AVaughan

Which is why I suggested placing the drum inside the hull and spinning the drum one way and the rest of the ship the other. Note that I wasn't arguing that spacex should do this, just that it would be better/easier than adding a 'yyyyyyuge reaction wheel' that could spin up/spin down the entire ship.

Would probably be easier to just build the living quarter inside a rotating drum, running on bearings inside the pressure hull, and then spin the drum in one direction and the ship in the other. Then you can just use the drive motor to start/stop the rotation. That only costs electric power + wear and tear on the moving parts. (And a lot of extra mass you have to lift to orbit etc).

So you waste quite a bit of fuel spinning up and down every few hours? If you were going to do , you would do it once, and then leave the ship rotating until the time for the next course correction or other maneuver.

Functionally the same as shuttering them. Why go to the trouble and expense of adding windows in each cabin if most people can't stand the rotating view?

Yeah well 5 rpm gets you about 0.12g, but I don't see that fast a rotation rate working with the windows in each sleeping cabin. (I pretty sure that would make me so dizzy that the only alternative would be to shutter those windows, making them pointless).

From memory Apollo's Thermal control roll was 3 revolutions per hour. For BFS, at 4.5m radius that would be all of 0.12 mm/s of acceleration. Maybe enough to be noticeable, but probably not enough to help with toilet type tasks. (If you really want a useful amount of "artificial gravity", then you are probably better off using a cable to couple two BFSs nose to nose. But course corrections whilst coupled could be challenging).

Not sure but you would probably get more eyes from more experienced RO/RP-1 folks if you posted in the RP-0 thread.

[x] Science is known to cause a similar freeze. Does your freeze happen when [x] science isn't installed? Can you reproduce this in a vanilla game?

In RP-0/RP-1 you also need some sort of avionics to have any control, even stage/self destruct. The part you need is a sounding rocket avionics package (or any part with a science core). It provides just enough avionics to stage/run science experiments/self destruct, but no attitude control. I'm going to suggest reading https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/Tutorial:-Getting-Started (scroll down to My First Rocket). It's not upto date with the changes in the dev branch, but pretty much everything still applies. If teh ARrobee core you are using comes from a parts pack that isn't upto date with the latest dev branch, it's possible that that is what broke it).

The version of unity that ksp 1.4.x runs on use SDL2 for joystick input. So you will need to have SDL2 installed, and you might need to configure it so unity detects your joystick. See https://forum.unity.com/threads/no-joystick-detected.475870/#post-3215994 for more info on that. I'm pretty sure JS-Test isn't using the new APIs that SDL2 is using, so I'm not sure it's going to tell you whether SDL2 will see your joystick. In this post GeneCash says his joystick is working for him on linux.

Actually I think it looks exactly like an Apollo service module engine.

Yeah I have the extra tracking stations turned off to force me to build a proper interplanetary relay network, and whenever I visit a planet for the first time in a new game, I send along at least one relay sat designed to establish a relay network that can reach kerbin, even if it is behind the sun. But at 0.1 range multiplier even 12 x RA-100 relay antennas talking to another 12 x RA-100 antenna have only 10% signal strength at closest approach to Kerbin, and no connection a most of the time. So do you also build a set of dedicated relay satellites between Duna and Dres?

According to the spreadsheet I use 1x RA-100 Relay antenna has only 10% signal strength to a fully upgraded Tracking station at their maximum separation. So I'm not sure why you think that is OP? What antennas do you use for Jool/Eeloo missions if you turn antenna range down to 0.2?

Personally I think the solution is for Kerbalism to add some heavy Storm shelter parts, and have kerbals automatically hide inside those during times of high radiation. Then players can just de-couple those before re-entry and landing.

Principia is still a optional. Back when I did my 1.2.2 and 1.3.1 RP-1 installs it had known issues, so I just skipped it. RO/RP-0/RP-1 will still give you a new level of challenge compared to stock.

Youtube comments suggest it was just lense flare.

With the kickback still thrust limited, if I start the pitch over at 15m/s I can get a kerbin escape in 2 days 2 hr 25 min. But the upper stage is getting too close to thermal limits to be comfortable on that ascent profile. (Red bars about 80% full). If I remove the thrust limit on the kickback, but pitch the rocket 5 degrees downrange in the VAB, then launch without activating SAS I get 1 day 5 hr 17 mins. The fins are enough to keep it stable once it gets some velocity. (Indeed with this much TWR on liftoff I can't pitch downrange enough after launch, so I have to pitch it downrange in the VAB. Again the upper stage is too close to thermal limits to consider this a comfortable profile). I agree that you want to gain as much velocity as early as possible to minimise gravity losses when using a vertically ascent profile, so a low TWR design to test that profile wasn't my best idea. (It was habit, I tend to use a 1.2 - 1.5 liftoff TWR for most of my rockets). I think it's possible that by launching downrange I'm able to utilise enough of Kerbin's rotational velocity (about 175m/s at the equator, if my maths is right) to offset my higher atmospheric drag. (Even if I exit the atmosphere on a trajectory elevated 45 degrees above Kerbin's horizon, I should still be benefiting from about 123m/s of Kerbins rotational velocity).

