Raptor's Craft Download Catalog - Tested & Proven

[drhay53]

Having some trouble flying the C7-142 and similar craft. When I try vertical takeoff, it seems to oscillate front to back too much for me to control it. Any pointers for flying those things?

[DMSP]

1 hour ago, drhay53 said:

Having some trouble flying the C7-142 and similar craft. When I try vertical takeoff, it seems to oscillate front to back too much for me to control it. Any pointers for flying those things?

Do you have the reaction wheels turned on? They'll help a lot if not.

[drhay53]

11 minutes ago, DMSP said:

Do you have the reaction wheels turned on? They'll help a lot if not.

My bad, I wasn't turning on the RW. That helps alot. Thanks!

[Raptor9]

@DMSP= aeroTech Support, at your service. 
__________________________

EDIT: The SVR-23 'Raven' vertically-launched spaceplanes are updated to 1.2 on KerbalX.

RE-EDIT: The SVR-16 'Ranger' (my space shuttle analogue) is also updated to 1.2...finally.  To reiterate, it's not quite as flexible in mission as the real-life space shuttle, but primarily a space station module carrier in KSP.  There are a lot design compromises that are made due to the limits of KSP craft engineering in-game.  But I think I have a decent balance of aesthetics and functionality without resorting to personal no-go's such as canards or reaction wheels clipped into the craft for enhanced control/stability.

Main changes between the 1.1.3 and the 1.2 versions are:
- Re-engined OMS system.  Instead of LF+O-powered Mk55 'Thuds', the OMS is now monoprop-powered O-10 'Puff' engines.  The OMS pods themselves hold a decent amount of LF+O to power the four fuel cells.  However, if you plan on doing a lot of science transmissions, I would load some additional LF+O or solar cells in the cargo bay
- Stronger main and nose landing gear.  The nose gear does have a tendency to bounce if the nose comes down hard on landing.  Use caution.
- Larger and more powerful launch stack.  The SVR-16's 'Vector' engines are limited 10% higher, and the RE-M3 'Mainsail' boosters have been replaced with a pair of KR-1x2 'Twin Boar' boosters from the 'Titan 4C+' heavy rocket.  The external fuel tank is also slightly longer with more fuel.
- Tweaked RCS thruster layout and orientation for better control.
- Better control scheme for launch & ascent, to include a decent launch abort sequence.  A small docking port on top of the external fuel tank should be used as the control point until MECO/ET seperation.

Happy launching. 
__________________________

ANOTHER EDIT: The LV-3C cargo lander and BM-series Mun base modules are all updated to 1.2 and re-uploaded to KerbalX.  Minimal changes; the O-10 engines needed to be swapped out after the external model was made much larger.  LF+O-powered 24-77 engines have replaced them.  The part count of the LV-3C lander itself was also reduced slightly.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Raptor9

[Raptor9]

So the final craft files, the LV-3D and LV-3E, are updated to 1.2.  Nothing significant changed on the landers, just some tweaks here and there, and swapped some antennas out.  Now I can focus on new stuff (like satellites & probes) and my career save.

[septemberWaves]

10 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

Now I can focus on new stuff (like satellites & probes) and my career save.

Have you ever considered using cubesats (made with the structural panels)? They're quite fun to design, and very easy to make standardized launch vehicles for.

[Raptor9]

On 1/14/2017 at 7:24 AM, eloquentJane said:

Have you ever considered using cubesats (made with the structural panels)? They're quite fun to design, and very easy to make standardized launch vehicles for.

Does the QBE count?  Actually, I haven't; I try to keep my sats as small as possible.

[septemberWaves]

48 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

Does the QBE count?

I wasn't counting it, no. I was talking about things like this:

The cubes aren't particularly convenient for containing fuel tanks, but they tend to look pretty good and they allow a large variety of design choices. The one above even has a tiny lander probe that can be separated and sent down to a planet or moon.

The structural panels make them easy to standardize, which is why I thought this sort of design might appeal to you.

Edited January 15, 2017 by eloquentJane

[Jestersage]

Hey Raptor, did you updated any crafts before you updated "SVR-23A & SVR-23B 'Raven' vertically launched spaceplanes"?

[Jester Darrak]

Well, the structural panels trigger eye-cancer on my end, I'd rather like open builds with lots of strutting, like Raptor9's Mun Landers. Plus the gold-wrapped drone core thingy.

[Raptor9]

3 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

[snip]

The structural panels make them easy to standardize, which is why I thought this sort of design might appeal to you.

That's quite a large probe, way larger than my largest one.  The structural panels themselves would make the smallest cubesat 1.25m across, which is much larger than I would probably make for a satellite.  However, I gather it makes them easy to scale up or down in size.

2 hours ago, Jestersage said:

Hey Raptor, did you updated any crafts before you updated "SVR-23A & SVR-23B 'Raven' vertically launched spaceplanes"?

To summarize, all my craft are now updated to 1.2 as of a couple days ago.  So yeah, a lot of craft were updated before the Ravens.   While we're on that topic, I just updated the LV-3C/Mun Base modules to correct for the misaligned resource transfer port on the sides of the LV-3C's themselves.

