Building a surface outpost.

[Dizzle]

So I have a contract to build an outpost on the moon. I've never successfully built one before, but after spending a lot of time in the VAB, I'm really not sure how to even go about it. I can't figure out how to connect the pieces together, or get the docking ports to line up once they're on the ground. Even in the editor, it's hard to know if they'll be lined up when they're resting on a surface that might be slightly uneven.

Any help is appreciated.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Dizzle

[andruszkow]

Check out this post, it has a lot of great tips and standards.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/48876-The-art-of-modular-base-building

Other than that, depending on tech, you could just send it in one single go, just build upwards

[OopsThatNotWork]

Ive never tried it in career mode but in sandbox i use wheels and/or landing gears to keep it up off the ground and create a tow vehicle and drag it into place. Using docking ports for connection points of course.

[Kesa]

If it's just for the contract, you should be able to single launch your outpost, or at least assemble it in LKO, and land it in one piece (great docking skill or docking port alignement indicator are usefull to align modules perfectly).

If it's for the fun of having modular base, I can't make better than the two post above.

G'dluck!

[Skorpychan]

Making things line up on the ground is hard. Very hard.

I tried to get around that with a Kethane mining/launching system by simply mounting a docking port on top, and landing the launcher on that, with a docking port on the underside.

It took half an hour of trying to get them to connect, I destroyed half the solar panels on both, and then had to go back to the VAB to redesign the launcher.

Landing within a few km is one thing. Landing literally on top of something is another.

[Dizzle]

Thanks for the tips and the guide, some useful info here.

[tsotha]

For these contracts you can just replace the word "outpost" with "ship" in your mind. Here's an example of an early Munar outpost that required space for five Kerbals, docking port, antenna, and power:

The contract says it needs room for five Kerbals, but they don't actually have to be there. So I included a probe head and only enough fuel to get it to the Mun. No need for fancy exoplanetary construction. It's a small ship. Of course they get bigger later on, as they require more kerbals, research labs, wheels, etc. But even then they don't get particularly large.

Edited January 23, 2015 by tsotha

[pikedastr]

For these contracts you can just replace the word "outpost" with "ship" in your mind. Here's an example of an early Munar outpost that required space for five Kerbals, docking port, antenna, and power:

http://i.imgur.com/U7GZcs5.png

The contract says it needs room for five Kerbals, but they don't actually have to be there. So I included a probe head and only enough fuel to get it to the Mun. No need for fancy exoplanetary construction. It's a small ship. Of course they get bigger later on, as they require more kerbals, research labs, wheels, etc. But even then they don't get particularly large.

In my contract it says that i need to send a "ship" with a research lab, does it require a mobile processing lab? because i don't see one in your ship.

Thank you anyway your answer was exactaly what i was looking for

[Adrianrff]

For these contracts you can just replace the word "outpost" with "ship" in your mind. Here's an example of an early Munar outpost that required space for five Kerbals, docking port, antenna, and power:

http://i.imgur.com/U7GZcs5.png

The contract says it needs room for five Kerbals, but they don't actually have to be there. So I included a probe head and only enough fuel to get it to the Mun. No need for fancy exoplanetary construction. It's a small ship. Of course they get bigger later on, as they require more kerbals, research labs, wheels, etc. But even then they don't get particularly large.

Tsotha, first timer here.

How did you manage to land that ship? I notice it doesn't have an engine at the bottom(or is it just not visible in the picture?). Did you have it docked below another ship, landed, undocked and flew back up? I just completed this mission too, this is what I built to do it

I know it's probably a terrible design, but it's what I could come up with. I was having trouble packing enough fuel to shed velocity near the Mun and used those tanks at the side, should have put decouplers on them and cross fuel to lose weight, but wth, I landed. The modulear segments are because I was affraid it would tip over, being so tall. They worked great.

[axis]

I just finished building this and I didn't complete the mission, it says "it must have a docking port, antenna and generate power" i put on solar thinking that would be fine but its not. not sure, anyway, as far as making the docking ports line up, i found it easiest to check with them setup in the space plane hangar.

to attach seperators to use to attach wheels to, you turn off snap to grid and theres a sweet spot where they will attach parallel yet still low enough that you can put wheels on.

[Kirogn 1]

when the contract says it needs to support 5 kerbals. do i have to send them up with it to complete the contract or could i treat the outpost as a probe that just has room for 5 kerbals

[Waxing_Kibbous]

Check out this guy's videos, good stuff:

 

[Sir_Robert]

On 22-5-2015 at 10:19 PM, pikedastr said:

In my contract it says that i need to send a "ship" with a research lab, does it require a mobile processing lab? because i don't see one in your ship.

Thank you anyway your answer was exactaly what i was looking for

If it says to get a research lab, than yes. You need a research lab. His picture is an example of his base, not an example for yours.

Basically what he's saying is: Keep it simple

[Jakalth]

Best way to go with a surface base like that is to simply build a lander.  And by best, I mean simplest.  Keep the lander as low to the ground as possible, so try not to build it tall.  This is entirely for ease of landing.  Short landers are more stable when landed at an angle then tall ones.

 

Also, when it says research lab, it usually means you can just use the science Jr.  Simple way to check this is to do the following:

1: make a quick craft with a science jr, and a command pod.

2: send it to the launch pad

3: check the mission list to see if the research lab part of the requirements is checked

4: recover the craft for 100% returns.

