Raptor9

I don't think there is any hard number that causes the lag to go up significantly, but I could be wrong. Also, what part number at which lag becomes noticeable is going to be subjective to each person based on their computer's hardware. But then again, I'm the furthest thing from a computer expert that you can get.

I've noticed that too much autostrutting to far off parts can cause vibration and then disintegration. I try to utilize the "Grandparent Part" autostrut function rather than the "Root Part" or "Heaviest Part".

@katateochi, I have a question for a possible feature on the site. Would it be possible to add a "Download all craft files in this hanger"-type button? That way someone could more easily (and quickly) download multiple craft files without wading through dozens of craft pages to download them one at a time. Another benefit this would provide is being able to group a category of craft into a single download. So for example if it takes 5 components to assemble an interplanetary ship in space, and each component is mounted on a lifter as an individual download, this ensures the downloaders don't miss a component. And of course, thanks for your continued administration of the site.

While that was certainly an interesting thing to read about when I was researching the Apollo Applications program and the Boeing IMIS study of 1969, that isn't exactly what I had in mind. My original plan was a fairly elaborate mission architecture that would have involved a lot of parts and pieces, be extremely expensive from a career point-of-view, and required a lot of room for error due to over-complication. At the moment, I'm focused on getting all my 1.1.X craft to 1.2.X currency, and using that as a chance to revamp a lot of the older craft files to better designs. However, I've been taking breaks from that to plan out (among other things) a better Eve mission strategy that is more tiered. Each tier would be attained based on experience and proficiency gained from the preceding tier. Tier 1) Establish a foothold in the Eve SOI by constructing an outpost at Gilly in the form of a small space station. ISRU equipment would then be brought in to gather propellant from the surface of Gilly to provide delta-V reserves to future spacecraft arrivals, and stored at the space station. Tier 2) Start sending spacecraft to low Eve orbit to build infrastructure and gain proficiency at moving spacecraft around the Eve SOI (higher gravity well than Kerbin). Establish a space station in low Eve orbit. The station will probably be much larger than the Gilly station and include a research lab. Tier 3) Initiate robotic surface exploration of Eve with small probe landers and rovers, staged out of the station in low Eve orbit. Atmospheric entry angles and speeds can be experimented with using the probes to predict landing trajectories for targeted locations. Potential landing sites of larger landers can be surveyed along the way. Tier 4) Crewed landers will begin Eve atmospheric entries to the surface. Probably start out in smaller one-Kerbal landers and hopefully progress to multi-Kerbal lander/ascent vehicles and surface outposts. That sounds awesome. I'd like to see any screenshots here whenever you do the mission(s). The Titan 5 was really only meant to be a similar analogue to the Saturn 5, not a standard lifter for other uses beyond the early Mun missions. That's why I never posted it as a separate download Not at this time I'm afraid.

@Majorjim!, if you hadn't checked to see the effects of this change yourself, why would you ask me why I was bringing it up. A bit of the "wagon before the horse." No kidding, sal_vager explained it to me a few posts above.

After much, much testing, I finally got the new LV-4A 'Armadillo' Duna lander finished and published on KerbalX. Along with that, the EV-3 'Clipper' and associated component lifters are also redone/updated on KerbalX. As previewed above, the new LV-4A includes an entirely new descent stage which includes a cargo bay with expanded science equipment and a surface rover. Happy launchings.

One of the reasons the physics track each part is so if a craft has a collision with another object or the ground, individual parts can be separated as debris. Or an entire Rapid Unplanned Disassembly event can occur. Or, if you break off a landing leg due to an improper touchdown, and your lander is now on it's side, you may be stuck on the surface until a rescue mission can arrive. If you're a stock only kind of guy like me, the offset tool will probably be your best friend. The offset tool, especially when used in conjunction with the shift key, allows you to place parts in rather far off places from their parent part, but still give the appearance of them being attached through other parts in between. This saves you from making an internal structure with parts to mount other objects to, which increases your part count. In the first two images below, the part count was reduced from 34 to 9 using the offset tool instead of direct attachment. Another way this is useful is so you can make craft components modular and easy to swap out. Let's say you're building an SR-71 looking plane like in the above two images. The conventional way to build such a craft would be to attach the engine nacelles to the inner wing segment, and then attach the outer wing segment to the engine nacelles. If you want to completely change the engine nacelle out with different fuel tank and/or engine combinations, you would need to first remove the outer wing segment. By attaching the outer wing segment directly to the inner wing segment and then offsetting it so there is a gap between the two, you can swap out engine nacelles freely without reattaching any other parts. This may not be the solution you were looking for in your post, but these building techniques are useful for keeping your part count low.

