Raptor9

Raptor's Craft Download Catalog - Tested & Proven

Recommended Posts

I think Olympus would be an appropriate name for the 5m rocket lineup. That way, each manufacturer has their own naming scheme: Junkyard = Projectiles, Rockomax = Weather, Kerbodyne = Greek mythology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of stage and a half: The Decoupler actually allows thrust and heat to go through the ring, so you can actually do a real Atlas Analogue and a Lk-1 analogue (In fact I tested a LK-1 myself) in Kerbin orbit, trying to test the N-1 itself)

Based on this, you may even be able to do a mobile launch system (which TBH is useless as it tie to the diameter of the decoupler)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jestersage said:

Speaking of stage and a half: The Decoupler actually allows thrust and heat to go through the ring, so you can actually do a real Atlas Analogue and a Lk-1 analogue (In fact I tested a LK-1 myself) in Kerbin orbit, trying to test the N-1 itself)

I was thinking the same thing for the stage and a half...I would love to do a Soviet-style Mun mission, but that's something I'm going to tackle down the road (I'm digging the Soviet-green textures on some of the parts and the fairings).  I'm forcing myself to update all existing craft first.

6 hours ago, d4harp said:

I think Olympus would be an appropriate name for the 5m rocket lineup. That way, each manufacturer has their own naming scheme: Junkyard = Projectiles, Rockomax = Weather, Kerbodyne = Greek mythology

That sounds like an excellent suggestion.  I honestly hadn't realized I had grouped them as such.  I was trying to steer away from "Human" mythology, and adopt an analogous naming scheme to the Jupiter and Saturn-series rockets that were being tested early in the American space program; but there are already so many rockets that are labeled Jool or Sarnus, so I wouldn't be breaking any new ground there.  But I like Olympus.  It seems to convey large size as well as reminding me of Olympus Mons on Mars, the largest mountain and largest volcano in the Solar System.  I'll add 'Olympus' to my list of possible names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raptor9,

 

I myself am looking at some designs, but I do feel that the new parts and designs lend themselves towards a proton clone or cousin, espeically with the 5m shell, though you would have to play with the engine count.

As for rocket names, I've always found natural event names appropiate. "Thunderhead", "Tidal blast", "Sizemic event"..
Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far I've accumulated a fair amount of new and/or updated craft files for 1.4.x.  As soon as Kronal Vessel Viewer is updated to 1.4.x, I'll start releasing the new craft files on KerbalX.

I'm especially excited about using the new LV-1 'Frog' family of landers.  The LV-1 landers were always my baseline landers, analogous to the Apollo lunar lander.  Prior to 1.4, the family consisted of three variants.  The LV-1A was the basic flags, footprints, and take a few measurements lander.  The B-model traded some fuel reserves for space to bring a rover, like the later Apollo landings, to explore further away from the landing site.  The LV-1C was a pre-staged habitation lander for longer duration stays and the ability to explore even more terrain.

The LV-1C was created after some brief study into the Apollo Applications Program, but the 1.4 versions of the LV-1 expand on it even further.  In all, the family now consists of 6 lander variants (so far), each with a specific purpose and unique set of capabilities, all inspired by concepts proposed for Apollo missions beyond the last mission, Apollo 17.  The most notable feature of the landers is they all share a common descent module.  The differences between the landers are whats riding on top, as well as what is placed in the two equipment bays on each side of the descent module itself.  The sequence would go something like this:

Initial Munar landings (No change from pre-1.4): LV-1A with a basic science package in equipment bay 1, and auxiliary fuel tanks in equipment bay 2.
Follow-on Munar landings: after the player gets familiar with the performance and limitations of the LV-1A on the initial landings, some of the extra fuel stored in equipment bay 2 is replaced with the ER-1 'Rat' rover.  Additionally, the orbiting EV-2A 'Runabout' will now include a sub-satellite in the service bay, which is released into a Munar orbit while the landing party is exploring the surface (These are analogous to PFS-1 and PFS-2 sub-satellites released by Apollo 15 and 16 respectively, and are part of my probe revamp project)
Expanded science return landings: an un-crewed LV-1S 'Frog' Munar shelter is delivered by remote control near the next landing site by a crewed EV-2A conducting an orbital science mission.  The next crew would arrive later in an LV-1B to conduct a multi-day/multi-week mission, using the LV-1S as the staging outpost (and larger science experiments in equipment bay 1 like a SC-9001 Science Jr.) and then returning to orbit in the LV-1B ascent stage.
Long-term surface base: an un-crewed 'Olympus 5' rocket (yes @d4harp, I'm going with 'Olympus' :D) would autonomously deliver an LV-1U utilities lander and LV-1H habitation lander to a suitable outpost location on the Munar surface.  The LV-1U would provide a basic comms relay and propellant storage for fuel cell power on the LV-1H, which would be a larger habitation lander very similar to the existing pre-1.4 LV-1C.  When the crews arrive, they will use the new LV-1C 'Frog', to ferry Kerbals down to the surface outpost.  The new 1.4 LV-1C is essentially an LV-1A with some slight modifications as a single-stage lander, and a science storage container for transporting experiment data back up to the waiting EV-2A, if bringing back "hard copies" was preferred in lieu of transmitting the data.

