[1.2.2] Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0) - Lightweight RealismOverhaul career v0.53 June 12

[Lazy8]

Wow! interesting stuff....thanks for the links on that.

[chrisl]

I can happily verify that it looks like the problem with the 2/LEO mission duration timers is resolved in the next Contract Configurator release. I installed the dev dlls on my system and tested and the contract now works as it's supposed to. So you don't have to remain on the craft for the entire duration. Now we just patiently wait for nightingale to release the update. (or download the dev dlls if you're impatient like me)

EDIT: I maybe spoke to soon. It was starting to work just fine, but then it messed up again. I'll test more and see if I can figure out what is causing the problem.

Edited October 7, 2015 by chrisl

[Lilienthal]

Nathan et al., With so many changes to the code, wouldn't it be a good idea to make another release?

Also, with 1.0.5 coming (Yeah!), could I ask that there are releases of the latest code base for 1.0.4 before you work on 1.0.5. This time I intend to continue playing the old version until the mods are updated.

[NathanKell]

Lilienthal: I agree. I've been trying to release for...a few weeks now, I just haven't been able to scrape up the time

Plus contributors keep sending in PRs with new awesome stuff...

[federicoaa]

Small question here. I had a craft with a vacuum kerolox engine I sent to the moon.

After reaching moon SOI I realized all the liquid oxygen was gone, I think it's some kind of boil off, but I did not get any warning.

I think It'd be quite nice to have some kind of aid tool in the VAB that tells you if a given tank will boil off and when.

[BevoLJ]

I think It'd be quite nice to have some kind of aid tool in the VAB that tells you if a given tank will boil off and when.

A good rule of thumb, if the fuel (or oxidizer) has the word "Liquid" in the name, it will boil off. The word liquid is put in the name to signify that it's natural state is as a gas (on earth) that has been liquefied for use as a fuel or oxidizer. =) Edited October 8, 2015 by BevoLJ

[Rothank]

I'll add to what BevoLJ said:

1) There are only 3 propellants that suffer from boiloff:

-LOxygen (LOx, oxidiser)

-LHydrogen (LH2, highly cryogenic fuel, will boiloff FAST)

-LMethane (high tech and nuclear fuel)

2) You can slow the boiloff down using cryo tanks, but you can't stop it completelly (temp. difference).

3) Cryo fuels are all about efficiency, but not storability, so for long duration missions (24h onwards) it might be better idea to switch to some hypergolic fuel or monopropellant, depends how much efficiency you need.

4) Cryo fuels are best used for ascent stages, as they burn rather fast. You might be able to use them as orbital stages as long as you do it relatively early after the mission start (Centaur or S-IVB style).

Edited October 8, 2015 by Rothank
Them typos again

[Jonno]

I'll add to what BevoLJ said:

1) There are only 3 propellants that suffer from boiloff:

-LOxygen (LOx, oxidiser)

-LHydrogen (LH2, highly cryogenic fuel, will boiloff FAST)

-LMethane (high tech and nuclear fuel)

Actually not: LqdAmmonia, Diborane, Ethane, Ethylene, OF2, N2F4, FLOX30, FLOX70, and FLOX88 are all slightly cryogenic, but boils off at much slower rates than LqdOxygen/LqdMethane, and even LqdOxygen/LqdMethane boils of rather slowly: In a Balloon/Default/Structural tank you will loose about 1.30% in a month, but in a BalloonCryo/Cryogenic/Fuselage/ServiceModule tank you will only loose about 0.25% in a year.

LqdHydrogen boils of much faster, in a Default tank you'll loose 1.47% in a day, and LqdHydrogen in a cryogenic tank will boil of at exactly the same rate as LqdOxygen/LqdMethane in a non-cryogenic tank (eg 1.30% in a month).

Exact rates can be found in GameData/RealFuels/Resources/RealTankTypes.cfg, where the loss_rate value is boiloff rate per second (the percentages I listed above was derived using (1-(1-«loss_rate»)^(«days»*24*60^2))*100% ).

Edited October 8, 2015 by Jonno
Grammar

[Rothank]

Actually not: LqdAmmonia, Diborane, Ethane, Ethylene, OF2, N2F4, FLOX30, FLOX70, and FLOX88 are all slightly cryogenic, but boils off at much slower rates than LqdOxygen/LqdMethane, and even LqdOxygen/LqdMethane boils of rather slowly

I stand corrected then. However, the 3 fuels i listed are the ones that suffer from boiloff the most while being used very often.

