Jestersage

Most of my stuff are stock (+DLC) replicas, or replica of paper projects. I will say the most "full on replica" is my Soyuz Clone, since it does not even have reaction wheel, but utilized RCS for the reentry guidance. For other stuff, click on my signature.

I will be honest -- not sure how many Chinese players will be on this forum or KerbalX, seieng there's the steam community... In any case, I had uploaded the only known RTG powered manned spaceship that gone past paper plans, the Soyuz VI clone "Dongmeng Vincat SaX CR2 Roc + Ladle N". Technically it was a combination of 2 paper/prototype project: The Soyuz VI itself, and the YARD Nuclear Core Stage Soyuz launcher. Also, just like any crazy soviet military plans, it comes with missiles. (original name had an unfortunate meaning -_-) No, I will not be making a Buran with Nuclear Bomb. Not that I am against putting weapons on it, but it's just useless in stock game. If you manage to stuff any of my proposed Buran Clones (or Buran derived station) with simulated warhead(s) all the power to you.

Damn, I better hurry up with my clones before you make them! True to be told, the beauty of Soviet Space program is that many are paper project and or prototype that got scrapped or remixed. Eg: Almaz APOS split into VA capsule and Salyut. The challenge is to decide what the size you want to use. For example, the VA capsule is a conical capsule at 2.9m. So is it best represented by the Mk1-3 capsule (for shape) or the KV-3 (for size)? I've been experimenting on both, and I still can't really decide (so my TKS and Almaz APOS cloen is actually sitting in my folders). And if you want to keep consistency, then suddenly you are not designing one project, but a bunch of related one: VA capsule is used in TKS (originally actually manned) and the LK700 (which my clone use the Mk1-3; on hindsight maybe not so good idea)

As long as there is a fully covered mount (so I can hide the tanks that may stick out), I am good.

Depends on how they work, that may or may changed my Altair clone from requiring DLC to fully stock.

As I promised, I had released the Chinese Space Station/tiangong 3 analogue, as well as Shenzhou in its best iteration (When its orbital module can fly and be redocked instead of being a Soyuz clone)

Hey Raptor9, How did you manage to get KVV take the photo from the same angle of your craft everytime?

Ok, Quick update to bump it back to first page: First, I had updated My single-SRB Orion CEV and the "Fully protected Altair" to 1.5.1 about a month ago. Then within the last two weeks, as a challenge -- and continuation of my Soyuz Clone, I had completed the Kerbal analog to Shenzhou, Long March 2 and 5, Tiangong, and Chinese Modular Station. So in order to have new designs out, Long March -- named as Xinhai (辛亥); and Tiangong 1/2 -- named as HuiMu (會幕), is released first: As stated in the craft page, the tiangong clone is actually overbuild, but I never feel good to just place a lab module into orbit, even if it has a service/propulsion module. So what comes next: aside from the Shenzhou clone, is the Chinese Modular Space Station, which unlike the HuiMu, is a no-DLC build. Once the Chinese builds are done, I will work on releasing another stock station, before turning my direction to make the poster for my workhorse. Because of that, I will unlikely release Orion MPCV (note the versions above are closer to the CEV), due to significant overlapping with my workhorse -- except I consider it a replica of something else. Along with it, I will release my workhorse rocket that I uses for my career. Edit: regarding what will be stock in the Chinese analogues: The Shenzhou and Tiangong will require DLC, as with the Xinhai YiWCC (LM-2 clone). The Modular Space Station, the LM-5 clone (Xinhai ErCC) and a few others will be attempted to not need DLC.

While I know there's Kerin side, I want to keep my mod in the folder to a minimum. So is there a drop in mod that will just enable selecting Baikerbanur launchpad? EDIT: Answer: Just get KerbalKonstruct if I only want KSC2.

I figure this is more of an opinion question then gameplay question, so... In short, I am trying to make a Tiangong clone, along with the Chengzheng rocket. Problem is that I intepret to be best expressed with the 1.875 diameter parts, which are DLC. I had done a test using non DLC parts, which isn't too bad looking. So I am curious: should a shareable craft be made of DLC parts, or not? How does everyone decide if they will purposely scale back on using DLC?

My "Test Station", aka Skylab: <old picture removed> Not the most creative naming scheme. Then again, "Skylab" and "Space Lab" or even "International Space Station" is plain when compared to Salyut, Almaz, and Mir.... but that still hold nothing to Tiangong (Heavenly palace).

I am just typing this quickly in the mean time to say that is quite a lot. That warning thing is actually more than enough. And I understand about busyiness -- I am actually typing this at work. My apologies for laying on this hard. Now that I have some time to mull over, we also need to be not overly zealous. While some poster may disagree, I think one who actually attribute the craft should get a pass -- in fact, AeroGav had known to have improved/resolved a lot of SSTO issues of interesting designs. Plus, rocket designs are limited. For example, many Soyuz clone involves "a Pomengenade half-wrapped by a fairing" Yet I know they are not copies.

