Oksbad

What's the word on strategies available from the administration building? A quick look suggests most of them are utterly useless or completely overpowered. There are stock mods to make then more sane (such as Sane Strategies), are any of them recommended for use with RP0?

Is there an RO friendly way/mod to dump fuel? Also, is it possible to transfer electric charge between two storage units, or it that just for liquid fuels? EDIT: Also, is the very poor reliability of engines to initially ignite on initial liftoff a feature? It seems I have to repeat the initial liftoff many times before the boosters activate as intended. Am I doing something wrong?

Hey guys, typing in "contract" in the CKAN GUI uncovers a whole lot of contract packs. Are they compatible with RP0? It seems I might have a problem with either planets that no longer exist (mimnus) or the different sizing of everything.

Is there a way to make the earth texture less blocky when in low earth orbit without a significant performance hit? It looks a fine from far away and it looks OK when in atmo, but quite ugly in low orbit. Also, when using the recommended part packs, are the engines automatically adjusted to RO specs? Finally, I see a few added contract mods on CKAN but many of them reference stock celestial bodies. Are there any additional contract mods compatible with RO? Thanks!

I'm having some trouble and I'm not sure if it's user error or a bug. My engines seem to randomly and suddenly shut down or dramatically reduce their thrust on ascent. Is that excepted behavior? EDIT: Ah, nevermind. I found the engine burn reliability statistic. I was well over the design limit. EDIT 2: Actually, I still have a problem. Sometimes my stage 1 engines fail to initially ignite. Is that a feature? If so, how can it be prevented?

What's considered the edge of space for RO? 70km is stock, RO is about 150km ish?

I think vanilla KSP is very good for the default product. However, I wish that "realistic mode" (think Realism Overhaul with most of the trimmings) could also come a vanilla option so I don't have to deal with installing 3 dozen mods and dealing with stability issues if that's what I wish in my game.

A question about RP-8 career mode. When are the stretchy tanks supposed to appear on the tech tree? They don't seem to be there in the initial node.

What part packs do you guys recommend for a newly started RO player? Well, not exactly new; but it's been sufficiently long I can't remember the parts/packs I used last time.

Utter crap. Ask the more experienced and realism focused players if they would like mechjeb implemented in the vanilla game, and you'll receive a large amount of support. The biggest use of Mechjeb is not by new players to learn, but by experienced players to automate what has become mundane. Now you're just inventing things out of whole cloth. If Squad announced experienced Kerbals being able to plot their own maneuver nodes, there would be no controversy, like there is no controversy on Kerbal experience increasing science yields. The controversy arises because a skilled Kerbal making engine ISP more efficient is pointlessly unrealistic and gamey and there are plenty of other ways that Kerbal experience could matter, such as your own suggestion. And how exactly does the propose change help new players? The people with the experienced crews most capable of taking advantage of it will be the experienced players. New players will receive very little benefit from it.

What? Why on earth do you think the people who don't like magic delta V increasing Kerbals dislike Mechjeb? I think you are simply lumping anyone who disagrees with you in one massive united group. Every time an unrealistic feature is opposed, people will trot out the same excuse that fun trumps realism. This is true, and a good implementation of this includes the shrinking of the solar system, which shortens launch times and permits easier rocket designs which really help new players (though I can think of many who would appreciate a "hard mode" with a scaled up solar system). However, as a rocket simulator, KSP's fun value is more dependent than most games on paying lip service to real physics. If "fun" and "new players" are truly king, why don't we have starting parts that provide unlimited or regenerating fuel? Or have engines with 1000X the ISP of an ion drive with the same thrust as a mainsail? It would certainly make things easier for new players, could be considered fun for casual players and could simply not be used or modded out by purists. Yet few would think that these parts should be added to the game (at least for career mode). We understand that fun trumps realism. We simply find the "fun" provided by that change insufficient to compensate for the "fun" lost due unnecessary deviations from an accurate depiction of rocketry.

Sounds good. I've been bouncing back and forth for some time now. Can you link me to the RO files for TAC?

So I'm running this mod with ECLSS which does not simulate the electrical requirements of life support. What would be a good energy drain per kerbal that I can put in as a temporary bandaid until either ECLSS 2.0 comes out or TAC finishes their overhaul?

Woops wrong thread. Ignore!

I ran into a problem. Your website says the ECLSS pack is best with the rebalancer mod. However the link to the mod on your page is dead. While I found the mod at spaceport, instead of including the instructions in the download or the spaceport page, the instructions direct me to a page on your website, but that link is also dead. So how do I install the rebalancer mod?

I see. Any known fixes? EDIT: You know I realised I come into this thread all the time with problems, but I just wanted you guys to know that in general I really enjoy this mod you've put out. You all are doing awesome work!

My... Ground seems bugged. Kerbals and rockets "sink" into it and landing on water causes my ships to bounce up and down indefinitely, making it very difficult to recover the ships or EVA. Any ideas on what could be causing it?

So do you guys do anything to tweak the huge number of asteroids that end up coming through Kerbin's SOI? The number I have is getting absurd. I have 4 "moons", 6 on a collision course and maybe 20 on an escape trajectory.

Is it intentional that full tanks still require ullage motors to settle the fuel? I assumed they wouldn't but then my upper stage failed to ignite.

Just as a heads up, the link in that post is dead.

But there are engines in RO(typically upper stage ones) that can be reignited using hypergolics but can't be reignited using, say, KeroLox. How can an ablative nozzle be a factor in those? It is primary those types of engines I was interested in reigniting. After all, booster engines generally fire in atmosphere and can't be reached with EVA before they are jettisoned anyway. And furthermore, *realism* overhaul or not, it does not keep track of the ablative material on the engine. If I burn for half the time the rocket is designed for, did I just use up all of the ablative coating? What about a fourth of the the time? What about a mere one second? Is that really how ablative cooling works? EDIT: And because I'm genuinely curious, why can an ablative heat shield survive multiple heating events (provided sufficient ablative material remains) but a ablatively cooled rocket engine cannot survive two ignitions?

What does an ablative nozzle have to do with ignition? They protect the engine while running. Besides, Realism Overhaul does not simulate nozzles getting worn down from being used repeatedly/too long, so why did this suddenly become a problem and how is it relevant? And why on earth do you need to apply hypergolic solution to the engine while it's running? You could place a time-delayed or remote controlled pyrotechnic charge instead.

Is there a way to make it so one can reset engine ignitions on EVA's? It seems a bit too limited otherwise.

Sorry for being obtuse, but so I should just delete/ignore these then?

So how do I install Engine Ignitor for RO? Do I leave one or both of the zipped files untouched or unzip them both?