LqdOxygen boiloff might seem small, but, as you can see few posts back, it can be fatal for a mission, same goes for Methane. On top of that, LqdHydrogen's high rate of boiloff can ruin a whole mission for someone that's not prepared for that. Other fuels? Not so much, as they are rarely/never used in RP-0 career.

[Jonno]

You certainly need to take boiloff into consideration or risk ruining a mission, but that is true even for the 9 less frequently used cryogenic fuels. However, except for LqdHydrogen, the best solution is often to pack some extra fuel, not to use less efficient but non-cryogenic fuels, and you don't necessarily need the actual Cryogenic tank type, I did my first successful interplanetary mission with LqdOxygen in a ServiceModule tank (and Kerosene in a Default tank), packing 12 litres extra LqdOxygen to compensate for a year of boiloff during the trip. 338.6 ISP minus boiloff was a quite frankly a much better option than 278 ISP without boiloff, even on a 1 year mission...

[Lilienthal]

afaik, this also depends on the temperature of the tank, doesn't it? Last time I checked (months ago), every fuel had a temperature below which it wouldn't boil off.

Actually not: LqdAmmonia, Diborane, Ethane, Ethylene, OF2, N2F4, FLOX30, FLOX70, and FLOX88 are all slightly cryogenic, but boils off at much slower rates than LqdOxygen/LqdMethane, and even LqdOxygen/LqdMethane boils of rather slowly: In a Balloon/Default/Structural tank you will loose about 1.30% in a month, but in a BalloonCryo/Cryogenic/Fuselage/ServiceModule tank you will only loose about 0.25% in a year.

LqdHydrogen boils of much faster, in a Default tank you'll loose 1.47% in a day, and LqdHydrogen in a cryogenic tank will boil of at exactly the same rate as LqdOxygen/LqdMethane in a non-cryogenic tank (eg 1.30% in a month).

Exact rates can be found in GameData/RealFuels/Resources/RealTankTypes.cfg, where the loss_rate value is boiloff rate per second (the percentages I listed above was derived using (1-(1-«loss_rate»)^(«days»*24*60^2))*100% ).

[BevoLJ]

afaik, this also depends on the temperature of the tank, doesn't it? Last time I checked (months ago), every fuel had a temperature below which it wouldn't boil off.

I had no idea about this. So does this mean temps cause higher or lower boil off? Like does the game/mod actually simulate that? If so that is AWESOME! =D

Like would reentry heating, or even like missions to Mercury vs Saturn effect boil off?

- - - Updated - - -

Infernal Robotics and SCAN-SAT are also supported.

AIES is partially supported.

There should be an info about those mods in opening post.

Also more than 90% of FASA parts are supported so it's more like "fully supported" than "work in progress".

I just noticed all your PRs on the git. Holy cow m8 you have been going bonkers! \o/

You have a list or anything anywhere on what all should be good/in progress in RP-0 already, and that you are working on?

[chrisl]

I'm noticing some issues with the parts used to created the Saturn 1B (FASA).

1) The command module appears to have 313L more "fuel" than it can hold [Volume: Avail: -313: / Tot: 700T]. It does seem that the CM has about 14 days worth of life support for 3 crew, plus a sizable quantity of rcs fuel. But I always thought most of the life support and RCS fuel was stored in the service module. Maybe the bulk of the life support and rcs fuel should be moved to the SM part? Or we just need to increase the capacity on the CM.

2) According to the CSM wiki, "dry mass" should be 11.9t while the "launch mass" should be between 14.7t (Apollo 7 is listed at 16.5t) and 28.8t (Apollo 8). The dry mass of the CSM appears to be 9.036t while the fully fueled mass is 30.556t. I assume that the lower dry mass was to allow for the addition of science modules and such. So if there is basically 2.9t of mass available for "extras", then the wet mass of the completed CSM is about 4.6t heavy. These weights are without the LES.

3) The only "Spacecraft LM Adapter" I can find appears to be non-RP0 but the "Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter - Fairing" has been setup for RP-0. It should also weigh in at 1.84t but appears to only weight 1.789t (adapter + fairing).

4) The S-IVB should apparently have a dry mass of 10.6t but I'm seeing 11.951t. I did include a pair of "Saturn IB/V - APS Flight Pack" modules (+.426t) and a pair of "S-II Ullage Rocket" motors (+.497t). Not sure if those should be included in the dry mass of the S-IVB or not, so it's 0.43t - 1.35t overweight.