Edited January 15, 2017 by Raptor9

[Jestersage]

10 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

To summarize, all my craft are now updated to 1.2 as of a couple days ago.  So yeah, a lot of craft were updated before the Ravens.   While we're on that topic, I just updated the LV-3C/Mun Base modules to correct for the misaligned resource transfer port on the sides of the LV-3C's themselves.

I have downloaded most if not all of your updates, but want to make sure. Can you tell me what you have updated for the last 30 days? I may be able to backtrack it -- I did got your 1.2 Asteroid Redirecter though.

Edited January 15, 2017 by Jestersage

[Raptor9]

11 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

I have downloaded most if not all of your updates, but want to make sure. Can you tell me what you have updated for the last 30 days? I may be able to backtrack it -- I did got your 1.2 Asteroid Redirecter though.

Oh I have no idea.  I know I released a new SR-19A spaceplane, and probably all the ISRU refinery stuff and PD-32/64 propellant depots was within the last 30 days I think.  Sorry, I really haven't kept track of all that beyond the last seven days.

[Jester Darrak]

After diving even deeper into planetary and satellite (here: moons) landing and recovery missions I found your LV-2D Cricket Lander as the go-to thing. What bothers me though is, that the sheer amount of RCS tanks makes it a PITA to refuel, wether on the surface or in orbit. Is there a way to ease handling of fuel transfer? I have KAS and KIS running, so maybe there is a trick with one of those but otherwise it's really hard to refuel and re-use the Lander.

This is how I execute missions to bring crew, tourists and cargo to the surface of whatever:

I placed Stations with refueling capacity into Low Orbits of Kerbin, Mun and Minmus that act as gateways/hubs. I use a dedicated (and yes, very cheap!) launch vehicle to bring the stuff into LKO where it gets transferred to the "Space Taxi" which brings it to the target hub where I transfer it into the Lander, followed by the descent onto the surface. That's the best way economic wise since I produce my fuels on Mun and Minmus.

 

I also get strange oscillations from the EV-2s when trying to dock with SAS on. Maybe it's because of the alignment of the RCS thruster packages. Did the RV-105 not have enough thrust/authority or why did you chose to use the Linear Thrusters?

 

€dit: The last one might probably come from MechJeb2 since the docking autopilot is very squirky and fuel hungry since it auto-over-corrects 99.9% of the time. I did not use the Docking AP but Smart A.S.S.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Jester Darrak

[septemberWaves]

32 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

Is there a way to ease handling of fuel transfer?

It takes a bit of manual configuring, but there's a mod called GPOSpeedFuelPump that makes it very easy to automate.

[Nerfclasher]

@Raptor9

 I love using your crafts in my videos and I even give you a name mention in some

Edited January 16, 2017 by Nerfclasher

[Raptor9]

21 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

After diving even deeper into planetary and satellite (here: moons) landing and recovery missions I found your LV-2D Cricket Lander as the go-to thing. What bothers me though is, that the sheer amount of RCS tanks makes it a PITA to refuel, wether on the surface or in orbit. Is there a way to ease handling of fuel transfer? I have KAS and KIS running, so maybe there is a trick with one of those but otherwise it's really hard to refuel and re-use the Lander.

Without mod plugins like @eloquentJane mentioned, I'm afraid not.  Generally, I'm never in a big hurry to get anywhere, so it doesn't tend to bother me.  The alternative to save trouble and part count would be to replace the lower half of the LV-2D with the 2.5m FL-R1 tank, but that only holds 750 units of monoprop, so I guess there's some notional structural components in there that reduces the total volume.  Although it would make the lander a lot cheaper and lighter in mass.

I can pack way more monoprop in a 2.5m service module (or similar size area) with the smaller monoprop tanks, so the benefits of more fuel outweigh the hinderance of refueling operations IMO.

21 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

I placed Stations with refueling capacity into Low Orbits of Kerbin, Mun and Minmus that act as gateways/hubs. I use a dedicated (and yes, very cheap!) launch vehicle to bring the stuff into LKO where it gets transferred to the "Space Taxi" which brings it to the target hub where I transfer it into the Lander, followed by the descent onto the surface. That's the best way economic wise since I produce my fuels on Mun and Minmus.

I pretty much do the same thing.  Dedicated craft for dedicated roles and destinations.

21 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

I also get strange oscillations from the EV-2s when trying to dock with SAS on. Maybe it's because of the alignment of the RCS thruster packages. Did the RV-105 not have enough thrust/authority or why did you chose to use the Linear Thrusters?

I was trying to make the EV-2C resemble the Orion MPCV a little more with the 1.2 revision.  Unfortuneately, it did result in a craft that is much harder to refuel and higher in part count, but the EV-2C's were never meant to be a "workhorse craft" per se.  I mainly saw them as a way to send crews around the Kerbin SOI and return them again through Kerbin reentry.  Very rarely do I ever need to refuel them.  I use them at the beginning of the mission, and then again at the end.  If I use them during the mission phase itself, it's probably because something went wrong, or I need to use it as a back-up power source of some sort.

