Raptor9

Raptor's Craft Download Catalog - Tested & Proven

Recommended Posts

The M3V 'Pol Logistics Kit' and EV-7 'Skipjack'/'Mobile Mission Kit' are now published on KerbalX.  Aside from communications satellites and research probes, these are the first spacecraft specifically designed to support crewed expeditions into the Jool Sphere-Of-Influence.  Previous spacecraft such as the NITE, EV-6 'Windjammer', and certain landers possess capabilities that could be applied to the Joolian moons, but these are the first craft designed from the ground up with Jool's moons in mind.

The 'Pol Logistics Kit' is very similar to it's brethren, the 'Gilly Logistics Kit', but with some slight alterations.  Namely, the IV-2B 'Badger' ISRU rig replaces the fixed solar panels that were present on the IV-2A with six RTG's.  Due to the dim solar energy that reaches Jool, solar panels aren't a viable option for running three drills, a converter, and it's associated thermal management systems (unless the solar panels are spammed of course, but no :P).  The second alteration is on the included NITE stage.  While Pol is still an ultra-low gravity body like Gilly, using just the NITE's Vernor thrusters to assist the IV-2B's Spark engine during touchdown didn't afford the comfortable TWR I wanted.  Even when low on propellant, and landing on a small moon like Pol, the NITE coupled to an RTG-equipped ISRU rig is a lot of mass to move around.  So it comes with a Thrust Assist Pack that aids in the initial ISRU rig placement, and lifting a fully-fueled NITE away from the IV-2B to return to orbit.  The Thrust Assist Pack is only needed to get clear of the IV-2B before flipping over and using the large Wolfhound engine to actually burn up to orbit.

When returning the NITE to the IV-2B for more fuel, use caution.  The Thrust Assist Pack's engine plumes can knock over the IV-2B if not aligned correctly as you can see in the fourth screenshot in the bottom of the graphic.  It's also a good idea to retract the radiators on the IV-2B any time you are landing or departing the NITE, so they aren't caught in the thrust plumes.  But aside from that minor inconvenience, since the IV-2B relies solely on RTG power, ISRU operations are unimpeded by hours of darkness, and can completely refuel an empty NITE in 18 Kerbin days.  One final note: this kit can proceed from launchpad to Pol landing without refuel if you use a Tylo gravity brake maneuver, otherwise it might be wise to top off in Munar orbit first.  Or go to Ike to top off and then proceed on to Jool from there.

M3V%20Pol%20Logistics%20Kit%20Small_zps5tm6jwfp.png

M3V%20EV-7%20Skipjack%20Small_zpscvd7j8bk.png     M3V%20EV-7%20Mobile%20Mission%20Kit%20Small_zpsf3o1kyho.png

Finally finished the EV-7 'Skipjack'...took me long enough. :rolleyes:  It's assembled in low Kerbin orbit with three launches, and sent to it's target destination in similar fashion as other forward-deployed cargo.  Conceptually, this would be sent autonomously along with one of the Research Kits, and supported by one of the ISRU Logistics Kits.  In the case of Jool, a crewed EV-6 'Windjammer' would arrive in system and proceed to Pol, which is an ideal forward staging location prior to going to the other moons.  Pol's low gravity and low inclination make it ideal for ISRU propellant distribution.  After arriving in Pol orbit, the EV-6 can remain there, and use the EV-7 to conduct initial orbital scans elsewhere.  Or the entire expedition can be relocated to another moon, depending on what the mission plan is.

As an alternative, the EV-7 is also an invaluable asset when conducting missions to Dres.  Supported by an 'Ike/Dres Logistics Kit' (or it's own ISRU Module if you're patient enough), an EV-6 can arrive and set up shop with a Research kit in orbit like it would around Duna or elsewhere.  The EV-7 can conduct orbital science experiments, resource scans, and landing after landing to every biome.  With ISRU refuelings and a full suite of scientific sensors on it's Landing Module, an EV-7 could conceivably collect all the science from the Dres SOI, including asteroid samples, in one expedition.

Some additional notes that I haven't mentioned here are in the catalog in the OP.  Additionally, as mentioned before, in the spirit of M3V these modules can be used with other spacecraft.  You could use the Mission Modules (except the Landing Module) in the same manner with the EV-2L, or you could leave the ISRU Module moored to an asteroid and dock other spacecraft to it to receive fuel, etc.

These craft publishing posts seem to be getting longer every time, but there's just so much mission-specific info I feel like I should share. :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn dude... you make the best KSP Lego! These are some great looking builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:

Damn dude... you make the best KSP Lego! These are some great looking builds.

True words!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the gravity of Minmus is 0.05g compared to that of Pol with 0.038g, is it possible to abuse the whole Pol Logistics Kit to work on Minmus or is that too much for the RCS thrusters to land the NITE on the Pad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

Since the gravity of Minmus is 0.05g compared to that of Pol with 0.038g, is it possible to abuse the whole Pol Logistics Kit to work on Minmus or is that too much for the RCS thrusters to land the NITE on the Pad?

