Raptor9

Members
  • Content count

    881
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1185 Excellent

About Raptor9

  • Rank
    KSC Aerospace Concepts

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

5279 profile views
  1. As a general rule, I consider the use of reaction wheels outside of station stabilization and small sats/probes as "cheaty" since KSP RW's are overpowered IMO. Mind you, that is entirely my own subjective view. I endeavor to include an abundance of monopropellant in ships like the EV-3, -4, and -5 for this very reason. Specifically which craft were you using?
  2. Piggy-backing on the last couple posts, that too is something I was curious about. Possible ideas to keep a 5m Saturn V analogue from being grossly overpowered for a Mun mission might be a combination of the following: - Saturn-inspired engines (like the F-1 or J-2) might be less efficient than contemporary engines of similar power. Or, the F-1 engines are just really efficient at sea level, and have a really large dropoff of Isp by the time they reach the upper stratosphere; and the J-2-styled engines are just the opposite, really inefficient at sea level, but really good at those upper atmospheric altitudes. This might drive the need to stage from S-IC to S-II mid-ascent. - Saturn-inspired tanks may have a higher dry mass and/or less fuel capacity due to some reason like "thicker walls to be stronger". - Engines modeled after the F-1 and J-2 engines may have a lower tolerance or service life. This is a stretch, but if Squad is working on part failures, maybe if you run a set of five F-1 engines at full throttle for an entire ascent to LKO they'll have a higher chance of failing. Therefore you'll need to switch to the next stage, meaning you'll be carrying the additional mass of five more engines during the stage 1 ascent, further impacting your performance. I'm just spit-balling here, these are all pure speculation based on what little information we have thus far.
  3. I generally avoid commenting on KSP Weekly threads outside of the occasional excitement-driven "That new part looks cool" post. However, after seeing how consistently the KSP Weekly thread devolves into a knife-throwing contest, I want to humbly point out something (to no one in particular): Kerbal Space Program has been a game that has reached across many communities, nations, and even professional space agencies...but it is just a game. I know that may sound overly simplistic considering the level of impact it has had on not just people's lives but also the amount of times KSP has proven to be a bridge between the vast international public and real-life space agencies such as NASA, ESA, and SpaceX. But let's have a down-to-Kerbin pragmatic look at how the future of KSP impacts all of our lives. Whether KSP continues to be a sound financial investment for Squad or not, their decisions as a company will determine whether or not Squad employees will be able to keep their jobs and support their families. How KSP impacts us as players is how we are entertained. Now there is some middle-ground there, such as professional Twitch streamers that may rely on KSP as a means to generate income. But the main message I'm trying to portray is to maintain perspective. Let's remember that the KSP development team at Squad need to make the best decisions to ensure the survival of their company. If KSP (as a product) goes away, only our entertainment is affected; however Squad's employment is affected. TL;DR - We play fictional space game for fun, Squad plays real-life Game Dev Tycoon with real-world consequences
  4. I use Microsoft Paint for all the editing. It's not fancy by any measure, but it works. An FAQ section is a good idea, I'll add that this weekend. In other news, for those of you not aware of the recent update to the KerbalX site, there is now a bulk download option for all craft that are within a hanger. Below is a quote from the KerbalX thread: There are a number of my craft already sorted into applicable hangers, like the EV-4 MEV component lifters, but quite a few are not. This weekend I'll be coming up with a categorized hanger list on the KerbalX site, with links to each hanger on the thread OP. We'll see how it comes together, but it will take a little time to ensure all craft are appropriately categorized. I appreciate everyone's patience, and please send some kudos @katateochi's way for his hard work. EDIT: Categorized hangers have been set up on KerbalX, with associated links in this thread's OP. Don't worry, I'll be adding an ALL CRAFT hanger download link soon, since I ended up setting up 18 categories for download.
  5. That would require a ridiculous amount of flight testing to determine, which I don't want to do.
  6. That sounds awesome, thank you. I know a lot of players will appreciate it, and not just the ones that use this thread. I'm sure doing a couple captchas will probably still be faster than clicking away at dozens of download buttons.
  7. This has been something that has been requested many times, and I had plans this spring after getting back from a business trip to set up such a method, via dropbox or google drive or something. However during the setup I realized that if I did this, it would negate even having KerbalX links in this thread all together, since most users would undoubtedly download the single zip file and then remove whatever craft files they did not want. As a supporter of @katateochi's KerbalX website, this presents a bit of a conflict of interest for me. Not a legal one, but a bit of a kick in the nuts sort of thing. So I've decided against setting up a single download, or a series of categorized downloads. I would also like to respectively request that in the future no one post my craft files for download outside of reposting KerbalX links to the same. I hope anybody reading this understands my reasons and respects them.
  8. I'll throw my hat in here. The first is my Dyna-Soar inspired spaceplane, my cheapest (non-SSTO) way to get three Kerbals to LKO (~29,500). The second is the classic STS design.
  9. @smotheredrun, glad you like love it and getting a lot of use from it.
  10. No idea where you're inferring that from. The description doesn't say anything about refueling or fuel storage on the station. The intent behind it is a staging location for surface missions. The concept behind this type of small station is an SLS-like rocket carrying a crew capsule and reusable lander (like the EV-2C/LV-2B configuration) is sent to the station to deliver the first station crew and lander for a single, initial surface expedition, supported by follow-on research in the station's processing lab. The crew would then return home via the EV-2C. The second mission would follow with a similar rocket configuration, but with a propellant module in place of the lander in the payload fairing under the EV-2C. After arriving with the second crew, the propellant module would refuel the lander for another surface landing, and so on so forth. This mission scheme is illustrated in the 'Wernher Station' graphic, which shows the crew capsule bringing with it a propellant module to dock to the station. Having said all that, these station graphics are not exclusive configurations. They're only examples based on real-life analogies on how you can assemble the station module subassemblies. There is nothing stopping players from adding additional modules...like fuel storage tanks.
  11. Indeed, it's been corrected.
  12. Unfortunately, I have long since deleted those older designs. But as someone that has mild OCD, if I recognize a capability gap within my craft file list, I try to fill it. Even though I personally no longer have a need to move >60 Kerbals in one sortie, I still maintain the C7 300/310 designs just in case I or anybody else requires a mass airlift in the future.
  13. @eloquentJane, if you're intending to use mods for this project, Nertea designed the new Mk4-1 command pod in Near Future Construction based on the MEM ascent module. Just a suggestion if you're looking for something to fit that bill.