hypervelocity

NASA payload carried by Beresheet also among the list of probable crash survivors: https://www.space.com/did-nasa-experiment-survive-beresheet-crash.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dlvr.it

oh, see, that's easy: it has to be made out of something with a sufficient material strength to endure such impact

Beresheet was also carrying the Arch Mission Foundation's Lunar Library - a 30 million page archive. Per official sources, given the physical properties of the archive and the data from impact, it is believed the payload is intact. This would mean Beresheet's mission of delivering the first commercial payload to the Moon was a success.

I don't want to sound rude, but basically you are suggesting to disable RO to get powered landings on RO... My suggestion @lextacy would be to start playing around with KerbalOS - I know it might prove a tad challenging, but boy oh boy the feeling when you get it right! EDIT: also was not there a "RO-mode" under MechJeb's settings that handles ullage & ignitions? I might be completely wrong here.

great question, I just edited my original post as I missed RP-1 RP-1 balances the tech tree, a few parts and contracts (and surely does a lot more that I am not honouring right now) and aligns your Carreer mode to the Realism Overhaul suite. I fully recommend it as I too play Carreer mode. I have always played with RO, RP and RSS and enjoy it every time

For the *full* realistic experience, I recommend a fresh KSP 1.3.1 install with Realism Overhaul (and dependencies & recommendations), Real Solar System, Realistic Progression 1 (RP-1) and Principia. You will never go back. Not only will it challenge & engage you, but it will drive you to learn and investigate real orbital mechanics, spacecraft design, etc. For visual beautification, Real Solar System Visual Enhancements (RSSVE) is compatible with KSP 1.3.1; and you can throw KS3P on top for maximum pleasure.

I second this. The bumpy/broken runway is super annoying. I have tried Kerbal Constructs but the issue remains: somehow the game manages to break KC's props as well. How is the rest of the RO/RSS community dealing with spaceplane launches?

yes! go for it!

congratulations and thanks for the new release!!!! I very much appreciate your hard work and effort to bring us what I believe is the best KSP experience ever!

congratulations on the new release!

I use Principia with Persistent Rotation and have not experienced any malfunctions. Your issue seems to indicate an imbalanced CoM from the thrust vector - I recommend you use the RCSBuildAid mod to check whether any torque will be produced upon engine firing.

thanks @RoboRay!!! your second comment was on point, I just added "minimumCrew = 0" and it worked! thanks a ton!!!!

thank you @TranceaddicT & @RoboRay!!! will try it out! EDIT: ok, this is rather strange. I edited the save file's VESSEL{} entry but it didn't work I first tried the following (my addition is the @MODULE[ModuleCommand] entry at the bottom): PART { name = RO-Mk1CockpitInline cid = 4292551006 uid = 520936581 mid = 4257879762 launchID = 59 parent = 5 position = 0,3.9504241943359375,0 rotation = -0.707106352,0,-0.707107186,0 mirror = 1,1,1 symMethod = Radial istg = -1 resPri = 0 dstg = 4 sqor = -1 sepI = 0 sidx = -1 attm = 0 srfN = , -1 attN = top, 5 attN = bottom, -1 mass = 2.34067154 shielded = False temp = 223.06565801213159 tempExt = 222.86479049072139 tempExtUnexp = 4 expt = 0.5 state = 0 attached = True autostrutMode = Off rigidAttachment = False flag = Squad/Flags/redsacqua rTrf = RO-Mk1CockpitInline modCost = 9252.07813 EVENTS { } ACTIONS { } PARTDATA { } MODULE { name = ModuleCommand isEnabled = True hibernation = False hibernateOnWarp = False stagingEnabled = True EVENTS { } ACTIONS { HibernateToggle { actionGroup = None active = False } } UPGRADESAPPLIED { } } @MODULE[ModuleCommand] { @minimumCrew = 0 RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 1.895 } } And then, as it did not work, tried just simply adding "minimumCrew = 0" under MODULE {name=ModuleCommand} and left it as follows: MODULE { name = ModuleCommand minimumCrew = 0 isEnabled = True hibernation = False hibernateOnWarp = False stagingEnabled = True EVENTS { } ACTIONS { HibernateToggle { actionGroup = None active = False } } UPGRADESAPPLIED { } } None of these updates worked - any ideas?

