Hydrothermalventclam

Sure. These links should work. SSPXR-RO rescales the parts and SSPXR-RO-Tweakscale adds tweakscale to them. https://www.dropbox.com/s/caljffix7fpw7dr/SSPXR-RO-Tweakscale.cfg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/psus14i3btt7l0v/SSPXR-RO.cfg?dl=0 I built a test station core earlier today and it massed in around 22 tons, which is the same as the Zarya node on the ISS, so at least a few of the parts are balanced properly with respect to mass. That being said, I would love feedback on this, as this is my first time doing something like this, and I threw this together in a few hours this morning. I have only tested this in 1.3.1, so results may vary.

Thank you for that. I think I will try to put together something super basic this morning. Update - I have all the station parts scaled up to a better size. I went with a rescale factor of 1.68, because that makes the 2.5m parts the same diameter as the Destiny lab on the ISS. Everything else uses the same factor right now, so the adapters look good. I also got the masses sort of balanced, made a tweakscale config, and fixed the stock parts that SSPXR and RO both try to mess with simultaneously, and have added electric charge and modular tank space to the parts that need it.

Is there a config to balance the Stockalike Station Parts Redux mod with Realism Overhaul? And if not, what parts do people typically use to build space stations.

Thanks. I'll also ask there

Is there a patch to make this balanced with RSS/RO?

The RSS wiki has a fairly good intro to launch profiles. In my experience, low TWR upper stages are totally doable with the right profile. I usually try to burn approximately prograde until my Ap is 20-40 km higher than it needs to be, then just burn sideways until I make orbit. During this process you need to adjust the pitch of the rocket a bit to make sure you don't fall too low after you pass the Ap. When I launch a heavy payload with my Centaur upper stage it will often burn for 6+ minutes before I make orbit (which I think is fairly realistic). Mechjeb also implemented a guidance algorithm for RSS that deals really well with low TWR upper stages.

I have been primarily playing in my RSS/RO save for the last week or so. I started working on a moon landing mission, roughly based on the Constellation program architecture. The lander and transfer stage launch on an Ares V rocket. (Well, almost an Ares V rocket, the upper stage is a bit small) This launch was just a test of the lifter system, which preformed flawlessly. I also practiced landing on the Moon and practiced Earth-orbit rendezvous. Launching far away from the equator is tricky. Also, the probe lander engine could not throttle. There is so much more stuff to think about in RSS/RO. This is my Orion crew vehicle and my automated station resupply vehicle.

This mod adds the Hermes from The Martian movie It is not currently being worked on, so it might not work in the newest version. Also, station parts expansion adds a centrifuge that looks a lot like the centrifuge on the Hermes in the movie.

I play with KAS and EPL, so building surface outposts is a lot easier. That being said, my most recent mothership was designed to be able to land itself on a minmus sized world, and refuel there with no support equipment. There is the mothership launching from my minimus base. The line of tugs that I am working on right now for my Duna and Dres missions will have an accessory craft that can land them on any mun sized object and refuel there. In the kerbin system I have a minmus station and surface base that can refuel visiting craft. The ease of getting ore off minmus compared to the mun made it the logical choice for me.

I moved along my duna colonization mission. First, I loaded up the mothership with crew Then I transferred the mothership and the extra fuel plant to Duna. The drills transferred separately so they could take a faster trajectory, and thus land with time to refuel the vehicles already on Duna. Landing the drills: The mothership arriving at Duna: At this point, the engineers realized that putting all the cargo directly in the engine plume might be a bad idea. Then I loaded up the cargo shuttle with the first base module. Docking stuff inside of a mk3 cargo bay is a pain.

I am not great at SSTOs, though I have built a few SSTO spaceplanes. I find that they can make very routine missions, like a crew transfer to a LKO space station, much more interesting and fun. I have never had much difficulty returning them to the KSC, you just need to figure out the decent trajectory that works and stick to it. I always plan my missions such that there is a little fuel left in the tanks to fly the plane back to the runway if I overshoot or undershoot a bit. As to your question, it totally depends what you mean by "worth it". I would recommend designing one, flying a mission with it, and seeing if you like it, because that's all that matters in the end.

There is a manual control option in procedural fairings. One of the right-click options is to disable the autoshape feature. Then you can manually change the dimensions. Also, if you don't like how the curved parts of the fairings look, you can edit the curves in the part.cfg file. For example, I always use a procedural fairing that has a sharp angled bottom, but a smother cone on top, kind of like the largest Atlas V fairing.

That is so cool. Its one of those things I did not realize I wanted until I saw it. Your rocket sounds are so much better than stock. I don't often play with sounds, but I might need to now.

It does not look like it, but NASA is still trying to contact it. There is a small chance that it is still alive.

I loaded up my mothership with the cargo modules for my base. First, a orbital tug for loading them onto the lander dropship. Then 4 more rendezvous and dockings to get the cargo up. So tedious. Also, You gotta get that number into the thousands at least. I am at 6026 patches for my normal save and 23640 for my RSS/RO save (which is kind of an unfair comparison, becasue RO messes with a lot). Not that it makes any difference of course. (Just so this is not taken wrong, I mean this in the nicest, joking way possible. I am not trying to criticize you in any way)

Does this count? This is the OV-01 Kestrel, my crew transport to LKO vehicle. Here it is docked to my LKO station. The SSTO should be all stock, though my station is not. And here is the end of that mission.

I've got to say, your buildings looks amazing. It always seems to me like the KSC is missing critical components, compared to the real KSC, or Baikonur. There are just so many more buildings in real life. Also, that orbiter processing facility looks amazing. I can't wait for the release.

I did not expect to see this meme on the KSP forums today. I am highly amused. Good job.

I have had this same problem, for me going to map view and back fixes it. I have no idea what causes it though.

I built a Soyuz replica, and was so happy when this happened. Also, this picture of Jeb buzzing the tower is pretty good. And two of my prettiest KSP screenshots are this: Duna sunrise, and this: from a lathe flyby.

This is my favorite mun landing, because I actually put design time and effort into the lander. My goal was to be able to build a small rover after landing using KIS, and it worked pretty well (until I crashed the rover). The actual lander was a two staged design, because the descent stage ended up being under-powered and I did not want to haul the KIS containers back to orbit.

You could use an engine with a really high gimbal range, like the vector. That will allow SAS to keep the thrust vector through the CoM. If you are not opposed to adding mods, Throttle controlled avionics can automatically thrust limit the engines on your ship to keep the thrust vector through the CoM. I have not used command seats much, but I would not have expected a small deviation in position of a kerbal on a command chair to render a ship uncontrollable, especially something as big as a Tylo lander. Kerbals are pretty tiny. Do you have enough reaction wheels, RCS and vectoring engines on your craft?

And then your kerbal would turn into a spazzy pile of spaghetti. It was silly (like funny silly, not stupid silly) not having atmospheric heating or proper drag. You could fly the dumbest shaped objects through the atmosphere, and nothing would happen. It was great.

That depends on what experience one wants from the game. The way you worded your statement is imposing your ideas on everyone. Using the autopilot does not detract from the game experience, though it may detract from yours. If someone enjoys the game more with the autopilot, it does not detract from their experience. KSP is a great game because everyone can play it differently based on what they like to do. Reading through other people's responses, I see this same thing over and over from both sides of the debate. People all over this thread are making generalizations about how people should play the game. The end goal is to have fun. No one should criticize the way someone else plays KSP.

In the part config file. So, the directory path would be 'GameData\Squad\Parts\Engine\MassiveSRB\part.cfg'.