The mobile processing lab is terrible.

[-Velocity-]

Really, it's a matter of timing. If you nail it perfectly for an Eve-Moho transfer, it tends to take around 4000 to 4400dV or so to complete the Eve departure and circularization around Moho. A fully capable Tylo lander needs in the neighborhood of 6400dV, so it's well within reason as long as it can reach Gilly, land, return to low Eve orbit, and get into position for its slingshot within 2000dv.

I'm pretty sure that 6400 m/s delta-V is over-designed for a Tylo lander. I once made and used a 6000 m/s delta-V fully resuable Tylo lander and it did a Tylo landing and return to orbit, and still had 1000 m/s delta-V left when it was done. Since then, my design goal DV for a Tylo lander has been 5600+ m/s delta-V. You always want to have some spare delta-V...

[Son of Hicks]

It's weird reading posts defending the "no documentation, it takes too much time" stance, as the game is already documented by Squad. Every progam of even moderate size needs comments to tell other programmers on the development team what it does; indeed, every game feature is documented before it is programmed to make sure the programmers are on the same page. Now that documentation is probably in Spanish, but that's OK; even a hilariously garbled online translation is better than, well, nothing.

[Sirrobert]

It's weird reading posts defending the "no documentation, it takes too much time" stance, as the game is already documented by Squad. Every progam of even moderate size needs comments to tell other programmers on the development team what it does; indeed, every game feature is documented before it is programmed to make sure the programmers are on the same page. Now that documentation is probably in Spanish, but that's OK; even a hilariously garbled online translation is better than, well, nothing.

There is a VERY BIG difference between 'documentation' quickly explaining what a part does, and a full on guide.

And yes, a full guide WILL take time

A prime example is going on right now. We are getting now tuturials in the next update. Alot of the old tuturials are made useless by the recent changes.

If they have to update the tuturials with each new thing they added to the game, squad would have to spend more time making tuturials (and thowing them away again later), than updating the game itself

And don't even try suggesting a written manual. This is a game. Games are explained in tuturials, not in a book

Ultimate Guide to KSP in the works.

Damn that looks good. Are you working on that or did you find it somewhere?

Small note: Now that we have Kerbin time, you could change the Launch window callander to Kerbin years. Since those are the default

Edited April 19, 2014 by Sirrobert

[razark]

And don't even try suggesting a written manual. This is a game. Games are explained in tuturials, not in a book

someone posts a book

Damn that looks good.

Seriously?

[Seret]

While the game is in development the most sensible place to document it is the wiki. Plenty of good info on there.

I would advise people to think twice about producing parallel guides, it'll just dilute community effort. If you're producing good stuff, put it on the wiki.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Seret

[Sirrobert]

someone posts a book

Seriously?

I already know the game

[Vanamonde]

the game is already documented by Squad. Every progam of even moderate size needs comments to tell other programmers on the development team what it does

That is not even remotely close to what we're talking about. Game documention goes something like, "Jet engines will not work in atmospheres without oxygen." Code documentation goes something like, "// A value tag is used to describe the property value < / value > " *

*It's been a very long time since I wrote any code. Sorry if this is a bad example.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Vanamonde

[Superfluous J]

While the game is in development the most sensible place to document it is the wiki. Plenty of good info on there.

I would advise people to think twice about producing parallel guides, it'll just dilute community effort. If you're producing good stuff, put it on the wiki.

Very good point. I'm a bit surprised that (if?) all this stuff isn't in the wiki already.

[Rakaydos]

I didnt see a delta V map in the wiki... could someone show me where it's at?

[Sirrobert]

I didnt see a delta V map in the wiki... could someone show me where it's at?

If only there was an easy to use search engine to help us with these things

[Son of Hicks]

Before I made the OP, I made sure to check the the part in the KSP VAB as well as the wiki to see if the process was explained. It was not. Heck, I still lost 90% of the science for that Duna mission because I didn't know to transfer science by kerbal before cleaning the science part, thinking (erroneously) that "processing" the science in the modular lab did that already. This is like slamming my lander into the Mun over and over again before my first successful touchdown; like getting my first interplanetary transit encounter; like my first interplanetary aerobreaking maneuver. Totally FUBAR. It's a new learning curve, which is ultimately why I like campaign! It gives me the opportunity to do amazing things with unique restrictions that I don't get in sandbox.

