The Eve return mission is too tedious

[KerikBalm]

The thing is, when you are experienced, getting a craft to eve orbit is no longer a challenge.

Orbital rendevous is no longer a challange.

The challenge of getting something off of Eve can be difficult, and time consuming.

I don't see a problem with "skipping the easy parts" to save time, while testing a craft.

In a similar fashion, I've tried to make fully recoverable/reusable, but still efficient interplanetary voyages (not fully reusable for eve though).

Single stage to Kerbin orbit carryong ~100-150 tons->

*A Tug rendevous with the payload and SSTO(a 2nd tug if the payload lacks propulsio) ->

* Tug places payload nearly on escape trajectory from Kerbin, or nearly so (ie Apoapsis past minmus orbit) ->

1st tug aerobrakes to and rendevous with a fuel depot in LKO, ready for re-use

* 2nd tug/payload with propulsion burns at PE to go interplantary ->

* Orbital insertion at destination ->

first mission detaches a fuel depot, tug (optional, used for laythe, not for Duna) , and lander, subesequent missions refuel the depot

* Lander goes down, lander comes up, refuels ->

* Tug places (if present) return vehicle nearly on an escape trajectory (aerobrakes if possible, ie laythe and Duna) and returns to fuel depot ->

* Return vehicle does transfer back to Kerbin

* Return vehicle aerobrakes at kerbin, docks with station/fuel depot, ready to dock with a tug and repeat the mission (first missions carry the lander + fuel depot + optional tug for destination, subsequent missions just carry extra fuel if the fuel depot needs re-filling

* SSTO refuels the station/fuel depot in LKO as needed to support operations.

* Other payloads like ground bases, rovers, etc may be sent.

Its a very time consuming mission architecture, so when I want to test something (ie, like a tylo lander), that I can't approximate on Kerbin (like a rover or space plane for laythe can easily be tested on Kerbin as "close enough"), I edit myself there (I don't hyperedit, I just edit the save file, to but me in orbit around the target)

Its not a matter of skill, its a matter of saving time.

[Laie]

I don't mean to criticize everyone's Eve returns, especially since i haven't ever even tried, but if you use hyper-edit to test the craft before ever attempting it, are you really a KSP expert?

I strongly suggest that one should try to get it right the first time, and play "seriously". The thrill of getting to and landing on Eve for the first time is something one shouldn't dilute with hyperedit. However, there's a high probability that your lander will break during landing, or proves to be almost (but not quite) good enough. It may require several iterations to get it right, and I see no fault in speeding up the development with hyperedit.

[magnemoe]

I don't mean to criticize everyone's Eve returns, especially since i haven't ever even tried, but if you use hyper-edit to test the craft before ever attempting it, are you really a KSP expert? Maybe it really is harder than I could imagine, plus the time investment for failures would have to be quite high, but using hyper-edit to do it just seems... wrong. But like I said, I've yet to even try so please don't think I am knocking those that can do it.

Most who hyperedit do this as an simulation of the real mission before doing so, often in an separate save. Then I did the 100 ton from LKO grand tour, I tested the special landers for Moho, Eve, Laythe and Tylo in hyperedit to make sure they worked without being to heavy.

Same goes for challenges like the lightest Eve lander where you have to modify you design many times.

[Frank_G]

Drop some probes and probably a robotic return vehicle first to get some experience in mostly unpowered descents in Eves atmosphere. I found that very helpful. Gaining experience from failure or probe missions is the most thrilling and fun part of the game in my opinion. There is no shame in using hyperedit, but you would miss a lot of fun for sure, especially when going for the big things. There is nothing more rewarding then actually succeeding in a mission completely by yourself.

[MarvinKitFox]

Ok I decided to pull off the eve return mission I build the ship capable of 11300 dv, and Eve land\return flight weightiung 150 tonns (tested it via hyperedit). Got into LKO refueled, get it into eve orbit refuled it again on the eve orbit. Landied the probe on the tallest mountain range so have a glimps on terrain and provide lightbeam mark for the main lander. The whole process took me around week or real time (I played by few hours at the evenings) and then just before I decided to go for landing I noticed that two of the enines fell off without any apparent reason, and in noticed it only after i quicksaved, therefore ruining my mission. After such setback I don't want to play KSP for a while (maybe till 0.22) so my point is: The eve return mission is diffucult to the point where fun is lost. Maybe delta v requirements for eve return shuld be set lower for somewhere around 9000-9500 dv for the takeoff from Eve sea level it still be a challenge, but make things easier and allow more Eve return capable spacecraft designs to be build.

