boosters++

Terrain bug seen below, shortly after ship explosion. Here are my currently installed mods: All of them are updated to latest via CKAN. Any idea if any of them could cause this? I installed most of these alongside other mods via CKAN, so it's hard to isolate when this started. I've only seen it for this one save - I haven't tried making a new one. Quitting and restarting KSP solves the problem for a while, but then it reappears 30min later on scene switch. Halp - the fate of my USI Duna base lies in your collective hands.

Hi everyone - I was wondering what the relevant differences are between restartable and non-restartable engines. For example, if I wanted to mod an existing engine in-game to make a new restartable version, what else should I change about the engine to make that improvement plausible? For example: increased mass, etc.

But it also gives my pod an unhealthy red glow. And I want all my ships to look ... (•_•) ( •_•)>âŒÂâ– -â– (âŒÂâ– _â– ) cool.

I built a space station in the Realism Overhaul mod...

Speaking of heat ... why is my command module getting a heat bar from apparently just being in the sun? I'm running KSP 1.0.4 and RO 10.2. How do I keep it cool? Just use the stock heat radiators...?

Thanks! My American-themed RO game has suffered from a distinct lack of orbital modules.

So, can anyone tell me the status of Tantares and Realism Overhaul compatibility? I installed Tantares last night to my RO install, and the config seems possibly outdated, since nothing from Tantares was resized or otherwise realism-ized. Has anyone else seen this problem with the latest Tantares and RO versions, and if so, how did you get around it?

I think AntennaRange is a good difficulty level for the base game's target realism, and this system sounds basically like AntennaRange, so it strikes me as appropriate. RemoteTech will be updated, no doubt, to please the realism crowd (of which I am a part). To me, KSP can come in different flavors. I'm currently building my first multi-module space station in Realism Overhaul, and I had to build a RemoteTech network to do it easily. Sometimes that's the game I want to play. Other times I want to play the vanilla game, more or less, for a more casual experience - and AntennaRange is a great fit there. So, thumbs up. This is one less mod to install for me to get one kind of play I want.

Great mod idea! Is this universal enough to work with Realism Overhaul or an alternate Kerbol system, or is it coded specifically for Kerbin/Duna/etc?

Thank you for this helpful explanation. Now I'm wondering: where's the tank that works more like a syringe than an aerosol can? More specifically: is there any way to ensure reliable ignitions without using RCS/ullage motors to "shake the can" in the right direction? I'm doing alright with RCS and a hotkey set to "activate engines" (though I feel like I'm flicking a lighter for a very important cigarette), but with engines with 1-3 ignitions, that seems like a bad (albeit kerbally) solution.

Hello! I'm having some trouble with the RL-60 engines: despite being attached to a pressurized tank and propellant flow being listed as "very stable", they're not igniting without fail on ascent. I'm using a cluster of 8 as a second stage. Sometimes I'm getting the "vapor in the feed lines" error that usually accompanies unsettled fuel - despite having been pushed by the first stage just moments before. Any ideas? Am I missing something about how "fuel settling" works? EDIT: Also, what's the deal with pressurized tanks? Should I need to use RCS to boost forward and settle that fuel? Aren't there supposed to be like ... pumps in there, for that? EDIT #2: I made it to space anyway! Still proud every time I make it in RO

Just installed this, working great (mostly)! Thanks for doing this! Got some "flashing atmosphere" bug when running it with elements from Astronomer's Pack - trying to pin down exactly which part is causing it. Astronomer's clouds seem okay.

curtquarquesso's tweakscale config has me convinced the new docking port size is a great idea (also NavCam makes a mighty fine docking camera, if you offset it just right!)

Haha, yes, thank you.

Hmm, I think you are right - I'm throwing around some fairly advanced terminology, there, I suppose. Not a challenge for anyone still having trouble reaching orbit = not a challenge for newbies.

