NathanKell

No problem!

Step 1: What kind of experience would you like? (a) Realsitic rockets, with real life efficiencies? Get Realism Overhaul ( Kerbal rockets but boosted to real life efficiency? Get ROMini or SMURFF. © stock KSP (i.e. horribly inefficient) parts? Change nothing. The answer to your question depends on your answer above, though in all cases you need a real life quantity of delta V (9000-9500 vacuum dv, depending on liftoff TWR and burn time to orbit) and an orbit of ~150x150 or higher.

Please try not to bite the hands that help you, folks. Whether the help is exactly as you ordered it to be or not.

Woot! OP updated!

Sorry, not seeing any issues here. Explain more?

It's not that one does better or worse at subsonic, it's that the drag from everything else matters more, whereas supersonic the drag from the nose bits alone becomes (relatively) more important, and thus the lower drag of the pointy cone (yes, it *always* has lower drag) matters more.

paul23: Yes, it does, with a .8 multiplier to height. There's lots of discussion in the Overhauls for 1.0 thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119108-Overhauls-for-1-0 SpecTRe-X: atmosphereCurve, which is used to set Isp, uses pressure (in units of one atmosphere of pressure). atmCurve, used for changing flow with density, uses normalized density (normalized so a sea level density of 1.225kg/m^3 appears as 1.0).

Ah, I see. Yeah, guess I wasn't clear enough. I'll edit the OP.

Shocking, right?

Huh? The pods are the right size in RO. As to the question, no, but do check out the heights of the Mercury Seven.

You're right, we totally do need docs! Awesome! Quick note, though--career mode in RO, but without RP-0, is going to be fairly broken (and is totally unsupported), as this thread's OP mentions. The metaphor I usually use is, it's like you're having a marathon, and some people are showing up in Ferraris, and some of the contestants can't move. That's because RO changes parts (particulary engines) all around, without regard to what they were before, and without re-pricing them or changing their nodes. If you want to play RO career, please, please use RP-0, and for RP-0 there are two tutorials on the wiki (though we desperately need more of course).

Real Fuels doesn't come with an engine config pack. Realism Overhaul, the only engine config pack I'm involved in, does indeed assign real fuels to real SRBs.

FASA is not a realism pack. It's not even a "kerbalized-real-stats" pack. If you want realistic configs, check out Realism Overhaul.

I'm mildly disappointed that people seem to be misreading what I wrote. It is not the end of stock configs. It is merely a recognition that balancing configs for stock KSP is...shall we say not within the skill set of the three people currently engaged in this endeavor, and that's why we want to expand the team. What stance would you like me to take? Have me guess numbers for them? That won't end well.

It's wikipedia, but:

I use regex's approach, and am eagerly awaiting someone replacing the kerbal assets.

I find it particularly humorous that, prior to KSP 1.0, FAR also used the same per-part approach, with the same downsides. The main difference between 1.0 stock Aero and pre-1.0 FAR is regarding wings, where FAR does try to ascertain total wing geometry and calculate AR and sweep effects, where stock does not. That's not to minimize how awesome old-FAR was, of course; I adopted FAR in my first month of playing (June 2013) and never looked back, but we also shouldn't minimize the advances that ferram brought with post-KSP-1.0 FAR.

Sure! Re: 2, it's no longer accurate. Thought I made that clear, sorry. That formula calculates pressure (not density, let alone normalized density) and is only correct for KSP prior to 1.0.

1. Nope, multimode engine supports only two modes. 2. Um. atmCurve uses normalized density (where 1.0 in the curve = 1.225kg/m^3 density). If you want to find Kerbin atmospheric properties, your best bet is to go here, take your Kerbin altitude and multiply it by 1.25, and put it in the altitude box. Then change the density readout to 'sigma' not kg/m^3. I'm...not even going to address how crazy it is to have an engine provide nearly double the thrust of sea level with only 1/3 the mass flow of sea level, that's all on your head.

Starwaster, are you thinking of the Titan III's third stage, the Transtage? That was restartable, it used AJ10 engines.

The 0.5 multiplier is done internally by flightintegrator when running its occlusion system and then passed on to its internal radiation method. You won't see anything related to it anywhere, but unless you are using a mod that changes that bit of Flight Integrator (and to my knowledge no such mods exist) it's still there.

Further, it would be impossible to control reentry without RCS, and that would be...very bad. The shielding is probably rated to survive a purely ballistic reentry, but you'd lose any ability to control landing zone or mitigate Gs, and you'd be stressing the TCS.

I don't remember what the latest version of Kopernicus for 1.0.2 is, but I doubt it had great on-demand support. If you have only 2GB of RAM, well, you can make up for that with a page file but things will get rather slow then I think. Any particular reason you're not on 1.0.4?

Sorry, never seen the like. Anyone else experience this?

Shockingly it says exactly that...in the manual