• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1217 Excellent

About Raptor9

  • Rank
    KSC Aerospace Concepts

Profile Information

  • Location Central US
  • Interests Anything and everything aerospace-related.

Recent Profile Visitors

5772 profile views
  1. I hear ya. I just came off a 3.5 month break from KSP. Definitely feel the creative thoughts flowing again though. Sometimes you just have to put the mouse down.
  2. Very nice to see some more preview images; thank you. Every Friday the first thing I do is skim (more frantically than I'll admit) through the post and look for blue hyperlinked preview images.
  3. Another awesome video @Cupcake.... I love how you always use parts for other visuals, like the antennas and seismometers for fishing poles and beer soda cans. No idea how you turned the mini drill into a pogo stick, lol. My favorite part was knocking the debris over with the engine plume. Question: which visual mod gives Minmus that greenish gaseous look around the surface?
  4. @Nertea, you never fail to impress. Nice! [Insert GIF of man in nicely-tailored suit and an eye-monocle clapping his appreciation]
  5. This challenge seems tailor-made for @Cupcake... me thinks.
  6. I'm starting to think there needs to be a "Ludicrous Mode" category...
  7. Not even trying to compete for tonnage, but figured I would see how quickly I could get my X-20 from the starting point on the runway to the VAB. I was trying to get it up there in under a minute, but I settled for less than 90 seconds. The craft isn't heavy at all, but is fairly controllable. And just to punctuate Jeb's flying skill, he decided to land his jet on the Admin building to irritate the PR people inside. EDIT: Forgot to mention that this craft is inspired by the Soviet Naval Aviation Yak-38.
  8. Hmm, Soyuz rocket engine I'm assuming?
  9. Yes...if nothing else for referring to himself in the third person.
  10. Some nice flying there @Cupcake..., despite the reportedly high number of takes.
  11. I prefer to load a rover into a long-range plane, land near the border of several biomes, kick out the rover, go do it's thing, return to plane, find another area of multiple biomes, rinse, repeat, etc. Coincidentally, that's exactly what I originally designed the ATSV for. Which reminds me, I need to make another version of it powered by fuel cells...(*sigh* So much to do)
  12. They're not uploaded yet, I'm waiting for 1.3.1 to drop to fix a couple bugs with struts. The 'Thunder'/'Lightning' series are my favorite too. With the new update, I'll be expanding the 'Thunder' rocket family from 5 configurations to 9. The rather heavy RE-I5 Skipper-powered upper stage on the 'Thunder 3' has been replaced with a modest upper stage closer in comparison with ULA's Centaur. These additional configurations will hopefully provide a more tailored launch selection for whatever payload mass you're wanting to launch to orbit; and they are more analogous to their real-life Atlas V and Delta IV inspirations.
  13. @HvP, thanks for bringing back those nightmares...
  14. As the PSA states on the OP, I'm still doing some light experimenting and tweaking of some craft files while I wait for the 1.3.1 patch. The main focus is the never-ending effort to reduce part counts and costs. The latest version of the 'Lightning' rocket (inspired by ULA's Vulcan/ACES), has a reduction of 9 parts and nearly a ton of dry mass from the LITE reusable upper stage. This will equate to better performance for use in the CisMunar space economy, and the overall cost of the 'Lightning' rocket itself has been reduced by over 10,000 funds. The 'Thunder' rocket family is also undergoing some tweaking to squeeze out more performance gains. It's my goal to hopefully shift some payloads (ie IV-1 'Meerkat' series) to the single-core 'Thunder' & 'Lightning' rockets from the SLS-inspired 'Titan' family, which are twice as expensive. Other craft that have seen slight improvements are the EV-1B 'Skiff' (better launch performance), and the CST-100 inspired EV-2B 'Runabout' (reduced part count; important for servicing high part count ISS-type space stations). I'm also interested in some feedback from users of the LV-2D 'Cricket' reusable singe-stage lander. The existing version of the 'Cricket' is designed to depart from an orbiting space station in low Munar orbit, land on the Mun, and then return to the station before exhausting its monopropellant fuel supply. To attain maximum performance from it's propellant reservoir, I tightly packed (not-clipped) inside the lower fuselage 8x Stratus-V Cylindrified mono tanks around two FL-R25 core tanks, plus 4x externally mounted Stratus-V Roundified mono tanks. This arrangement resulted in some nice aesthetics and enough performance to make large inclination changes pre-landing and post-ascent, but refueling the lander is a bit of a pain with so many tanks inside of the lander. I've tested a new version of the lander that has replaced tank arrangement in the lower fuselage with a single FL-R1 2.5m monopropellant tank, and added two additional externally-mounted Stratus-V Roundified tanks. The result is an LV-2D that is lower in part count and much easier to refuel, but with a slash to it's delta-V budget due to reduced propellant capacity. Landing to Munar equatorial regions is still possible (assuming the station staging orbit is prograde and equatorial of course), but large inclination changes to reach higher latitudes isn't possible unless a disposable descent booster is brought along for each landing attempt. So let me know what you guys and gals think about it. Existing LV-2D Pros: Large delta-V, more landing sites in reach from staging orbit Existing LV-2D Cons: Higher part count, tedious/time-consuming to refuel after each landing New LV-2D Pros: Lower part count (11), easy to refuel after each landing New LV-2D Cons: Less delta-V (~400 m/s), limited landing site selection, disposable descent booster is required for non-equatorial landing sites (resulting in higher costs and less than 100% reusability)
  15. Sounds like a challenge. (see what I did there? Don't get up, I'll let myself out...)