Raptor9

Raptor's Craft Download Catalog - Tested & Proven

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Something tell me you will have to update the LV-3 series when the DLC comes up. And the SVR-20. And all those props crafts.

 

Edited by Jestersage

Share this post


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

After a lot of tediousness, 80% of the catalog has been updated to 1.7.0, mainly to address the changes to the RCS and Vernor thruster model revisions.  Thankfully (and I do mean thankfully), the singular Linear RCS port was a straight drop-in replacement...the idea of having to replace all of those throughout my catalog makes me shutter.  The rest will come eventually as I am sort of on a KSP break again.

The main reason I decided to update what I have was after discovering a couple designs that were defective.  The 'Scout-Outrider' probe's staging was messed up, the EV-3 NTR stages' RCS axis assignments were seriously borked (not sure how that happened), and the behavior of my EV-2 LES shrouds changed in 1.7.  This amounted to quite a few designs that needed to be updated, so I just bit the bullet and did a bunch more while I had KSP booted up.

The last thing I wanted to mention is that if any of my graphics display a legacy part on them that has since received a revision, the graphic just hasn't been updated.  The version number of the craft on KerbalX should indicate what parts it has.  If a craft has 1.7.0 as its version number, it has received any applicable part updates up to that version, despite what the graphics may display.  You will find a lot of legacy parts on my graphics since I am not gonna redo every graphic every three months to keep them up-to-date with simple part revisions.  One such example is my EV-1A 'Skiff' on the 'Arrow 3' launcher.  The upper stage still has the legacy, gold-foil-wrapped LV-909 Terrier engine on it; however it does in fact have the new LV-909 model on the craft.

Your dedication to the collection is astounding, and makes continued use of your whole library/hangar of craft really, really worthwhile. I know I sound a bit like a broken record, but it's really appreciated, and not the least bit awe-inspiring. That's more than a few craft to load/tweak/save/upload, load/tweak/save/upload... :)

Share this post


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

Something tell me you will have to update the LV-3 series when the DLC comes up. And the SVR-20. And all those props crafts.

Sunday night I update 195 out of the 243 craft files on KerbalX to 1.7.0.

Monday morning I read that there's a new DLC coming out in 24 days.
giphy.gif?cid=790b76115cd0e421486664536f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2019 at 2:51 AM, Raptor9 said:

Sunday night I update 195 out of the 243 craft files on KerbalX to 1.7.0.

Monday morning I read that there's a new DLC coming out in 24 days.
 

I feel your feels mate.. ;.;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 6:51 PM, Raptor9 said:

Sunday night I update 195 out of the 243 craft files on KerbalX to 1.7.0.

Monday morning I read that there's a new DLC coming out in 24 days.
 

Yeah. Was gonna release my Orbiter... then that news.

For me, one upside: I can focus on spacecrafts that have no robotics involved... IE, my Gemini clone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Don't get me wrong, having my plans preempted by Squad releasing more content isn't a bad thing in my mind.  It just means that anything that was close to being released will have to be re-visited, at least in lieu of updating it later and creating more work for myself.

On 5/6/2019 at 8:53 AM, Jestersage said:

you will have to update the LV-3 series when the DLC comes up. And the SVR-20.

I've given this some more thought, and that may not be the case.  Regarding the SVR-20, I assume you mean the possibility of adding a robotic arm (RMS)?  It really comes down to the size and nature of the DLC's smaller robotic parts and such; we'll just have to see.  I don't want to make any assumptions on the capabilities or limitations of the robotics.

Regarding the LV-3 landers, about the only thing I see myself doing is adding a legitimate deployable ramp for the LV-3B's rover.  But that depends on the load-bearing capacity of the hinges to hold a ramp with an ER-3 rover on it.  I'd like to keep the LV-3A as a simple crew transport/science lander, and I don't see myself changing how the Base Modules are deployed off the LV-3C/D cargo landers.  The original prototype iterations of the LV-3D in fact had deployable ramps, but the ramps actually weren't the problem.  It was the various ways I tested to get them down the ramps that encountered issues.  You would need wheels on the modules obviously; but whether you had the modules self-drive themselves down or pull them down with an LR-3-style rover, the only way it worked out was to have a ramp that had a very shallow deployed angle to the surface.  Even with a short lander like the LV-3D, this required a rather long ramp, and made it very impractical and cumbersome.

