Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TBenz

  1. Some people without dual monitor setups took extreme issue with the suggestion that Intercept "waste" any amount of development time on a feature they wouldn't use.
  2. I believe this came up before, and if I recall correctly, the answer was 'out of scope'. Due to the way USI and SystemHeat both handle converters, compatibility between the two requires significantly more than just a patch. Nobody has tackled that issue yet, as far as I am aware.
  3. Another option is to bring some small chemical engines or suitable RCS for making fine adjustments.
  4. I know who not to ask for legal advise. ALWAYS CYA.
  5. It should be possible to install both Restock and Restock+ then delete all the restock patches and whitelist all the stock patches. That's a quick and dirty way to do it, and would cause your game to load ALL the stock and restock assets when it won't be using most of the Restock stuff. But it should work and not require a ton of jumping through hoops and testing.
  6. It appears it was intentionally removed back in 2017. https://github.com/post-kerbin-mining-corporation/StationPartsExpansionRedux/commit/d5815a646e56631284ffeaaccea6a7bd1f61ea2d#diff-ba7de6ff63c9a0fde898a50882762103cd32df0b39fd2625793c11324bc8bc88
  7. My guess is that the Science Lab has an integrated telescope, and the part on the right is a standalone version for when you want to run that experiment without lugging a 5m lab across the kerbolar system. Then the part on the left is a small greenhouse part for when you need just a little bit of snacks. 1.875m form factor, presumably?
  8. One thing I've seen done for parts without proper IVAs is to just create a solid black IVA cube inside the part and place the kerbals in there. That way you can at least see their portraits. When mods don't include any IVA at all then the Kerbal portraits won't show up, which is annoying. I've also seen mods reuse existing IVAs from other parts, the Mk3 passenger module could be a stand-in for anything less than16 kerbals. Loving it. This looks to be more of a living area, in contrast to the sleeping quarters focus on the PXL-2 Shelter (flat 3.75 hab)?
  9. I squealed like a schoolgirl when I saw this. Absolutely gorgeous.
  10. Thinking further, I believe you are correct. My mistake was in assuming that the reactor could "under heat" the propellant should it not be outputting enough energy to heat it all and maintain core temp, but now that I consider it, I'm not sure that is possible in a practical NTR.
  11. My thermodynamics are pretty rusty, but I think that's correct behavior. The reactor power setting indicates how much energy over time (power) it is generating that can be transferred to the propellant to increase ISP. The core temp is just an instantaneous measure of energy in the reactor. We only care about it because we want it at a certain point to safely and efficiently run the reactor.
  12. Stock fuel cells work like other stock converters, they use a "catch up" mechanic where the game attempts to calculate how much power they generated and how much fuel they used once you load them back in. I would assume TACLS handles that by assuming that an active fuel cell has enough fuel until you load the ship back in, which would mean you could generate more power than you have fuel for if you leave it unattended for long enough. It may be possible to utilize the same system here, in lieu of background processing. It's not exactly great, but it's "good enough" for all the stock power generators.
  13. Yeah, they can function with core heat. They have their full ability to cool core heat and system heat simultaneously.
  14. System heat does not integrate into MKS, both use their own extension of the resource converter and resource producer modules that don't interoperate. MKS still does work fine when system heat is installed, because system heat doesn't remove core heat. However that means you need to consider both system heat and core heat when designing cooling systems.
  15. Am I the only person who noticed that the rocket during the "something else" section was staging itself with nobody at the controls? I took it as a hint that they were working on some kind of flight automation system.
  16. The SP-X modules don't have their own IVAs. The models are used to replace the KV-X pods when Making History is installed. Since these models are original, the Restock team could use them in Restock+. But they never redid the IVAs, and can't redistribute MH IVA's, so without MH installed the parts don't have IVAs.
  17. I take it the parts show up in the VAB fine when you are playing sandbox? Are you using any mods that change the tech tree?
  18. Yeah that's a cry of shame moment. Both USI and SystemHeat use custom modules that extend the ResourceConverter and ResourceHarvester modules. Someone would have to write an entirely new module that implements the functionality of both into one. MM patches can't do anything about it.
  19. As a complete IVA snob, I'm thrilled to see we are getting some more Nerta quality crewed parts to play with. I get that IVAs don't have much of any practical value, and that most players probably don't care that much, but I spend more time than I should considering the internal layout of my vessels, and high quality IVAs just make me happy inside.
  20. Nertea keeps a list of projects he's thinking of working on in his development thread, but I'll let you know right now that more spaceplane parts aren't on that list. There are some other mods out there that can help fill that niche though. Nertea's own MKIV Spaceplane System: and Orbital Portal Technologies:
  21. A quick reverse image search turned up this little number: https://wodeshu.gitee.io/roprop/text00023.html
  22. These production chains don't exist solely in wolf, dumping excess could negatively impact chains using regular converters.
  23. Yeah, that's what I meant, a typo in the part files. I actually went ahead a created a pull request to fix it in BDB the other day, and it's already been merged, so it should be fixed in the next release.
  24. This should do the trick. I tested it out with Vostok Continued and didn't see any errors or issues. And it's a damn simple patch so it's hard to screw up. @part[IronVostok_Control_A] { @bulkheadProfiles = size0p5, size0 } @part[IronVostok_Crew_A] { @bulkheadProfiles = size0p5, size0 } @part[IronVostok_Decoupler_A] { @bulkheadProfiles = size0p5 } @part[IronVostok_Control_A] { @bulkheadProfiles = size1, size0p5 }
  • Create New...