NathanKell

@nobodyhasthis2 fair enough; might as well leave it then. @Skalou in real life you go off-prograde all the time, indeed most modern LVs (and Saturn V when ascending to parking orbit) circularize after apogee. But in real life while the cosine loss for burning off prograde for 30s may be 50m/s, just as in KSP, you're talking about total steering losses of maybe 75m/s out of 9400m/s expended, vs KSP where that would be 75 out of 3200 or so.

@hieywiey Again there's nothing in there that says anything. I mean just don't have MFT (RF and MFT are incompatible). At this point, though, I think it *is* time to try with just RF and its dependencies, and see if that alone is enough to cause the crash. Because I don't know anything else to suggest

Ideally I'd unlock it from either node (capsules, or spaceplanes) but as things stand your solution is best for that--you should be able to pack extra oxygen on an X-15, not have a hard-set amount. Unlike the X-1 cockpit, where I *do* want to leave a hard limit (so it's not used for >100km flights, as certain youtubers are guilty of )

@NecroBones yep, we forgot to install the engines, the upper stage, and the payload! Certainly not a winged monstrosity of 80t dry mass, no one would be that silly.

@nobodyhasthis2 it's true if we isolate just to rocket control we can pick out stuff, but...that video is two years old, it's long before the aero overhaul last spring, and is very, very bad advice (and quite possibly rocket-destroyingly catastrophic due to aerodynamic forces) these days. @Armisael you're not wrong that if the LV is designed then what you want to optimize for is delta V expended. However, at *that* point, minimizing delta V just to LKO is a fool's errand because, unless that's all you're going to, you might do better going for a higher orbit (i.e not thorttling down let alone coasting). You have to balance steering, gravity, and drag losses *and* you have to include subsequent burns in your calculation...

@ZaPPPa Yes, good point. Though...I thought I put a few hours of oxygen in the 1.25m cockpit--that's the one you're using, right, not the X-1? Or does it come with default life support, which equates to a modular tank, which equates to no LS because the TANKs aren't unlocked.

@Hotaru welcome! 1. You will have a bad time. Probably survivable, but bad. Note that FAR with real-size things behaves rather differently than in stock KSP; a lot of the things that makes FAR difficult to deal with in stock KSP (low gimbal ranges / flippyness, bottom-heavy rockets, big draggy fronts of rockets, etc) are artifacts of KSP scaling issues (and non-real part stats and sizes, and wacky payload fractions) and go away in RO. Please at least try with FAR for a few days, although for goodness sake (and this goes in general, not just re: FAR) read the False KSP Lessons RO wiki entry and for good measure the tutorials there and (especially) on RP-0's wiki. 2. RealHeat ( thread link ) is a minimalist version of the original project. It calculates the correct shockwave temperature based on atmospheric data. It's needed so the shockwave temperature is correct for a given body at a given velocity. 3. Yes, unless the colliders have issues in 1.0.5 (that's why we don't suggest BobCat's Proton anymore) parts even from like .22 will work fine if RO says they are supported. However, I would highly recommend the following: If you're just starting out in RO, you might want to try with RP-0 (the career mod; without it career isn't supported). It will slowly get you used to flight in RO, then orbit, then lunar and interplanetary. For part packs you should use: * SXT (required) * Ven's Stock Revamp (required) * Deadly Reentry and RealChute (not part packs per se, but required) * The three procedurals (Proc Fairings, Proc Parts, B9 Proc Parts [wings]--not required, but nearly). That's in addition to the other mods RP-0 (and RO) require. If you still want more parts and have RAM headroom, you can try FASA or Raidernick's various mods, but do please obey the "non-RP0" prefixes on parts, those aren't supported yet (there are always some we haven't gotten to).

Yes, it is certainly possible to write contracts like that. That'd make an interesting contract pack, I look forward to seeing it!

Yes, with a few updates here and there. It's accessed through Debug->Physics->Aero like the other aero debug options.

@Temeter yep, only Lunar-rated heatshields are lunar-rated. Weird that the Soyuz isn't, that was originally designed for lunar missions. I'll have a look. I didn't know RP-0 supported the SXT Soyuz already...

@-Velocity- If it does not, then please tell the CKAN people. RO *does* 'recommend' RealSolarSystem, which means it *should* install automatically.

Efficient in terms of what? Cost? You'll need to accept higher delta V to orbit and lower payload fraction. Delta V? You'll need to accept a much lower payload fraction, and you might burn up. Payload fraction? It may take a lot of delta V, and you'll need to use only the best equipment. Generally delta V is the worst thing to optimize for, because if you get a higher payload fraction who cares if you spent 300 m/s more? (And same with cost.) In terms of some happy medium, however, here's a few guidelines (they may conflict). Any time you're throttled down (or not burning at all, throttle 0, the worst) that's a sign you brought too much engine (payload fraction is suffering) or you're taking gravity losses you shouldn't (delta V cost is increasing). Any time you're not burning prograde, you're taking steering losses. Any time you're under terminal velocity (it can be very high, mind), again, you're taking gravity losses you could avoid.