In my opinion, the most ideal way to offload cargo from the top of a "vertical" lander is using a winch/crane system.  Since I don't see winches in our immediate future (assumption), a simple, controlled rocket thruster hop is the simplest way to reduce complexity of offloading the modules at the landing site.  And the propellant tanks double as storage for outpost fuel cells.  Really, the only extra parts that aren't used after placing the base modules on the surface are the rocket engines themselves, or the lift rack assemblies (but you can easily get rid of those).

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


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

I've given this some more thought, and that may not be the case.  Regarding the SVR-20, I assume you mean the possibility of adding a robotic arm (RMS)?  It really comes down to the size and nature of the DLC's smaller robotic parts and such; we'll just have to see.  I don't want to make any assumptions on the capabilities or limitations of the robotics.

Regarding the LV-3 landers, (--snip--)

Yes, I am refering to the Canadarm (I will refer to that name always since its our nation pride) But I agree -- let's see how the robotic parts actually work and look.

In terms of LV-3 (or rather, horizontal Altair), I am actually refering the the ATHLETE system. One of the design variant involves the Altair crew module pull the double duty of pressurized rover for shuttling between the lander and the lunar base, while the cargo variant of course just use the ATHLETE to remove the cargo (which I assume your rocket thrusters replicates). As you can guess, that is my plan going forward... if the DLC is actually that powerful (I did try to make a prototype using the landing legs.

Of course, in your case, it involves another revision of your system.

Share this post


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

Yes, I am refering to the Canadarm (I will refer to that name always since its our nation pride)

I thought your national pride was Tim Hortons? :sticktongue:

Funny story, I had never heard of it until a couple years ago.  I was checking into a hotel in Edmonton and asked the desk clerk if Tim Hortons was a popular restaurant in the Canada or something because I was seeing them everywhere.  I'll never forget the look the guy gave me.  I think it was a mix of shock and pity.

Share this post


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

I thought your national pride was Tim Hortons? :sticktongue:

Funny story, I had never heard of it until a couple years ago.  I was checking into a hotel in Edmonton and asked the desk clerk if Tim Hortons was a popular restaurant in the Canada or something because I was seeing them everywhere.  I'll never forget the look the guy gave me.  I think it was a mix of shock and pity.

Don't worry: you guys got a lot of fast food restaurants that we don't have up here.

And you ain't missing much. Timmies stuff managed to be worse than McD. Not sure how it compare to Dunkin (which we don't have much) for the soup and donuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 11:53 AM, Jestersage said:

Something tell me you will have to update the LV-3 series when the DLC comes up. And the SVR-20. And all those props crafts.

I thought you were referring to the new surface experiments, analogous to ALSEP. By the way, sometime in the future do you, Raptor, plan to add props to the appropriate planes (planes inspired by real-life planes that have propellers, but currently have jets). Speaking of robotic arms (I am getting hyped up over something that might not be feasible), other than your shuttle, you could add arms to the appropriate craft or station modules, such as 'Scarab', 'Jackrabbit', SM-PL(T), T, and PL(ER). Yes, a lot of these might not need an arm at all, but it might be fun to add a robotic arm system to 'Pioneer Station''s truss. Definitely that new science arm to 'Scarab'. You could add a rotation joint on the solar array, or an artificial gravity ring. It would also be nice to have a docking port on the SM-TP3 and Z1 for historical accuracy.

Sorry, for the lengthy comment. As usual, these are just ideas that came to mind with this new DLC.

Share this post


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

Not sure how it compare to Dunkin (which we don't have much) for the soup and donuts.

I love Dunkin Donuts...unfortunately we don't have any where I live though.

4 hours ago, AlchemicRaven said:

I thought you were referring to the new surface experiments, analogous to ALSEP.

Well, obviously I will be looking to add those to the LV-1 series of landers, since they are the Apollo-inspired landers.  As for the rest of the landers, we will have to see how the final mechanics are designed for transporting and deploying the new experiments.  I'm just glad we will have more to do on the surfaces themselves.

