Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cost'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL





Found 6 results

  1. S A F I R E - Stockalike Adjustments to Fuels, ISRU, Ratios and Engines Main ideas: 1 stock resource unit = 1 kg -> check propellant mass just looking at the units Oxidizer : Fuel ratio = 3:1 for all LFO rocket engines -> more realistic and great for semi-direct ISRU, where you can produce locally only part of propellant Rocket engines generally cost 60% more, tanks cost ~60% less and rocket fuels cost much less -> more or less same rocket costs but with much more realistic distribution - better for reusability, TSTO, SSTO and drop tanks designs ISRU produces only Oxidizer from ORE; no heat, needs high energy input and is slow -> no more unlimited fuel production, realistic ISRU operation, semi-direct missions (produce 75% of your propellant, bring the rest with you) This is a continuation of an idea from couple of years ago, you can read more about it here How does it look in-game: Requirements: Module Manager by Sarbian. Warning: Save-game breaking and not compatible with old and stock vessels because it doesn't update values in old saved craft parts. New vessels should work fine. DOWNLOAD 0.2.0 GITHUB CONFIRMED COMPATIBILITY: - SMURFF - Making History Expansion - Rescale mods such as Sigma Dimensions CURRENTLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH: - mods using Community Resource Pack, procedural and fuel switch modules Changelog:
  2. I've started a career mode with custom settings with one of them being to have to pay an entry cost to unlock a new part once it has been researched. I have researched new parts and I have the required funds to unlock them but I can't seem to unlock them. I assume it's X on the PS4 but it does nothing as if I haven't researched them. It's really annoying as these are the difficulty settings I want to use but I cannot progress any further. I've tried restarting a new career and it keeps happening. Does anyone know if this is a bug or if I'm missing something really obvious?
  3. Hi all, At some point in the past, i remember downloading a small mod, that, amongst other things, allowed you to tweak the building upgrade costs. In the stock career game, in my opinion the vast majority of the money is used on building upgrades whilst space vehicles are really , really cheap. I'd like to have cheap building upgrades but reduce funds rewards or increase part costs, so there is some incentive to re-use and build out infrastructure in a new career game. Anyone remember what this mod was called, i'd like to get it again..
  4. Hi I'm trying to modify some part, and I'm putting empty resource in the parts, like this RESOURCE { name = EnrichedUranium amount = 0 maxAmount = 50 } But now my part show up with negative price tag. It's like the cost of the part is inclusive the resources. Is that true? Or is it something else, like a bug or me doing something wrong?
  5. I just saw 3Dprintingnut's brilliant design on KerbalX for early career mode games - I downloaded the thing and yes, it really does work, and flies well. It's got me thinking about the economics of re-usability, in KSP - assuming that's something you want to RP (yes, i know, you can just ignore economics and fly a few more contracts to farm cash, and most of your cost is upgrading buildings not space vehicles) In a standard rocket, you have a lower stage, which you accelerate to about half of orbital velocity, then throw it away. Then you have the upper stage, which is taken all the way in to orbit. It consists of the upper stage engine, upper stage fuel tank, pod, and whatever stuff you need to survive re-entry and landing. Typically, the upper stage engine and tank are decoupled prior to re-entry, because it makes the process easier. However, since you already accelerated these components to orbital velocity, there is no performance reason why you couldn't bring them back, provided you can solve the design issue. To increase re-usability further, we have to start bringing more of the lower stage components up to orbit then home again. At this point it becomes a tradeoff - there is only so much mass you can carry with you before performance declines too much. So it's helpful to start looking at the Dry mass vs Cost of these components to see which are most worth saving - Reliant Engine - Mass 1.25T Cost 1100 Saving per Tonne when re-used = 880 Swivel Engine - Mass 1.5T Cost 1200 Saving per Tonne when re-used = 800 FT400 tank - Dry mass 0.25T Cost 316.4 Saving per Tonne when re-used = 1265.6 Rather surprisingly, it is better to ditch your lower stage rocket engine but drag it's empty fuel tanks to orbit for re-use, assuming you don't have the delta V to bring the whole lot.
  6. I really hope that I had KSP. I wish it was free. All I do is watch YouTubers play it. I actually know more about KSP than Jacksepticeye. *sigh*