I understand that. However, downvoting is not only heavily penalized, but unless the message was not explain otherwise, a downvote will always cost points with no refund. The moderation is sufficient for now, for what it's worth. All he need to do is to fix point 1, with point 2 be next step, and point 3 is "nice to have"

A certain poster on KerbalX had once again plagiarized a craft. Unlike last time however, I no longer see a desire to downvote it and report it, seeing each downvote costs 5 points. I also do not know if I remove the downvote, whether those 5 points are refunded. Even if it's likely to be identified as "based on someone's craft", those points are gone. I am also curious how effective the report system is. Even if the creator of KerbalX did confirm it's based on someone's craft, that blue banner is blue in color (so it doesn't serve as a warning) and at the bottom, out of sight of most people. It should be at the top, in bright red to catch people's attention. So overall, I do not feel confident that KerbalX actually care about the plagiarization. Then in that case it's no different than Steam Workshop, which have far greater reach. EDIT: Right -- solution suggestions While a downvote remove 5 points, rescind of the downvote should refund the points. If a craft is checked and confirmed to be likely plagerized, the banner should be in bright red, at the top. Color may be changed to accommodate color blinded (optional) If it's checked and confirmed to be likely plagerized, downvotes should not cost 5 points. May be 1, up to 3.

So after refining the Craft, here it is: My Apollo Clone, "Ananas": Name comes from how in Chinese, Apollo is 阿波羅, and since 波羅 is "pineapple"... My greatest decision regarding this build is whether to use the Jr-port or the Standard Size port. Based on MH parts -- as well as referencing many MH Saturn-V builds-- I decide to go with Jr-port, since the Apollo docking port is built for LEM -- which in MH, is represented as a Jr-port. Plus, the whole exercise is to eventually lead to a standalone station that allows my Lehu stock-type to connect to.

Kluster's revenge?

Thanks, Raptor9. One thing I notice is that sometimes, in order to make a replica functional, you have to do the associated hardware... which in turn lead to creating a predecessor. In this case, my attempt to create a Skylab leads to the creation of Apollo and Saturn-I clone, which in turn leads to creating a Mercury Redstone -- since Saturn-I is a cluster of redstones surrounding a Jupiter-C tank, and it will be bad if the scale ended up mismatch, right? I will be honest, if Saturn-I was not a cluster of redstone, I would not even bother with the suborbital rocket. Then again, for a longest time, I was complaining why everyone's Saturn-I replica is a cluster of FT-800 instead of just the size-2 tanks, until I found out it is a cluster of tanks. It is definitely one of those crafts created for the sake of replica.

Thank you. I am definitely inspired by you (and I think you are the earliest and still active user that started the "blueprint" graphic), but I also want to distinguish myself. Though noticing some other users having more downloads does make me a bit disappointed.

So here we are -- my Soyuz clone "Dongmeng". Specifically, the SaX model (LFO propulsion), RL edition (so no Reaction wheel, but utilize RCS... even for the reentry capsule) All in all, a fun build, as I experiment with different part combination to reach a point where I like. chances are, within a few days, the standard version (uses Reaction wheel) will come out, with a few other variants depend on how I feel -- I actually have a YiX (low mass monoprop edition) and other interesting editions in the pipeline. EDIT: Reaction wheel edition is up.

Well, at least in terms of kv3 (3 person voskhod pod)

I feel like the absolute position was shifted a bit compared to 1.4. How do I verify that it was not "just a feel"?

We know that starting form 1.4, some parts are depreciate. Should we also assume it's going to be the case for all "new-replace-old" parts? In other words, the parts that have new parts introduced in 1.5 will be depreciated too, as in 1.4 parts?

I was actually refering to the 1.1.3 version using the Oscar tanks... namely, the size and design (large lander cans and 2.5m parts). Fair enough -- that just means something I can design

So based on what you know, what is the difference between the Lockheed Mars Lander (RL inspiration for LV-7A) and the Oct 3rd debut Luna lander? I feel like it's basically the same craft without the extra aerodynamics, so I am curious whether you will even bother. On the other hand, you do need to redo the LV-2D, so... EDIT: Rechecked it. It IS actually a stripped down Mars Base Camp lander. Lockheed explicitly mentioned it's based on that.

So I was already greeted by "This thread is quite old" request. In short, I have too much lull time between creation... That is why I ended up uploading "Valentis", the Voskhod 2 clone. It was a fun build, and easy to chunk out (relatively) -- unlike other crafts where I have to be concerned with part counts and looks (or even mass), realistically no one will use it to dock with a spacestation, so I went a bit nuts on the RCS pods to mimic the looks. If nothing else, it give me a good starting point for R7 Boosters, since from what I can tell, Soyuz launch core is physicall identical to the older generations -- just need to change the second stage.