thanks @RoboRay!!! any clue on how to edit a craft already in flight?

hey guys, hope everyone is great today! quick question here: one of my vessels is now stranded in space without control as the only command module it has is an uncrewed MK1 cockpit. Is there a way to remove the crew requirement in order to operate the vessel remotely? I have tried the following but it didn't work, so I am wondering if either the code I added is wrong, or it simply does not apply to launched vessels. I edited RO_Squad_Spaceplanes.cfg for the following part... // Resized parts. // because why not, and 1.25m is too narrow a diameter for crewed spaceplanes +PART[Mark1Cockpit]:FOR[RealismOverhaul] { @name = RO-Mk1Cockpit ... and added the following bit of code: @MODULE[ModuleCommand] { @minimumCrew = 0 RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 1.895 } } Thanks in advance!

@Starwaster I believe there's a recipe in Page 8 discussing MMH+NTO. If I understand correctly, only addition required to CRP is NaCl (and this was a couple of years ago, so maybe its already added). They discussed the following flow: Chloralkali process > Hooker process > Olin Raschig process.

if you depend on others for your own success you are not doing things quite right. I said "I believe" it was bundled with RO. good luck to you now.

@etheoma - that is strange - if you can wait until tomorrow I will get back to my pc and provide a detailed walkthrough on how to find the part & associated cfg file, and screenshots of how my install looks like so you can replicate in your build.

@NSEP very nice! have you ever considered integrating the abort system to the pod a la Dragon, adding orbital maneuvering capabilities to the capsule? If my calculations are correct, you would gain a mass efficiency by doing so taking advantage of the service module's fuel and reducing engines & tankage mass.

thanks for your efforts @Starwaster!!!! you are actually blowing my mind with the idea of recapturing boiled off gasses - would you mind explaining in detail how would I go about doing so? @etheoma - take it easy pal, there's people trying to help out here - go look at the mod's folder, find the licquefaction array CFG, check the part name and/or manufacturer, look it up in the game - if its not there, your installation is corrupted. ALSO: I play at KSP 1.2.2 and I *do* have a RealISRU folder under the manufacturers filter in the VAB/SPH.

@etheoma - I too would love a full ISRU suite for Realism Overhaul. I believe this has now been bundled with RO. Current available parts (if my memory does not fail) are as follows: Resource Drill that extracts water, hydrates and not much else I believe; Licquefaction Array, which liquefies gases such as Oxygen, Hydrogen, CO2, Methane, and maybe some others (its config file is very easy to understand, so you could tweak it to get your desired substance in there); Mars Atmospheric Scoop that captures CO2 from the atmosphere; and then there is a Water Electrolyser, a SABATIER unit, a Fischer-Tropsch unit, and I think that's pretty much it (again, I might be missing something). In conclusion, with the mod in its current state you are able to mine hydrates at the Moon or Mars and get drinking water; you can produce Lqd Methane in Mars for fuel, and I believe (never tested) you could produce Kerosene at Titan as well. Again, these are only the limited uses I gave the hardware, but I'm almost certain there are more resources to be produced.

the eternal struggle! I am still at KSP 1.2.2 as my favourite mods have not been updated - you should only update KSP once you are sure you can take all your favourite mods with you!

ok @kurgut, this may be blunt, but..... I TOTALLY ABSOFREACKINGLUTELY LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What propellers are you using???

I know - what I meant to say is the HL2 engine was designed to deliver those graphics on an action game. KSP is different and it is created to spend its resources calculating physics for your craft's parts. I'm not entirely sure if we couldn't have both (nice planetary surfaces & part-based physics) but I imagine it would run even worse than it functions as it is. EDIT: don't get me wrong - I would LOVE detailed planetary surfaces and actually having something to do once landed, but hey, dreaming is free.

@Sharpy though striking, the comparison is not relevant: HL2 is running on their custom Source engine that was engineered to deliver what they wanted - this is a different game running on a pre-built engine.