5) The "FASA Saturn iB Apollo" craft file is using a "non RP-0 - Saturn S-IB Stage" fuel tank (FASA_SIB) which looks like it's a tank and thrust plate in one. The part is in the "Improved Solids" tech node. But in the "Advanced Construction" tech node there is a "Saturn S-IB Stage Tanks" fuel tank (FASAApalloLFTS1BStage1). It doesn't have the thrust plate so can't mount the engines. In that same tech node there is a thrust plate that initially looks correct. It's listed as "Engine Mount" (FASAApolloStrS1BPlate) but it's not sized correctly. Since all the other Saturn IB/V parts (other than engines) become available in the "Advanced Construction" tech node, can we either get the FASA_SIB part moved and made RP-0 compliant, or at least resize the FASAApolloSTRS1BPlate so it actually fits on the FASAApalloLFTS1BStage1 tank?

6) The "FASA Saturn IB Apollo" craft file is using "non RP-0 - Saturn S-1B Fin" (FASAStrS1BWing) which is currently in the "Advanced Jet Engines" tech node. Since all the other Saturn IB/V parts (other than engines) become available in the "Advanced Construction" tech node, can we get this part moved and made RP-0 compliant?

7) It seems like fuel weights are off. The S1-B stage should have a dry mass of around 42t and should carry about 399.4t of fuel giving it a wet mass of 441.4t and a 150s burn time (at least according to one source. Astronautix actually gives it a gross mass of 448.6t, 155s burn time, with the same basic dry mass resulting in 407t of fuel). Using the FASA_SIB part (which I know is non RP-0 but has the engine plate required to mount the eight H-1B engines), eight H-1B engines, eight FASAStrS1BWing fins, and four "Baby Sergeant Solid Kick Motor" ullage rockets (not sure why those were used but that's what's in the FASA Saturn IB Apollo craft file I'm using for reference), the dry weight of this stage is 31.708t. When I add enough fuel for 148s burn time (the max I can put in the FASA_SIB tank), the fuel weighs 411.305t. The end result is a wet mass of 443.013t which is only about 2.3t heavier then it should be. But that still means the fuel is weighing about 12 tons more than it's apparently supposed to and that's with at least 2 seconds less burn time. Not exactly sure what can be done here since adjusting the resource masses will effect alot more then just this one vessel but is there any way to validate that Kersone should weigh 0.82kg/L and that LOX should weigh 1.141kg/L?

Anyway, between the extra 4.6t on the CSM, and the extra 2.3t on the S1B stage, the Saturn IB is about 7t heavier then it should be. With 2-7 seconds less burn time available.

EDIT: I found a reference that claims the S-1B stage could hold 405kL of fuel (155m3 of RP-1 + 250m3 of LOX). The S-1B tank as it currently exists can hold 404137.4L. I haven't tested yet, but an extra 862.6L of fuel might give the extra 2-7 seconds burn time that various references suggest the S-1B tank should have.

Edited October 8, 2015 by chrisl

[federicoaa]

Actually not: LqdAmmonia, Diborane, Ethane, Ethylene, OF2, N2F4, FLOX30, FLOX70, and FLOX88 are all slightly cryogenic, but boils off at much slower rates than LqdOxygen/LqdMethane, and even LqdOxygen/LqdMethane boils of rather slowly: In a Balloon/Default/Structural tank you will loose about 1.30% in a month, but in a BalloonCryo/Cryogenic/Fuselage/ServiceModule tank you will only loose about 0.25% in a year.

LqdHydrogen boils of much faster, in a Default tank you'll loose 1.47% in a day, and LqdHydrogen in a cryogenic tank will boil of at exactly the same rate as LqdOxygen/LqdMethane in a non-cryogenic tank (eg 1.30% in a month).

Exact rates can be found in GameData/RealFuels/Resources/RealTankTypes.cfg, where the loss_rate value is boiloff rate per second (the percentages I listed above was derived using (1-(1-«loss_rate»)^(«days»*24*60^2))*100% ).

I lost 50% of a tank (default type) liquid oxygen going from LEO to moon.

[Jonno]

I lost 50% of a tank (default type) liquid oxygen going from LEO to moon.

I've done that several times with less than 1% boiloff, you should only see 50% if the trip takes over 4 years, so there must be something more than just boiloff affecting you...

