Jump to content

Raptor9

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,599

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Raptor9

  1. Raptor9
    I agree. The initial setup costs are very steep, which makes me want to go full-in 100% commitment early on to make it worth my while, but like you said I have to upgrade the building first which takes a lot of money as well, not to mention I can't afford the initial setup anyway ha ha. Having said that, I still use them. The newest strategy is an interesting one: Leadership Initiative. It focuses on field scientific work and milestone gains, but at the cost of gains from contract completion. When you look at the 100% commitment benefits/costs, they read as follows: +150% Funds to milestone gains +150% Reputation to milestone gains +50% Science to field work gains -75% Funds from contract gains -75% Science from contract gains -75% Reputation from contract gains Initial investment: 250,000 Funds, 500 Science, 100 Rep I'm not gonna lie, that 150% additional funds and rep got my attention, and would probably more than pay for itself quickly. But that 500 science points hurts. I'd like to see more strategies like this pop up in future KSP updates, as more play-styles can be accommodated. As soon as I get enough resources to invest 100% in this, I'm going for it.
  2. Raptor9
    Looking forward to seeing the lander. I've only managed to construct a Tylo ascent vehicle of reasonable size...can't pull off a descent stage yet. Which is odd, usually it's the other way around.
  3. Raptor9
    @chriswheelz, I recommend you update your last post with the list of mods you're using on this craft file. I downloaded the craft to take a look, but but since I'm running stock, I couldn't open the craft file in the VAB. This information helps other players determine if they can even use your craft file in their KSP prior to downloading.
  4. Raptor9
    @chriswheelz, without being able to see your shuttle, I'm going to take a shot in the dark. If you are using the large ("Big-S Elevons") control surfaces for your shuttle, try limiting their control authority. I limit the control authority in roll on almost all my planes to keep them controllable, and the "Big-S Elevons" are more than necessary at 100% authority. As an example, my shuttle has it's inboard elevons limited to the pitch axis only and 70% authority, and my outboard elevons are limited to pitch/roll at 30% authority. As @YoeriCookie pointed out, there are multiple ways to upload screenshots and/or craft files for people to reference. The biggest thing when asking for assistance with a ship is screenshots (especially in daylight if it's in flight). A picture is worth a thousand words, and it will make it much easier for people to diagnose possible causes, short of downloading the craft file and test flying it of course. You can also have a look at @Columbia's guide to posting in the Spacecraft Exchange for a step-by-step process. Hope this helps.
  5. Raptor9
    Definitely needs a Sticky-bomb
  6. Raptor9
    @DaMichel thanks for updating this. I hadn't realized how reliant I had become on this data until 1.1 came out. Good to see this still being updated.
  7. Raptor9
    Wanted to share a link here for some really cool documents to read (if you want to put yourself to sleep ). Last year, I read through most of the volumes of the IMIS study of 1968, which is what the EV-3 'Clipper' is based on. Some really interesting concepts developed back then for a Mars mission after Apollo. A lot of technical data in there, but some really fascinating concept diagrams as well.
  8. Raptor9
    @DMSP, I'm humbled. Thanks for the kind words.
  9. Raptor9
    You're welcome. Always good to hear my designs work for other people besides me. Hopefully. I haven't looked at these designs in 1.1 yet, too busy updating the already published craft files. But I was working on updating the Constellation-style horizontal landers in 1.0.5 to get ahead of the game until 1.1 came out. Adding new and/or better equipment, better deorbit and Duna entry sequence, etc. Of course, you can still get the EV-4 'Longship' MEV (Copernicus MTV type spacecraft); that's already available and updated to 1.1.2. EDIT: The updated EV-3 and associated pre-fitted modules/lifters will be released in the next couple days sometime (Saturday at the absolute latest). Test mission went wonderfully, the EV-3 (even though it consists of 7 orbitally-assembled modules docked together) is rock solid during RCS maneuvering and full-throttle burns. I'm quite satisfied with the improvements. EDIT 2: EV-3 'Clipper' and all associated craft files for building it in orbit are updated and reuploaded to KerbalX. I'll need to update some of the Engineer's Notes on the OP this weekend. I'll be away from my computer next couple days.
