100% Recovery?

[L3GO]

After watching Scott Manleys reusable space program for the 2nd time in a year i started thinking. If i was to press RECOVER VESSEL would it be counted as 100% reusable rocket or be classed as a new craft when it comes out of the VAB/SPH. If it was this would enable me to land rockets on the barge below and recover the vessel witch would save time.

What do you think is it still classed as 100% reusable or be classified as a new after being recovered and opened up in the VAB?

[NecroBones]

I guess it depends on the level of challenge you're seeking.

Scott Manley's reusable space program, if I recall correctly, did recover some things back at Kerbin. I think that was part of his rules... either re-use it while it's deployed, or bring it back to Kerbin.

Most reusable spacecraft (those few that have existed, such as the space shuttles) have historically required a significant amount refurbishing. I wouldn't sweat recovering and rebuilding in the VAB.

Transporting your booster back to KSC, refueling it, and docking a new payload on it, all outdoors with custom-built vehicles and transports? That would be pretty hardcore.

[L3GO]

Hardcore as it would be is this barge is 64 km from ksc so i dont have any Physics kicking in. I am making a new barge that is bigger stronger and faster that way i can cover ground in fast amount of time and possibly relaunch rockets from it.

[magnemoe]

Don't understand, if you recover the craft goes away and you get an faction of the money back. You might play that the parts being reused but they are not done so internally.

Doing real reuse is pretty hard and pretty much require KAS unless you only launch kerbals or fuel or other resources. You still need to launch the tanks and pods with kerbals.

I once made an SSTO with two 1x2 engines and payload between, this was bottom loaded from a truck who picked up the cargo at launchpad using landing legs to raise the truck up so it docked at bottom. Moved it to rocket and repeated the process to dock it to top docking port.

It required KAS for the struts you could place in EVA this was required on both the truck and the rocket. another truck moved fuel from tanks who was part of the structure on launchpad.

Ground crew did the connections for refueling and mounted the struts.

After launch I dropped the bottom 2.5 meter docking port and the spacing who was needed to get the payload too have the correct height.

Planes are a bit easier but require an wide enough portal crane, you might want to use two cranes, one small to pick up payload and move it, then a wide one who move payload over the plane and lower it down into the hold.

[Pecan]

Nope, I don't think I understand what you mean either. What does "100% reusable rocket" refer to?

Recovering a vehicle in KSP destroys it, with funds returned for intact parts depending on how close you are to KSC.

Every vehicle edited in or launched from the VAB/SPH is "new", KSP does not have a concept of old parts.

[GoSlash27]

You don't need KAS to launch multiple payloads, you just have to be inventive with your reloading procedure.

Something I knocked together a few days ago for another challenge (all stock).

The idea was to assemble a space station in orbit using a single vehicle and without recovering it.

Challenging, but it can be done.

Best,

-Slashy

Edited February 6, 2015 by GoSlash27

[Archgeek]

I'm with Necro on this, recovery is fine, being an abstraction for the task securing and returning landed/splashed down ships and parts.

Don't understand, if you recover the craft goes away and you get an faction of the money back. You might play that the parts being reused but they are not done so internally.

Nope, I don't think I understand what you mean either. What does "100% reusable rocket" refer to?

Recovering a vehicle in KSP destroys it, with funds returned for intact parts depending on how close you are to KSC.

Every vehicle edited in or launched from the VAB/SPH is "new", KSP does not have a concept of old parts.

Hey, don't be clumpwhumpers. The fund return isn't some prize for accuracy, it's an abstraction of returning the old parts to the space center for refurbishing and refueling. The percent off you get further away comes from the increased cost of transporting rocket parts greater distances. The game's internal book-keeping is immaterial to the goal of a reusable space program.

Besides, if how else but recovery and editing in the VAB can one implement additons and upgrades mission planners and engineers might want to apply to a craft for a given mission outside of stuff like swapping out entire dockable drive/leg modules for landers in orbit?

[Pecan]

I'm with Necro on this, recovery is fine, being an abstraction for the task securing and returning landed/splashed down ships and parts.

Hey, don't be clumpwhumpers. The fund return isn't some prize for accuracy, it's an abstraction of returning the old parts to the space center for refurbishing and refueling. The percent off you get further away comes from the increased cost of transporting rocket parts greater distances. The game's internal book-keeping is immaterial to the goal of a reusable space program.