5: build your surface base/lander

[Snark]

On 5/22/2015 at 1:19 PM, pikedastr said:

In my contract it says that i need to send a "ship" with a research lab, does it require a mobile processing lab?

Yes, that's exactly right.

3 hours ago, Jakalth said:

Also, when it says research lab, it usually means you can just use the science Jr.

This is incorrect.  When it says "research lab", what it means is the Mobile Processing Lab (the big 3.5-ton, two-kerbal thing).

Contracts that want a Science Jr. refer to it as a "materials bay".

Yes, the use of "chatty" descriptions for parts in contracts, instead of their actual names, is confusing.  I really wish they'd fix that.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Snark

[Jakalth]

Ah, thank you for the correction Snark.

[Snark]

On 5/30/2015 at 10:29 PM, Adrianrff said:

I know it's probably a terrible design, but it's what I could come up with. I was having trouble packing enough fuel to shed velocity near the Mun and used those tanks at the side, should have put decouplers on them and cross fuel to lose weight, but wth, I landed. The modulear segments are because I was affraid it would tip over, being so tall. They worked great.

Welcome to the forums, and congratulations!

That's great for a first attempt, it takes a while to find one's feet in KSP.  A couple of practical suggestions for ship designs such as you've pictured:

• You can make it not quite so tall if you get rid of the Poodle underneath, and put a Terrier under each one of the four "outriggers".  It's not quite as good (slightly less thrust, slightly more mass, slightly worse fuel efficiency), but it's very close.
• You can make the stance wider by mounting your landing legs on those four outriggers, instead of on the central tank.  Makes it a lot wider and more stable.
• Doing the above two things, you can then drop all those girders you were using.  That will save you a lot of weight-- those girders are heavy!

6 hours ago, Kirogn 1 said:

when the contract says it needs to support 5 kerbals. do i have to send them up with it to complete the contract or could i treat the outpost as a probe that just has room for 5 kerbals

The second one.  If it just says "support 5 kerbals," it just means "have space for 5 kerbals."

However, be careful-- you need to read the fine print.  Since 1.0.5, those outpost & station contracts will occasionally say something like "Have 3 pilots in the station" or whatever.  If there's a requirement like that, then you have to have those as crew on the ship.

But if it doesn't say that, then no, you don't have to have any crew on board.

[Sir_Robert]

13 minutes ago, Snark said:

Yes, that's exactly right.

This is incorrect.  When it says "research lab", what it means is the Mobile Processing Lab (the big 3.5-ton, two-kerbal thing).

Contracts that want a Science Jr. refer to it as a "materials bay".

Yes, the use of "chatty" descriptions for parts in contracts, instead of their actual names, is confusing.  I really wish they'd fix that.

My contract descriptions include a list of 'acceptable parts' whenever there is a demand for specific parts. That uses the real name. Though I have several mods that mess with contracts, so it's possible that those are responsible? I haven't actually seen the incoherent mess that is stock contract descriptions in a long time

[Snark]

5 hours ago, Sir_Robert said:

My contract descriptions include a list of 'acceptable parts' whenever there is a demand for specific parts. That uses the real name. Though I have several mods that mess with contracts, so it's possible that those are responsible? I haven't actually seen the incoherent mess that is stock contract descriptions in a long time

Yes, it's your mods that are doing that.

[RexKramer]

As stated, it is very tricky getting docking ports to line up horizontally once you are on the surface.  No matter how carefully you place your rover wheels or landing legs, differences in gravity or changes in the vehicle's weight cause the ports to not quite line up.  Very frustrating.

Here's one workaround I have had great success with:  Use the fixed (non-retractable) aircraft landing gear.  They don't flex or sag with minor changes in weight or gravity.  The only trick is ALL your modules have to have the landing gear attached in the same location.

The fixed aircraft landing gear do not provide propulsion or steering (unless you use the steerable nose gear, haven't tried that yet), so you will need to provide those functions.  A reaction wheel (SAS) is adequate to provide steering on Mun and Minmus, and a small rocket engine (or two) works for propulsion.  Even RCS can be used for short distances.

Joining modules together on the surface isn't really necessary for the first contract, just land the whole thing in one piece.  The ability to add modules really comes in handy if you want to accept the "Expand Surface Outpost" contracts.  

Using the fixed landing gear, I can test on the KSC runway.  If it works on the runway, it will work on any flat surface, because the geometry won't change.  

Edited February 14, 2016 by RexKramer

[Snark]

My own personal favorite way of joining together things on the surface is to use Kerbal Attachment System.

It's a complex mod, but my favorite piece of it is one simple thing:  an innocent-looking little "connector port" part that you can attach radially pretty much anywhere.  To join together two craft A and B on the surface,

1. make sure both A and B are equipped with a connector port
2. land them within a couple of dozen meters of each other
3. send out a kerbal on EVA, right click on A's port, choose "Link"
4. walk over to B, right click its port, choose "Link"

...and presto, the two ports are connected by a nicely-drawn "pipe", and the two craft are now considered one, same as if they were docked.  Unlinking them is equally simple, just send out a kerbal, right click a port, choose "Unlink".

Simple, elegant, easy to use, looks nice, gives EVA kerbals something to do.  What's not to love? 

I really like that solution... wish the stock game would add something like it.