@hieywiey the log says nothing about why it crashed, it cuts off before the crash. That said, you should: 1. Ensure you have the latest Procedural Parts 2. Make sure you only have RealFuels, you don't also have Modular Fuel Tanks (see the warning at the top of the OP). 3. Make sure you stay below 3GB for KSP's process space.

I concur on the above. Also regarding Saturn IC / F-1 continuation as it happens; I'm persuaded, actually, by the argument for Saturn IB (if the USAF can be bludgeoned into not going for Titan Uber Alles), and perhaps going to 9 H-1s. Heck, you can even dunk the darn things and they still work, so first-stage reuse isn't so implausible. 9 further-uprated H-1s and a tank stretch should break even with F-1A's higher Isp, and at a reasonable cost (and without the NASA-too-big-for-its-britches issues with keeping the F-1 around).

@plague006 can the version be bumped then?

@Gaarst Nope, you've got it flipped. Think of a dart: fins go at the back, not the front. @THX1138 Just because the CoL is behind the CoM at one angle of attack doesn't mean it always is. Try slowly rotating your plane in the SPH so it has more and more pitch (simulating AoA), and watch the CoL move. Remember that your Mk2 fuselage also provides list. Finally, recall that what matters is the aerodynamic center (which, sadly, KSP won't show you)--i.e. the sum of all aerodynamic forces, not just lift. Just because the center of lift is behind the center of mass doesn't mean draggy bits forward of the center of mass aren't moving the aerodynamic center forward...

If you use it in 64K you will get a payload fraction somewhere between real life (2-5%) and KSP (10-20%). So I would not call it overpowered.

weird. Typo somewhere I'd guess. @Oromis Finally looking into the bug. Does it ever occur on something other than a RealChute? If not, I think it's safe to say the issue is in how RealChute's module reports mass (via GetModuleMass). Also, it's very much the case that the mass shown in the part list tooltip won't match the mass in practice, since it's a procedural part...

v10.8.0 SSTU improvements. Fix max temps on BD Adjustable Gear. Improve mass/volume/etc stats for Universal Storage. Better support stock radiators. Tweak stats and configs of US LVs and their engines (mostly FASA). NOTE: May cause engine configs to switch for LR79s in flight. Includes new parts (Delta avionics, Atlas II core) and part and engine config tweaks. Add another Castor 4 config. Adjust early and mid AJ10, add new AJ10Adv clone for late model AJ10s. Fix issue where A-4 guidance unit was set to type Debris. Fix RZ2 diameter and stats. Support CST-100 (Starliner pack). Fix reversed nodes for Mk2 cargo bay. Improve support for Raidernick packs including Blok D, LK/LOK, Soyuz, VA, Scout, IUS, Zenit, etc. Craft updates. Add workaround for logspam from DRE. Update UA solids' gimbal range to NASA spec. Support BobCat Orion. No longer suggest some part packs that have broken colliders in 1.0.5. Fix Skylab life support stats, add science lab module to it. Fixes to various old BobCat configs. Fix an issue with Castor 30XL gimbal. Fix to RCS plumes no longer being visible. Fixed scale, nodes of ISS Destiny module. Change title of Bell 80xx (Agena) engine to have LR81 prefix, and X-405 Vanguard booster to have XLR50 prefix, like other US engines.

@CatastrophicFailure Please try a clean install with only RF (and its requirements) and Proc Parts. You've got lots of other errors in the log. Also make sure you are not using any hacks to the executable.

@linuxgurugamer ferram is on Windows. @taniwha would be the guy to ask for linux dev.

Yes, replace the broken one with that.

@Phineas Freak I believe that's @ferram4's Saturn-Nova texture pack (and fairing texture pack). Not sure where it's available; I know we folded it into COM. You can get it from there (the two SN folders). With ferram's permission we should probably just plop it in RO. @harlikwin the Titan's engines were LR87 for the booster and LR91 for the upper. They are available in the FASA pack, which RP-0 mostly supports (and RO completely supports). LR79 was the engine for Thor/Jupiter, and later reworked into H-1 for Saturn I/IB (and RS-27 for Thor again). It was comparable to the LR89 Atlas booster engine.

Probably easier to just check for a value on the part itself, i.e. @PART[*]:HAS[~SMURFFExclude[True],other_has_checks]:FOR[.... and then in a PART {} you do SMURFFExclude = True To avoid logspam, you also do: @PART[*]:FINAL { !SMURFFExclude = DEL } since any extra values in a part will trigger logspam on part compile.

If a part hasn't been placed by RP-0 into a node, *and* it hasn't been placed into the ORPHANS node, then it will be wherever the original partmaker placed it. However, its title will begin with Non-RP0--that's a signal that you shouldn't use it.