NathanKell

Nope, never have. If you want to know your drag losses: 1. Switch navball to Surface mode and pause. 2. Note total dV expended 3. Subtract srf velocity from that number 4. Subtract gravity losses. 5. Subtract steering losses. 6. The result is your drag losses.

Known issue, fixed in 1.0.5.

I can't speak to the courts, but on this forum the moderators do enforce licenses. Sampa: yep.

I have (finally) posted a thread on the Future of FASA. Apologies for the long time coming.

Hi all! frizzank has entrusted me with maintaining FASA now that he's moving on to other things. Here are my general plans. First, FASA will be moving to a CC-BY-NC-SA license. That means you can reuse FASA assets, but you must give credit to frizzank, prominently; you must allow others to reuse/derive from your work, and you must not sell or otherwise profit commercially from the FASA assets. Second, existing parts will be maintained for regular (non-RO) KSP usage. Further, for any new parts, or old parts that change, we're looking for volunteers to configure them for regular KSP play, since making all FASA parts available for regular KSP play remains our aim. Third, the awesome Raidernick and saabstory88 have already stepped up to work on filling in the gaps and making modifications to the assets when needed (though per point 2, the original forms of all assets will be preserved as an option). Due to all of us being rather busy, please don't start any hype tricycles. But I did very much want to finally make the announcment, not least so that those people who do want to make derivative works using FASA assets as a base can do so. Let's give another hearty cheer to our great benefactor and artist extraordinaire frizzank.

It's true that Realism Overhaul makes some things harder--for example, limited throttling and ignitions, and ullage--but the same basic toolset that let you play KSP will apply. Orbital mechanics haven't changed, staging and Rocket Science in general are the same, etc. Make sure you check out RP-0's tutorials and FAQ, and also it's well worth looking at Realism Overhaul's tutorials and FAQs as well (click the down arrow next to 'Pages'--and be sure to check out 'False KSP Lessons').

Wait, what? Career mode for RSS exists and works pretty well. It's called RP-0. Further, installing RP-0, and Realism Overhaul on which it depends, is very easy with CKAN.

Congrats! KW Community fixes is still broken for RO. You will have to manually remove it. Or just don't use KW at all until it's fixed.

Yes. As the descriptions of the shields say, some are rated only for LEO reentries, but some are rated for lunar reentries.

AeroGUI displays only per-vessel stats. So the force each wing produces is of course correct for that part (it's just reading the force vector from the stock module after all), and then all those vectors are summed, and then the displayed vessel lift force is the vector sum of all those part vectors dotted with vessel +Z And sure, np.

You still have a lot of part packs. Please follow my original advice.

Bug, fixed in git. Sorry.

Ok, can you show your modlist for that install then?

Launch just before that (invariant plane) longitude is where your DN will be on ascent. Polar orbits are easiest for this--just launch when you're 'under' the desired orbital track in the tracking station view.

You've got waaaaaay too many part packs. Start with just the required and recommended (NOT suggested) mods.

RO already configures it, worry not.

In career, Fuselage and Structural are the only two tanks unlocked at the start, and of the two, Fuselage is the default. In sandbox, all tanks are unlocked, and the tank type Default is the default type, and it's not highly pressurized.

legoclone09: What makes that especially funny is that the stats for the KSP engines were themselves derived from real engine performance (F100-PW-229 in dry thrust for the BJE, a super-J58, i.e. that goes down to near-1.0 prat3, for the TRJ, and an extrapolation of that for the RAPIER). Isps are about 2x real and TWRs about 1.5x real. So you're chicken-and-egging here.

More than that--it's like asking why two mods, one which gives the Mainsail 2000kN thrust, and another that gives the Mainsail 2200kN thrust, aren't compatible.

The other solution, of course, is to not have LV-Ts balanced for career have the same stats in sandbox/end-of-career. They have 3/4 the Isp and 1/2 the TWR of late game engines, so no wonder seeing a late game engine in 1.25m formfactor is shocking.

It's a pressure fed engine. It needs highly pressurized tanks to feed it, i.e. tank type Fuselage or tank type ServiceModule.

Huh. My understanding was that aerospike referred to the entire class of altitude-compensating nozzles which use either e a physical or created-by-exhaust-pressure spike down the center (toroidal) or linearly (linear) to form the inner half of a notional nozzle and thus keep exhaust exit pressure near ambient. Interestingly, it appears that 'plug nozzle' can refer to two different systems: the aerospike, above, where the unmoving centra spike or inverted-trench is the plug, or a movable plug like garden hoses have (an alternate method of altitude compensation, *not* an aerospike, because it's doing the compensation entirely by geometry, not using the air as well).

Here's an interesting article on the full four-stage version, speculating that in fact the figures of the A-9/A-10/A-11/A-12 system were back-computed from Von Braun's quite-fully-worked-out 1948 ferry rocket study (which was made prettier and used in the famous 1952 Collier's magazine series Man Will Conquer Space Soon). Really only the A-10 (and the A-9 / A-4b boost-glide vehicle) were fully worked out, of the whole series; even if there were notional A-11 and A-12 the figures were very scanty.

Per that cite, 690t of LOX and LH2. Let's assume it's at 5.5:1, that's 2010 m^3. The total stage volume, assuming a cylinder, is 3926 cubic meters. So only half the stated volume is used by the LH2 and LOX, which would make sense for a conic N1-style non-integral-tank stage. Note the N1's structure:

Each AJ10-190 OME provides 26.7kN of thrust. Shuttles were ~75t dry, and could loft about 20t of cargo. That means a TWR of 0.074 to 0.055. So I'd say the ingame Puffs are about right.