Umbrae

Read that last part again, in what numbering system is 2.12 greater than 2.8? The problem is not with CKAN, but with the EE version numbers. Looking at the github releases it went 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 2.11, 2.12... Yea CKAN is going to have a problem with that, and so is anything else that can count. The version number did not increase. I would think this version should be named 3.12, not 2.12 which is less than 2.8, or even the old 2.2 version I currently have installed. I was checking this thread to see what was going on as even the fist post in this thread showed me an older version number than what I already had.

I am going to have to go with MonaBabii on this one. As it stands now, some one can update this and post the update here (as people have done with adding additional parts since the last release). If any one, such as Espresso truly feels this mod is done, and needs to create a new one fully, then they still can. When that day comes, and they release there mod, we can close down this thread... Until then as people can still positively contribute, and there are not other options, I see no reason to end this thread.

As a TrackIR owner, I owe you a drink sir.

Strike that reverse it... Install KAS into gamedata as normal. Then move the unzipped fix into the gamedata folder and overwrite anything. It is basically only a single file replacement, but you need to copy the fix over last. keep following the folders in the zip, you will find it is just one .dll, if all else fails, follow the same path in the kas folder, and replace the file directly.

Or how about kerbal stuff http://beta.kerbalstuff.com/

TACLS has a .9 preview up that should be 0.24 compatible... So just KAS for me. On an unrelated note, thank you very much for the quick update to this.

I think the RSS crowd would enjoy this a bit, but for me, no. I fully understand the point your trying to get to, but for my usage, I would not. I think the idea of a realistic mining an resource system would be nice, I think you will need to use more than one resource. You need a way to refine oxidizer too, even if it comes from a separate resource. Otherwise your are just going to end with refining stations with huge oxidizer stores instead of fuel stores. The huge power requirement, and time requirement I am all for but with time warp the amount of time that conversion takes is almost pointless. I would suggest you try and go full realism (multiple sources of fuel), and use fuel types from the real fuels mod. Add different soil refinement rates per biome... some with large amounts of oxidizer, some with more fuel, although both can be rather rare. The problem I see is right now, I think kethane fills the nitch that I think you are looking to be in, the simple resource non hard core people. What nitch is not filled is the hardcore realism style. And for part mods, just delete the parts you don't like. for example I like Nova Punch Engines, and tanks, but the farings and near everything else I delete. Many of the larger part mods are well organized so you can simply remove parts you would not use or do not want. That is my opinion, I hope it helps.

Thank you, any update on KAS? I love Kethane, but KAS is IMO needed in KSP.

Might I suggest you make a few shaped wings, and make them compatible with TweakScale so that we can make parts that fit the craft, as opposed to the other way around.

Actually reduction packs still help. If you doubt me, install Active reduction and B9. Load, to title, check your memory usage. Exit. Install the texture reduction pack that comes with B9 (not as good as the one from this post, but still). reload ksp, and check your memory usage, it will have gone down. Packs like this also let you use a mix of more and less aggressive texture management, as you can extremely low res texture versions on parts you don't care about, and higher res versions for ones you do. Simply because you don't use both does not mean there is no need or that they are un-necessary as many people have seemed to indicate. They are just not as critical.