[Hitokiri]

Hello,

I know this is probably not directly related to RP-0 but anyway I hope you may help me or at least direct me, where to find help. Since few days ago, when I enter launch pad the craft became like in flight and I cannot use timewarp (only physical warp is available) The ship I have is about 300t, some 80 pieces, 4 stages, nothing extraordinary, 6 launch clamps to stabilize it. Worst is, it happen with ships that was working without troubles before.

Any Idea what may be the cause of it? How to deal with it?

[Laie]

Hello,

I know this is probably not directly related to RP-0 but anyway I hope you may help me or at least direct me, where to find help. Since few days ago, when I enter launch pad the craft became like in flight and I cannot use timewarp (only physical warp is available).

Any Idea what may be the cause of it? How to deal with it?

I'm getting the same problem, occasionally. Things that help:

a) place the vessel HIGH on launch clamps (the problem seems to come more often if your rocket is just inches above the launchpad)

save before you click "launch" in KCT, load this savegame instead of "revert to launch"

c) restart KSP

The first two work often, but not always. c) has never failed me so far.

[Warp11]

Anyone know how I can get the Moon Flyby/Impact Contracts again? I didn't accept them when they were offered because I wasn't ready for them yet and now the game seems to think I am already past that and is offering me Lunar orbit contracts.

I was getting the Launch Pad issue as well, restarting the game didn't help though.

Thank you.

[NathanKell]

Lilienthal is 100% right about the temperature delta (part internal temp - boiling point) being a multiplier to loss rate. If you're cruising at around 100 K above boiling point (about what it is for LOX in LEO) that's a factor of 100 to the stated loss rate.

Warp11: They should come back soon. Give it a few days and they should respawn.

[stratochief66]

I'm noticing some issues with the parts used to created the Saturn 1B (FASA).

1) The command module appears to have 313L more "fuel" than it can hold [Volume: Avail: -313: / Tot: 700T]. It does seem that the CM has about 14 days worth of life support for 3 crew, plus a sizable quantity of rcs fuel. But I always thought most of the life support and RCS fuel was stored in the service module. Maybe the bulk of the life support and rcs fuel should be moved to the SM part? Or we just need to increase the capacity on the CM.

2) According to the CSM wiki, "dry mass" should be 11.9t while the "launch mass" should be between 14.7t (Apollo 7 is listed at 16.5t) and 28.8t (Apollo 8). The dry mass of the CSM appears to be 9.036t while the fully fueled mass is 30.556t. I assume that the lower dry mass was to allow for the addition of science modules and such. So if there is basically 2.9t of mass available for "extras", then the wet mass of the completed CSM is about 4.6t heavy. These weights are without the LES.

3) The only "Spacecraft LM Adapter" I can find appears to be non-RP0 but the "Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter - Fairing" has been setup for RP-0. It should also weigh in at 1.84t but appears to only weight 1.789t (adapter + fairing).

4) The S-IVB should apparently have a dry mass of 10.6t but I'm seeing 11.951t. I did include a pair of "Saturn IB/V - APS Flight Pack" modules (+.426t) and a pair of "S-II Ullage Rocket" motors (+.497t). Not sure if those should be included in the dry mass of the S-IVB or not, so it's 0.43t - 1.35t overweight.

5) The "FASA Saturn iB Apollo" craft file is using a "non RP-0 - Saturn S-IB Stage" fuel tank (FASA_SIB) which looks like it's a tank and thrust plate in one. The part is in the "Improved Solids" tech node. But in the "Advanced Construction" tech node there is a "Saturn S-IB Stage Tanks" fuel tank (FASAApalloLFTS1BStage1). It doesn't have the thrust plate so can't mount the engines. In that same tech node there is a thrust plate that initially looks correct. It's listed as "Engine Mount" (FASAApolloStrS1BPlate) but it's not sized correctly. Since all the other Saturn IB/V parts (other than engines) become available in the "Advanced Construction" tech node, can we either get the FASA_SIB part moved and made RP-0 compliant, or at least resize the FASAApolloSTRS1BPlate so it actually fits on the FASAApalloLFTS1BStage1 tank?

6) The "FASA Saturn IB Apollo" craft file is using "non RP-0 - Saturn S-1B Fin" (FASAStrS1BWing) which is currently in the "Advanced Jet Engines" tech node. Since all the other Saturn IB/V parts (other than engines) become available in the "Advanced Construction" tech node, can we get this part moved and made RP-0 compliant?