Besides, if how else but recovery and editing in the VAB can one implement additons and upgrades mission planners and engineers might want to apply to a craft for a given mission outside of stuff like swapping out entire dockable drive/leg modules for landers in orbit?

I have absolutely no idea what this means either, but I'm pretty sure that it isn't anything to do with the subject.

Still trying to find out the difference between 'recoverable' and 'reusable'.

[Renegrade]

ON the topic of recovery, I was hoping that eventually the parts stock would mean something:

(Note stock counter that the blue arrow is pointing at)

I had envisioned that the recovery model would have been like this:

1. All stock is initially zero.

2. When a rocket is launched, parts are drawn from stock to build it. Any stock which is zero is automatically bought with funds and placed into the rocket.

3. Any rocket recovered would have it's parts returned to stock.

I'd also envisioned that there'd be assembly/launch expenses and refurbishment, but that never materialized. With this system, you'd only have to pay the difference between what's in stock and what isn't, and you might actually have to think about the parts you're effectively buying, since you couldn't build a mainsail-launcher out of stock parts if you blew all your space bucks on turbojets. (Right now, you can recover ANY vessel and turn it to ANY other vessel as long as the new vessel is the same cost or cheaper)

This system would mean that part testing parts could actually just be added to stock (say, 1-4), so you'd have an opportunity to fail testing if you blew 'em all up in accidents (assuming hardcore play).

I was mightily disappointed when none of that materialized and the stock indicator went bye-bye. :/

[Liowen]

I feel it depends on how you want to look at it; some will say that "reusable" mean you can ONLY use those items that have been launched before, and others say that as long as it is recovered it is refueled for the next craft. Slashy has an interesting idea though, but to me it would be very time consuming (different strokes for different folks ). Personally if you recover it for 100%, minus the original fuel cost, and relaunch the same rocket I do not see why you couldn't say that it a reusable rocket, however there will be others who say that it is not. Neither is right or wrong really as it is personal choice really, and at the end of the day it should only matter to you how you play your game.

[Caelib]

I see what you're getting at, but the recovery cost being based on the distance from KSC isn't likely to change ... if you land your craft on a barge, there's a cost associated with retrieving those parts based on the distance.

[katateochi]

In theory I really like the idea of refuelling aircraft/SSTO's on the tarmac and sending them on their way without actually "recovering" them. But in reality its a faffle, for several reasons; one, as magnemoe said, you pretty much have to have KAS (I'd also say InfernalRobotics too).

It works, but its kinda a mission in itself. And it has a fairly high part count, which brings me to problem two; ground crew lagging up KSC. When launching other large craft the last thing you want is another couple 100 part craft sitting around and adding to the lag.

What I really want are "hangers" where you can park craft and have them unloaded from the environment, but when you reload them they come back exactly as they went in, same fuel levels, damaged/missing parts etc. I'd keep the ground crew in a hanger and also any SSTO's that I regularly use. There is a mod that add's hangers but I've not really had a chance to play with it properly yet.

[KerBlam]

I think at this stage, it's really just a matter of having to imagine that if you're 'recovering vessel' then it goes back to KSC and is reused, even though that's actually not what's happening from a UI POV.

I think it's fair that there's a cost associated with recovering anything that isn't right at KSC, as this is true IRL. Recovering a stage from the ocean and refurbishing it for reuse would be expensive! Even the SpaceX reusable stages would have to be cleaned and refurbished before reuse, They're not going to just smash some more fuel in and hope it's good to go. It would need to be thoroughly inspected and tested for damage. The fact that's they're landing on barges in the ocean means they are inviting salt water corrosion, so everything would have to be cleaned thoroughly. These processes cost money. You might save some on not having to rebuild a part, but getting that part ready for reuse is not free.

[magnemoe]

You don't need KAS to launch multiple payloads, you just have to be inventive with your reloading procedure.

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g13/GoSlash27/Micro1_zps8d9pkify.jpg

Something I knocked together a few days ago for another challenge (all stock).

The idea was to assemble a space station in orbit using a single vehicle and without recovering it.

Challenging, but it can be done.

Best,

-Slashy

No you don't need KAS, I only needed it for eva place able struts for longer structures, My max length was around 2.5 times longer than you and around 10 ton max weight.

