Looks like all the plans so far are going in thr same general direction, so there's that.

Longer term - what sort of big goals do we want to go for? Any real life proposals that were passed on that we want to go for? Dyna-soar, Comet HLLV, Manned Venus Flyby...?
 
Looks like all the plans so far are going in thr same general direction, so there's that.

Longer term - what sort of big goals do we want to go for? Any real life proposals that were passed on that we want to go for? Dyna-soar, Comet HLLV, Manned Venus Flyby...?

I tend to focus on EO and Cis-Lunar. In that context: Kerolox Boosters, Hydrolox Second Stages, Propellant Depots and Space Tugs, Reusable Launch Vehicles. Comparisons to IRL programs aren't too useful because of butterflies tho.

I'm not terribly partial to winged vehicles, but an argument could be made for something like Dyna-Soar as a crew delivery system. I prefer capsules through for their simplicity and low cost.

A hard push on commercial space initiatives to create a self sustaining space sector
 
A hard push on commercial space initiatives to create a self sustaining space sector

I'm all for this. Why I like Hydrolox engines - easier to fuel from asteroids. But need a reason for major space industry first...

R&D maybe? Comm. Sats if we can have data needs out run the development of fiber optics, solar power is often suggested but the overhead from being in space usually doesn't offset the advantages in efficiency. There's the usual panoply of suggested goods - foamed metals, exotic alloys, hyper-pure crystal growth (Silicon, protein, or optical glass) as well as the real life uses we already have - weather, earth observation, navigation...
 
I'm all for this. Why I like Hydrolox engines - easier to fuel from asteroids. But need a reason for major space industry first...

R&D maybe? Comm. Sats if we can have data needs out run the development of fiber optics, solar power is often suggested but the overhead from being in space usually doesn't offset the advantages in efficiency. There's the usual panoply of suggested goods - foamed metals, exotic alloys, hyper-pure crystal growth (Silicon, protein, or optical glass) as well as the real life uses we already have - weather, earth observation, navigation...

Yeah, that's a another reason to go for hydrolox second stages - easier ISRU. Hydrolysis is simpler than Hydrolysis + Sebatier reaction.

SPS is a bit of a meme, nuclear is superior is almost every way, but it really depends on how strong the nuclear taboos is in this TL. Ironically, we also want to develop nuclear for propulsion and power for our spacecraft.

A lot of all that hinges on having cheap, rapid space launch to jump on these new materials as they get invented. That's the step that failed IRL.
 
A lot of all that hinges on having cheap, rapid space launch to jump on these new materials as they get invented. That's the step that failed IRL.

In which case you want a lot of small booster or a few REALLY big ones. Which one depends on how you want to do other things and your feelings about mission-critical orbital rendezvous.
 
I'm a big fan of many small ones and EOR because reusability and high launch cadence is how you drive down costs and get economies of scale.
This is fine to an extent, however both early and for latter use we should build a Super-heavy-lift vehicle(SHLV). For one, LOR is just less risky than EOR one launch and that's it. Obviously rendezvous in lunar orbit is risky but that's unavoidable, which is why we should make lower the risk to an already difficult mission by avoiding EOR.

Plus the SHLV we need to develop for such a mission can be used to launch space stations and later large space station modules. Smaller rockets would have trouble doing this because even if we don't use the full lift capticy on each station/module it'd allow us to launch stations with volume. Something we've only ever done with Skylab IRL.
 
The yearly budget negotiations were little more than three months away. This would, of course, be the IEC's first go at them. You were fairly confident you could swing a better budget out of the negotiations,

I'd just like to point out that by leveraging our newly-acquired ☢️special device☢️ we could be extremely confident in swinging a better budget.

All jokes aside, I'm more inclined to support a plan that temporarily shelves the ACO in favor of replenishing our Political Support for a) the upcoming budget, and b) a dedicated push to finish the ACO when we're a little less down to the wire. CyberEnby's plan calls to me from the depths of my rocket-loving soul, but I'm hoping we end up with something closer to Dessard's when it comes to resource conservation, unless someone has a really compelling argument to make on why we shouldn't.
 