Nah, it all works just fine.  I just did a quick validation test, and the Thrust Assist Pack is still able to lift a full NITE clear of the IV-2B's pad.  You're good to go. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

Nah, it all works just fine.  I just did a quick validation test, and the Thrust Assist Pack is still able to lift a full NITE clear of the IV-2B's pad.  You're good to go. :)

Perfect!

About the EV-7: You send it unkerbed to Jool after a Logistics Kit, followed by EV-6 that Brings the Crew, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Jester Darrak said:

About the EV-7: You send it unkerbed to Jool after a Logistics Kit, followed by EV-6 that Brings the Crew, right?

That's the idea anyway.  1) Send 'JoolLink' to establish communications bridge, 2) Send 'Pol Logistics Kit' to establish initial propellant supply, 3) Send the EV-7 and one of the 'Research Kits', 4) Send the EV-6 with the expedition crew and link up with the EV-7 and 'Research Kit'.

Of course, you could really send all of that in the same transfer window considering the length of time between return transfer windows, but whenever my career save advances to the point I actually start doing "official missions" to Jool I'll probably send my 'JoolLink' with my science probes, and send all the supporting kits in the transfer window prior to my crewed ship.  What's convenient is between the 'Logistics Kit, the 'Research Kit', and the EV-7 'Mobile Mission Kit', there will be three NITE's in the Jool SOI to facilitate propellant supply and transfers.

What's sad is I've been playing KSP for as long as I have but only been as far as Duna and Eve in my career save.  :P Anything further out has been sandbox testing and validation.

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A few small updates that have been on the back burner are up today.  The 'Ike/Dres Logistics Kits' have the new Saddle trusses (which are better, lighter, less parts) from the latest EV-4 versions.  The T-14 has been updated to reflect the Boeing/Saab T-X demonstrators.  I really didn't care for the previous version of the T-14.  It reminded me of an F-16 before it went through puberty.  With the new twin tails and stepped, tandem cockpit, the new T-14 looks and performs better IMO.

A new aircraft is up now in the SPH>KSA Fleet section, based on the NASA WB-57F.  At first glance the WR-24 'HawkEye' looks like a two-seat, twin-engine WR-6 'Condor', but the main difference in it's design is the wing and tailplane incidences have been optimized for high altitude cruising.  Unfortunately, the aircraft has a fairly aggressive nose up tendency at low altitude and high speeds, but at 9,500 meters altitude and full throttle, the WR-24 is stable with minimal to no trim applied.  The aircraft will takeoff on it's own, but shortly thereafter you will need to start applying negative pitch trim.  There are four flap segments that can aid in this as well, but the more of these you activate the more drag you will incur, requiring more throttle and shallower climb angles.

Overall, it can't fly as high as the WR-6 can in afterburner mode, since it has dry thrust only and it's almost twice the gross weight.  But it can travel a little further and the flying at altitude has less of a workload to it.

WR-24%20HawkEye%20Small_zpsgx3xatvx.png

EDIT: I had to update the EV-2L today.  I could've sworn the crew capsule had a Communotron 16S mounted to it, but maybe I inadvertently reverted to an older capsule version when I was updating all my LITE-based craft.  So that was the only change.  But a necessary one if you want to separate the LITE from the EV-2L Command Module and use them as separate spacecraft.

The main reason this is needed is the potential for adaptation of the EV-2L using the EV-7 'Mobile Mission Kit' modules, which some have parts that require a dedicated comms antenna.  However, since the EV-7 Landing Module cannot be used with the EV-2L, an M3V kit that has been on my list for a few months is an 'EV-2L Landing Kit'.  Sending a crew or EVA report from a surface would obviously need an antenna.

The obvious question is why waste time trying to reconfigure the EV-2L to land...just use a dedicated lander.  The answer is it's all about options for versatility and redundancy.

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

For whatever reason I keep getting structural failure on my Titans between the S3-7200 and the fairing (the first, covering the RE-J10), all on the main propulsion stage, around 1 minute into flight. Only mod used is MechJeb2, but he's set to not fly it like a fighter jet. Any idea?

Edit: Double-checked it, it happens when the boosters are separated from the main stage. Looks like there is some frame drop, causing the physics to "catch up", thus exceeding craft integrity beyond structural limits.

Edited by Jester Darrak
Because reasons!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

For whatever reason I keep getting structural failure on my Titans between the S3-7200 and the fairing

Try keeping the acceleration below 2 G's, I've only ever experienced this when accelerating too quickly.

@Jester Darrak What specific craft file are you using? So I can run some more tests.

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the IV-2A with NITE Thrust Assist Pack on a Titan 3 main stage. Thrust is sufficient to get into LKO. As I said, it happens everytime the Boosters are seperated using MechJeb ascent guidance with auto staging. I will try manual staging tomorrow to see if that causes the fps and physics stuttering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

So... gonna make Blue Origin/SpaceX with the EV-2C?

Nope, not at all.

17 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

I will try manual staging tomorrow to see if that causes the fps and physics stuttering.

Cool, let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Raptor9 said:

Nope, not at all.

Oh come on, Trump want that to happen :P 

Yeah, it was just a rib that SLS is pretty much DoA at this point, and seeing you tend to lean a bit closer to actualized projects (compare to mine, which is Russian/China and even more paper projects... Orion and SLS flying to the moon is still much more likely than Federarsiya flying anywhere.)