They're really just the commuter car to get to work, and then the Kerbalnauts hop into their big rigs to do some serious work. 

[Jester Darrak]

4 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

They're really just the commuter car to get to work, and then the Kerbalnauts hop into their big rigs to do some serious work. 

I see your point and my fault there. One thing: For your Wernher Station you have a EV-2C bringing a service module with fuel (monopropellant?), do you have that somewhere?

[Raptor9]

3 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

For your Wernher Station you have a EV-2C bringing a service module with fuel (monopropellant?), do you have that somewhere?

Not available for download, didn't think it was necessary.  If you take either the EV-2C/LV-2A or EV-2C/LV-2B craft files, remove the lander from inside the fairing, and replace it with whatever payload you want.  Service modules, station modules, etc.  The service module in the 'Wernher Station' graphic is just a service bay with a bunch of monoprop jammed in like you said, to refuel the LV-2A for another landing or two.  Whenever I send another expedition to the station, it brings another service module along with it to fuel the lander for that expeditions' series of landings.

[TopHeavy11]

It's time to build new craft!

Aaaaaaaand this. You are amazing! These craft are expertly thought through and do just as advertised. My Pet Peeve of KSP is that I couldn't align docking ports on my surface bases if my life depended on it (KAS/KIS is a lifesaver for me) and I tend to...well...let's just say that most of my rovers...faceplant the ground...at 50 mps...off a cliff ANYWAYS. These are great craft. If only I could group-download all of them at once. Like'd!

[EVA_Reentry]

Have you seen KerbalX lately? Looks like your graphics are inspiring lots of people... 

(They also seem to be heavily inspired by your style, series, subassemblies, plans, and names... but that's none of my business)

[Raptor9]

9 hours ago, TopHeavy11 said:

My Pet Peeve of KSP is that I couldn't align docking ports on my surface bases if my life depended on it (KAS/KIS is a lifesaver for me)

Yeah, I struggled with that for a long time (still do sometimes).  But testing helps out a lot when using the Hack Gravity in Alt-F12; it allows me to test the stuff on the KSC runway to ensure wheel suspension settings are set properly and the docking ports are all the correct height.  The one thing to watch out for is the different "resting heights" of rovers and landers when they're full of fuel or empty.  That can sometimes throw the docking ports out of alignment enough, but not usually.

KAS/KIS is definitely an awesome mod that gives a lot more functionality to surface bases and EVA's.  I'm also a huge fan of Kerbal Planetary Base Systems by Nils277, amazing IVA's in that one.  Thanks for the compliment too. 

3 hours ago, EVA_Reentry said:

Have you seen KerbalX lately? Looks like your graphics are inspiring lots of people... 

Yeah, ha ha.  @chlbutterworth has been fairly busy lately. 

[EVA_Reentry]

17 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

Yeah, I struggled with that for a long time (still do sometimes).  But testing helps out a lot when using the Hack Gravity in Alt-F12; it allows me to test the stuff on the KSC runway to ensure wheel suspension settings are set properly and the docking ports are all the correct height.  The one thing to watch out for is the different "resting heights" of rovers and landers when they're full of fuel or empty.  That can sometimes throw the docking ports out of alignment enough, but not usually.

KAS/KIS is definitely an awesome mod that gives a lot more functionality to surface bases and EVA's.  I'm also a huge fan of Kerbal Planetary Base Systems by Nils277, amazing IVA's in that one.  Thanks for the compliment too. 

Yeah, ha ha.  @chlbutterworth has been fairly busy lately. 

seriously.

"SM-Series"? C'mon, now...

Also: https://kerbalx.com/chlbutterworth/CF-2A

I hate that-even the naming system is the same!

 

EDIT: Didn't you make this? https://kerbalx.com/chlbutterworth/Griffin-A0

 

(I wouldn't have posted the above f I had realized he/she had a forum account. Just making a few observations)

Edited January 18, 2017 by EVA_Reentry

[Raptor9]

7 hours ago, EVA_Reentry said:

"SM-Series"? C'mon, now...

I hate that-even the naming system is the same!

It is fairly derivative, unfortunately.  As long as the stuff isn't plagiarizing directly from my craft and/or graphics.

7 hours ago, EVA_Reentry said:

EDIT: Didn't you make this?

I didn't, no.  The graphic layout of his "Griffin" series is like my 'Thunder' rocket family graphic, and the Griffin's upper stage is fairly close to my LITE upper stage on the 'Lightning' medium launcher, but then again, my 'Lightning' is based on ULA's "Vulcan"/ACES rocket.  So really, who's copying who here? 

Edited January 19, 2017 by Raptor9

[EVA_Reentry]

8 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

graphic layout of his "Griffin" series is like my 'Thunder' rocket family graphic, and the Griffin's upper stage is fairly close to my LITE upper stage on the 'Lightning' medium launcher, but then again, my 'Lightning' is based on ULA's "Vulcan"/ACES rocket.  So really, who's copying who here? 

...as long as you're okay with it. Blatantly copying someone really irks me. So does taking a high quality craft, adding a few tiny bits here and there. and calling it your own. Oh well.