Because of the center bottom between two engine towers it was I could not take much wobbling.

With shorter modules it would not be an major issue but I wanted something who was useful and practical.

Refueling could be done with claw.

Your design was opposite of mine I used bottom connect on the truck, payload was held by launching clamps until docked.

What do you use the small jet probe for? First I thought it was to lift cargo up to top docking ports but then it would not need parachutes. Its also way to small to reach orbit. with any sort of payload.

- - - Updated - - -

I see what you're getting at, but the recovery cost being based on the distance from KSC isn't likely to change ... if you land your craft on a barge, there's a cost associated with retrieving those parts based on the distance.

This can be solved with refueling and an ballistic trajectory beck to spaceport. With an separate fuel ship you can even use an claw and do it in stock.

[Axelord FTW]

Isn't there also a mod that add construction times for parts before a launch but will handle and recognise recovered part as being readily (no construction time) available for immediate use?

[zekes]

I made a 100% reusable three stage lifter stock quite a long time ago...

[GoSlash27]

No you don't need KAS, I only needed it for eva place able struts for longer structures, My max length was around 2.5 times longer than you and around 10 ton max weight.

Because of the center bottom between two engine towers it was I could not take much wobbling.

With shorter modules it would not be an major issue but I wanted something who was useful and practical.

Refueling could be done with claw.

Your design was opposite of mine I used bottom connect on the truck, payload was held by launching clamps until docked.

What do you use the small jet probe for? First I thought it was to lift cargo up to top docking ports but then it would not need parachutes. Its also way to small to reach orbit. with any sort of payload.

Magnemoe,

Shockingly, that is the orbiter! Not only does it reach orbit, but it does it with those payloads.

Turbojets are seriously broken in KSP...

Best,

-Slashy

[L3GO]

Making cranes and other things like that would cause lag around KSC because of a high part count needed for it. I find that saving 10 seconds of fuel for a powered landing saves the need of adding more weight to the ship depending on how big it is.

So landing a rocket on a floating platform such as the image below and using recover vessel is classed as being reusable. I could make some crafts to take them to ksc if need be.

[rcp27]

Personally I would go with the principle that any vessel that is recovered from the KSC itself (preferably the runway or launchpad) counts. In the career mode that gets you 100% recovery value, so that seems a good measure.

[Rune]

Don't understand, if you recover the craft goes away and you get an faction of the money back. You might play that the parts being reused but they are not done so internally.

Doing real reuse is pretty hard and pretty much require KAS unless you only launch kerbals or fuel or other resources. You still need to launch the tanks and pods with kerbals.

I once made an SSTO with two 1x2 engines and payload between, this was bottom loaded from a truck who picked up the cargo at launchpad using landing legs to raise the truck up so it docked at bottom. Moved it to rocket and repeated the process to dock it to top docking port.

It required KAS for the struts you could place in EVA this was required on both the truck and the rocket. another truck moved fuel from tanks who was part of the structure on launchpad.

Ground crew did the connections for refueling and mounted the struts.

After launch I dropped the bottom 2.5 meter docking port and the spacing who was needed to get the payload too have the correct height.

Planes are a bit easier but require an wide enough portal crane, you might want to use two cranes, one small to pick up payload and move it, then a wide one who move payload over the plane and lower it down into the hold.

You don't need KAS, or cranes, or any contraptions really. You just have to design smartly:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Did this way back when cargo bays were something you built yourself, for the reusable program challenge.

Rune. Just like Slashy, methinks.

Edited February 7, 2015 by Rune

[L3GO]

Personally I would go with the principle that any vessel that is recovered from the KSC itself (preferably the runway or launchpad) counts. In the career mode that gets you 100% recovery value, so that seems a good measure.

Im in sandbox getting the kinks out of the craft before hand. Im not sure if i want to do career mode because i would need to go through most of it to get the parts i want. I may do a series in career mode because of the money aspect but would it be better skipping the early stages on a few things then going all out?

[WWEdeadman]

ON the topic of recovery, I was hoping that eventually the parts stock would mean something:

http://alpha.renegrade.net/images/022-Stock.jpg

(Note stock counter that the blue arrow is pointing at)

I had envisioned that the recovery model would have been like this:

1. All stock is initially zero.

2. When a rocket is launched, parts are drawn from stock to build it. Any stock which is zero is automatically bought with funds and placed into the rocket.