The EVE return trip requires some very painstaking attention to detail.

If you are the type to complain how "diffucult" it is to "refuled" your probe before you "landied" on Eve just to catch a "glimps" of the terrain...

You do not possess the correct mindset to attempt an EVE landing.

To do Eve, and do it right, you need to plan accurately. You need to be methodical. You need to check, double-check and triple-check your work.

You need to NOT make mistakes.

Edited November 11, 2014 by MarvinKitFox

[Guz]

eve was very challenging but when i finally made a successful mission the feeling i got was nearly as great as my first munlanding.

i felt i got rewarded for the pain i had building that ship

full vid here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyc-fth6kR8&list=UUok0KC9bFXjee3ve7pOJ15Q

[magnemoe]

Drop some probes and probably a robotic return vehicle first to get some experience in mostly unpowered descents in Eves atmosphere. I found that very helpful. Gaining experience from failure or probe missions is the most thrilling and fun part of the game in my opinion. There is no shame in using hyperedit, but you would miss a lot of fun for sure, especially when going for the big things. There is nothing more rewarding then actually succeeding in a mission completely by yourself.

In the previous game I used the Eve return lander to just return the science data from the base on ground, this was an nice test of it and I had no need for the kerbals to return yet.

[Lukaszenko]

I did an EVE return mission without hyperedit, as I felt it was a more rewarding experience. I had to pay more attention to designing it correctly the first (and 2nd and 3rd.... ) time because the cost of failure was that much higher. It felt more realistic, too. After all, when we send probes to other planets we don't hyperedit them there, we build them to the conditions they must survive in, but we design and test them on earth (as much as possible).

I'm now planning on doing another EVE return mission in "ironman" mode, where each test failure also costs me (lots of) funds, although on the other hand it seems easier since version .23.5's larger parts.

[Caelib]

Some feats aren't meant to be done

[Bekiekutmoar]

Eve is an unforgivable planet for return-missions indeed ... ! I finally succeeded in performing such a mission last week with FAR and DRE installed, but it took me several weeks. Lander nr. 1 weighed around 165 tons, was transferred to Eve with A LOT of effort, but burned up in the atmosphere. Lander nr. 2 weighed around 90 tons, also shipped to Eve, got bbq'd in the atmosphere too. But finally, the third iteration (around 51 tons) actually worked ... !

[John FX]

Eve is not too hard. It IS very very hard but when you have played for a while, you want there to be some very very hard parts of the game.

Ones where even if you build the right craft you could still fail.

If you can do everything within a few weeks of starting the game that could lead some people to just stop playing.

There needs to be very very hard things for the very very experienced and skilled players.

[DerekL1963]

I don't mean to criticize everyone's Eve returns, especially since i haven't ever even tried, but if you use hyper-edit to test the craft before ever attempting it, are you really a KSP expert? Maybe it really is harder than I could imagine, plus the time investment for failures would have to be quite high, but using hyper-edit to do it just seems... wrong. But like I said, I've yet to even try so please don't think I am knocking those that can do it.

When you imply that someone else is doing something "wrong" and as a result they are "not really a KSP expert", you're criticizing and knocking by definition. Handwaving disclaimers to the contrary don't change things.

That being said, NASA simulates the heck out of missions - all the way from the first concepts to the final hardware. And so do I. NASA has the Mars Yard, and the Shuttle Fuselage Simulator, wind tunnels, and a whole host of other specialized trainers, simulators, and test and development facilities. For those things they can't simulate directly (Like Curiosity's EDL), they have man years of experience in the related disciplines, hundreds of engineers, and everything from high end workstations to full blown supercomputers to run simulations on.

I have Hyperedit and a separate save.

Those who think "I'm doing it wrong" or "diluting the experience" or am "not serious" can pound sand as far I'm concerned. It's my game and I'll play how I want and find my own satisfaction. (And none of us are in the wrong for finding satisfaction in something somebody else doesn't.) I neither need nor want your approval of my play style.

[aleis]

Those who think "I'm doing it wrong" or "diluting the experience" or am "not serious" can pound sand as far I'm concerned. It's my game and I'll play how I want and find my own satisfaction. (And none of us are in the wrong for finding satisfaction in something somebody else doesn't.) I neither need nor want your approval of my play style.

well said, unless your doing some challenges do it how you want.

[metl]

Narcissistic tendencies with hyper-stimulated defensiveness and an extreme fear of failure. Got it.

[technicalfool]

Guys.

This thread was an epic necro, and it's getting nasty. Go start a new thread about Eve returns if you want, and play nice in it, or it'll quickly suffer the same fate as this thread.