I'm still going to use the mobile lab, low part count is as important a quality as low mass, even with the "disastrous*" learning curve.

*the mission was unsuccessful due to the lack of science, but the crew made it safely back to Kerbin, so "disastrous" not "catastrophic".

[Superfluous J]

*the mission was unsuccessful due to the lack of science, but the crew made it safely back to Kerbin, so "disastrous" not "catastrophic".

Actually that's how I define "amazing success" but we all have our own goals

[BMBender]

I would not say it is useless in of itself, but I will say I never use the overweight; power hungry; manned required thing. If it had a +science over time, automated, ate less power or something I might use it. But as it is, other than ascetics I never send missions with it. I do a lot of interplanetary and it has very little utility compared to sci spamming in terms of both weight and power use. Not to mention the whole manned thing.

[madmat]

If only there was an easy to use search engine to help us with these things

This is a beautiful thing!

[Seret]

I didnt see a delta V map in the wiki... could someone show me where it's at?

There's one on the KSP cheat sheet page, which is so full of awesome it should probably be in your bookmarks.

[Seret]

Before I made the OP, I made sure to check the the part in the KSP VAB as well as the wiki to see if the process was explained. It was not.

See now the constructive thing to do instead of complaining would have been to add the missing info to the wiki page...

[archont]

With something like 14 biomes on mun and 9 or so on minmus, the usefulness of the lab is obvious - even in the stock game. Add the various locations in orbit and there could still be advantage on interplanetary trips. Install custom boomed and it becomes even more useful. The thing is fine if you ask me.

No, it's not fine. The science lab tries to solve a problem that we don't yet have and does it in a way that has severe drawbacks.

1) The science module is manned. Chances are you'll be bringing those kerbals back to kerbal eventually. If so, you might as well take the raw experiments.

2) Science tools are cheap and light, the research module is bulky and expensive. A set of every single science experiment lumped together into one module (including interstellar mod sciency stuff) is 0.635t. You'll break even at 6 sets of experiments weight-wise.

3) The transmit gain is pitiful for the effort involved. 15-30% science is peanuts, the 30-50% hit from not bringing the experiment is significant.

Mun and Minmus would be good candidates for science lab stations, only that getting back to Kerbal from munar orbit takes very little delta-V in the first place. The only other place left in the system that is both far enough and has enough ‼SCIENCE‼ situations would be Jool.

That said, we're still missing 3 crucial gameplay parts that will make the lab more useful:

1) Time constraints

2) Budget constraints

3) Life support

[HeadHunter67]

See now the constructive thing to do instead of complaining would have been to add the missing info to the wiki page...

See, now the intelligent conclusion we can arrive at is, if he's visiting the Wiki to find out needed information, he doesn't have it to add.

He's trying to GET information - and you're suggesting he updates it? Seems like there's a failure to understand how reference material is supposed to work.

[Superfluous J]

See, now the intelligent conclusion we can arrive at is, if he's visiting the Wiki to find out needed information, he doesn't have it to add.

He's trying to GET information - and you're suggesting he updates it? Seems like there's a failure to understand how reference material is supposed to work.

The problem is, when the title of the thread is "The mobile processing lab is terrible" instead of "I cannot find information on how to use the mobile processing lab on the wiki," we are unable to come to that intelligent conclusion.

[Dunbaratu]

The lab's main problem is that it needs to be manned. Since most manned missions are (at least planned) to safely return to Kerbin, transmitting is less than optimal.

Yes. Exactly. This is the problem. Transmitting is less than optimal unless you don't plan to come back home, like it's a remote probe. But if it's a remote probe that's not manned, then the lab can't be used. So it's only useful when sending kerbals on a suicide mission. Otherwise the extra science points you get from a full return and just carrying more than one goo container and more than one materials bay to handle the different biomes is more efficient.