7) It seems like fuel weights are off. The S1-B stage should have a dry mass of around 42t and should carry about 399.4t of fuel giving it a wet mass of 441.4t and a 150s burn time (at least according to one source. Astronautix actually gives it a gross mass of 448.6t, 155s burn time, with the same basic dry mass resulting in 407t of fuel). Using the FASA_SIB part (which I know is non RP-0 but has the engine plate required to mount the eight H-1B engines), eight H-1B engines, eight FASAStrS1BWing fins, and four "Baby Sergeant Solid Kick Motor" ullage rockets (not sure why those were used but that's what's in the FASA Saturn IB Apollo craft file I'm using for reference), the dry weight of this stage is 31.708t. When I add enough fuel for 148s burn time (the max I can put in the FASA_SIB tank), the fuel weighs 411.305t. The end result is a wet mass of 443.013t which is only about 2.3t heavier then it should be. But that still means the fuel is weighing about 12 tons more than it's apparently supposed to and that's with at least 2 seconds less burn time. Not exactly sure what can be done here since adjusting the resource masses will effect alot more then just this one vessel but is there any way to validate that Kersone should weigh 0.82kg/L and that LOX should weigh 1.141kg/L?

Anyway, between the extra 4.6t on the CSM, and the extra 2.3t on the S1B stage, the Saturn IB is about 7t heavier then it should be. With 2-7 seconds less burn time available.

EDIT: I found a reference that claims the S-1B stage could hold 405kL of fuel (155m3 of RP-1 + 250m3 of LOX). The S-1B tank as it currently exists can hold 404137.4L. I haven't tested yet, but an extra 862.6L of fuel might give the extra 2-7 seconds burn time that various references suggest the S-1B tank should have.

1) Good eye on noticing the L of available volume. That is the kind of minutia I usually don't notice or fix. That is controlled by this line of code, if you want to adjust it: https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/blob/master/GameData/RealismOverhaul/RO_SuggestedMods/FASA/RO_FASA_ApolloCSM.cfg#L249

I believe I put pretty much all of the LS materials where they should be, but I might double check that. There is minimal water aboard, most of the water consumed is generated by the SM fuel cells, and those materials are already in the SM. The rest (food, lithium hydroxide to clean the air) would need to be available in the CM cabin for obvious reasons, they can't be piped in from the SM.

2) I would appreciate any link you provide with specific CM/SM masses, I consulted half a dozen reputable ones in forming the current values in RO, but if you point me to any new ones I would love to see them

It gets hard to know what is meant by 'dry mass' for the SM or CM unless more detail is provided by the source. Does it include LS supplies, astronaut masses, etc, etc. Also, different Apollo missions were flown at different masses for various reasons. For instance, Apollo 7 was the lightest because it was launched atop an early Saturn iB rocket. Later Apollo missions launched on Saturn iB rockets report more mass, I am assuming this is achieve through optimizations of the launch trajectory, slight improvements in tank dry masses, engine ISP, etc.

3) What is 50 kg amongst friends? But seriously, the precise mass of all of these parts have been adjusted again and again slightly by different people looking at different sources. Remember not to take any one source as gospel.

4) There were a great many variations on the S-IVB flown, and their dry masses varied substantially. Some flew with more or fewer APS packs, some with a lighter J-2 engine without restart capability. Again, we collect multiple sources and make our best adjustments from there.

5) The FASA Saturn iB Apollo .craft files, and all the other FASA craft files were constructed for RO, before we got RP-0 up and running again for KSP 1.0+. As far as I know, the FASA parts have never all been configured fully for RP-0 and your comment seems to confirm that. Personally, I am playing through RP-0 for the first time (and loving it!) and I am contributing minor changes to help improve RP-0 as I go along. For instance, I helped add the new RD-107 & RD-108 because I love building R-7 style rockets in my early career. Currently I have just placed a 1 man capsule into orbit, and when I progress to the 'Apollo' stage of RP-0 I will hopefully be able to improve the support for later FASA parts.

6) We would be more than happy to help you help us make those changes.

7) Multiple sources were consulted in arriving at the current Saturn iB values, here is a pretty good one I recall using as well: http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_1/Saturn-1/Description/Frame.htm

The whole www.b14643.de is an excellent source in general. I added the ullage engines as sort of an afterthough, so they aren't factored into any of my mass estimates, but they are all relatively light and I found they didn't impact the ability of any of the FASA craft files I built to perform their intended missions.