This is fine to an extent, however both early and for latter use we should build a Super-heavy-lift vehicle(SHLV). For one, LOR is just less risky than EOR one launch and that's it. Obviously rendezvous in lunar orbit is risky but that's unavoidable, which is why we should make lower the risk to an already difficult mission by avoiding EOR.

Plus the SHLV we need to develop for such a mission can be used to launch space stations and later large space station modules. Smaller rockets would have trouble doing this because even if we don't use the full lift capticy on each station/module it'd allow us to launch stations with volume. Something we've only ever done with Skylab IRL.

We don't have to rush moon missions the same way they were IRL - we can take a bit more time and do EoR safely. It's such an enabler that I think delaying it is actually sabotaging ourselves by denying us the chance to practice docking randevous ops.

Especially early on, having lots of small missions to test one thing each is going to be much more useful than a few big launches that we have to over-engineer the hell out of.
SHLV can wait until we've tested out a bunch of stuff with a lighter, higher cadence system.

Possibly a reusable LV and a semi-reusable SHLV (engine pod recovery) might be a good pairing
 
Engineering (2/3 Dice, 10R)
[ ] Conduct Design Studies (Platform) (Heavy Sounding Rocket) (5R per die, 0/80, unlocks Heavy Sounding Rocket (and a naming vote because that's unwieldy))
[ ] Advanced Concepts Office (5R and -5 PS per die, 51/150, will occasionally provide a new Program to pursue based on brainstorming and priorities)
I don't think saving just 5R is worth leaving a die de-activated for a turn.
 
Is a reusable LV even feasible in the near term as a way of driving costs down? The cost of developing reusable rockets is quite high. STS first flew in the '80s, and while you could bump it up a bit by cutting out some of the sillier requirements, low cycle cost reusable rocket engines are still going to be pushing capabilities if it's being done as an early step.

Clearly, if we're talking economies of scale in a world ravaged by nuclear war, then we should be gunning for big dumb boosters. Commercial shipyards welding steel prop tanks together, dozens of clustered low-cost, low-tech engines rolling off assembly lines, hundreds of tons of payload per launch... only half /s
 
For one, LOR is just less risky than EOR one launch and that's it.

From what I know the concerns about EOR historically ended up being unfounded - the USSR got good at it fairly fast as I recall and we're going to need it for building large stations anyhow. I agree that going all-up instead of EOR is simpler but I think the risks of EOR get overblown.

Similarly, smaller rockets can manage decent sized payloads - FH can handle, iirc, 50 tons? That's six ISS modules. It's not quite Skylab, but its still pretty big. Again, I don't mind BDBs - I want Sea Dragon, dammit! - But keeping in mind the options we have is a good idea I think.
 
Is a reusable LV even feasible in the near term as a way of driving costs down? The cost of developing reusable rockets is quite high. STS first flew in the '80s, and while you could bump it up a bit by cutting out some of the sillier requirements, low cycle cost reusable rocket engines are still going to be pushing capabilities if it's being done as an early step.

Think less Falcon Heavy and more Kistler K-1:


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IU-BGgI4bWo

Edit: This is more of a medium term thing tho. Early game is gonna be a lot of expendable rockets.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for this. Why I like Hydrolox engines - easier to fuel from asteroids. But need a reason for major space industry first...

Yeah, that's a another reason to go for hydrolox second stages - easier ISRU. Hydrolysis is simpler than Hydrolysis + Sebatier reaction.

I disagree with you both. Hydrolox is easier to procure from asteroids, sure, but it certainly isn't easier to use or store by any means. IRL with modern materials science it's extremely difficult to compress and store, which goes double for in the quest. Just look at some of the recent issues with the SLS, which are a direct result of using liquid hydrogen. This makes it extremely difficult and more importantly, dangerous, to use.

Methane is almost as abundant, easy to store, easy to use, and frankly, and easy to make. To add to it, the components to make it are also extremely abundant. Water and dry ices are everywhere in the solar system.

From a reliability perspective, Methalox is the way to go.
 
I view getting started on materials research and keeping PS spending this turn lowish as very important, so both of these plans do that.

My preferred plan, Plan: A PS-Conscious, Budget-Conscious Aluminum Rocket, takes a pessimistic view of the upcoming budget negotiations and skimps on anything not necessary in the short term to try to stretch out our current surplus longer.

