Zeiss Ikon

Supposed to be just frozen deuterium or D-T mix, some designs with a polymer coating. Very innocuous, chemically. Just keep combustion sources away from the bay for a couple days while all the things thaw, boil, rupture, and the bubbles surface...

Last night, in my new RSS/RO/RP-1/Principia career, I succeeded in building a WAC Corporal analog. Performance is somewhat disappointing -- only about 30 km with very modest payload -- but I was able to recover the core and science instruments intact (had the parachute for the sustainer engine and tank staged wrong, it smashed) and between that and experiments in flight I got back enough science to unlock several more of the low tier nodes. Still takes Way Too Long to get a rocket built or a tech node fully researched, though. Upgrades, upgrades...

Straightened out a couple missing mods in my RSS/RO/RP-1/Principia setup, started a new career (Moderate difficulty -- my first time at other than Custom eased a bit from Standard - no Kerbal respawns this career!), and completed the "first launch" contract -- after wasting some time trying to design/build a WAC Corporal, only to discover I didn't seem to have any FINS!! Seems they're neglected in the starting parts you get when you accept the "First Launch" contract. I realized I did have (access to) some of the B9 Procedural Wings, only after I'd assembled and launched a "Captured V-2" using the A-4 parts.Got a few science points even from that (and missed at least one -- there'll be other flights for "low atmosphere"), not to mention setting a bunch of World's First records for speed and altitude. I grabbed the last telemetry and destroyed the rocket just after it entered space proper (140 km), because the battery was almost gone and I wasn't sure I'd be able to destruct without EC, and it was headed uncomfortably close to the Bahamas. In the end, the flight was good for close to 40,000 profit over the (very modest, because captured parts, I presume) cost of the rocket. Not bad for only 50,000 starting funds.

I spent my play time last night reinstalling my 1.3.1/RSS/RO/RP-1/Principia setup -- and it was worth it. Remote Tech and KSC Switcher have resolved their differences, and I can get connection to my spacecraft, both on the pad and up at (at least) 100 km altitude over Canaveral and White Sands. Still need to fiddle with parts packs; the procedural Avionics and most of the procedural tanks don't seem to have made the transition, though I do, now, have the self-shaping procedural fairings I couldn't get to show in the other install.

A clean install, following Bornholio's spreadsheet as closely as current CKAN setup will allow seems to have fixed this problem. I now get connection through RT, both on the pad and up to at least 100 km altitude over Canaveral and White Sands.

Confirmation that the Dev Branch of Test Flight seems to work in 1.3.1 with RSS/RO/RP-1. Had a couple A-4 engines fail to ignite (back in 1942, that used to lead to a blob of jelly falling out of the nozzle, composed of a highly explosive mix of LOX and alcohol fuel), had some Aerobee/WAC Corporal engines shut down with fuel still in the tanks, and I could see the flight test data accumulating for engines I'd launched a few times.

Okay, clean install following Bornholio's spreadsheet as closely as CKAN allows (a few months later), and everything now seems to work. I've got ground stations all over the place, and I get connection through RT both on the pad and to at least 100 km (that's all I had time to test last night).

Thanks, @TaxiService, but it was KSC Switcher. I must have had a version conflict somewhere (wrong version of KSC Switcher, I'm guessing). Last night I did a clean reinstall following Bornholio's spreadsheet as closely as possible (some things now get added earlier because CKAN grabs them when you install related mods) -- and everything seems to work. My multiple launch sites now have omni comms, presumably to be replaced with powerful dishes over time (I've only looked at the first couple weeks of 1951, so far), and there are a bunch of ground stations showing that aren't connected to launch sites (Canary Islands and Natal, Brazil, for instance). Instead of no connection on the pad, it now looks like I'll be able to use built-in or attached omnis on spacecraft at least to LEO, likely as far as the Moon.

Today, I launched a sounding rocket (based on Project Bumper -- only mine goes lots higher, because better upper stage). Got almost 40 kg of payload above 600 km. And still couldn't get the antenna to work. I removed Remote Tech from my 1.3.1 RO/RSS/RP-1/Principia install, until I can find a solution to KSC Switcher putting Mission Control in South America (a little out of comm range from White Sands, Wallops, and Canaveral). Unfortunately, now even stock-type antennae (modded by RSS/RO for range, data rate, and electrical consumption) lack an "Activate" button, whether in VAB, on the pad, or in space.

I've removed the Remote Tech mod. Now, RO/RP-1 do mod the ranges, electric consumption, and data rates of the antennae, but they're supposed to work just like they do in the original. In this case, Communotron 16S is a surface mount antenna.

I've been having trouble with Remote Tech in my RO/RP-0(/KCT/RSS/Principia) install that I think is due to KSC Switcher putting Mission Control in South America. So, in order to be able to at least build and launch real-like 1951 rockets (A-4 with a sounding rocket as an upper stage, mostly -- >600 km with a 40+ kg science payload), I removed Remote Tech (using CKAN, which I had used to install everything for this install that has a CKAN entry). Now, a Communotron 16-S lacks an "activate" button, whether in VAB, on the pad, or in flight -- which means I can't transmit experimental data. Doesn't matter in Sandbox, but if I have to run my career without Remote Tech because of the KSC Switcher conflict, I'll need to be able to transmit data right from the start -- and I'd much rather not start over installing this... Suggestions on something I might be missing?