So, I've been playing around today with building crew transport vehicles, and it isn't too hard to build a cool one for trips to LKO for under $50,000. But it's challenging enough to become, I think, a moderate challenge on the forums - one a bit less daunting than Jool-5 or Eve return. NO PARTS MODS OR PHYSICS/AERODYNAMICS MODS! Use any utility mods you like (MechJeb, KER, etc), but don't use anything that changes the way aerodynamics works or how any of the stock parts function. OFFSETTING AND STOCK BUILD TOOLS ARE FINE. NO PART CLIPPING. Don't use the debug menu to stack on attachment nodes. Here's what I'm thinking: build a stock spacecraft and its lifter for under $50k, with the following requirements: Lifter The lifter must be able to put the spacecraft in a 75 x 75 km or higher orbit. Spacecraft The spacecraft must be able to carry 3 Kerbals, dock with another vessel in orbit, and return the 3 Kerbals safely to the surface of Kerbin. SCORING Each entry is scored by tallying points from the following features: SCORING Cost For every full $10k saved from the $50k budget (+1) Lifter costs less than the spacecraft itself (+1) [*]Lifter The lifter leaves no stages on orbit - it delivers only the spacecraft, and can de-orbit any upper stages (+1) The lifter has retrievable boosters or stages (+1) The lifter can deliver the spacecraft to a 100 x 100 km orbit (+1) Lifter orbits both the spacecraft and a Mun-capable upper stage (~850m/s dV) (+2) For every 1000m/s dV remaining in orbited upper stage (+1) Spacecraft is launched with a launch escape system (+1) [*]Spacecraft Spacecraft has an RCS system for translation & easier docking (+1) Spacecraft has method of generating power (+1) Spacecraft stores >1000 units of electric charge (+1) Spacecraft uses medium docking port (+1) For every 500m/s dV the spacecraft has (+1) For every 500 units of monopropellant (+1) The spacecraft can perform a partially-powered landing (+1) The spacecraft can perform a fully-powered landing (uses no parachutes) (+1) This list might grow as entries are made - if you do something cool you think is worth some points, let me know in your entry. SUBMISSION RULES Make a post with: The total cost of your spacecraft, lifter, and spacecraft + lifter. The total mass of your spacecraft and spacecraft + lifter. A screenshot of your spacecraft and lifter in the VAB. A screenshot of your spacecraft docked with another vessel in Kerbin orbit. Any other screenshots you need to substantiate your score (e.g. with resource panel displayed while undocked, etc). OK! To space! - - - Updated - - - Here's an initial entry: the Artemis CTV! Total cost: $41,580 Spacecraft cost: $14,053 Lifter cost: $27,527 Total mass: 92,905kg Spacecraft mass: 9,245kg SCORING Cost For every full $10k saved from the $50k budget (+1) Lifter costs less than the spacecraft itself (+1) [*]Lifter The lifter leaves no stages on orbit - it delivers only the spacecraft, and can de-orbit any upper stages (+1) The lifter has retrievable boosters or stages (+1) The lifter can deliver the spacecraft to a 100 x 100 km orbit (+1) Lifter orbits both the spacecraft and a Mun-capable upper stage (~850km/s dV) (+2) For every 1000km/s dV remaining in orbited upper stage (+1) Spacecraft is launched with a launch escape system (+1) [*]Spacecraft Spacecraft has an RCS system for translation & easier docking (+1) Spacecraft has method of generating power (+1) Spacecraft stores >1000 units of electric charge (+1) Spacecraft uses medium docking port (+1) For every 500km/s dV the spacecraft has (+1) For every 500 units of monopropellant (+1) The spacecraft can perform a partially-powered landing (+1) The spacecraft can perform a fully-powered landing (uses no parachutes) (+1) Current first-place-holder-by-default: boosters++, with 7 points!

Hi all, I want to build an efficient 2-stage orbital rocket. Given that: I have a first stage engine better for use in atmosphere, and a second stage engine better for use in vaccuum. I have a fine amount of control (through say, Procedural Tanks mod) over the amount of fuel each stage of the rocket will have (and the dV calculations per stage for atmo/vac through MJ and KER) I will be using MechJeb, so the flight path will consist of two burns: A: ascent to desired apopapsis; and B: circularization burn. I have taken math through calculus II/integral calculus. I have the following questions: 1. How can I figure out the delta-V needed by the first stage to just reach the desired apopapsis? 2. How do I calculate the dV "savings" (compared to an ascent in vacuum) due to lift if I am using FAR (or, presumably, the 1.0 aero model)? 3. What are the optimal turn shape, final flight path angle, and altitude at which to begin a (mechjeb-approximated) gravity turn? 4. Assuming my second stage is now headed to my desired apoapsis (in vacuum), how do I figure out the dV I need for solely the second circularization burn? Thanks in advance!

Yup, Reddragon has it. The station is my Tantares/NearFuture/StockalikeStationParts ISS! Album here.

Offsetting the Hamal probe core into the Tantares orbital module gives you a pretty OK Soyuz 7K-OK look: Also, Beale, some questions! 1. Do you have a donation link for your work? 2. How would you feel about modelling a surface-attached Soyuz periscope, with an integrated decoupler? The periscope you see above decouples (thanks, offset feature!), but I have no doubt you could make a cooler-looking one, that I could safely stick right on top of the reentry capsule hatch.

Some Tantares ISS action for y'all. Thanks as always for making it possible, Beale.

Beale! That Gemini looks great! If you are branching out into American designs, would you have any interest in modelling the ROMBUS? http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/rombus.htm I have tried to build it using ProceduralParts, but as far as I know there's no way to emulate the "plug-nozzle" engine with any parts I've found: It's one of the weirder (and cooler, imo) designs-that-never-was, and seems like it might be something you'd be into one day.

I built an SSTO with your launcher parts! (Using FAR, so no idea if this would be doable in vanilla) On the way up: Kerbin orbit: Munar injection: Munar orbit: Crew module separates from launcher in Munar orbit ... I think I'm gonna turn this guy into a lander/return vehicle combo, so I can get 3 Kerbals to the Mun's surface in 2 stages.

Hi friends! I'm experiencing a weird bug... I have my Apollo-style orbiter and lander on the way to the Moon, but whenever I try to undock the CM so I can pull off the lander, the docking port stays connected, and the whole vehicle starts pitching back and forth wildly, whether RCS is activated or not. Here's my set-up: lander capsule, docking port, decoupler, engine. Connected in that order. A previous launch in this configuration was fine (but my lander was poorly designed, and I had to abort in lunar orbit). So, two things: why won't the port disconnect? When I try, why does the ship start pitching back and forth? This also occurs if I try to decouple either of the decouplers above or below the lander. :/ Thanks in advance!

So, using the Altair capsule's integrated decoupler, I flipped it over to build a cool-looking 2-stage Mun lander: The only problem with it being that the crew crawl out of the hatch head-first: And fall down: And in an incredible show of strength - flip over the lander when they stand up under the ladder! xD You had one job, Halfrod, just one job...

Go for RealismOverhaul/64k! But if not, download the USI MKS/OKS modpack & ExtraPlanetary Launchpads, and build a *totally* self-sufficient base on another planet, so you can be totally independent from Kerbin. This has been a dream of mine in KSP for a while, but the closest I've achieved is food/water/oxygen recycling for a Mun base.