degree.

Goals:

1: Be unique. We choose to go to duna and to do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.

2: Achieve everything. While I may not invent any new achievements, I seek to score all existing achievements.

3: Be practical. One of the achievments is execution. A theoretically perfect design includes no structural support, excess fuel, and demands superhuman piloting. I can't execute that.

4: Be realistic. I will bend some rules, and create harder rules to my entry, because some rules lead to unrealistic play.

5: Be optimal. Everything else held equal, I want my challenge to get the most points it can. If that means cutting things close, then so be it.

Theoretical Analysis:

To achieve the maximum number of points, you want to send the most kerbals to duna in the shortest time period possible. This depends on how many kerbals you can send and support in each launch window.

The most effective way to do this, is to launch an infinitely large rocket, with an infinite number of kerbals and food storages in the first launch. This will yield an infinite number of points. Unfortunately, this rocket can not be constructed in finite time.

Since all launches must be equal, you can send the product of your launch size, and the number of launches into orbit. The number of launches you have depends on the time between launches, which depends on your launch size. In our scenario, we have up to day 739 to send mass to duna. We also have a bonus launch at day 10. So, this gives us a total number of launchers of Round down((739-10)/1.5*payload mass)+1, or Round down(486/payload mass)+1. The total mass sent to duna, is then payload mass*Round down(486/payload mass)+payload mass.

The round down function is maximized for a serious of steps, where 486 mod payload mass = 0. For these steps, the equation simplifies to 486+payload mass. For each step, there is also a distinct number of launches equal to (486/payload mass)+1.

Thus, the lower the number, of launches, the higher your total payload to duna, which means the higher your total point score. For practical reasons, I am going to pick 7 launches. This gives us a maximum payload mass of 69.429.

Now, the mass we can get to duna is less than this maximum payload. The change in velocity required to get to duna is at least 860dV. This is assuming that you create an intercept with mun, and gravity assist all the way to duna, and aerobrake in duna's atmosphere into a perfect landing. The best engine to use is the LV-N "Nerv" Atomic Rocket Motor, which has a mass of 3, and a specific impulse of 800 s.

Additionally you are getting mass to duna in stages, assuming you use the launch windows. I'd call that a safe assumption, since otherwise you use more mass, and may get there in more time. The first stage gets one launch (50-10), the second two (55+228-10-104*2), the third two (55+228*2-10-104*4), the fourth two (55+228*3-10-104*6).

Using the rocket equation, this means we can get 860=9.81*800*ln(full mass/(full mass - fuel)). For the first case, this is 860=9.81*800*ln(69.429/(69.429 - fuel)) or 860=9.81*800*ln(69.429/(69.429 - fuel)), or a fuel mass of 7.206. This will take 8.75 mass for the fuel tanks, for a total mass to duna, less engine and fuel, of 57.679. For the other cases, this is 860=9.81*800*ln(69.429*2/(69.429*2 - fuel)) 14.41 or 16.25 using fuel tanks, thus we have a to duna mass of 119.608.

We also need mass for food. Each kerbal will spend 960 days in transit. Using the most space efficient food and realistic food, this is FL-R1 RCS Fuel Tank at 220.6 food per mass. If we wanted the most space efficient food, it'd be PB-X150 Xenon Container at 5833.4 food per mass. In my opinion 100 grams is not a full day's worth of food. 400 grams, on the other hand, is reasonable, assuming you recycle 100% of your water. Anyways, assuming we utilize the 40 days of food in our rover and housing we get 4.17 mass per kerbal, for food.

We also need long term housing. The cheapest option, is for kerbals to live in a pair of EAS-1 External Command Seats, which duplicate as their rover. However, for realism sake, I'll pick something else. How about a pair of MK1 Lander Cans? MK3 Passenger Module? MK2 Crew Cabin? All would work, but I feel like all of those options would be kind of unrealistic. A more realistic option is the PPD-10 Hitchhiker Storage Container. It's roomy, spacious, and linked. It's quite large, and so I can EASILY see a couple of kerbals living years in one. However, this means it will require 1.25 mass per kerbal.

For the kerbals to get home, let's assume they are just lifting their storage container into orbit and then to ike. This is a dv of 1690, and using 24-77 "twitch" liquid fuel engines(what I am actually using). This gives us 1690=9.81*290*ln(2.5+fuel/(2.5)) or 2.475 with fuel cans considered.

This gives us a grand total of 6.68 mass per kerbal, not including a lot of stuff. So, in the first trip we can get 8 kerbals, to duna, and during each subsequent trip, we can get 16, assuming we don't spread the food out. This gives us a theoretical score of 832*8+717*16+489*16+261*16+33*16 or 30,656.

Practical Analysis

Next up, the explanation for how NeilC gets larger than this score... he manufactured fuel on site. Basically, if you do that, you get to drop the food cost entirely, and you get 275% more kerbals per trip. This actually means that had NeilC found a way to do his mission with a 0 mass mining operation, and more improbably assumptions made in this calculation, he could've scored 84304 points.