  10. Raptor9
    @DMSP, I remember you using the EV-3 'Clipper' in the past (referenced from one of your earlier stories). I'm pretty far along in tackling a much needed update, and not just for 1.1 currency. I've reduced the part count of a fully assembed EV-3 (with LV-4 lander attached) down to 326, about a 200 part reduction. I'm now operating in real-physics-time ; I can't wait to take it for a test mission to Duna tomorrow to see how the updated LV-4 handles. Oh, and the price tag should be cheaper too. I haven't done the hard numbers, but now that all the modules are launched via Rockomax 'Thunder' rockets, the fly-away cost should be cheaper. (The Lab/Hab module and LV-4 lander used to be lifted by Kerbodyne 'Titan' rockets)
  11. Raptor9
    Awesome. I can't wait to get to the point in my 1.1 career where I'm once again building stations and surface outposts using this stuff. As soon as I test an updated craft and I know it's working in 1.1.2, I re-publish it and move on to the next one. I still haven't gone beyond suborbital in my 1.1 career, so I have a ways to go. Fortunately, I only have the EV-3 craft files and a few aircraft remaining to update. Thanks for those screenshots @DMSP, nice to see the craft in action in 1.1.
  12. Raptor9
    Thanks, I'll experiment with different traction settings. Meanwhile, the LV-3C cargo landers with Mun BM-series base modules are tweaked and updated to 1.1.2. EDIT: And the updated graphics are finished along with a new craft file uploaded to KerbalX: LV-3C lander with a 4-way Hub module and a Passageway module.
  13. Raptor9
    @DMSP, that's awesome! I'm still updating the LV-3C-delivered Mun base module assemblies. Namely, tweaking the wheel handling; replacing the roof solar panels on the Passageway, Utility, and Airlock modules with the new large solar panel; and adding a 4-way Hub module. Thanks for the update though, I'll see about adjusting the LV-3C mounting height to avoid the clipping. So much to do...soooo much to do... If anyone reading this thread has any tips about how to tweak rover wheels like the "RoveMax Model S2" to perform better on the Mun, please let me know. EDIT: Wish I didn't have a real-life job, I would have so much more time for KSP. (and yes, I realize how silly that sounds )
  14. Raptor9
    Ask and you shall receive. C7 200, 300 & 310 are flight-tested and verified for 1.1.2. Happy transporting
  15. Raptor9
    Yeah, I have a new hinge. It's already on the updated LV-3A. I looked at using Communotron 16s like you said. The hinge actually works better now than before, although the whole setup is 250% more expensive. The six Ant engines cost 720 funds, and now using the six antennas it cost 1800. However I stayed away from using any thermometers since those are 900 a pop But yeah, ramps are now upgraded. Still need to swap over the LV-3B though, but the A model is already republished.
  16. Raptor9
    ...good lord That's a lot of boom-boom juice floating around.
  17. Raptor9
    All 'Titan'-series heavy lifters are now available on KerbalX via VAB>Rocket Market>Kerbodyne on the OP. Like father always said: "lift with your legs, not your back" EDIT: The 'Lightning' rocket with LITE upper stage is also now available on KerbalX. Modeled after ULA's "Vulcan"/ACES upper stage, the 'Lightning' falls between the 'Thunder 3' and 'Thunder 4 Heavy' when it comes to lifting power, but has the advantage of reusable payload delivery to/from Munar orbit. ULA's Vulcan page ULA's ACES youtube video
  18. Raptor9
    Your welcome Feel free to throw up some screenshots of how you integrated the USI parts whenever you get there. Meanwhile, on KerbalX, I've finally published a series of craft in a project I've been working on for longer than I care to admit. A while ago I decided to create and publish a series of pre-manufactured and tested lifters for delivering payloads to orbit. My goals were to create a very distinct series of rockets separated by payload class and/or target orbit altitude. I had used standardized launchers on my previously published craft before, except now they're download ready for any payload the individual player desires to place on them. During this process, I began to immerse the rockets themselves into the Kerbal universe by limiting (for the most part) the parts used in each rocket to a specific Kerbin company. Jeb's Junkyard & Spaceship Parts Co. produced the 1.25m LV-series engines and FL-series fuel tanks, which became the 'Javelin' rockets. Rockomax produced the 2.5m RE-series engines and X-series/Jumbo-64 fuel tanks, which became the 'Thunder' rockets. Kerbodyne produced the 3.75m S3 series tanks/engines, "Kickback" and "Twin Boar" boosters, which became the 'Titan' rockets. These rockets are now available on KerbalX. All KerbalX download links are on the OP in the VAB>Rocket Market section.
