NathanKell

Sounds like you're using Realism Overhaul. If you are, then please don't ask for support from the part maker, but rather on the RO thread (and you certainly shouldn't expect a craft file made for the original partmod to work after RO changes everything around!) As for B, no, no they were not balloon tanks. Balloon tanks are what Atlas and Centaur used, tanks where there was no structure, the tank itself *was* the stage structure (and had to be kept pressurized at all times or the stage would collapse, hence the name). You're getting confused between that and "common bulkhead" stages, where the top of one tank serves as the bottom of the other. S-II and S-IV and S-IVB were all common bulkhead stages (unlike S-IC), but they were certainly not balloon tanked.

RftS is *very* out of date. The only mod that prices everything for the Real*.* universe is RP-0, though it's nowhere near finished. RealFuels, like all the realism mods in the RO stable, uses 1 fund = $1000 in 1965 dollars. So that tank costs $28,000 USD (probably something like $400k in today's dollars). Propellants, however, are dirt cheap: think about how cheap a gallon (rather more than a liter!) of gas was in 1965... RP-0: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/103196-0-25-Realistic-Progression-Zero (note that ONLY the mods listed as supported are supported by RP-0, and if it's not even listed as WIP, then *none* of the prices will be correct...)

When I did my non-RealFuels 1-kerbal Mun missions, IIRC it took about 1200 tons of LV. That meant, as I recall, something like 4x mainsails on the first stage and a bunch of k125 SRBs as stage 0.

There was a refactor by taniwha, yes, however it has not been released on the RF side yet. The boiloff code RF uses (and MFT doesn't have any fuels that boil off...) hasn't been touched in about a year. Unless you mean *last* December.

Regarding boiloff, let me know if there's stuff you want done to RealFuels. My guess is that when ferram optimized it (about 6-8 months ago?) the way it caches UT makes it hard for KCT?

On Dropbox or mediafire or whatever site you want. Zip it first, however, the size will shrink amazingly.

Bender: yes, the TL (and thus Isp and casing mass) of the proc SRB can be upgraded as you unlock more engine techs. However, the gimbal is rather different. The holdup is that neither CTT nor Tech Manager have been released for .90, and therefore CKAN has not updated their metadata. The 2 contracts thing is a stock 'feature' where the first tier Mission Control building only allows you to have 2 active contracts, as BevoLJ says. Ldk, your talk of 'master' means that BevoLJ is right: you need to download a release of RP-0. Conveniently, I just have just made another one, and edited the OP.

chrisl: I have not seen that issue on 0.90 at all. If that is not a .90 issue, and no one else has .90-specific issues, I would ask anonish to please recompile and release for .90, or, if anonish does not feel recompiling is necessary, update the KerbalStuff metadata.

Can this please have its KerbalStuff metadata updated to .90? There is no reason a .cfg would not be .90 compatible...

Czerky: Make a *large* tank (like, 5m x 10m, say). Show the RF GUI, and add a LH2 tank. Now tell me again that it costs 0.

hoojiwana: I agree with your edit 100%. The entire point of dropping backwards compatibility is that craft built under the old system need not fly right under the new. If one's metric is "craft built under the old system should fly better under the new one" that is the definition of backwards compatibility.

I need to do some deep investigation of what's using memory now, because for 10x Kerbol, ram usage on the main menu with RSS should *not* be any different than memory usage without since (AFAIK?) no new textures are provided.

Ah! Very cool.

While they should be considered key/value pairs, in KSP's code both sides are called a value, i.e ConfigNode.Value is the pair and ConfigNode.Value.name and ConfigNode.Value.value are the two sides. Oy. I would suggest we call them key/value pairs, but if y'all want to say 'field', why not.

As for monitoring electricity, try forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/50077-0-24-2-Fusebox-electric-charge-tracker-and-build-helper-1-0a-released-24-08-14

TheKnave, please don't make that kind of assumption. MechJeb handles RSS (and/or any alternate config for RSS) just fine. This sounds like some other issue in MechJeb. maxdor, welcome to the forums! If you make a backup of your save, remove RSS, and load it and try the exact same rocket, does it still have the same issues?

Since RSS includes Deimos and Phobos (which are, ballpark, that size), you certainly could have the exterior. It would have to be entirely a convex hull, however, excepting any PQSCity-added objects.

Oh goody! Did not realize that (I really should use AGX, but I have enough trouble keeping my own mods up and working... :] ). It does not enable the action editor mode of the VAB/SPH, however, which is an issue for mods like RealFuels or RealChute which use it.

Raptor831: on reflection, I would suggest going to a 0.75 general thrust multiplier for hydrolox. That seems a decent fit for statistical reality, and it should work decently when making one engine support both LH2 and something else. I'd suggest maybe .9-.95x for methalox, too.

Did you add enough intakes?

I would not expect the 8k textures to work in 32bit, period. Unless you use Linux x64, they are there so you can pick one or two planets to make 8192, and the rest 2048. Augustus, cool!

Squad made it unmoddable. Ask them to make it moddable.

Bender222: that would be nice, if there were a way to do that. m_robber: install all required mods. Then go to the github link, click releases, and grab the latest release. Install normally (i.e. place the folders inside GameData in the zip into your KSP/GameData folder).

Here's some docs on what each param in a launch site definition does.

mecki: 1. Yeah, solids are *hard*. Much harder than liquid. 1ft solids came about around the time we first got to orbit, not back in the mid-1940s. 2. The 'fairing upgrades' you see in the tree are not correct, they have not been updated for RP-0 and thus don't correspond to when you actually unlock things. 3. The HSF contract *should* only occur if you've reached orbit or have a pod unlocked. Something is off in the code however. 4. The problem is that early solids should not have gimbal, but later ones should. I guess we could just have two different proc SRBs... 5. No idea about the falling; if it's happening with proc parts it's a proc part issue (KSP placing the part based on how big it thinks it is, then the size changes). If it's not, though... Thanks so much! But do thank the rest of the team. Airships...well, if someone wants to configure them... Bender222: The issue is the size of the pressure vessel... Agathorn: fair cops, all. I'll address when I'm not falling asleep :] AChE: Welcome to the forums, and what a first post! Per above, sleepytime is not the time for math, I'll get back to you... Bender222: Latest Ven's (unless you run the pruner) no longer conflicts with SXT. I run 8192 Earth, 8192 Moon, and no other planet textures. That gives me enough RAM for RVE and if lucky a part pack.