Raptor9

Raptor's Craft Download Catalog - Tested & Proven

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Three_Pounds said:

The offset tool is still limited, even with the option enabled.

I forget which parts I connected them with when placing them, because I really wasn't too concerned since I was about to move them anyway to their final positions.  However, it sounds like you are hitting the initial limit of the offset tool.  If you hold down the Shift key while using the offset tool, it doubles or triples the distance you can move the parts using offsetting.

2 hours ago, Three_Pounds said:

Upon further testing it works fine in 1.3.1. Is that the version of the game you're running?

I'm running 1.4.4, but the current version of the Gilly Logistics Kit (with those fixed struts) was built in 1.4.3.

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


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

 If you hold down the Shift key while using the offset tool, it doubles or triples the distance you can move the parts using offsetting.

I've played this game for thousands of hours and never knew this. Blind = blown :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm stupid, but to me it looks like the Scarab Cruise Module is either out of balance itself or very prone to even light weight imbalancies. I strapped a MJ2 case onto it and wasn't able to hold attitude while using the Ant Engines.

Additional note: Since MechJeb has it's problems with RCS thrusters I try not to use RCS whenever possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After you separate from the 'Thunder 2' upper stage, stage the engines on the cruise module, then cycle action group 3 by double tapping it..  It not only toggles the LV-1R engines, but also ensures the proper "Control From Here" axis is aligned with the thrust vector.

Also, since the SAS system is rather retarded, when I'm flying with a craft that has sufficient gimbaling on the engines, as soon as I start my burn I turn RCS off and let the gimbals keep the craft aligned.  Keeping RCS enabled when drifting, coasting, or burning with gimbals just wastes RCS needlessly in KSP IMO.

Couldn't comment on MJ since I'm unfamiliar with it's function or use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2018 at 1:57 AM, Raptor9 said:

then cycle action group 3 by double tapping it

If I was just able to read... xD

On 7/12/2018 at 1:57 AM, Raptor9 said:

 

Edited by Jester Darrak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we need a dedicated Relay Satellite for the Scarab, which probe out of your catalogue would you suggest in terms of capability, cost and durability? Or did you even have plans for a Deep Space Network?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jester Darrak, I was in the process of designing dedicated interplanetary comms satellites, starting with Duna and Eve, when I went on my KSP hiatus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: How do you determine which Solar panel to use? Specifically, I am looking a your MOL clone, and I am wondering how you decide to go with the smaller 1x6 panel (aside from, of course, the original one does not have solar panels at all). That got me thinking about the size of solar panel I should have used for my designs.

Edited by Jestersage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jestersage said:

how you decide to go with the smaller 1x6 panel (aside from, of course, the original one does not have solar panels at all).

I just thought it looked better with the 1x6 versus the 3x2.  If you look around on the internet, you will find some MOL concept proposals that did include solar arrays.

Share this post


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

I just thought it looked better with the 1x6 versus the 3x2.  If you look around on the internet, you will find some MOL concept proposals that did include solar arrays.

I was thinking of the gigantic array...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raptor9 I've been a long time user of your craft on KerbalX, but just found this forum and your YouTube Channel (Raptor 9), thank you so much for all of your hard work and dedication to not only making great craft, but taking the time to make such great documentation on KerbalX and making them stock so they are usable by all.

Fantastic work

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Raptor, would like to ask your opinion: In terms of docking port, when would you use the junior ports, and when should you use the standard ports? Or would it be better to just choose one depends on the looks of one and then have its supporting hardware follow suit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jestersage, I generally keep the small docking clamps as grappling ports as a way of attaching smaller pieces of equipment to a spacecraft, as resource transfer "plug-ins", or used in groups to attach trusses for space stations (or my EV-5 truss).  The regular 1.25m clamps are my standard crew passage and transfer docking ports, and the large 2.5m clamps are for attaching large orbital assembly modules/spacecraft together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jester Darrak, unfortunately not.  I've tinkered with a few projects here and there over the past month or two, but that's about it.  It has, however, given me time to gather some more ideas, so that's good. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SiriusRocketry, I'm afraid not.  I learned to hate the SVR-23's so much I just deleted them from my KSP folder, and when I did my 1.4 update with all the new brochure graphics, I deleted all the outdated ones.  Not that they take a lot of hard drive space, but with so many it was becoming a headache to keep them organized.

Share this post


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

Can you remember how you launched the SVR-23?

The theory behind it was to do the opposite of the stereotypical space shuttle configuration.  Instead of having the high-gimbal Vector engines on the spaceplane, I put a single Vector on the booster rocket, with fixed-nozzle aerospike engines on the SVR-23 which rode piggyback on the booster.  However, this configuration never really achieved a satisfactory level of controllability during ascent to orbit.

I never was particularly adept at SSTO spaceplanes, so the SVR-23's were my attempt to get around that by just launching them vertically in a partially-reusable configuration.  In the end, the SVR-23 was probably better described as a proof-of-concept prototype than a spacecraft with practical use.  Not my best work by any metric.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I was only asking because I was attempting to find the best way of launching a similar plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SVR-23 is the "Mk-2 shuttle with 1x Shuttle Liquid Booster beneath, launched like Buran", right?

I think it has two problems for you:

  • STS Shuttle inheritly have stability problem in KSP
  • There are not much historical basis for such configuration with a IRL diameter of 3 to 5 meters (technically there is one -- MAKS, which is air launch)

What you should do instead is to make it an analogue to the Hermes or LKS shuttle -- make it inline. In fact, I guess that will be my next release (still tinkering with my TKS). I know for a fact that it is capable of reaching a 125k orbit, as I was using your designs before redesigning it to get around such issue.

 

Edited by Jestersage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SiriusRocketry said:

OK, I was only asking because I was attempting to find the best way of launching a similar plane.

From experience with a similar situation, I usually have to tweak the booster (Boreas-R, Twin-Boar-based recoverable booster) thrust during the flight in order to maintain acceptable manoeuvrability, but other than that, its profile is nothing fancy. Using Gravity Turn, I only have to act on booster thrust and roll (180 to 0) during the flight. 

Now, as is visible in the picture, this version of Boreas-R is specifically designed for greater pitch control (6 vernor RCS for pitch control, 2 for yaw), so RCS is necessary for the flight.

Spoiler

wSsvCMA.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jester Darrak, bug hit me again...sort of.

After 2.5 months of not touching KSP, I'm (temporarily) back to the drawing boards.  A couple days ago I started a new project.  I know I have a lot of open and existing projects that are still languishing on my hard drive, not to mention I never finished updating all of my legacy craft files for 1.4.x.  However, I'll take inspiration wherever I can get it.

I use the term "sort of" because when this project is finished and released, I'll probably take another break from KSP until 1.5 is released.

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.