OFMM Mission Discussions

[astrosammy]

Orulex is ok. But I prefer playing with the D3D9 client, so I will not use it. As Gary said, "If you want to, yes".
That would also mean no DG-IV for me. I prefer unmanned missions so that's no problem for me.

 

[Chub777]

Lunar missions still depend on the Mars photo reconnaissance mission. Since it's a 'dress rehersal' for what will happen on mars, we need the terrain to be very similar.

For example, if we pick a location in the Mars highlands, then you land on the Moon highlands etc. (you know, for practice )!

Yes. We could make OFMM-3 a mission to launch a satellite similar to the MRO. Then we could pick a landing site and use OFMM-4 as a dress rehearsal on the moon. The solar satellite would then be launched on OFMM-6 and the entire mission schedule be moved up.

 

[River Crab]

Yes. We could make OFMM-3 a mission to launch a satellite similar to the MRO. Then we could pick a landing site and use OFMM-4 as a dress rehearsal on the moon. The solar satellite would then be launched on OFMM-6 and the entire mission schedule be moved up.

My DSCS is very similar to MRO (it was designed with MRO in mind), if you don't mind me suggesting my own addon.
It's smaller, and it shouldn't require aerobraking to enter Mars orbit like MRO did, with the right LV. I'll get a scenario for this up as soon as possible.

 

[Pipcard]

[-deleted section-]

Yes. We could make OFMM-3 a mission to launch a satellite similar to the MRO.

Doesn't OFMM-1 have the same purpose?

 

[garyw]

Doesn't OFMM-1 have the same purpose?

OFMM-1 is a lunar orbiter to test out capaibilies for Mars operations (comms, GPS, etc).

OFMM-3 is a solar flare warning satellite.

Unless you guys want to change missions around at all?

 

[Kveldulf]

OFMM-1 is a lunar orbiter to test out capaibilies for Mars operations (comms, GPS, etc).

OFMM-3 is a solar flare warning satellite.

Unless you guys want to change missions around at all?

In this case, no. It would make sense that we're going to test the capabilities for Mars operations before anything else.

---------- Post added at 12:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 PM ----------

Here's a possible patch for OFMM-7:

I hate to sound like an ass... but why worry about patches now? We're still trying to figure out what missions to fly, and even what ships to use.

IF patches are going to be made, it should be once a final mission list is decided on, and pilots are assigned to the missions.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

I believe Scruce is working on a SC3 Mars Orbiter... perhaps he can allow us to use it for the recon mission?

 

[Pipcard]

OFMM-1 is a lunar orbiter to test out capaibilies for Mars operations (comms, GPS, etc).

That's what I meant by OFMM-1 already having a similar purpose to the MRO.

I hate to sound like an ass... but why worry about patches now? We're still trying to figure out what missions to fly, and even what ships to use.

IF patches are going to be made, it should be once a final mission list is decided on, and pilots are assigned to the missions.

I wanted to show what I am capable of in terms of patch making. It's a demo and something I made for fun. Sorry.

I just couldn't wait for the final mission list. [-deleted section-]

 

[Scruce]

I believe Scruce is working on a SC3 Mars Orbiter... perhaps he can allow us to use it for the recon mission?

I confirm that I am working on two Mars probes: (Mars-Scout, Mars-Storm)

Only when Vash accepts my 'waiting approval' addons, then I can pester for it. Until it's accepted on Orbit Hangar Mods, you will hear nothing from me over here in terms of development.

 

[garyw]

I just couldn't wait for the final mission list. When I saw River Crab's DSCS, I wanted to make a sample patch to showcase how it could be used in OFMM.

As you might realise by now, patience is a virture. I'm not rushing into missions. I am trying to give everyone a say in how the mission is flown but so far this thread hasn't had much in the way of mission discussion so much as patches and addon development.

This isn't what I intended but it is good to see that people are motivated.

 

[Woo482]

Small and relatively unimportant details like patches seem to be being discussed here more than the actual mission plan, I've only seen a few posts discussing the actual mission plan so far and it really seems like this is going to tread down the same path as the original OFMM if mission patches and addons are going to have higher priority than the missions themselves.

 

[garyw]

As many of you know I am something of a stickler for going for real world procedures and processes. I wrote the attached document sometime back - I never finished it but it will give you an idea of how I'm running my ISA Mars Missions. It might help give you some food for thought here.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

IS the Mars ship decided on? I've just perused the thread and I've seen the Cosmos, mentioned, along with the James Cook. Like the 'Cook, never flown the Cosmos, and I've just downloaded the Russian Mars Transfer Vehicle to give it a test drive.