I see, thanks for the responses @sal_vager & @Red Iron Crown. That is unfortunate IMO from a "visual appeal" perspective. But as someone that values function over aesthetics, I can appreciate putting the premium on performance, especially for players that don't have powerhouse processors.

Installed v1.2.2 on my system and started importing my craft files into the save folder. Noticed that all the strut endpoints are protruding from the surface location they're attached to. Looks rather clunky compared to their historical behavior from 1.2.1 as far back as I remember them being added into the Alpha versions of the game. Not sure if this is intentional or a by-product of the following item listed in the 1.2.2 changelog: * Fix for strut connectors attaching below surface on SRB-KD25k. Anyone else noticing this? I know a lot of players (including myself) relied on their previous behavior for aesthetics when creating structural "frames" using struts. I know you can use the offset tool to move around the origin endpoint, but the destination endpoint is stuck outside whatever surface you attach to.

The 1.2 branch of KVV by @linuxgurugamer is working great for me, that's how I get the craft images. After that, I drop the images onto a standard graphic template layout I built using Microsoft Paint. This is where I do the rest of my editing, the text, the title, etc is all in Paint. It does take a bit of effort, but I think it's a good way to show in a concise, and easy to understand way, what went into a craft and how it was designed to be used. When typing or editing a thread post, at the bottom right corner (just above "Submit Reply" button) is a grey button called "Insert other media". Use that to embed a image url to your image. I personally use Photobucket.

I've never done any tourist contracts beyond LKO. The time isn't worth the revenue in my opinion. I'd rather focus on exploration contracts, satellite deliveries, or building infrastructure like fuel depots or ISRU sites. Oh lord no. That effort was around 0.24 or 0.25 time frame. Sorry. ______________________ EDIT: I've finished uploading the final group of updated Station Module subassemblies: zenith cores and the truss system. Also updated are the 'Titan 4C' and 'Titan 4C+' heavy lifters. 'Titan 3'-series will come tomorrow; along with the re-done LV-2 landers. The legacy LV-2A 'Grasshopper' Minmus lander relied on a pre-positioned station in low orbit around Minmus to refuel and offload science data, and therefore was launched on an uncrewed 'Thunder 3' payload rocket and sent to the station ahead of the first expedition crew. I decided to cut that particular tether and instead give players the option of conducting standalone landing missions, or using an orbital station as a staging point. The new LV-2A 'Grasshopper' uses an "all-up launch" method akin to Apollo and my EV-2A/LV-1/Titan 5 configurations. The LV-2A is stored in the payload section of the EV-2C/Titan 3P configuration, itself an analogue to the Orion/SLS Block 1B Crew rocket. A crew conducts a single landing (or multiple if sufficient lander propellant remains) and then returns to Kerbin, whether they utilize a Minmus orbital station or not. If desired, follow-on missions could replace the LV-2A lander in the payload fairing for a monopropellant fuel tank to refuel the lander left in Minmus orbit/docked to orbital station. Like the LV-1C habitat lander, the LV-2C 'Heavy Grasshopper' provides a pre-positioned autonomous surface habitat and expanded field lab of experiments for Minmus landings. It includes an ER-V aerial survey vehicle for gathering basic sensor readings from multiple biomes. It is also mounted on a large docking mount that allows it to be mated to either an EV-3 or EV-4 NTR stage and sent to other planetary bodies for low-gravity use. The LV-2B, like it's legacy version, is an adaptation of the LV-2A for Munar operations. It's been lightened somewhat in mass, with a third engine for handling the higher gravity of the Mun. Like the A-model, it has been tested to be reusable. While it has enough propellant to make a round trip to the surface and back, or vice versa, it is equipped with a small docking clamp on the base of the frame to enable surface refueling from ISRU equipment. Despite being capable of transporting only a single Kerbal, the LV-2A/B landers are inspired by Boeing design references for a reusable lunar lander (with some slight variations of course).