4 hours ago, AlchemicRaven said:

 do you plan to add props to the appropriate planes (planes inspired by real-life planes that have propellers, but currently have jets)

I'm not gonna promise anything, since I don't want to make any assumptions on what will be possible with the DLC.  We can only speculate.  I will say that the first atmospheric tech I will be looking into for feasibility will be vertical lift in the form of helicopters or tiltrotors.  Legitimate swing-wing jets like the X-12 and C7 140 may also be possible.

4 hours ago, AlchemicRaven said:

Speaking of robotic arms (I am getting hyped up over something that might not be feasible), other than your shuttle, you could add arms to the appropriate craft or station modules, such as 'Scarab', 'Jackrabbit', SM-PL(T), T, and PL(ER). Yes, a lot of these might not need an arm at all, but it might be fun to add a robotic arm system to 'Pioneer Station''s truss. Definitely that new science arm to 'Scarab'. You could add a rotation joint on the solar array, or an artificial gravity ring. It would also be nice to have a docking port on the SM-TP3 and Z1 for historical accuracy.

These are all ideas I've considered this week.  It would be nice to have those features for everything you listed, especially if I could make the double-length Gigantor XL solar arrays be fold-able/extend-able for the 'Pioneer Station' ISS-analogue.  That way I could ditch the SM-MSAT's and have the SM-TP2S2 and SM-TP3S3 have everything in one module to make the massive solar arrays.  As mentioned, we will have to wait and see how it all pans out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raptor I'm just gonna go ahead and say it: your craft are absolutely stunning and define everything I ever wanted to do with this game. please get somebody with a beefy computer and good editing skill to make some cinametics. more people need to see this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 9:51 PM, Raptor9 said:

Sunday night I update 195 out of the 243 craft files on KerbalX to 1.7.0.

Monday morning I read that there's a new DLC coming out in 24 days.
 

I just put blood, sweat, and tears into a stock hinge for stock falcon 9 landing legs and the day I finish them like once I log off and check my phone I hear about Breaking Ground and almost lost it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to use the LR-3 Mongoose rovers. I can't figure out  how to get the two rovers disconnected from their own little landing skid. Anyone know how to detach them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Viperxx91 said:

I'm trying to use the LR-3 Mongoose rovers. I can't figure out  how to get the two rovers disconnected from their own little landing skid. Anyone know how to detach them?

With any of the modules that use the 'LV Lift Rack' to place them on the surface, whether it be the Airlock modules, LR-3 rovers, etc, after you have them safely on the surface use the ABORT action group to detach the equipment from the 'LV Lift Rack'.  Reference the BM module graphics for additional information such as action groups.

Share this post


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

With any of the modules that use the 'LV Lift Rack' to place them on the surface, whether it be the Airlock modules, LR-3 rovers, etc, after you have them safely on the surface use the ABORT action group to detach the equipment from the 'LV Lift Rack'.  Reference the BM module graphics for additional information such as action groups.

That did it, thank you very much!

Share this post


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

how's your first impression of the new DLC? Did you already make your F-14 analogue swing-wing capable?

Unfortunately I've been really busy with work and haven't had a chance to mess around with it very much.  I spent about an hour the other night experimenting with the robotics, but that's it.  Hopefully I'll get some more KSP time soon.

I've already had plenty of ideas of how these robotics can revolutionize a lot of my strategies.  However, I am cautious to modify any existing designs prematurely.  My designs are thoroughly tested and proven to varying degrees, with the more complex architectures heavily reliant on multiple craft to work properly.

What makes this DLC different from the majority of the Making History parts and a lot of the previous new base game parts are the fact the robotics and surface experiment/cargo containers add new functionalities that will undoubtedly need a few refinements in the near future now that they are out among the masses.  Any implementation of these into my catalog will be more deliberate and gradual than previous KSP updates.

I hesitate to say this (because as you know I try to refrain from talking too much about projects I'm working on), but there is something else I want to focus on that I was wanting to publish, even before the Breaking Ground DLC was announced.  That is my priority right now whenever I get back to KSP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a craft have an old mechanism that can be depreciated by DLC, would you completely depreciate the old craft with no way to download it, or keep it as subassembly for other people to download, but not going to update it?