First, I don't think a dedicated recharger is that great of an idea. what would stop them from using solar power or a reactor to recharge from (for example a lander with a command ship. the lander may only use batteries, but why re-dock with a nuclear generator only to have to recharge the batteries using a separate part?) Unless I am missing something, I don't see any advantage to that over just replacing the battery itself, specifically as it saves on texture space which is extremely limited. Second, let me re-explain my idea a bit more. I have often have trouble explaining complex system, I apologize. All numbers in this are for simplicity only. 4 new resources, Iron, Copper, and Oxidized Iron, and Oxidized Copper. Batters work like a generator, using both iron and copper to produce electric power. The waste product of this conversion is Oxidized Iron, and Oxidized Copper. Batters cannot be recharged forever, but they can be recharged several time before they stop holding some charge, then eventually die totally. To simulate this, here is what I propose. Both iron and Copper are used in equal amounts to make electric change, and each one gives off an equal amount of oxidized version. So 1 electric charge for example takes 1 copper, and 1 iron, also produces 1 oxidized iron, and 1 oxidized copper. To recharge, use electric charge to convert oxidized resources back into the normal form (taking a bit more charge than it does to get electricity, so overall batteries are a power sink for the convenience of storing it). Now here is the trick, to simulate the battery going dead over time. Since only the non-oxidized versions of a resource work, have one resource convert back to the non-oxidized for at an increased rate. So 1 oxidized iron becomes 2 iron, but one oxidized copper becomes 1 copper. Naturally, there will not be room to convert all of the iron, so you will end up with more and more oxidized iron that is nothing more than waste. This would instantly lower the available charge, as both Iron and copper are needed, but you now have 100 copper, but only half that of iron (the rest being oxidized with no room to convert). But batteries don't instantly start going dead, so we need another trick for that. Leave extra room for resources in the battery. For example if the battery holds 400 iron (or iron oxide), and 400 copper (or copper oxide), but only 100 iron and copper, first charge, works fully 100 electric power generated, and are left with 100 of each oxidized resource. Convert back from oxidized, now you have 200 iron, and 100 copper, which is then used and converted into 100 electricity. Recharge, now you have 300 iron, and 100 copper. Over time as you keep recharging the problem exasperates itself, the next charge 400 iron, 100 copper. Now is where it starts getting interesting. The next recharge conversion will run out of space to convert iron. With 300 extra iron, but only 100 space left it will only make 50 iron for a total of 350. Now you are on a downward spiral, but as you still have 100 of both non-oxidized resource, you are still producing the same power output. As you recharge, you now have even more oxide built up with no room to convert, 300 iron. Then 250, 200, 150, 100... Once you have 300 oxidized iron built up that is your last full charge with 100 iron to make electric charge from. Once that is used, the next recharge, you will only get 50 iron back, so you will only be able make 50 electric charge. Each recharge is going than half the electric power your batter can produce. Again these numbers are just for simplicity, but I hope you get the concept I am trying to describe.

Simple method Perhaps you could use a resource, similar to the generators from interstellar, in how it changes resources from one type to another. Start with say Iron, convert iron to electric power, and create oxidized iron. Then convert oxidized iron to iron again, but with an additional waste product. This will give you true function, but no real purpose, as it is functionally the same. Complex method. Similar to above, only using more resources, to better simulate how batteries work. Battery = multi fuel storage compartment, have some extra space, so say 120 for 100 resources. Say Iron and Copper. Both are needed to make electricity, you need a 1-1 ratio. When converting the oxidized form back to normal, have one convert at a greater than 1-1 ratio. So to start Batter = 120/120 storage with 100 iron/100 copper Drained, and recharged, now you have 120/120 storage with 105 iron/100 copper Draining at a 1-1 ratio, you are going to end up with too much iron oxide to convert into iron, as you reach the 120 capacity. Because copper is stable, you can never get more than a full charge, even with the extra iron you get at first. As Iron oxide builds up (from lack of room to convert it back) your battery starts losing the charge it can produce (going dead). Eventually, you will not really be able to recharge it at all as it slowly dies over time. If they are KAS compatible you could change them out on stations and mutli usage ships.

This needs to be procedural. the ability to make these to any length would be great. Not that they are not great, I just see my next ship part count going up a good amount.

how well does this work for part balance? I never use a single goo tank, as it would unbalance my craft. But my OCD requires me to then use two bays as well (yes I know parachutes are the same mass). When placing a goo container in a storage container, it would be closer to the center mass (as opposed to radial mounting which is as far from COM as it could get). How off balanced are craft with a single goo can in a storage bay? Also, are these parts (with shroud) far compatible, to reduce drag from the parts within?

EDP, you tease. . . .