I'm hoping to have the new EV-3 'Clipper' and LV-4A 'Armadillo' lander finished this week. I have a growing list of updates that are in queue ready to go when I get some more time for uploading. Still need to finish the last group of updated Station Module subassemblies, and three new craft files for Minmus DRA 1.0. I also need to generate a few more tags that I forgot to do. So much to do; trying to capitalize on my KSP time while it's slow at work.

I think RIC is approaching Salt Factor 10 as he approaches 10K rep points, ha ha.

I had at one point. I just couldn't get a Soyuz-type craft to my liking. Also, in my play style, there wouldn't be any use for a Soyuz-style crew vehicle when my EV-2-series already performs the same functions. And as for other ISS vehicles like the ATV, Dragon, Progress, and Cygnus, there really isn't much use I would get out of them since those are all cargo vehicles, and you don't need to move anything in KSP besides Kerbals, science data, or propellant. I already have plenty of dedicated LKO transports for moving Kerbals, science data can be loaded on any crewed capsules going back down to the Kerbin surface, and propellant would come from the Mun or Minmus ISRU sites, not from Kerbin. That's my take on it anyway.

I ran a series of test launches with ballast inside the payload fairings. There are already a lot of my KerbalX craft with these already implemented. If you see a craft with these, that means it's been updated to 1.2. Also, if you want to use them in your search, say you want to find all my craft that are "Optionally-Crewed" or "Reusable", simply type those into the search bar in my craft list and it will list all available craft with those tags. EDIT: I thought I had uploaded the new EV-2C on the Thunder 1B for LKO launches, and the C7 325R, but apparently not. Both are uploaded now, along with a few more Station Module subassemblies, the EMU subassembly, and the SVR-10 'Thunderbird'

Thanks man. Some more craft uploaded the past couple days: - C7 200, C7 300, C7 310, C7 320, C7 325R - X-14, X-18 - LV-1C Mun habitat lander and 'Sky Lab' which rounds out the Apollo-era analogue craft already updated last week - EV-2B LKO service vehicle - EV-2C (3 versions, mounted on the 'Thunder 1B' for LKO, 'Titan 1P' for Munar trajectories, and 'Titan 3P' for anything within the Kerbin SOI and Near-Kerbin Asteroid missions) EDIT: Also, as I update each craft to KSP 1.2, I'll be implementing a new tagging system on KerbalX to more easily sort groups of craft for missions sets. As missions become more complex, several craft downloads will be needed for any given Design Reference Architecture (DRA). An example of Mun DRA 1.0 would be Apollo-era hardware analogues, such as my EV-2A, LV-1-series landers, and Titan 5 rockets. Mun DRA 2.0 would be the Constellation-style craft, etc. The tags themselves are meant to be in the stock KSP style to resemble actual icons in the game itself. Some examples of other tags that will be displayed on KerbalX below: The OP also needs updated as I'm reorganizing things a bit. So please bear with me. Some craft files are being consolidated as I refine my own mission setups. One example is dedicated downloads for the LV-1A, LV-1B, LV-2A, and LV-2B landers have been removed, as these are shipped with EV-2-series craft for their respective mission architectures. This will hopefully clean up the download list and make it less confusing as to which craft are required to perform a given multiple-craft mission, along with the tagging system.

1) I certainly considered it when looking at the extended Gemini program proposals However, I've done craft like that before, and I really didn't care for how they turned out. 2) After I made such craft, I rarely ever used them and found myself just letting them become defunct. I don't have any landers that take more than three Kerbals to the surface at one time, so I don't have any need for large passenger transports. Similar question was asked of me one time why I don't make dedicated cargo craft like the Dragon or Progress. Those types don't serve any purpose in my playstyle, so I don't have much drive to make them.

Just updated a batch of craft files (complete list at the bottom of the OP). Mostly X-planes; practically no changes, just some auto-strutting to keep wings from flexing ridiculously on some aircraft like the X-8/WR-8. Also updated all existing EV-1 versions along with publishing the two new ones below. The EV-1C is also brand new, but I'm still calling it an update since I had a older version of it already on KerbalX. Also updated are all EV-2A craft files to cover the Apollo-analogue era. Still need to update the LV-1C habitation lander and 'Sky Lab' station to complete that collection however. Hopefully in the next couple days.