I can think of, in your case, of you SkyLab clone, where the ATM will now be moved to position mechanically instead of using careful docking maneuvers; or even the Apollo LRV, where in both your versions involved the kart just hanging on the side or in an interior hanger, but now can be moved out by a hinge system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the craft that you have built and I have used them quite a bit as inspiration for my own craft.  I was wondering though what ever happened to the Javelin series of boosters.  Some of your posted craft descriptions allude to them and one of your Gemini analogs has a "Javelin 3" as its booster.  With all the the great lifters that you have there seems to be a capability gap between your Arrow and Thunder series of boosters.  It looked like the Javelins were supposed to be that lifter family but no craft files are posted. 

Anyways, thanks for all the hard work on your craft files they have been super helpful.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/2/2019 at 12:08 PM, Jestersage said:

If a craft have an old mechanism that can be depreciated by DLC, would you completely depreciate the old craft with no way to download it, or keep it as subassembly for other people to download, but not going to update it?

I would probably depreciate it.  Otherwise it can lead to duplication of craft files with people confused as to which craft might work with "this version of KSP" or "this particular updated architecture", etc.  Any time my catalog grows in size, it's to accommodate additional capabilities that I believe are necessary, otherwise I try to keep the catalog from ballooning needlessly any more than it already has.  Plus I'm sure there would be players asking me to update the old craft file to work with the newest version, etc etc.

On 6/2/2019 at 12:08 PM, Jestersage said:

I can think of, in your case, of you SkyLab clone, where the ATM will now be moved to position mechanically instead of using careful docking maneuvers

I definitely want to make the side solar arrays deployable instead of needing them to be undocked and reattached by the EV-2A.  Not sure if I'll have the ATM-esque part be deployed by servos yet or not, I haven't gotten around to exploring it.

On 6/4/2019 at 7:31 AM, Jester Darrak said:

I believe someone on KerbalX already has, but I wouldn't have much interest in making something of that nature anyway.

On 6/6/2019 at 7:18 AM, Galland1998 said:

I was wondering though what ever happened to the Javelin series of boosters.  Some of your posted craft descriptions allude to them and one of your Gemini analogs has a "Javelin 3" as its booster.  With all the the great lifters that you have there seems to be a capability gap between your Arrow and Thunder series of boosters.  It looked like the Javelins were supposed to be that lifter family but no craft files are posted. 

This is all true.  When the Making History DLC was released I re-organized my various booster families, with the 1.875m 'Javelin' series being analogous to the real-life Titan family and the 5m 'Olympus' being the Saturn analogues.  However I have never gotten around to posting them as standalone lifter families like the others.  This has been due to a combination of low priority and a lack of necessity.  The capability gap between the 'Arrow' and the 'Thunder' is more important to eventually fill, since I have never needed a dedicated cargo lifter more powerful than the 3.75m 'Titan' family.  The heaviest payloads I have ever launched are the HLV-6 Duna landers, and even those didn't come close to the 100 ton payload rating for the 'Titan 4C+'

Edited by Raptor9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/7/2019 at 4:01 PM, Raptor9 said:

I would probably depreciate it.  Otherwise it can lead to duplication of craft files with people confused as to which craft might work with "this version of KSP" or "this particular updated architecture", etc.  Any time my catalog grows in size, it's to accommodate additional capabilities that I believe are necessary, otherwise I try to keep the catalog from ballooning needlessly any more than it already has.  Plus I'm sure there would be players asking me to update the old craft file to work with the newest version, etc etc.

I definitely want to make the side solar arrays deployable instead of needing them to be undocked and reattached by the EV-2A.  Not sure if I'll have the ATM-esque part be deployed by servos yet or not, I haven't gotten around to exploring it.

Thank you. This has helped me a lot regarding my own crafts too. I would say it's a slight shame (since I am proud of my ability to mount the LRV within the descent stage pre-BG), but they are not as accurate regardless.

As for the ATM deployable, I managed to start with a pseudo version with double hinge. Single hinge have a minor issue, in that when you mount the G-12 hinge on the side (as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Telescope_Mount#/media/File:Deployment_of_Apollo_Telescope_Mount.jpg), the supporting beams can stuck out of the payload shroud on 4 diagonals if I used absolute positioning. However, it should be doable for your build style.

EDIT: I managed to update my own version with a single hinge at the expense of part count. Looks good enough for me, but this shows if you want to and have skill (which you do), you can make it very close in terms of looks.

Edited by Jestersage

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.