Laythe Lander?

[Mmmmyum]

Uh it's 11pm and I really, really don't want to do another launch other than seeing how well it docks in LKO. Does anyone think this won't work as a Laythe lander? It's going to try to land unpowered (11 of the radial parachutes, and 3 drogues), and then take off with the SRB's which then drop off, leaving the LV909 to power it into a rendezvous with the interplanetary stage. I tend to overengineer things a bit, this has around 4k delta-v.

After docking, the ascent stage is going to eject, leaving just the capsule inverted upon the interplanetary stage. Which will then go for an aerocapture into Kerbin's atmosphere.

Edited October 14, 2013 by Mmmmyum

[Kasuha]

Are these fuel tanks modded, or are they aircraft ones?

[Mmmmyum]

Are these fuel tanks modded, or are they aircraft ones?

They're ones from KW Rocketry, they have the exact same stats as the stock tanks of the same size, just look a bit more professional. Which I like.

There are a few double size ones as well. Just a bigger small tank (can't remember the measurement :/)

Edited October 14, 2013 by Mmmmyum

[Kasuha]

Then it should be ok. I was just wondering if you're bringing any oxidizer. I also don't see any RCS but you may not need it if you're good enough. Regarding entry/lading/return to orbit this rocket should be strong enough.

[Mmmmyum]

Then it should be ok. I was just wondering if you're bringing any oxidizer. I also don't see any RCS but you may not need it if you're good enough. Regarding entry/lading/return to orbit this rocket should be strong enough.

There's a RCS tank under the capsule, I took this screen before I added the thrusters, generators and struts. I just don't want to leave Bill on the surface of Laythe:sticktongue:

[Geschosskopf]

You really should have more parachutes IMHO--Laythe has thinner air than Kerbin. Use the parachute calculator to make sure you're got enough chutes.

http://ksp.freeiz.com/

The other concern I have is that most of what little land area Laythe has is on pretty much of a slope. So unless you've previously reconned the place, know where the few flat spots are, and are good at landing on such relatively small targets, you need to build Laythe landers for landing on hillsides. So I'd build it lower and wider. You know, divide the fuel up between tanks and engines on outriggers, and put the landing legs out there, too, for the widest possible stance.

[Commander Zoom]

I advise getting HyperEdit (and/or starting a separate save game), putting it in orbit above Laythe, and running "simulations" for yourself.

Once you're satisfied and have made any necessary changes, you can do it "for real" as part of a full mission.

[SRV Ron]

You should ditch the SRBs in favor of liquid fueled engines. There is less weight for the given power and flexibility you will have available for launch. An onion or asparagus design for the lander is most ideal for efficiency. A small burst from the lander engine can then be done if needed to reduce speed prior to touchdown under parachutes.

[Mmmmyum]

You should ditch the SRBs in favor of liquid fueled engines. There is less weight for the given power and flexibility you will have available for launch. An onion or asparagus design for the lander is most ideal for efficiency. A small burst from the lander engine can then be done if needed to reduce speed prior to touchdown under parachutes.

Asparagus staging is a big no no lol, I don't like it because it's unrealistic, and I use FAR, which means that Jool would rip it apart while aerobraking

[arq]

Asparagus staging is a big no no lol, I don't like it because it's unrealistic, and I use FAR, which means that Jool would rip it apart while aerobraking

Well, strictly speaking, aerobraking is also a bit unrealistic.

[chemieglennie]

You can land and take off on water if you have a bit of width.

I made the mistake of a tall thin lander the first time which fell over.

[magnemoe]

Laythe is an bit easier than Kerbin so anything who can reach orbit on kerbin should be able to get from low Laythe orbit and back if careful.

And as other say, Laythe is very hilly so you want an wide lander. You can ditch the landing gear on liftoff, it might be an idea to use an jet engine but has bad experiences trying to land with them and you need rockets to deorbit anyway.

[Mmmmyum]

Well, strictly speaking, aerobraking is also a bit unrealistic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobraking

[Scotius]

Will you stop consider asparagus staging unrealistic, when SpaceX flies its first Falcon Heavy rocket?

[Starwaster]

Will you stop consider asparagus staging unrealistic, when SpaceX flies its first Falcon Heavy rocket?

No, because the Falcon Heavy design is reasonable whereas most KSP so-called 'asparagus' rockets are nightmarish freaks of nature that would never survive 5 seconds past lift-off in the real world...

Uh it's 11pm and I really, really don't want to do another launch other than seeing how well it docks in LKO. Does anyone think this won't work as a Laythe lander? It's going to try to land unpowered (11 of the radial parachutes, and 3 drogues), and then take off with the SRB's which then drop off, leaving the LV909 to power it into a rendezvous with the interplanetary stage. I tend to overengineer things a bit, this has around 4k delta-v.

After docking, the ascent stage is going to eject, leaving just the capsule inverted upon the interplanetary stage. Which will then go for an aerocapture into Kerbin's atmosphere.