Not really, just a matter of preference. I haven't really had much drive to design a propulsive landing type vehicle like the Dragon v2, or a reusable launch system like the Falcon 9. So I decided instead to loosely base the EV-2B on the Boeing CST-100. It's still relatively cheap to use. But the cheapest way to transport three Kerbals to LKO/MKO and back is my SVR-10 'Thunderbird' (itself based on the X-20 Dyan-soar). In KSP 1.1.3, it costs just under 30,000 per launch for the SVR-10 (assuming you landed back at the KSC for full recovery). In other news, I've downloaded @linuxgurugamer's version of KVV for KSP 1.2.1, and it works like a champ. I've already started generating new graphic prints for some of the new craft files like the EV-1D, and updating existing ones along the way.

That's quite an innovative concept @Azimech. Very cool.

Nice! Thanks for linking that! Nope. Although I have experimented with a prototype designated 'C7 305' that is essentially a 300 converted to drop a rocket out the bottom. 'Pegasus' is a throw back to a Mk3 SSTO from v0.25. Back then, the 'Phoenix' and the 'Pegasus' were two VTOL SSTO's that were deployed as a team. The v0.25 'Phoenix' was similar to what the SR-21A 'Phoenix' is today (with the exception that it had VTOL capability of course). The 'Phoenix' would be the passenger delivery spaceplane to and from the Laythe surface, and the 'Pegasus' would be the cargo and surface module delivery spaceplane. VTOL was a must-have due to the fact that no runways exist on Laythe. But after the J-33's were nerfed and dimensions redone in later versions, the designs became defunct. The 'Phoenix' obviously resurfaced in the form of the SR-21A and then a derivative SR-21B, but I still struggled with Mk3 SSTO's that weren't ridiculously huge or just crazy looking (my SSTO spaceplane skills are no where near Rune or some other KSP high-rollers ). Project 'Pegasus' is my attempt to bring it back into practical use. It won't have VTOL tech, but it should be able to easily ferry surface modules and rovers down to Laythe. The design itself is promising; I've just been trying to find out exactly how it could be used, assuming I could find a location reasonably flat enough on Laythe to land and takeoff from. Of course, I've only been as far as Dres (once), and I've never made it Jool...stepping stones.

@linuxgurugamer, awesome! Thanks for doing this.

Thank you, and good eye. Even though the Mk1 only allows one Kerbal, the EV-1D is based on one of the alternative NASA proposals to extend the Gemini program for lunar landings instead of Apollo.

So I've had a slow week, and was able to dedicate more time to KSP. As I alluded to a couple posts above, I'm using this time to not just maintain/update existing craft files, but revisit a lot of legacy craft designs for potential improvements. Several have already been rebuilt entirely from scratch, such as the entire LV-2 series of landers. Below is a collection of preview screenshots of the most significant craft redesigns, along with a few brand new ones (like the expanded EV-1 line-up). I'm particularly glad the new LV-4 is finished. The 'Armadillo' has been (surprisingly) one of the most popular downloads out of my collections. Despite this, I never considered it my best work, and this is the third version of it in the photo. Unlike the previous versions, this new LV-4 now includes an ER-1 'Rat' surface rover stored in a cargo bay with deployable ramp. A complete science package shares the rover bay real estate, bringing more science returns than ever. My craft file catalog is still a long ways from receiving updates however. Along with more consistent KSP time, I'm also hoping Kronal Vessel Viewer will be updated to KSP 1.2.X in the near future. If it isn't, I may have to come up with an alternative presentation scheme when it comes time for uploading to KerbalX.

@kronal, first off I want to say thank you making this mod, even though you haven't touched it in a while. I've assembled a craft download catalog on the forums with over 150 download links to KerbalX. Every spacecraft, lander, rover, or subassembly is featured with their own graphic "brochure", which was created with Kronal Vessel Viewer through KSP 1.1.3. I've been especially proud of being able to present them using the KVV mod, so I attribute my success to your work and the others that followed through to maintain it. Secondly, I would respond to your question that I am of course interested in KVV for KSP 1.2.X and beyond. But if you or anyone else don't have the time to maintain it, it's no big deal.