3. Any rocket recovered would have it's parts returned to stock.

I'd also envisioned that there'd be assembly/launch expenses and refurbishment, but that never materialized. With this system, you'd only have to pay the difference between what's in stock and what isn't, and you might actually have to think about the parts you're effectively buying, since you couldn't build a mainsail-launcher out of stock parts if you blew all your space bucks on turbojets. (Right now, you can recover ANY vessel and turn it to ANY other vessel as long as the new vessel is the same cost or cheaper)

This system would mean that part testing parts could actually just be added to stock (say, 1-4), so you'd have an opportunity to fail testing if you blew 'em all up in accidents (assuming hardcore play).

I was mightily disappointed when none of that materialized and the stock indicator went bye-bye. :/

This. And if squad won't implement that, there needs to be a mod for that.

[rcp27]

I'm not suggesting it has to be done in career mode, just that this measure is a useful one for establishing a "return to base" criterion. Of course you can always start a career mode with costs turned way down, rewards way up and a huge pile of starting cash so that you can get access to things like kerbal experience and working through the tech tree without having to worry too much about money. That said, if you are going for 100% reusable, it will probably work out quite cheap because your only expense will be fuel.

- - - Updated - - -

ON the topic of recovery, I was hoping that eventually the parts stock would mean something:

I had envisioned that the recovery model would have been like this:

1. All stock is initially zero.

2. When a rocket is launched, parts are drawn from stock to build it. Any stock which is zero is automatically bought with funds and placed into the rocket.

3. Any rocket recovered would have it's parts returned to stock.

I'd also envisioned that there'd be assembly/launch expenses and refurbishment, but that never materialized. With this system, you'd only have to pay the difference between what's in stock and what isn't, and you might actually have to think about the parts you're effectively buying, since you couldn't build a mainsail-launcher out of stock parts if you blew all your space bucks on turbojets. (Right now, you can recover ANY vessel and turn it to ANY other vessel as long as the new vessel is the same cost or cheaper)

This system would mean that part testing parts could actually just be added to stock (say, 1-4), so you'd have an opportunity to fail testing if you blew 'em all up in accidents (assuming hardcore play).

I was mightily disappointed when none of that materialized and the stock indicator went bye-bye. :/

While the mechanic is different in stock, the effect is basically the same. Taking the "parts in stock" model, I build a space plane once, and pay full price. I fly it, return with it and recover the parts to stock. I launch the space plane a second time, and all the parts are drawn from stock. I therefore only pay for the fuel. In stock, I launch my space plane once, paying full price. I return to the KSC and recover the vessel and am refunded the purchase price for the parts, but not the fuel I burned. If I launch the same space plane a second time, I pay full price, but apart from the fuel cost, all of that money was the same as the money I got back for recovering the vessel. The effect on my bank balance is therefore identical.

[Majorjim!]

100% re-usability doesn't need any kind of 'fancy' reloading method.

Just make a fuel tank with wheels and a claw then fill her up and fly again and again. easy as pie.

[Motokid600]

If only squad could get rid of the loading distance limit on a specified craft and fix the float point errors. I'm certain if that were the case it'd be common practice to fly your boosters back to the launch pad. I've been doing it with BGDArmory's 500km load distance and it's really... Really cool. I should make a video. And get LazTek...

Basically just copying the Falcon 9 trajectory, stage deplete, seperates then I get MechJeb to take the second stage to orbit while I boost the first stage back and land right back at the pad. By this point the second stage is just about done. I recover the booster then switch to the next stage in orbit through the tracking station.

Mechjeb landing bugs out however if I don't babysit it or... After a certain distance perhaps. Otherwise I'd just set the landing guidance and control the second stage while the first lands on its own.

Mechjeb is incapable of boosting back on its own. So I wonder... If I placed a barge down range would I be able to recover the craft if it landed on said barge? Or would it be buggy and not let me? Because I'm thinking if MJ doesn't have to perform a large boostback then it may work by itself. I know it can. I've been doing Grasshopper tests and watching my rocket land all by itself while I watch from another craft. It's freakin awesome.

Edited February 7, 2015 by Motokid600