Landing on Tylo

[Kadrush]

Guys, I am really struggling to make a lander capable of landing on Tylo. I read around some forums that I need around 8k delta V to land and come back with a TWR of at least 2.

The best I could make had 7k delta V using a landing stage that I would discard close to the ground, land, do my science stuff and return using 2 light weight boosters just to get of the ground.

I also tried aspargus and sky crane configurations, but I just cant feel confident that I will make it.

I am also considering to land a lander with a small refinery on it, or a drone wheeled small refinery close to it.

Anyway, i could use some hints and screenshots of your landers.

[Jupiter3927]

Tylo is the hardest body to land on in KSP.
It's just as heavy as Laythe but has no atmosphere.
There's a handy wiki page of Tylo here...
https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Tylo

Its surface gravity is 0.8g or about 8m/s^2 so any lander design should have a minimum of 12m/s^2 of acceleration to be safe.
The wiki page says orbital velocity is about 2000m/s so a lander with 7km/s or 8km/s of dV would leave a lot of room for error.

Mining for fuel would be a lot easier on Bop or Pol due to the lower surface gravity.
Leaving the refinery stuff off will save a lot of mass.
If you insist on mining on Tylo, you'll only need about half the dV but your lander will be a lot heavier.

I recommend using clusters of Spark engines.
They have some of the best TWR's of any engine and they're pretty easy to cluster together.
They even beat out the Terrier engine.
I made my Tylo lander forever ago but it used one Poodle engine and some drop tanks.
I would not use it again and I didn't take a lot of pictures of it.
I like to build my landers with the lightest command pod available and stick any extra kerbals on with exterior command seats or have them hang onto the ladder.
You can get away with just sending 1 scientist and a probe core down.
Make sure you build your lander wide because you probably won't be able to take off if it tips over.

The ground is going to come at you really fast so good luck with your mission.

[Operation40]

your 7k lander is more than enough with an interplanetary stage.. interplanetary stage needs like no TWR (or as little as your paitence will handle lol)

[doum]

Tylo lander and also laythe lander (2 seats). In fact it can land on anyworld that have 1 g or less and lift off anyworld that have 0,8g or less. That lander refuel itself once on ground.(tested)
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1540950931
And its mothership that can bring it to jool and orbit of tylo or any other moon.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1540951730
Notice that this mother ship can also land and refuel on moon that have less then 0,3 g. The mothership also carry fuel and oxygen so the lander can refuel once back from tylo or laythe( because they dont have much fuel left once in orbit) and land elsewhere once the mothership have bring it to a low g moon orbit then permiting the lander to land and refuel itself again. Lander have been tested on both tylo and laythe. Limit are yours.

You can make a nuke lander for tylo that refuel itself and then go back to tylo's orbit (tested). But that lander weight 65tons and is useless for laythe. It's better to stick with chemical for lander.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1408254438
Miner and ISRU are in the core of that ship.

[doum]

You can also make a single use 2 stage lander. Here each stage have 4300 m/s of delta v.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1541006285

[A Terrible Modder]

if you can make a lander that can take off and land back on kerbin (without parachutes) than you can land on tylo

[Ruby Rhod]

Do it simple:
Mono stage with Rhino engine. Refuel on ground with Ore mining. 90t all included.
Keep in mind KSP without RSS and Real XXX mod is really easy... So if you have some problem, try to simplify your rocket design.

[andylaugel]

I'm not sure if this will help, but here is an example of a Tylo lander I've used.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=868913519
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=917287879
I figure it has about 4,453 m/s dV in its 7-kerbal configuration (i.e. with that pod on top)--enough to either land on Tylo, or return to low Tylo orbit. But once its lands, it can refuel itself.

I already had a mining operation on Vall that could refuel it and its interplanetary tugboat, so the typical operation went something like this:

• Refuel Genie on Vall.
  
• Dock Genie with Horse in orbit.
  
• Top off Genie and Horse with other ships related to the Vall refueling set-up.
  
• Use Horse's efficient "Nerv" engines to put the pair in low Tylo orbit.
  
• Separate the ships. Land Genie.
  
• Collect science, find a flat place to park and refuel.
  
• Suborbital hop(s) with Genie to explore another patch of Tylo, refueling after each one (optional).
  
• Return Genie into orbit.
  
• Rendevous and dock with Horse.
  
• Return to low Vall orbit.
  
• Use other ships to provide Genie with enough fuel to land (often not needed).
  
• Rince and repeat.

It's how I got all my Kerbals around Jool's moons the patch for planting a flag on Tylo.

[RoofCat]

I think you already got most you needed above. Short checklist of mine:

1. mining return fuel on Tylo rocks. You land light with almost empty tanks and thus high TWR for safety (++), you have high delta v because it's refuelled as many times as you need (+), mining unit is cheaper than designing a ship without it - more tanks, engines, huge launch stage would be needed, etc. (+), you can do multiple biomes (all) on Tylo if interested at once (+). All win.