If it turns out people are more worried about dice efficiency, Plan: A PS-Conscious Aluminum Rocket spends more R and PS to use a two-stage sounding rocket for the weather program and keep all Engineering dice in play. That said, I think we're looking at having more dice than resources in the immediate future so the first plan is my pick.

[X] Plan: A PS-Conscious, Budget-Conscious Aluminum Rocket
Total: -90R, -5 PS
Operations (1/1 Dice, 15R)
[X]
Construct a Sounding Rocket (15R per dice, 0/40, costs 1 Build Capacity until complete)
-[X] Launch it only as part of Weather Studies, don't launch it if that action isn't ready
Facilities (1/1 Dice, 15R)
-[X] Construct a Heavy Sounding Rocket launch site (15R per die, 0/60, allows launch of the Heavy Sounding Rocket and theoretical derivatives up to 30 tons)
Engineering (2/3 Dice, 10R)
-[X] Conduct Design Studies (Platform) (Heavy Sounding Rocket) (5R per die, 0/80, unlocks Heavy Sounding Rocket (and a naming vote because that's unwieldy))
-[X] Advanced Concepts Office (5R and -5 PS per die, 51/150, will occasionally provide a new Program to pursue based on brainstorming and priorities)
Science (3/3 Dice, 35R)
-[X] Research Program Outreach (10R per dice, 81/120, gives +2 bonus to 1d4 research areas (including engineering))
-[X] Conduct Materials Research (Phase 1) (15R per die, 0/150, provides access to aluminum structures)
-[X] Weather Studies (Phase 1) (10R per die, requires a Sounding Rocket, 0/80, unlocks weather science) (+5 PS on complete)
Politics (3/3 Dice, 15R)
-[X] Council Liaison Office (5R, establishes a Council Liaison Office, provides details on the state of Council funding priorities, budget, infrastructure status, etc.)
-[X] Rocket Boxes (Phase I) (5R per die, 102/200. Gives Rocket Boxes to every middle-school, high-school and university or equivalent in Africa. Encourages future African scientists and engineers - some of whom will even come work with the IEC.)
-[X] Rocket Reels (5R per die, 0/120, gain a coinflip for 1 additional Political Support per quarter; successful rocket launches give you an additional coin flip for each launch.)

[X] Plan: A PS-Conscious Aluminum Rocket
Total: -100R, -10 PS
Operations (1/1 Dice, 20R)
-[X
] Construct a 2-Stage Sounding Rocket - The IEC's engineers and scientists have come up with a moderately reliable stage separation system for multi-stage rockets. Moderately as in "It worked the first time", anyway. It could use more development. But it does go higher and further, staying in space longer... so it is worth it. (20R per dice, 0/50, costs 1 Build Capacity until complete)
-[X] Launch it only as part of Weather Studies, don't launch it if that action isn't ready
Facilities (1/1 Dice, 15R)
-[X] Construct a Heavy Sounding Rocket launch site (15R per die, 0/60, allows launch of the Heavy Sounding Rocket and theoretical derivatives up to 30 tons)
Engineering (3/3 Dice, 15R)
-[X] Conduct Design Studies (Platform) (Heavy Sounding Rocket) (5R per die, 0/80, unlocks Heavy Sounding Rocket (and a naming vote because that's unwieldy))
-[X] (2 Dice) Advanced Concepts Office (5R and -5 PS per die, 51/150, will occasionally provide a new Program to pursue based on brainstorming and priorities)
Science (3/3 Dice, 35R)
-[X] Research Program Outreach (10R per dice, 81/120, gives +2 bonus to 1d4 research areas (including engineering))
-[X] Conduct Materials Research (Phase 1) (15R per die, 0/150, provides access to aluminum structures)
-[X] Weather Studies (Phase 1) (10R per die, requires a Sounding Rocket, 0/80, unlocks weather science) (+5 PS on complete)
Politics (3/3 Dice, 15R)
-[X] Council Liaison Office (5R, establishes a Council Liaison Office, provides details on the state of Council funding priorities, budget, infrastructure status, etc.)
-[X] Rocket Boxes (Phase I) (5R per die, 102/200. Gives Rocket Boxes to every middle-school, high-school and university or equivalent in Africa. Encourages future African scientists and engineers - some of whom will even come work with the IEC.)
-[X] Rocket Reels (5R per die, 0/120, gain a coinflip for 1 additional Political Support per quarter; successful rocket launches give you an additional coin flip for each launch.)
 
