cordilon

Sorry, wrong choice of words... I meant, I'm glad someone brought it up at least.

I can at least confirm that I've been having the "parachute has been destroyed due to aero forces and heat" problem exactly as described by @AxleGreaser for many years, without that bounding box issue. Haven't really tested this on a clean install tbh, my game has been modded pretty heavily for quite some time, so I just assumed (lol here we go again..) it was some other mod causing it. Yes I know, the mod is not in development anymore, but I'm weirdly glad that this is adressed after all

Very honorable attitude. I'm trying to do the same if it's within my capabilities. Funny enough, I actually posted an issue "report" for KIS many years ago, because it was obliterating vessels when used close to the SOI edge ; ) Anyway, my programming skills are close to nonexistent. I can see that the efficiency tag is present in the part configs (obviously), but sadly just wouldn't know how to make that appear in the game. Just to be clear: I absolutely didn't want to put pressure on RoverDude or anyone else to get this fixed asap.

Cool. I have no idea what a pull request is... just wanted to say that I encountered the same problem.

Yeah, I'm almost certain this module was listed in the in-game part description in earlier versions. As it is now, KSP is more work for me than fun, because planning bases and their extensions is mostly trial and error or spending too much time on the wiki. I'm playing KSP 1.9.1 with MKS 1.3.0.0. It would be great if it could be fixed in the next version

I have the same issue as @salsaheaven : The contract doesn't recognize that the antenna rating should be met. If I keep adding relay antennas the requirement is eventually met, but it doesn't seem like the proper behavior plus I remember this working correctly in earlier playthroughs. There's a screenshot in my dropbox. Sorry, I don't know how to properly insert images here. KSP v1.9.1 ContractConfigurator v1.28.0 CommNetRelays v2.1.0 [and ~60 other mods]

I just had the exact same thing happen to me. After that I failed the mission, because the game didn't register me actually undocking from the other craft... or at least I assume so with the weirdly complicated mission logic window not having a checkmark on that objective. Still I'm confident that squad will adress such issues, because they surely know that the mission builder and all the possible community content that it could bring is the core of this expansion

I totally get where you're going with this and I would completely agree if you didn't have to choose a spicific vessel to put in a DIY kit before launch. This way it feels more to me like an IKEA piece of furniture where everything's pretty much ready to be assembled (screwdriver not inlcuded) and only packed efficiently... hence the weight and size of the whole thing. Either way, that's a design choice of the mod and I don't want to argue about that. Thanks for answering my questions! A somewhat related last question: Is MKS downward compatible? I'd like to install the latest version but will stay with KSP 1.2.2 for a while.

I was referring to this part of the GC description on the mod's forum page: Besides that my question was rather if you could increase the efficiency of the workshop parts itself or can you only affect the build speed by the skill of your engineers? In my test there were four 2-star engineers working on a small rover and still needed three days to finish. Oh also adding another workshop which would attend to the same DIY kit wouldn't change the construction time either.

Hey everyone, I've been playing around with the Ground Construction mod that is bundled with MKS for some hours now, but I just can't really figure out how the (work) efficiency works. In the description of the standalone GC mod it says that every crew part adds to the efficiency, because it automatically gets the corresponding module, but this doesn't seem to work for me. Whatever I do, the efficiency of the 2.5m Tundra Workshop stays at 100% or 300% respectively for the 3.75m Assembly Plant. Further a lot of free living space is supposed to give more efficiency, too, but I couldn't get that to work either. After some time I got really frustrated, cause four engineers would still take 3 days to build the tiniest of rovers. I'm a Kerbal with a fairly high stupidity rating, so if anyone could feed this to me in more or less simple words, I would be very grateful! KSP version is 1.2.2 with MKS 0.50.18 and a great bunch of other mods that I can list if it becomes nessecary.

Awesome thread! Here are some of my flags, most of them abstract or for my latest playthrough named Division 64 (due to the celebration of 64bit support). For those who are interested: LXIV is roman for 64 and the flag with dots has - you guessed right! - 64 of them, each randomly colored to symbolize all the unforseen catastrophies™ we will encounter. Feel free to use them yourself. I'll probably make more at some point =)

up to date changelog can be found here.

Uhm i'm not sure where you got the impression that I want to attach anything to a kerbal ^^ No sir, we are talking about plain old attaching things (RealChute parachutes) to a ship.

Hey, I encountered the same bug as described by @bradleyjh (some pages ago in this thread). Short version: RealChute parachutes disappear when attaching. Some additional info though: - the chute seems to get placed in the world, but without a model and somewhat in the center of the ship as opposed to where it should be - detaching an existing RealChute chute from the ship, storing it in a Kerbals inventory and attaching it somewhere else on the ship works perfectly fine. I know it's impossible to make a mod compatible with every other mod out there, but attaching emergency chutes some 5sec before atmospheric reentry is just the coolest thing to do ; )