2. you can use double, tripple landing strategy. Land on Vall first. Thus you need much less fuel for transfer plus landing than direct approach. Refuel and go for Tylo. Again, this patch is much cheaper than transfer plus landing from Kerbin directly. Launch from Tylo and depending on your situation you can go for extra Vall landing again or just drop mining on Tylo and head home directly. The difference shouldn't be too large in this case since you save mass while dropping mining stuff.


Suicide landing on Tylo is almost impossible. You have to brake a lot and a long way ahead. Still you can waste more or less while doing so. Initiate at least 40km high and balance reasonable speed as you get lower. The last part will be almost vertical and thus altimeter will tick down very quickly. Most engines wouldn't suffice if you don't slow down in advance already. Also each second of hovering there is very expensive. Tricky, but doable. Pay attention to your deceleration, vertical speed and altimeter all the time. Definitely the hardest place to land on. No drag with medium high G.


You can of course also do clean Kerbin launch - Tylo landing - Kerbin return ship without mining. Even without nukes. But the launch mass will be huge while the final return payload small. It's simply not worth if you can avoid it. Much cheaper/better payload with mining solution. Only advice how to improve this - don't land on Tylo your return fuel, keep it on orbit. With heatshield for free Kerbin slowdown.


This 770t "SSTO" mothership went everywhere except Eve surface with just 5500..6500m/s max depending on the burn order (Nukes, Mammoths). Tylo inclusive. Without dropping anything ever. Single stage. Full recovery from Kerbin runway in the end. It didn't take direct transfer as it visited Duna system and Dres first. So transfer was slightly cheaper already. And then at Jool it started with Vall just like described above. It's not just about delta v in KSP. It's how you use them.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=855580249

[George Kerman]

A demonstration of this Vall to Tylo landing with a monster of a rocket:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwsLdlmtsSE&index=5&list=PLQFblzJPbnmn3RAY31Xt_-2TO-ZfQSEzU

First part is from Laythe orbit to Vall, second is Vall to Tylo.

You got KER readings so you can mostly see what's happening. The rocket has just 5.2 k dV and goes in one place everywhere but for Eve's surface. That's what you need to get anywhere in the Kerbin system: 5.2k dV and mining & refining equipment.

[Gob]

This simple 4-nuke design gets a man-in-a-can from and to a 50km orbit...

https://i.imgur.com/SpEwWYr.png

The first stage will get you down with a little fuel to spare. Shortly after takeoff you dump that and the single nuke will get you to orbit with a few hunded dV to spare.

[RoofCat]

Originally posted by Gob:

This simple 4-nuke design gets a man-in-a-can from and to a 50km orbit...

https://i.imgur.com/SpEwWYr.png

I didn't check the math, but I have a suspicion using the same design but with Terriers and thus 2.5t fuel extra for each because of the saved engine mass you would have more delta v, gimbal for easier landing, more chances for incremental weight reduction (more tanks to dump) and the price 1/4 of this.

Nukes are endurance engines. Few for high mass payload on medium distances or with usual payload and high fuel amount for high range. None of that works for Tylo landings though. So Tylo G limits your fuel amount due to TWR needed and your fuel in turn limits your delta v to less what same weight Terrier construction would achieve.

[Gob]

Yup but nukes are fun ;)

[Gob]

If you want minimal then this is getting close to as small as possible...

https://i.imgur.com/J0mX60i.png

[RoofCat]

Originally posted by Gob:

Yup but nukes are fun ;)

I did a test for your time invested. I didn't add 2 ladders as those aren't needed with shorter Terriers, so my results might be by few m/s off and the price by 880$ less for your design, but rather accurate otherwise.

your Nuke design -
price 47672 $
1st stage 3187.6 m/s
2nd stage 3175.5 m/s

basically same (mass 0.1t less due to missing tanks in perfect size) Terrier design
price 9257 $
1st stage 3181.4 m/s
2nd stage 4012.6 m/s

Nukes suck with low fuel amounts. You paid 5 times more for a ship with 830.9 m/s less (11.5%).

[Gob]

Originally posted by RoofCat:

Originally posted by Gob:

Yup but nukes are fun ;)

I did a test for your time invested. I didn't add 2 ladders as those aren't needed with shorter Terriers, so my results might be by few m/s off and the price by 880$ less for your design, but rather accurate otherwise.

your Nuke design -
price 47672 $
1st stage 3187.6 m/s
2nd stage 3175.5 m/s

basically same (mass 0.1t less due to missing tanks in perfect size) Terrier design
price 9257 $
1st stage 3181.4 m/s
2nd stage 4012.6 m/s

Nukes suck with low fuel amounts. You paid 5 times more for a ship with 830.9 m/s less (11.5%).

To be fair, the OP didn't say anything about wanting cheap or even efficient.
I was just showing that there are a range of possibilities. Of course nukes are not the best choice
...or are they...
You could use the same nuke engines for the transfer stage and for the lander with a few drop tanks and save a lot engine mass for the whole craft.