leudaimon

@nanomage Those are extreme examples, and getting to those planets without a gravity assist from Jupiter is not very realistic TBH (both because of mission length and delta-v), but maybe they could be extended. Although, remember that New Horizons got to Pluto in 9 years, with one single (and almost mandatory to make this type of mission feasible) gravity assist from Jupiter.

@EliasDanger When I started RP-0 I also tought some of the contracts looked to be too tight when you consider launching windows and tech development. When I was explained that contracts are meant to be accepted only when you are ready to launch the mission (or at least start rocket construction), I noticed they are quite comfortable in general. Do you have any examples of contracts you believe to have too short deadlines?

KER had several issues with RO. The most apparent and game-breaking is it does not show correct delta-V. I don't know these issues are solved in the 1.2.2 version.

I have never used Mac, and I don't think the instructions for linux would apply. I googled it, and think you may follow this tutorial to install it, and then just open the .exe with wine.

If you have Wine installed, just run the .exe file with Wine.

Can't say about Mac, but I run this on Wine in Linux with no issues

@Kaue_ https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/releases

Great Job! Works flawlessly and looks great!! Very eager to start a new RP-0 career asap!

Actually, is most cases using an utilization of 100% is cheating. The meaning of utilization is the percentage of the tank volume occupied by propellant. With the exception of spherical balloon tanks of RCS, most tanks have a much lower utilization. As can be seen in any schematics of a real tank, there are two separate spheroid tanks inside a cylindrical tank. Thus, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization. That's why the slider is at 86%. I really a resource for rules of thumb for tank utilization, but didn't find any around. What I usually do is get near to 100% in RCS tanks, and a little above 90% in big cylindrical tanks, a bit higher if they are of type balloon. For the small ones I keep the default 86%.

@Trolllception If you have a controllable core, you can use the kick motor to do the heavy job (raise the periapsis for a geostationary orbit for example) and then use RCS to fine-tune the orbit. Also, the current implementation of satellite contracts uses the stock system and really is not ideal, but that's what we have for now... AFAIK writing these more realistic early contracts is in the roadmap for future updates, but not done yet.

@ebigunso the [x] science mod is very helpful for that and much more. Otherwise, I don't think this info is easily available outside the game configs. @Estebanium Taerobee is a recommended mod and the A-4 is quite necessary for the early game. In general, it is very good to install some engine packs to have more options throughout the career.

@Sol Invictus PersistentRotation is actually recommended in CKAN, probably just forgotten in the OP. No idea about Orbital Decay, but I would guess it's because it's new and probably not stable/compatible enough.

@MarvinCZ This is a bug that has been around for a long time (always I think). It has been reported here before but afaik there is no solution to it yet. It's likely to be an issue with RemoteTech, so it may be worth it to report it there.

@nightingale thank you for the directions on the period issue. I'm traveling this weekend, but when I'm back I'll try to get to these issues then I'll ask more specific questions here or on irc. Also, if you can take a look at any of the ones starting with "first", all of them give the same error... I find it weird that the text showing there adds a "targetBody = @/targetBody" into all requirements, including the one of type any, while I don't have this in the cfgs

@Luciano The 2-person Mk1 can you are referring to is a lander can (similar to the one in the lunar module) not a reentry capsule. To have a two-crew capsule you need gemini (from FASA) or the Voskhod from Raidernick's,

@pap1723 Thanks for the directions! here they go: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/f9ob9m68oispqxo/AABEvxVqVeX8L6kzfiyylYZea?dl=0

How do I get those? I tried to look at ksp.log but didn't know what to look for

@nightingale I'm trying to get the contracts for RP-0 I commented above to work, but I'm getting some weird stuff. For the contracts here, the debug tool is giving errors with the 'any' requirement, and lots of "@/targetbody" appear throughout the text of the contract in that window. For these, I think I'm doing lots of stuff wrong, by the amount of errors shown... If you, or anyone else willing to help, could give some suggestions, I would be most thankful

Thanks @nightingale! I've been looking at these contracts there to learn some of the syntax. I had seen this one, but thought the AvailableExperiment() had come from somewhere else, as I hadn't found it in the documentation. I'll try to use this. Once I get these corrections and the at least a large amount of the set of uncrewed exploration contracts I'm making for RP-0, would you be willing to help me with debugging some of them?

Greetings! I'm building a repeatable contract for RP-0, and I'm struggling to find a way to select a random (already unlocked) experiment to include as a requirement. Do the AllExperiments() expression list only the unlocked experiments, or all of them? Thanks in advance!

Since 1.1.x I've been getting that. Didn't check in 1.1.3, because I just stopped using it.

Sure, but you can still do a lot with that. Especially if you don't use a dish (that is not necessary for a moon mission), you can get plenty of dV with 200kg.

@TheEpicSquared It's a little hard to give you suggestions without knowing at what tech level you are (assuming you are playing career given you are worried about price). First of all, do you have any reason to build such a heavy probe? You could easily build a probe with plenty of scientific experiments and even a dish antenna with a single early controllable core, solar panels and some delta-v for in-course corrections (and even a orbital insertion maneuver). This would allow you to build a much smaller rocket. If you want to use this large probe anyway, you will need a bigger rocket, but it's possible. Just use an agena guidance unit attached to a stage with enough delta-v for TLI (3200 m/s is enough). Below that, just build a LV that allows you to get to a parking orbit. If you are at the Basic Orbital node, you can choose to go american or soviet. I tend o build a R-7 like LV, with 2 or 4 boosters and a core-stage depending on my payload, and an RD-0105 or RD-0109 as upper stage. If you get the numbers right, the upper stage can use the Agena guidance for avionics, which saves weight and increases the upper stage efficiency. Btw, if you are worried about price, only this set of three probe cores should get you above 5k credits IIRC.

@Sir_Fanch Thank you for the suggestion. I think I tried to do that, but on one side, changing root also messes with the delta-v depending on the part selected (my impression was that delta-v was counted correctly only for lower stages), and on the other side, I think there is some deeper problem than delta-v readings, because the center of lift is also messed up, and stays in the probe regardless of vessel aerodynamics. I'm hoping that this issue will be solved on 1.1.3...

Because RO/RP-0 are not 1.1.3 compatible yet. But it's great news that Persistent rotation is totally updated and improved. I'll be waiting for the complete update of the RO suite before moving to 1.1.3 though