There is something in the development thread for the Russian MTV about 'kitbashing' an existing lander to go with it. And the Cook has the 2 ports on the nose for DeltaGliders.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Cosmos has four or five, can't recall off the top of my head. It's a nice vessel, if a little large.

 

[garyw]

IS the Mars ship decided on? I've just perused the thread and I've seen the Cosmos, mentioned, along with the James Cook. Like the 'Cook, never flown the Cosmos, and I've just downloaded the Russian Mars Transfer Vehicle to give it a test drive.

There is something in the development thread for the Russian MTV about 'kitbashing' an existing lander to go with it. And the Cook has the 2 ports on the nose for DeltaGliders.

I don't think so. I proposed the Cosmos because it has four docking ports so plenty of options for Mars mission load out, has plenty of dV to get to Mars but not so much that it prop levels can be ignored like with deepstar and arrow. If the Cosmos is to be used to fuel up the landing DG's (and unless ISRU is the plan then thats the only option) then people will need to excercise some prop management which adds a nice element to things.

I've not looked at the James cook at all.

 

[Scruce]

Spaceplane vs. Launch Vehicle

Now, there are mainly two options in getting to Mars:

Spaceplane:

Advantages:

• Avoids discarding expensive engines and structure (vs. expendable).
  
• Avoids difficulty of retrieving the large first stage (vs. reusable multistage).
  
• Avoids increased development cost of two separate vehicles (vs. multistage).
  
• For a winged vehicle the center of lift moves during the atmospheric flight as well as the center of mass; and the vehicle spends longer in the atmosphere as well.

Disadvantages:

• The weight of a reusable vehicle is almost invariably higher than an expendable that was made with the same materials, for a given payload.
  
• As a rough rule of thumb, 15% of the landed weight of a vehicle needs to be aerobraking reentry shielding.
  
• The R&D costs of reusable vehicle are expected to be higher, because making a vehicle reusable implies making it robust enough to survive more than one use, which adds to the testing required. Increasing robustness is most easily done by adding weight; but this reduces performance and puts further pressure on the R&D to recoup this in some other way.
  
• The vehicle needs wings to take off. For reaching orbit, a 'wet wing' would often need to be used where the wing contains propellant. Around 9-12% of the vehicle takeoff weight is perhaps tied up in the wings, which in turn implies that the takeoff weight is higher and/or the payload smaller.

Launch Vehicle

Advantages:

• A wingless launch vehicle has lower aerodynamic forces affecting the vehicle, and attitude control can be active perhaps with some fins to aid stability.
  
• Boosters allow the remaining engines to be smaller, which reduces the burnout mass of later stages, and thus allows for larger payloads.
  
• Launch vehicles are very often supplied with boosters, which supply high thrust early on in the flight, and normally in parallel with other engines on the vehicle.

Disadvantages:

• The vehicles used in expendable rocket launch systems are designed to be used only once in their lifetime (i.e. they are "expended" during a single flight), and their components are not recovered for re-use after launch, adding to manufacturing cost.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Eh. If we need more propellant, I can kludge together a velcro ET for either vessel. Just give me the dimensions and the general color you want it, and I'll have it in a few days at most.

 

[Chub777]

That's what I meant by OFMM-1 already having a similar purpose to the MRO.

OFMM-1 doesn't select the Martian landing sites. If we change the missions around, OFMM-3 would select the landing sites and OFMM-7 would be the "TDRS" of Mars. Actually, what is the need of a solar flare warning satellite?

 

[garyw]

Actually, what is the need of a solar flare warning satellite?

To warn the crew of solar flares so that they can get to shelter.

1. The ship has no magentic field. Solar flares will be leathal.

2. Mars has no magnetic field. Again, flares will be leathal.

By having the earliest warning possible the crew get the maximum amount of time to get to shelter.

The fastest flare recorded was 1/3rd lightspeed. That gives the crew about 35 minutes from warning to having to be in the shelter before the flare hits.

 

[Pipcard]

OFMM-1 doesn't select the Martian landing sites. If we change the missions around, OFMM-3 would select the landing sites and OFMM-7 would be the "TDRS" of Mars. Actually, what is the need of a solar flare warning satellite?

You said

Yes. We could make OFMM-3 a mission to launch a satellite similar to the MRO. Then we could pick a landing site and use OFMM-4 as a dress rehearsal on the moon.

Oh, I get it now. I thought you meant OFMM-3 selected the lunar landing site for OFMM-4 (and subsequently, I thought that OFMM-1 already served that purpose).

So what you really meant was OFMM-3 (unmanned) goes to orbit Mars and we select a landing site, then OFMM-4 (manned) lands in a similar area on the Moon. I was sort of confused by your wording.

And I feel like people are bashing on me because of the patches. Okay, I'll wait until the first mission actually starts before making them.