Obviously, at some point we have to stop making wild assumptions like "If you could somehow get to duna by intercepting mun and using a gravity assist, it'll only cost 860 dV", because I am not building my entire program based on my capability of performing a perfect gravity assist off of Mun. Not even going to try for a gravity assist in the first place. I'm pretty sure if I tried, I'd end up spending more dV than I would've just going straight to duna.

Anyway, the process of actually designing a ship is, well, a process. Start with the theoretical max, include all the components, then ask yourself "Am I missing something to actually launch this into space", like an engine, or a some way to connect the blob of parts I just stacked other than stacking them, or docking ports, or even a light. Instead of going through the whole process, I'll show the results.

I've created three modular ship types.

The first I call the Food Supplier. It consists of RCS cans to store 1870 food, nd a few RCS engines(with RCS fuel) to land. It's total mass is 9.7.

The second I call the Inhabitor. It has a hitchhiker housing unit, 360 units of fuel, and a bit of food.

The third I call rover. It has seating for four kerbals, and four scientific tools.

All three ship types include power generation, parachutes, wheels, and docking ports (except the rover).

These parts come together to make a primary payload and a secondary payload. The primary payload consist of two rovers, four inhabitors, and a food supplier, along with a pair of nuclear engines, liquid fuel, food, docking ports, and structural parts. The secondary payload consists of four food suppliers, excess fuel for the return trip, docking ports, and structural parts. Each tops out at just under 69.42 mass.

The launch schedule is as follows.

Launch and transfer schedule

Day 10: Launch Window(Base)

Day 55: Duna Transfer Window

Day 114: Launch Window(Suppliers)

Day 119: Duna arrival

Day 218: Launch Window(Base)

Day 283: Duna Transfer Window(3 Food)

Day 322: Launch Window(Base)

Day 347: Duna arrival

Day 426: Launch Window(Base)

Day 511: Duna Transfer Window(1 Food)

Day 530: Launch Window(Suppliers)

Day 575: Duna arrival

Day 634: Launch Window(Base)

Day 739: Launch Window(Base)

Day 739: Duna Transfer Window(1 Food)

Day 803: Duna arrival

Day 843: Launch Window(Suppliers)

Day 947: Launch Window(Suppliers)

Day 951: Kerbin Transfer Window

Day 967: Duna Transfer Window(5 food)

Day 1015: Kerbin arrival

Day 1031: Duna arrival

Day 1051: Launch Window(Suppliers)

Day 1155: Launch Window(Suppliers)

[Syhrus]

Is this challenge still alive? I'm thinking of doing a new 1.0 mission with TAC...

[Death Engineering]

Is this challenge still alive? I'm thinking of doing a new 1.0 mission with TAC...

While we haven't seen OP in quite some time, this challenge is as close to immortal as they come. You might not get on the leaderboard, but there are a few of us still participating and encourage new attempts.

Regarding my own latest attempt... it was all a bad dream! Whew.. it was getting silly trying to complete this challenge under the restrictions of the BTSM mod. Will still be entering another submission, but going to be more of an extension of the AAP Challenge.

[Syhrus]

While we haven't seen OP in quite some time, this challenge is as close to immortal as they come. You might not get on the leaderboard, but there are a few of us still participating and encourage new attempts.

Regarding my own latest attempt... it was all a bad dream! Whew.. it was getting silly trying to complete this challenge under the restrictions of the BTSM mod. Will still be entering another submission, but going to be more of an extension of the AAP Challenge.

Perhaps we should rejig the rules a little for 1.0 and start up again?

Heck, make the goal a little different and aim for Laythe or something.

[MathigNihilcehk]

Perhaps we should rejig the rules a little for 1.0 and start up again?

Heck, make the goal a little different and aim for Laythe or something.

I was thinking of issuing a similar challenge, after I finish editing videos, for Mars Permanent Outpost... RSS style. I mean, the cool thing about that challenge, is if you could complete it, then theoretically someone could ACTUALLY set up a permanent base on mars for the same price... excluding the billion assumptions made that say all your mods === real life.

[Death Engineering]

Perhaps we should rejig the rules a little for 1.0 and start up again?

Heck, make the goal a little different and aim for Laythe or something.

I was thinking of issuing a similar challenge, after I finish editing videos, for Mars Permanent Outpost... RSS style. I mean, the cool thing about that challenge, is if you could complete it, then theoretically someone could ACTUALLY set up a permanent base on mars for the same price... excluding the billion assumptions made that say all your mods === real life.

Kinda torn.. I like the idea of reworking this challenge with attention to in-game costs and science achievements, but I'm not into RSS and undecided on whether Laythe would make for a better goal. There's this challenge, as an option: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/115535-From-Duna-to-Mars-Realism-Challenge

If I were to author a re-worked "Permanent Outpost" challenge, I'd be more inclined to stick with stock SS/Duna..

[DBowman]

I like stock also, apart from anything it's much more approachable and will have more participants. Duna has a special 'romance' as a Mars analog also.

I like the launch constraints from this challenge, maybe they are 'too generous'. You could imagine having the same launch constraints and a few (any?) alternate destinations.

I think the current 'kerbal duna day' scoring forces a particular kind of entry, i.e. as big as you can as early as you can. I tried to make a 'realistic' science oriented scoring system for 'From Duna to Mars', not sure how well it would actually work.