RocketSquid

Ah, the trick is that nothing keeps the station from having fuel on it. Hell, moonrock contains enough aluminum and oxygen that they could make (admittedly rather low quality) fuel on the moon with nothing but power. And nothing then keeps them from making a habitation cylinder out of lunar aluminum and filling it with lunar oxygen. Obviously this isn't likely to happen in the near future, but having an alternate, less-gravitationally-limited starting point is nothing to scoff at.

There is no upper limit from a mathematical perspective. You can just keep adding more boosters and stages. From a practical perspective, it depends on the size of the launch area.

Kerbalism is rather tougher and more realistic than TAC, having radiation and more complex supply chains. Ferram Aerospace research is necessary if you want fully realistic aerodynamics; of course, if you only care about rockets, it's not as necessary.

Tundra industries has a fixed size fairing, based on the Falcon 9's fairing.

Okay, I have a question. What exactly is the point of the escape pod feature? Most of the catastrophic failures will happen during launch, but most of the escape pods are non-durable, vacuum parts. Can space stations just explode?

It's beautiful, can't wait to use it. Does it work with docking ports and the Klaw?

That is indeed it. If you wanted the standard behavior while you have KPBS installed you’d have to go into that and mess with it.

This mod’s TAC-LS config checks if KPBS is present and adjusts the greenhouses to balance

Yeah, with KPBS there's fertilizer instead of minerals, and no water output. That makes a rather significant difference.

Wait, nevermind, I made a math error. One fertilizer will make a bit under ten food, but the greenhouse will consume water in the process. So you'd need to ship up water as well as fertilizer. The waste to food ratio might also be off to enough of an extent that you'll need to send up fresh food from time to time. I've been using the greenhouses from Pathfinder, in the inflatable module from DSEV, so I don't have much experience with the greenhouses from this mod.

How would I go about adding a new module to a WBIPackingBox's list of managed modules?

Volume-wise, the TAC containers work out correctly. A cylinder 1.25m in diameter, and 0.2m high would be adequate to hold 240 liters of water or food, and I think the smallest TAC container is a bit taller than 0.2m. The 2.5m containers work if they’re around half a meter tall. I’m not sure if the 3.75m is similar but I see no reason why it shouldn’t be. The universal storage containers have a similar efficiency, perhaps even a greater efficiency. The other thing is that the greenhouse consumes so much fertilizer that unless fertilizer containers hold a lot more fertilizer than a similarly sized container holds food, it’s still more efficient to ship up food. Because it’s based on the KPBS ratios, which are intended for bases on other planets, not kerbin orbit, the greenhouse is better suited for use with ISRU than it is for recycling.

Is there a good place to start, besides just “the beginning”? I stepped away for too long.

Okay, honestly that seems like an ideal implementation. If that is the case, the main change I’d want is adding more radiation shielding to the deepfreeze parts, and I can do that myself with a modulemanager patch. Also, I’ve made a small mod that helps bridge Kerbal Health and the WBI mods. If anyone here wants to help me test, that would be nice.

The stock TAC-LS containers hold a pretty enormous amount of resources, so I’m not sure this is that much of a problem. All something like this does is reduce the tedium associated with a space station.

Update: https://github.com/RocketSquid/WBI-Medical-Expansion/releases/tag/v0.3 Castillo radiation shielding has been removed, as it made the parts not appear in-game. An easy alternative is to fill a chuckwagon or similar large storage with water or lead. House call recuperation is increased to 3% to balance the higher complexity as compared to cupolas New Saloon Recreation center (habitat): Gives 1% recuperation and 50% microgravity reduction to up to six kerbals, requiring only electric charge. This is to increase the viability of bases on low-gravity worlds such as minmus, as well as in orbit, and to reduce the necessity for a medical kit supply chain or a Castillo, and balance the mod against stock or SSPXR parts. Possible issues: I'm not entirely sure on the balance of the various parts. The castillo is a truly immense boon, but it's also a truly immense part. The Saloon might be too powerful if loaded in a MOH; if so I will remove the moleHab tag from it.

Sorry to bother you @Katten, but is there any chance of this mod getting an update/recompile? It would solve an issue I've had for a long while, namely the impossibility of properly berthing a spacecraft in KSP. Of course I realize it might not be possible, and that it's been quite a while since you've updated it, so I fully understand if the answer is no.

This looks positively wonderful! In fact, all of your mods fill major niches I had.

Does freezing a kerbal with deepfreeze suspend all health effects for that kerbal?

The ablative shield module should probably not be included since it’s simply a way to represent the ablation of a treatment; the added complexity from the ablative shield module is confined to the ablator resource.

That is unusual. Have you tried transferring them out and back in again, if that’s an option with your ship configuration?

Is there a reason the ARC reactor can’t distribute resources? That makes powering a distributed base with it rather difficult

@Aeroboi so I should use grandparent if it’s supposed to dock with something, heaviest otherwise, and use rigid attachment only when I want to avoid bending at all costs?

I’ve found the autostruts very helpful, but recently realized that I’m probably using them wrong. My current strategy is usually just to turn rigid attachment on and set autostruts to heaviest part on anything I think will be subjected to a decent amount of force, mostly ignoring the other options for autostrut targets. When is each option best; and when is it best to have no autostruts? How does rigid attachment differ from autostrut: parent?

Oh, excellent, that makes extraplanetary bases and for that matter the wetworks way more practical.