Gaarst

I have the album Javascript thing too sometimes, I don't really know where it comes from (using Chrome). And for the quote (and other things, with [xxx] prompts at the beginning and [/xxx] at the end), they come from the fact that the old version of the forum (changed about 2 months ago) used a BBCode editor which wasn't a WYSIWYG like the current one. You then had to use a particular syntax to display quotes, images, albums, etc which does not work with the new forums.

Then you take the time needed to get halfway, and multiply it by 2: you spend half the trip accelerating, and the other half decelerating at the same rate. After a bit of maths, you find that the trip would be √2 longer than in the first case (only accelerating). Time taken is then 15h30 to get there minimum, 34h maximum And Isp needed is 110 ks (1.1 Mm/s) minimum, 250 ks (2.5 Mm/s) maximum, again for 10t of fuel to burn and 200kN of thrust Edit: you can apply the same reasoning to further destinations in KSP without worrying about relativistic effects and c as KSP doesn't simulate it. Also, if you would like to see the math behind these numbers so that you can replicate these results for other contexts, feel free to ask.

Did some very quick caculations for getting to Duna: How quick ? About 11 hours minimum (at Duna's closest to Kerbin, 24h at its furthest) if you travel in a straight line: considering the travel time, it's a reasonable approximation. What Isp ? About 80,000 s (or 784,800 m/s effective exhaust velocity) with constant thrust and mass consumption, if you fire your engines with 200 kN for 11 hours and have 10t fuel to burn. Of course, you can do some overcomplicated calculus with everything changing at the same time (acceleration, speed, mass, orbit...) to get exact results, but these figures should be rather close to the actual numbers (I rounded them up a bit). Oh, and this doesn't include the braking when you get to Duna: you are just going to get past it at ludicrous speed with these figures (about 370 km/s).

Or just make them stock for everyone.

Tried to build a rocket with two Tweakscaled boosters. Ended up smashing my head in the wall after TS prefered to NaN my game a few times instead of increasing thrust as I would have liked to...

Hitler had a dog. #Godwin

Aerospikes are not excellent in vacuum, this is why they are not there. The advantage of the Aerospikes is a small Isp gradient with atmospheric pressure; outside a space shuttle/plane (good luck with the gimbal though) or Eve, they are just like any other engine. Surprised at how light the NERVs become the best, that's less than their own mass, are you sure you did not make a mistake somewhere ? EDIT: in your Imgur album, the value at which the NERV overcomes the 909 for 2 km/s dV is closer to 4.5t

Is is a laptop by any chance ? Some laptops have a "fn" key that you need to press to access the usual F keys functionalities. You'd then have to press Alt + Fn + F12 to show the debug menu. Have you tried the other F keys to see if the issue is only with the debug menu ? (F1 takes screenshots, F2 hides GUI, F3 shows "mission tracker"...)

Added @mhoram's law and corollary

Added @EladDv's three laws of Kraken drives, and put spoilers in OP: it was starting to get messy.

7900 something in my 45+ mods RSS/non-RO install (was at 8141 for a long time before cleaning some cfg files).

I agree, but it's not really a question of absolute power, more relative: the Vector should be 10x less powerful when compared to KIckbacks (or the opposite). Big crafts have a lot of dV, too much for stock KSP; and the Vector and Mk3 parts are too close to real life to have sensible performance, same for rockets in general: if I make a realistic looking design with properly sized booster in RSS, the booster stage gives generally about 4km/s dV, which is orbit in stock game. Even if SRBs are not scaled to real life (what even would you do on Kerbin with a 12MN booster ?), they should be powered up at least a little, or we should have bigger boosters. Less powerful than real SRBs, but powerful enough for KSP SRBs to play their actual role: provide the majority of thrust at liftoff, not just assist the liquid fueled core.

I don't think adding cities would mess your thing up. But I'm not sure what mod they come from exactly: if they are from EVE you should have no problem, if they come from another mod, I don't know. And to reply, you can just write in the "Answser this question" box, and write @UndyingWar (with whoever you are talking to) in your message for the user to recieve a notification when you reply.

Yes, this mod is great, and not only for shuttles. You can get realistic thrust proportions (Ariane 5 is 90% SRB thrust at liftoff IIRC) without crushing your rocket under dozens of Gs before flameout. You can basically set a start thrust limit and end thrust limit, and the thrust of the SRB will vary linearly with the fuel left.

Depends on the mods. Installing, for example, RSS on an existing save will probably mess everything up, but you should be fine with part mods. Best thing to do is backup your saves and try.

Thrust balance at liftoff is also making making shuttles a lot harder than it should in KSP: SRBs are severely underpowered. While the RS-25 have about twice the thrust of the Vector, the SSSRBs had 12MN of thrust at liftoff (20 times the Kickbacks' !), so there's that. To make a somehow realistic copy of a space shuttle, you absolutely need to rebalance the Vector and SRBs (preferably make the SRBs a lot more powerful or give us bigger ones).

AFAIK, there are no leap years in KSP. I never paid attention but I wouldn't be surprised if the day slowly shifted year after year.

Some (most) mods work with only one version of KSP. Typically, a lot of mods for 1.0.4 were broken with 1.0.5: you need to update the mods as well, you can't just copy the folders of the outdated mods. The best thing to do is a completely clean reinstall, then reinstall the correct version of each of your mods and place the backup of your saves in your new folder.

Custom engine for KSP v2.0, still hoping...

MediaFire link 3rd (2nd? not sure how Reddit post counts work) post down by phoenix_nz. Those are banned on the forums, so you'll have to find it by yourself. Also, considering the topic is 2 years old, chances are it will not work on KSP most recent versions.

:hailprobe: ?

I don't know much about all the Telemachus stuff so I won't do the Launch Op Officer thing. Also, what is the exact role of the Payload Officer other than making sure the payload is well strutted to the rocket ? Is it linked to NASA's Payload Operation Center ?

Heh, wanna try the thing again ? I'm in! Though as there doesn't seem to be any FAO planned, I still have to settle on another role, depending on who from AMR come here to take back their roles. Edit: since the forum change, the private messaging function allows to create conversations with several members, so it might be easier to use this feature to organise the beginnings before creating a dedicated Skype/Steam group: it will be more accessible for people interested than going to Steam...

KSP has an option called "Max physics delta-time per frame" (no wonder why I forgot that name) that determines the interval between each calculation frame. It is set at 0.04s by default. Increasing that time should increase your framerate but time elapsed in the game will be slower (slow motion). Only reporting words from other users who have used it, don't take what I say for granted.

AFAIK most alternate systems mods require only Kopernicus and Module Manager. Anyway, there exists resizing mods with almost every size possible: x3, x6.4, x10 off the top of my head, probably a lot more that I don't remember.