[SkyRender]

Yes. Exactly. This is the problem. Transmitting is less than optimal unless you don't plan to come back home, like it's a remote probe. But if it's a remote probe that's not manned, then the lab can't be used. So it's only useful when sending kerbals on a suicide mission. Otherwise the extra science points you get from a full return and just carrying more than one goo container and more than one materials bay to handle the different biomes is more efficient.

A mission does have to be pretty complex to justify bringing the lab module, it's true. As noted, the best use thus far are for sweeps of the Mun and Minmus, which easily have enough biomes to justify the added weight of additional crew and the lab.

[architeuthis]

No, it's not fine. The science lab tries to solve a problem that we don't yet have and does it in a way that has severe drawbacks.

1) The science module is manned. Chances are you'll be bringing those kerbals back to kerbal eventually. If so, you might as well take the raw experiments.

2) Science tools are cheap and light, the research module is bulky and expensive. A set of every single science experiment lumped together into one module (including interstellar mod sciency stuff) is 0.635t. You'll break even at 6 sets of experiments weight-wise.

3) The transmit gain is pitiful for the effort involved. 15-30% science is peanuts, the 30-50% hit from not bringing the experiment is significant.

Mun and Minmus would be good candidates for science lab stations, only that getting back to Kerbal from munar orbit takes very little delta-V in the first place. The only other place left in the system that is both far enough and has enough ‼SCIENCE‼ situations would be Jool.

The mun and Minmus both have over 6 biomes. Also, it is not just six sets of experiments your're bringing along but also all of the extra delta-v you need to land and return that stuff from a planetary surface (e.g. six separate landers, or a single lander with 6 sets of experiments). Also when Jool's moons get biomes, you might be quite happy to set up a small science station and transmit rather than having to spend a few years Hohmann transferring all that science back to Kerbin, though this would mean you would have to revisit any given biome several times to maximize your science return (but what is wrong with that?).

As it is now I found it useful in the case of Minmus or the Mun, you can reuse a super minimalist lander to hit all the biomes, clean out the experiments at the lab after each surface sortie, EVA a kerbal to pack all of the science into a capsule, and then return the capsule back to Kerbin for a huge science payoff!

[HeadHunter67]

The problem is, when the title of the thread is "The mobile processing lab is terrible" instead of "I cannot find information on how to use the mobile processing lab on the wiki," we are unable to come to that intelligent conclusion.

I do not deny that the title of the thread could have been better chosen, but a "constructive" suggestion must be sensible. It would be more sensible to expect the knowledge to be updated by someone who already knows it, leading us to one of two scenarios:

1) Seret didn't know the information either, and thus has no grounds to criticize the OP, or

2) Seret did know the information, but couldn't be bothered to update the wiki either.

Both possibilities seem kind of hypocritical. Regardless, there can be no denying that it's hard to come by some information that should be basic material like this.

[Superfluous J]

I do not deny that the title of the thread could have been better chosen, but a "constructive" suggestion must be sensible. It would be more sensible to expect the knowledge to be updated by someone who already knows it, leading us to one of two scenarios:

1) Seret didn't know the information either, and thus has no grounds to criticize the OP, or

2) Seret did know the information, but couldn't be bothered to update the wiki either.

Both possibilities seem kind of hypocritical. Regardless, there can be no denying that it's hard to come by some information that should be basic material like this.

I agree. Honestly I don't know how I came across the information I did about the science lab. I assume it was from watching lots of videos and reading lots of forum posts. I did not go to the Wiki at any point to check and I don't think to, usually, check there for things I don't understand so much as to check things I know are there (how low you can safely orbit a moon, or how fast said moon rotates. Things like that).

I am as much to blame for not updating the wiki as anybody else, but in my (and everybody else's) defense, when I learn something new my first thought is not "I should update the wiki with this" but "how can I use this information to knock a cup off of Jeb's head with an asteroid?" and by the time I've done that, I'm not thinking about that nugget of information but instead the next crazy way to use an asteroid to almost - but not quite - kill Jeb.

[HeadHunter67]

If it weren't for videos by you and some others, there's an awful lot more that I wouldn't know about this game!