  19. Raptor9
    In between updating existing craft files from 1.0.5 to 1.1.2 (landers and rovers giving me headaches ), I've been working on expanding my collection of Station Module subassemblies. The original set was made with modules based on the ISS and conceptual Exploration Gateway Platform. This expanded set will feature more Soviet/Russian-centric modules. Please keep in mind that some of these modules may change in appearance; trying to find a good balance between functionality and appearance.
  20. Raptor9
    I have two tiers of standardization. The first is standardized light, medium, and heavy rockets based around 1.25m, 2.5m, and 3.75m diameters respectively. Each has been tested for a certain orbit altitude and/or payload capacity, so I pick the correct rocket for my payload and target orbit. The second is a series of subassemblies of the above rockets chopped into pieces; light launchers, light upper stages, medium launchers, medium upper stages, boosters, etc. So if I do need to mix and match to achieve a "non-standard" launch configuration, I can with the pre-built subassemblies. Of course, specific mission equipment such as extra batteries, RCS, solar panels can always be added as necessary. Another example: It's comforting to know that if I need to abort a launch and jettison any solid boosters in the process, my solid booster nose cone assemblies have Sepratrons oriented and tweaked just right so that they will push the boosters away from the main rocket without colliding with it or frying it with exhaust. All my boosters look like they're just breaking formation with the main rocket gently and speeding ahead. Not to mention that I know the decouplers and struts are also mounted appropriately so when I drop the boosters after use, they'll separate cleanly behind the rocket as well.
  21. Raptor9
    Since the rocket was never built, and the final design never materialized, you could research which was the most recent concept for Ares V before Constellation was cancelled, and then go from there. Or just pick whatever you want to build.
  22. Raptor9
    Aside from the fact I don't do pure replicas, the version of Altair I used as inspiration did have a ramp in the same place as mine, and 3D concept animations about Altair missions included a rover. I was referring to upgrading from my horizontal landers' old ramps in my "Red Planet Rivals" vid, which used decouplers, to what I use now on my LV-3A/B landers. And fixing my rovers due to the wheel changes. I never said anything about the Ant hinges being broken.
  23. Raptor9
    I modeled the Altair with the horizontal ascent stage. I used a Mk1 Crew Cabin mounted to the back of a Mk1 Lander Can. For fuel tanks, I used an FL-T200 fuel tank with an Oscar-B fuel tank on each end, and an Aerodynamic Nose Cone enclosing each Oscar-B to bring the entire assembly to a cylindrical 1.25m tank assembly. On the KerbalX-published LV-3A 'Bullfrog' (which I'm still trying to update to 1.1), I placed a Materials Bay in that gap (on the descent stage where the fuel cell is) and put the ascent stage access ladder along one of the landing legs. But this photo gives a up close look at the horizontal method. On the far side is a drop ramp for the rover, which is stored in between the two trios of tanks.
  24. Raptor9
    Tonight I'm working to get my EV-4 MEV craft files tested and upgraded to 1.1.2 currency. After that I'm going to resume work on my horizontal landers this week. I was already working on the cargo lander in 1.0.5. Main improvements over the ones in my "Red Planet Rivals" video are: 1) Adding the small ISRU and drills to the cargo lander so it can generate propellant for the Duna Ascent Vehicle. Gives more burn time during landing to ensure the cargo lander gets to the planned landing site if entry trajectory is off. 2) Improving the rovers and rover ramps. Making the power generating rovers more useful and not reliant on mods like KAS/KIS to use. 3) Making a more logical and better Hab section on the crew/hab lander. 4) Make use of the new clamshell fairings to make the "aeroshell"/drogue chute separation a little cleaner.
  25. Raptor9
    oh.
×
×
  • Create New...