Unfortunately, there are no 'perfect' dry stage masses, or exact fuel loads or engine burn times. There was a bit of variation in each of these from launch to launch, and we see variation from source to source and ultimately have to put one set of numbers in the game. Engines actually burn for a few seconds and consume some tons of fuel before they are released from the launch pad, some variable amount of fuel boils off and is lost, some small amount of fuel or oxidizer is left in the tanks when the engines are shut down, etc. etc.

I have often switched into rocket mass pedant mode, particularly when a craft will not perform the intended mission when everything is put together, or ends up with waaay too much spare dV. In particular, I went through a lot of trouble figuring out issues with the Saturn iB - Apollo and Titan - Gemini launches with both of those issues and dug up plenty of bugs and inaccuracies and fixed them over time.

My number 1 rule when configuring parts or creating .craft for public use is "can this consistently perform the intended mission when hand-flown"? Ultimately, a choice to adjust the LM Adapter mass 50kg, or decide whether or not to remove the ullage engine mass from the dry mass of a stage doesn't affect that prime goal, so I don't sweat it.

That said, we are definitely more than happy to see PR (pull requests) for Realism Overhaul that intend to improve the accuracy and authenticity of the mod. I only ask that if you adjust the mass of a part, or the fuel volume, etc. is that you use that modified part in game to ensure that the overall craft can still perform the intended mission.

So, if you're interested in joining the club you can come and see us

at: http://webchat.esper.net/?channels=RO . The channel can be quiet at some times of the day, but we're always glad to help out. Also, all of Realism Overhaul, Realistic Progression 0 and many many other excellent mods are brought together and improved here: https://github.com/KSP-RO

Thanks for caring enough to comment chrisl

[Hitokiri]

I'm getting the same problem, occasionally. Things that help:

a) place the vessel HIGH on launch clamps (the problem seems to come more often if your rocket is just inches above the launchpad)

save before you click "launch" in KCT, load this savegame instead of "revert to launch"

c) restart KSP

The first two work often, but not always. c) has never failed me so far.

Thanks, so it looks like it is beyond repair for me... I never tried a) hover both and c) doesnt work for me anymore (it used to work, but the situation progressively worsen). I will try fresh install and we will see.

- - - Updated - - -

Is there any place to find all "realism" related mods? Wouldn't it make sense to have separate sub-forum with all realism related stuff?

[winged]

I just noticed all your PRs on the git. Holy cow m8 you have been going bonkers! \o/

You have a list or anything anywhere on what all should be good/in progress in RP-0 already, and that you are working on?

I have my own list, currently I'm working on RO and RP-0 support for B9 parts.

[Warp11]

Warp11: They should come back soon. Give it a few days and they should respawn.

Sry to bother you, but my contract system is completely screwed up now and its already been a couple of real life and a lot of in game days. All the milestone contracts are completely wrong. I got a probe in orbit around the moon now (without completing the flyby/impact missions first).

My current milestone contracts are: Pass the Karman line (uncrewed) and brake the sound barrier (crewed) but I have done these before. Also I kept getting the first flight contract but now I just completed it.

For stock contracts I am not getting high or geosynchronous orbit contracts any more (I completed one of the high ones already) only LEO.

Is there some way of getting this right by editing save files or something like that?

Thanks

EDIT: I also had a look at the config file for the first manned orbit contract. In there it says:

REQUIREMENT

{

name = ReqCapsules

type = CanResearchTech

tech = enhancedSurvivability

}

There doesn't seem to be a node called enhanced survivability, only survivability. Is that a remnant of the old tech tree?

Edited October 11, 2015 by Warp11

[NathanKell]

The tech exists, it's just called Early Capsules.

As for the contracts, that sounds like at some point your contracts got very messed up, then. You will probably have to hand-edit your SFS to fix things.

[Warp11]

Ok, what exactly do I need to change in the safe files? There obviously are the contracts in there. I suppose it will be in the progress tracking, but what exactly do I need to do?

And many thanks for these awesome mods and the immediate support every time someone has a problem. Amazing work, sometimes I wonder how you still have time to work for squad

PS: If the fix for the Launch Abort System decoupler is really simple would you be able to quickly share it here?

Edited October 11, 2015 by Warp11