(Disclaimer, I haven't found any references to a single-stage lunar lander in the expanded Apollo proposals, but I didn't want a bunch of used descent stages cluttering up any surface bases and increasing local part count)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say thank you for sharing these designs. I'm really interested in mission architectures, and I'm particularly interested in your Design Reference Architectures, the trade-offs you make for them, and their intended use cases. I look forward to experiencing them with updated balance in KSP 1.4.2. Thanks again! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/3/2018 at 6:56 AM, Raptor9 said:

@d4harpSo far I've accumulated a fair amount of new and/or updated craft files for 1.4.x.  As soon as Kronal Vessel Viewer is updated to 1.4.x, I'll start releasing the new craft files on KerbalX.

 

I can't wait to see what you have created with new tanks, engines and parts, I love your designs so foull of details and imagination placing extra parts to make them incredibly beautiful.

Great work!

Edited by Wirebraid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raptor9 is a source of inspiration for all the community. I'm ongoing a vanilla run JUST BECAUSE I would like to 1% mimicking what he have accomplished so far. 
So if you ever run for a presidency in one country you'll get my vote.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rawghi said:

So if you ever run for a presidency in one country you'll get my vote.

No thank you. I don't even have adequate time to run a simulated space program, let alone a real country.

But thanks for the compliment. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it says you're waiting on KVV to update before uploading any craft files, but any chance we could get a few screenshot teasers? The wait is killing me!
Great work as always!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Revali said:

What happened to titan 4 and 2?

I assume you're asking why there aren't specific launcher configurations named as such? It's because they never existed.  My naming convention *roughly* emulates the real-life Saturn rockets.

Example 1: 'Titan 1B' first stage (consisting of the core booster and 2x SRBs) and 'Titan 2' upper stage combine to form the 'Titan 3' rocket lifter
Example 2: 'Titan 1B' first stage and 'Titan 2P' upper stage combine to form the 'Titan 3P' rocket lifter
Example 3: 'Titan 1B' first stage and 'Titan 3' upper stage combine to form the 'Titan 4C' rocket lifter (in this case, the "C" was added to denote it as a Cargo rocket only)

So it's really just a mash-up of how I named and organized my individual rocket stages as subassemblies, to assemble complete lifters as the end product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did you use to make the P&P module for the EV2C? (Haven't downloaded it, wondered how for a replica?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Raptor9,

I'm trying to launch some of your ships, like the AKOS-Javelin 1 and I notice I cannot maneuver it withouth the engine gimbal. Am I supposed to achieve orbit in a single continuous burn? Because my usual burn to 80km, coast to Ap and the circularize is kind of difficult with it.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2018 at 7:18 PM, SiriusRocketry said:

What did you use to make the P&P module for the EV2C? (Haven't downloaded it, wondered how for a replica?)

Just a bunch of radiator panels placed in a circle, which is gonna change anyway now that we have 1.875m parts.

4 hours ago, Wirebraid said:

Am I supposed to achieve orbit in a single continuous burn? Because my usual burn to 80km, coast to Ap and the circularize is kind of difficult with it.

I generally do one continuous burn, and adjust the throttle as necessary after the gravity turn to achieve orbit, but still maintain control via the gimbal.  My launches pretty much go like this every time:

1) After launch, perform initial pitch-kick around 100m/s to start the gravity turn
2) Throttle down as necessary to keep acceleration no higher than 2 G's on the G-meter
3) Slowly drag the flight path vector (prograde marker) down as speed approaches 300m/s
4) Turn on SAS and select Prograde Hold as the rocket goes through transonic range 340-380 m/s, or just before SRB's jettison.  This keeps the rocket stable during supersonic transition or during SRB jettison sequence (if side boosters are on the rocket of course)
5) Continue throttling as necessary to keep acceleration at 2 G's, and slowly drag the flight path vector down towards the horizon
6) Ideally, when the flight path vector hits +40 deg pitch above the horizon, I'm looking to be around 600m/s and somewhere between 13,000m and 18,000m altitude.  The 600m/s at 40deg positive pitch is my "gravity turn check" gate that tells me I'm on track for a good LKO orbital insertion.  If I'm launching a payload that is near the max payload rating of the rocket and/or the lifter has a lower TWR, I may pitch over less aggressively and end up passing 600m/s when at 45-55 deg pitch.
7) After passing my "gravity turn check" I switch SAS back on and select Prograde Hold again, then switch to map view and start monitoring my apoapsis.  From this point forward, all I'm doing is adjusting throttle as necessary to hit my LKO apoapsis at about the same moment that I'm achieving orbital velocity.  I keep throttling down and watching how fast my Ap altitude is climbing to time it appropriately.  By the time my Ap is passing about 55km, I'm usually throttling the engine down to idle to maintain gimbal steering, and my Ap will slowly creep up above 70km as I semi-coast under minimal thrust.
NOTE I jettison my payload fairings at 50km altitude either by staging or manually right-clicking on them.