If I wanted to change the epoch/starting date (for instance, to start on 1946-01-01, to start near the beginning of the sounding rocket era), what .cfg file would I need to find and edit? I looked for a .cfg in my (KSP 1.3.1) installed RSSDateTime folder, and didn't find one. If you have RSS installed, especially RSS with Principia, you should have correct positions for all the supported bodies in the Solar System through at least several decades.

I've currently got a crew on the way back from a flyby of Duna and Ike in a stock (plus Better Burn Time) career, though I've been distracted the past week or so trying to get a full 1.3.1 RO/RP-1/RSS/Principia install working right (Remote Tech is, I think, disagreeing with KSC Switcher -- Switcher says Mission Control is at the equator, in northwestern Brazil or eastern Colombia, which doesn't work out well to connect to sounding rockets launched from White Sands or Wallops).

I'm in process of getting RO/RSS/RP-1 set up for a new career. One of the installed mods is KSC Switcher, and I've found it's causing a problem with another companion mod, Remote Tech. Short version -- KSC Switcher seems to establish a central Mission Control at the equator in either eastern Colombia or near the Colombian border in western Brazil. This means my omni antennae are always out of range at any available launch site, because they're all thousands of km away and too much of the Earth is in between (even if not for the range limitations of the antenna hardware). Is there a fix for this, short of removing Remote Tech?

I'm trying to set up an RO/RP-1/RSS career on 1.3.1, including Remote Tech. The problem I'm having is that I never, ever have connection to send commands to my vessels. I've been able to use MechJeb's autostage to stage the booster and get a homebrew sounding rocket to about 197 km, but I have no control over anything -- can't even "Analyze Telemetry". Oddly (I presume due to a bug somewhere), if I build a bone-stock A-4, I can control it in pitch/yaw/roll until the batteries run out (within limits of air for the fins to work against). I may have just spotted the problem -- something in either RP-1 or KSC Switcher has established Mission Control in eastern Colombia or in Brazil near the Colombian border (can't see political borders in the Tracking Station). This is clearly out of range from the omni antennae, either the ones built into the Aerobee and procedural probe cores, or the stock-alike dipoles. Unfortunately, there are no launch sites within omni range of this (interior South America) location; the nearest, Kourou (in what used to be French Guiana -- don't instantly recall the current name), is still multiple thousands of km away. I'm also going to post in the KSC Switcher thread, if I can find it, but would I be correct in thinking this is probably the issue with my Remote Tech never having connection?

Okay, I was sent over here after stumping the attempts at helping me with what I really think is a Remote Tech issue. I'm running 1.3.1, RO/RSS and the Dev Branch RP-0 (aka RP-1? -- with the very, very complex-looking tech tree) -- just downloaded the Dev Branch Test Flight, haven't installed it yet. I can get a complete mod list if it's needed. My early sounding rockets work great (WAC Corporal/Aerobee 100 equivalent), but Remote Tech is making my head hurt. Despite having a control core (Procedural Avionics or the Aerobee Avionics Core) adequate for multiple tonnes of craft, I keep getting "Controls Locked" messages, and with a Reflectron DP-10 antenna (on top of the built-in omni in the avionics) I can't so much as stage once the launch clamps disengage. Without Remote Tech, everything is fine. Stranger, if I launch a bone-stock A-4 (using only A-4 parts, haven't tried any modifications), I have pitch/yaw/roll control despite No Connection, for as long as the battery holds up and the fins have air to work in. Can't Range Safety Destruct, though (works fine if the launch clamps are still engaged). I've just uninstalled Remote Tech, though I'll put it back if/as needed to test, and I want to use it in my RO/RP-1 career. Meantime, I need to get Flight Test installed and check if it seems to work.

I suppose, though I don't know if this is an RO/RP-0 issue, or a Remote Tech problem -- I'm thinking the latter, because my rockets work fine without it, and don 't work with it (even if I have antenna and the Tracking Center is a block away).

Back again. My rockets are more like the 2.0 rockets in that tutorial, and they work fine without Remote Tech. I can launch an A-4 and have control for a while (until the battery runs down), that that seems to be in spite of Remote Tech -- the A-4 guidance unit is responding even though it reports "No Connection." I don't understand this... Here's my sounding rocket, roughly like a WAC Corporal. I can send commands (such as firing the decoupler to drop the booster on the pad) for as long as it's connected to the launch clamps. Disconnect, and it's like a kid's Estes model rocket -- no control at all, not even to stage. Edit: I just found MechJeb's autostage, and got this rocket to stage with that (basically a simple timer) -- it went 159 km high (more like Aerobee 150 than WAC Corporal). I had no ability to perform the science, other than (seemingly) "Analyze Telemetry", which I didn't attempt to transmit. Notice that this rocket has no connection, either -- but I have full control, within the limits of aerodynamics. Pitch, yaw, roll. No Range Safety, however, and if there were science aboard, I couldn't operate it. So, this makes two question. First, why are my rockets failing to connect -- and second, why can I control the A-4 without an uplink?