@bewing I haven't done the math, but testing in sandbox says launching straight up is not the best approach. Build the following rocket. Parachute, mk1 command pod, RT-10 Hammer, decoupler, Kickback srb (thrust limited to 65%), 4 x AV-T1 winglets, launch clamps. (KER says this rocket has 4330 m/s of dV). Launching straight up I get an apoapsis of around 12,960 km. (Of note is the apoapsis keeps decreasing every tick, even after I have left the atmosphere, unless I'm in timewarp. Not sure what causes this, unless it is loss of numerical precision when ksp is calculating orbit each tick). If I launch and then pitch over approx 5 degrees at 20m/s, the rocket will escape Kerbin's SOI. (Set SAS to prograde after pitching downrange. This particular turn passes 10,000m at about 60 degrees pitch, and is about 45 degrees pitch at around 40,000m and kickback burnout). (1.4.3 modded install, but nothing I would expect to affect physics). Further testing with variations of the above design (reducing fuel in the Rt-10 Hammer) shows that pitching over more aggressively (10 degrees at 15 m/s) is better that the less aggressive turn. In the past I've noticed similar behaviour when playing RO/RP-0. A rocket that could reach orbit, with an apoapsis around of 12,000km, could not reach the same 12,000km apoapsis when launching straight up as a sounding rocket.

@Sewer Urchin For antenna range I always use a google spreadsheet. There should be a forum topic somewhere. Google "KSP CommNet Signal Strength Calculator Antenna Selector". @jrbudda One thing I've wanted a few times in a node category, with containing the maneuver node info, and the post maneuver orbit info. I'm not sure if we could squeeze 5 buttons into each toolbar row, but that would be preferable to adding a third row.

It's been a while since I did this, so the following is what I think I did. From https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0 , select the Developmental banch, then download a .zip using the clone or download button on the right. Remove your old gamedata/rp-0, then open the .zip and copy the gamedata/rp-0 into gamedata. You should be able to do a complete install on 1.2.2 using ckan. This is the option I'd normally recommend for someone new to rp-0, however do note that the tech tree you said you wanted is new and is only available in the 1.3.1 development branch available via github. (There is also lot of other new stuff in the development branch).

@Zeiss Ikon RP-1 adds an entirely new tech tree, (and a whole lot of other stuff). That is probably the tech tree you saw Grayduster using. If you want to play career, then I recommended either installing RP-0 on a 1.2.2 install or using a dev build of RP-1 (make sure you use the dev branch version for the new tech tree). I've never played with an RO install that didn't have RP-0 or RP-1 installed, but whilst remotetech adds new antennas, it also normally adds remotetech modules to the stock antennas so they should work. Regarding the "no signal for control", since I've never played a bare RO install I'm not sure whether RO implements any requirements with regard to vessels requiring avionics, but missing/inadequate avionics might explain your issue. The latest instruction i can find for installing RP-1 are here. There are also a few updates mentioned later on in the RP-0 thread. There is also a discord group at https://discord.gg/kFXa6pv . Edit: that post also mentions a replacement remote tech dll.

Why do you even need a nose cone on a landable booster? Won't it be flying engine first during re-entry and landing? Won't extra drag actually be useful?

In general you reduce gravity losses by circularising over a steeper ascent path. (You don't need to actually circularise, if you can just continue the gravity turn and continue burning prograde so that you are pitched pitch down to the horizon by around 60km that should be enough to minimise gravity losses). Also you should be able to reach Kerbin orbit using around 3500 dV, so I assume that the 4500 was a typo.

I've often thought that the Mun has too many biomes. Minmus probably has a few too many as well. Which means it is too easy to unlock the entire stock tech tree without ever leaving the Kerbin system.

I think the root cause could be floating point precision. In which case you can't do anything about it, and just need to live with it. (Also don't forget that since you are rolling and yawing, the true angle of attack and true airspeed for each wing are different, so it's perfectly reasonable that they are producing different amounts of lift).