Last edited:
I disagree with you both. Hydrolox is easier to procure from asteroids, sure, but it certainly isn't easier to use or store by any means. IRL with modern materials science it's extremely difficult to compress and store, which goes double for in the quest. Just look at some of the recent issues with the SLS, which are a direct result of using liquid hydrogen. This makes it extremely difficult and more importantly, dangerous, to use.

Methane is almost as abundant, easy to store, easy to use, and frankly, and easy to make. To add to it, the components to make it are also extremely abundant. Water and dry ices are everywhere in the solar system.

From a reliability perspective, Methalox is the way to go.

Hey, if we can refuel Methalox via ISRU in the Asteroid belt, I'm all for it. My main interest in Hydrolox is because AFAIK Carbon isn't always where you want it. We'll still want Hydrogen fuel for eventual Nuclear Thermal rockets (hopefully) but all I really care about is making sure we can get around.

Way I see it, we've basically got two general options - the 'Direct' Approach and the 'Depot' approach. the Direct Approach is just the 'Mars Direct' idea from the 90s - use a big rocket to throw a Return Vehicle to the Moon or Mars, then throw the crew in a Hab next launch window. Crew lands and lives out of the Hab then fly home in the Return Vehicle - you can even use the Mars vehicles for the moon if you design them right. Simple mission architecture that only requires a few vehicles but they're technically complex and reuseablity is minimal (pretty much just the Habs)

The Depot Approach has you put a refueling station around each of your targets - Earth, Luna, Mars - and then use dedicated vehicles to get from the depots down to the surface of a target and back. Travel between stations is done via a space transport that doesn't have to land - basically a moving station. Advantage is that you're vehicles can now be smaller (or made out of small sections and assembled in space) and thus you can use smaller reusable launchers. All of the vehicles can ALSO be reusable. Down side is that you now need WAY more launches per mission, more vehicles and a lot of orbital rendezvous - basically trading reduced system complexity for mission complexity.

I'm fine with either, really, as long as we can manage sustained human exploration and Sol System development.

also, since I haven't voted yet:

[X] Plan: A Rocket to Surpass the Metal Gear
 
[X] Plan: A PS-Conscious, Budget-Conscious Aluminum Rocket

The plans all seem vaguely similar and my enthusiasm towards finishing off ACO is fairly low, so might as well save the expenditure.
 
Last edited:
[X] Plan PS Conscious
-[X] Operations (1 dice, +3 bonus)
--[X] Construct a 2-Stage Sounding Rocket 1 die 20R 0/50 54%
---[X] And launch it 50%
-[X] Facilities (1 dice, +0 bonus)
--[X] Construct a Heavy Sounding Rocket launch site 1 die 15R 0/60 41%
-[X] Engineering (3 dice, +6 Bonus to All)
--[X] Conduct Design Studies (Platform) (Heavy Sounding Rocket) [AERO] 1 die 5R 0/80 30%
--[X] Engine Cycles (Tech) [MATSCI, CHEM, PROP] 2 die 20R 0/250 (2/3.5 dice median chance)
-[X] Science (3 dice, +6 Bonus to All)
--[X] Research Program Outreach 1 die 10R 81/120 68%
--[X] Weather Studies (Phase 1) 2 die 20R 0/80 78%
-[X] Politics (3 dice, +10 bonus, reroll 1 failure per turn)
--[X] Council Liaison Office 1 die 5R Auto
--[X] Bothering Councilors 1 die -10 PS Auto
--[X] Rocket Boxes (Phase I) 1 die 5R 100/200 11%
-[X] Total: 100R/160R, -10/55 PS

It's the plan I put together earlier. Can't think of a new/better name right now. Importantly, I keep all our dice activated. (Also, assuming our income doesn't change, next turn we'll have 115R to work with... and we're probably going to increase our income one way or another.)

E: Fixed a technical error.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top