I see the Dev branch referenced above is "16 commits ahead of master" and a report that it works in 1.3.1 -- has anyone tried it with RO/RP-1 (RP-1 is an alternate name for the Dev branch of RP-0)? I'd like to have simulated failures in my RO career, but with 45 mods already installed, there are always potential compatibility issues...

I'll check Dang It!, but it sounds like it's giving a chance of failure based on actual burn time accumulated on a single example of an engine. Test Flight is (was) supposed to keep track of how many times a component type (like a Swivel) had been flown and "accumulate flight data" that the folks building the things could use to make it more reliable over time. Those are opposite sides of the same coin, and Test Flight also does/did what Dang It! does, if I'm reading your description correctly -- engines have a rated burn time, and their failure chance rises precipitately if you burn past that time. So, if you run an A-4 engine longer than the 54 seconds it had with the original A-4 tanks, it becomes much more likely to fail -- except that if you've flown twenty A-4 engines, you might have "learned things" that will let you burn one for two minutes instead of almost as minute. @SnarkI looked at the mod's thread first, which is where I saw that the last update was for 1.2.2 and got the link to GitHub, where I saw that there hasn't been a change in about a year. I'll go ahead over there and ask, anyway.

I tried it with the Taerobee Avionics and the Procedural Avionics (set to 3 T for a rocket that masses less than 1 T at ignition), without the "controls locked" message, but still without decoupling the booster (which, in an Aerobee, will result in an engine shutdown due to the zero/negative G from coasting when the booster burns out). The craft I started (RO RN Aerobee 100) with is labeled as being for RO; it's my understanding RO normally includes Remote Tech (for light speed lag, if nothing else). I'll go look at that wiki article and see if I missed something.

If tourists hang around the Astronaut Center or VAB (waiting to be assigned as crew), there's either an uncompleted contract, or a bug. If the contract they followed in has, in fact, been satisfied, then feel free to call Security (i.e. the cheat menu, Alt-F12) to politely escort them back to their hotel and, if necessary, the airport for the flight home.

Following up on this, I'm either starting to understand Remote Tech, or removing it (and a couple other mods) and reinstalling it fixed something. I can now launch an A-4 from Wallops, and apply pitch/yaw/roll controls until the (very short-lived) internal battery runs down. If I knew exactly what azimuth and elevation I needed, I could start a war with UK by dropping a leftover V-2 on Bermuda. I still can't make a Aerobee stage away the solid booster after launch, however (I get a message about locked controls as soon as the rocket clears the launch clamp). The message says the onboard avionics are rated for 0.00 T -- which is silly. An Aerobee hasn't got any controls other than the staging sequencer, and I'm pretty sure they used a simple mechanical timer for that in 1950. I'm not asking the onboard to fly aerobatics, I'm asking it to throw a switch. I used the RN RO Aerobee (don't recall which model, but not the one with a reduced diameter nose); I'll try replacing the avionics with a procedural unit and see if that solves the problem for me, but if it does, what is the Aerobee Core unit actually good for?

I'm working on getting an RSS/RO/RP-0 1.3.1 install running. So far, so good -- I'm launching from Canaveral, White Sands, and Wallops Island, got a tech tree that looks like a bowl of spaghetti processed to orthogonalize the strands, got engines that run on stuff like IRFNA/Aniline/Furfural and Ethanol 75/LOX, rockets that only respond when they're close enough to a control antenna, and a starting date of 1951-01-01. Grayduster, whose YouTube videos from earlier this year inspired me to try to set this up and play a career in it, seems to also have Test Flight -- which simulates part failures and tracks flight history of parts, increasing their reliability as you fly them more. I went to try to install that, and it seems the latest version I can find is for KSP 1.2.2, and doesn't work (as in, game closes on load) in 1.3.1 with RSS/RO/RP-0/Remote Tech. Removing Test Flight allows the game to run normally with the mods seeming to function correctly. I went to GitHub, and it appears that the Master branch was last updated about a year ago -- so where did Grayduster get a working Test Flight?

In my current stock career, I've used drop tanks on launchers, but quickly reached a point where they needed engines (and then larger engines), which made them liquid fuel strap-on boosters. For landers on the Mun and Minmus, however. they make a nice way to widen the base (cuts down on tip-over incidents) without carrying dead weight. All but my first generation of landers have used drop tanks (which were often empty before deorbiting for the landing, due to the lander doing its own transfer from Kerbin and capture at the Mun or Minmus). With the landing legs on the drop tanks, I don't dump them on the surface, but rather after I've done the initial boost, at the same time I start to tip over to build orbital velocity.