If you click on the link for "CisMunar Propellant Economy Part 1" tutorial video in this thread's OP (or in my signature),  you'll see a demonstration launch of how I perform my launches at the start of the video.  The payload is fairly heavy, so it's not an exact match to how I launch lightweight satellites to orbit, but you get the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

Just a bunch of radiator panels placed in a circle, which is gonna change anyway now that we have 1.875m parts.

Did you clip together 1.25m tanks to get this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SiriusRocketry said:

Did you clip together 1.25m tanks to get this?

Nope, just a crap ton of individual Oscar-B tanks stuffed in an orderly fashion inside the radiator panels.  Which drives up the part count significantly, so I'm glad I can use just a single 1.875m tank now.  Clipping fuel tanks inside each other is "cheaty" in my play-style.

If you're really that curious on how it's put together, just download the craft file and look for yourself, it will be much easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you set up a thread like this (embed pics in spoilers is mostly the stumbling block here) If there's another thread for this, just redirect me. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SiriusRocketry said:

How would you set up a thread like this (embed pics in spoilers is mostly the stumbling block here)

What difficulty are you running into specifically? Posting pictures in the thread, setting up spoilers blocks, or putting content in the spoiler blocks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KSP%20Forum%20Thread%20Tutorial_zpsylzey

Keep in mind that in this example, the image-hosting service is Photobucket.  There is an Imgur button one button to the right of the "Spoiler" button, but I've never used it and I've never used Imgur.

@SiriusRocketry, hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really like going shopping...FOR NASA!

could there be a .zip file that has every vessel in it, i love them all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Abpilot said:

could there be a .zip file that has every vessel in it

In the OP of this thread, there is a Categorized Bulk Downloads Section that includes links to KerbalX hangers that allow you to download groups of craft files.  If you want EVERYTHING, download the VAB, SPH, and Subassemby hangers that are bolded and italicized at the bottom of the table list.  The reason I kept these separate is because it's easier to keep the respective folders separated for easier installation into your KSP directory.
___________________________________
Having said that, now that Kronal Vessel Viewer is updated (big thanks to @linuxgurugamer's & @Kerbas_ad_astra's relentless efforts), I'm currently generating graphics for my 1.4.x craft file updates and revisions.  The priority at the moment is to update existing craft files, but some brand new craft designs will be coming out very soon.  Unfortunately, I will also be removing a few craft files from my catalog.  The primary reasons for any craft removals include redundancy, less-than-satisfactory performance (in my opinion), or me simply learning to hate them and no longer wanting to deal with them.

Already identified for removal within the coming weeks:
- SVR-23A & SVR-23B 'Raven' vertically-launched spaceplanes
- MPC-L and MCR utility rovers

The MCR is extremely impractical, and the MPC-L is fairly redundant after further testing.  For example, the amount of resources it would take to place the Mobile Comms Rover onto a planetary body is much greater and logistically silly compared to simply placing a similarly-capable comms relay satellite in orbit.  Likewise, designing a rover or base module with more thought to power supply negates the need to land an MPC-L rover to provide a small, however mobile, boost to solar power generation.

In fact, I've taken a much more in-depth look at how I was managing both my communications as well as my satellites and probes.  During my probe/satellite revamp project, I not only ensured the devices could physically perform their mission at their destination, but that they could (if a player desires) relay ALL of their science data back through the comm network.  For example, the Gravioli detector requires a significant increase in power reserves to relay a measurement compared to the thermometer.  Another example that I wasn't aware of until a player reported the issue was not having enough power to complete an orbital resource survey of larger planets such as Kerbin or Eve.  Therefore, communications and power have become their own separate testing categories prior to publishing a craft file.

A good number of craft files, while not being removed outright, will drastically change in appearance, functionality, and overall design.  The best example of this is the currently designated LV-3D and LV-3E Duna landers.  Not only have these landers been completely rebuilt from the ground up to be more accurate in both appearance and function compared to their real-life inspirations (as pictured below), but they have been re-designated as well to reflect their change in mission scope.  More on this later.

Boeing's Mars Crew Lander/Ascent Vehicle (left) and pre-staged habitation lander (right)

LunarLander_4View.jpg    23804590b389a1897e1eae3fa553b3cf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.