It seems reasonable. My first and only Laythe lander so far was similar in overall nature. It was loosely based on the stock KSP orbiter design (the one with three engines that has no lifter included). Except that I replaced the engines on that with some KW light engines and 6 KW SRBs. I forget which SRBs exactly, I think they were the second from the bottom in terms of power. It was a rescue ship so it had the hitchhiker pod. It had either six or 12 parachutes and landed mostly using the chutes.

It turned out to be a bit overpowered in terms of requirements but that was necessary since I wasn't really sure what Laythe required to reach orbit.

BIG WARNING

I had re-packed the chutes in case I was unable to make orbit so that the ship could land again.

For some reason the chutes insisted on re-deploying and if not for the power of the F9 key would have resulted in mission failure with total loss of life.

Since I had re-packed the chutes prior to using Quicksave I was had to use the Action Group mod that lets you edit actions on the fly. I used that to assign chute cutting to an action group so that I could swiftly cut all chutes a split second after lift-off when they deployed.

(on a side note, I did try to remove the parachutes seeing as how I had KAS installed but the kerbal & parachute were catapulted a kilometer into the sky so I gave up on that idea)

Edited October 15, 2013 by Starwaster

[Mmmmyum]

Will you stop consider asparagus staging unrealistic, when SpaceX flies its first Falcon Heavy rocket?

Yes! Well somewhat. It uses semi-asparagus staging. It feeds fuel into the main tank. So more like powered drop tanks I guess . Anyway my usual interplanetary stage had just enough fuel to get there (80m/s left of Delta-V). And ashamed to admit it, I used HyperEdit to refuel it, as I didn't want to send up another one with nuclear engines rather than a skipper

[DaveofDefeat]

KSP is unrealistic so you all lose.

[Starwaster]

Mmmmyum, I edited my last message with a reply to your first post as you were composing your last, sorry.

Just some feedback on your original question

[Geschosskopf]

BIG WARNING

I had re-packed the chutes in case I was unable to make orbit so that the ship could land again.

For some reason the chutes insisted on re-deploying and if not for the power of the F9 key would have resulted in mission failure with total loss of life.

Since I had re-packed the chutes prior to using Quicksave I was had to use the Action Group mod that lets you edit actions on the fly. I used that to assign chute cutting to an action group so that I could swiftly cut all chutes a split second after lift-off when they deployed.

(on a side note, I did try to remove the parachutes seeing as how I had KAS installed but the kerbal & parachute were catapulted a kilometer into the sky so I gave up on that idea)

Yeah, if you plan to reuse parachutes, ALWAYS assign deploying them to an action group because after the 1st use, the regular staging system totally farkles them.

[Kasuha]

I believe in KSP there's no point to disregard a successful design because it wouldn't work in real world.

Real world rockets are result of many years of rocket design evolution in conditions of real world physics.

KSP rockets are results of years of rocket design evolution in conditions of KSP physics.

As long as there are clearly some differences between real world physics and KSP physics, there are also understandably differences in most successful designs. That's the law of natural selection.

[Mmmmyum]

Well I learnt a bit about how my design could be changed at least...

[Kasuha]

I don't think this requires design improvement. Well, it may, that image doesn't tell me what happened. Or it may not. But your ship is IMO fine for Laythe.

First, F5/F9 are your friends.

Second, Laythe's atmosphere is thin. When I tried to land at steep angle from high orbit, I needed almost completely powered landing because drogues wouldn't slow the ship down enough to prevent main chutes breaking it at 500 m. So I learned to descend from ~65 km orbit and use quarter an orbit to descend through atmosphere. Yes it makes it even harder to hit land. But you can get an eye for it. For my ship it needed just a bit of thrust right above the ground to bring the speed below 10 m/s to not break the landing gear. And your ship uses even more chutes so it might be ok.

Edit: FYI, this is what I landed there. Landing as described but it didn't have enough fuel to get back to orbit. Then sent a rescue with less engines, less chutes and more fuel and it was ok.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Kasuha

[Mmmmyum]

I just landed in water, got pissed off and decided to light the SRBs for the hell of it... It was overkill. It had more than enough delta-v to go to orbit and back twice, now that I look at how much is needed. And I dislike using quicksaves, it's either a revert to launch, or - like now - there's a reason to send another craft to rescue a kerbal, Bill in this case

[Kasuha]

Ah, okay, understood.

I usually don't hesitate to use quicksaves for things I have no chance to eyeball or guess in advance. Landing on ground on Laythe is one of them; I'd need to send 20 missions otherwise and that'd stop being fun. Aerobraking is another, it'd be 7/10 ships destroyed and 2/10 lost in space.

[Mmmmyum]

Well my entire mission was a failure from the word go.. Took 9 launches to get the oversized lander into HKO, another 2 to get a refueling vessel up... But she didn't have enough delta-v to get into an orbit around Laythe, not without using the lander. Even with HyperEdit, I was unable to get into a good intercept until I'd cheated in another 10k/s of Delta-V