Edited by Jestersage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

SLS is pretty much DoA at this point

Not to get into a political debate, but a few key points you need to remember:
1) The budget proposal was just that, a proposal.  The U.S. Congress is still the determining factor in where the money is allocated, at least on paper.
2) The budget request itself doesn't cancel the SLS, but rather cuts the funding for the next fiscal year for development of the Exploration Upper Stage (ICPS), and directs NASA/Boeing to focus on finalizing the development of the Interim Crygenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) configuration with SLS.  So the EUS is on indefinite hold.
3) NASA already caused the EUS to be further delayed last year when they asked Boeing to further develop it for increased performance.  For years NASA has been going through the government agency development spiral called "feature creep", and inevitably shot themselves in the foot (and not the first time) with SLS.  I'm honestly surprised SLS hadn't received budget cuts sooner.

Now having said all that, I want to clearly state that I support any spaceflight program that increases scientific knowledge and human exploration; and I want everyone to succeed, whether it be NASA's return to the Moon, SpaceX's BFR, Blue Origin's New Glenn, ULA's CisLunar-1000, Russia's Federatsiya, or China's planned space station.  I have my personal doubts on whether all of these programs will in fact succeed, but I'm still rooting them all on regardless.

8 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

you tend to lean a bit closer to actualized projects

That's not accurate at all.  If it were, the majority of my craft catalog wouldn't even exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a few more test runs and the only way to prevent the structural failure is checking umbreakable joints the cheat menu. I even limited g loads to 2g and less.

I should mention that the fairing around the RE-J10 needs to be rebuilt everytime I move certain parts around, just like the struts were making problems with subassemblies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

I did a few more test runs and the only way to prevent the structural failure is checking umbreakable joints the cheat menu. I even limited g loads to 2g and less.

Hmm, weird, I haven't had any issues.  And you said Kerbal Joint Reinforcement isn't installed correct?  Could by any chance send me the craft file?  You can PM me if you need an email address or something.

21 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

I should mention that the fairing around the RE-J10 needs to be rebuilt everytime I move certain parts around, just like the struts were making problems with subassemblies.

Yeah, that's standard behavior any time you have fairings that serve as an interstage fairing or any sort of "open" fairing that closes around another part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: In carrier mode, do you do any surface/rover report contracts? If so, do you use the C7-3xx cargo carriers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

do you do any surface/rover report contracts? If so, do you use the C7-3xx cargo carriers?

I did some, early in my career.  But I just landed a single plane with sensors at each site.  But by that time my contract generation started to shift away from aerial survey contracts as I did more Munar exploration.

Making a better method of exploring Kerbin is on my list of things to do, to include a smaller cargo plane as a little brother to the 'Atlas' to facilitate this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So....thanks to @Jester Darrak :wink:, I found a deficiency with my 'Titan' series of launchers.  I long ago determined that having Rigid Attachment set to On was not good when making heavy rockets, or rockets that handle heavy payloads.  Yet for some reason I had the parts of every core 'Titan' first stage with Rigid Attachment set in such a manner.

I thought I had long ago removed that setting from my launchers, but I must have accidentally reverted to an older subassembly during a recent rocket revision.  In any case, all existing subassemblies I used to build my standardized rocket lifters have been purged to be sure, and all affected craft files on KerbalX have received the fix (56 in total :rolleyes:).  That's the downside to using a standardized rocket family.  When a problem is found, it affects any craft file that uses it.

Share this post


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

-snip-

Now I can finally put the Badger on Minmus. After downloading the whole catalogue again. (Better safe than sorry.^^)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what's coming next? Couldn't find any info on any projects in the pipeline. Maybe a series of more potent SSTOs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Jester Darrak said:

So, what's coming next? Couldn't find any info on any projects in the pipeline.

I moved my Most Recent Updates & Future Plans Section to the second post in the thread, to make it easier to edit the info there without having to load the entire OP.  The next thing you should expect is a few small tidbits here and there, but no timeline on it.

The main thing is I'm playing more of my Career save, to catch up my official play save to how far my published designs have gotten in Sandbox.  For example, I have the EV-7 for Dres and Jool exploration when I've only done a few Career Duna landings and just started low orbital research around Eve.  There are some obvious things I need to do, but those aren't necessarily needed at the moment.

1 hour ago, Jester Darrak said:

Maybe a series of more potent SSTOs?

I assume you mean SSTO spaceplanes beyond the SR-21's?  Personally, I'm not a fan of them.  Having said that, SSTO spaceplanes (or other SSTO design) make sense for Laythe.  With a relatively thick atmo with oxygen, it would be very wise to mature my build techniques in this area.  But I'm not up against heavy Jool exploration at the moment so it's not a pressing need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yeah, right, totally forgot you sometimes actually like to play the game itself to advance further in your career. The spoiled child that I am, I sometimes forget.

Have fun then. :)

Ps: I haven't even send Kerbals to Duna yet, I was just curious. ;)

Edited by Jester Darrak
Because reasons

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.