OctarineNoise

I've found that the mod is working fine in theory, however it is very sensitive to physics lag. On tiny probes (and a fast computer), I could usually enter thrust warp about 3 out of 4 tries. However, on a large 200+ part ship, it would not work at all, however many times I tried. I've made a workaround for the problem (I wouldn't call it a proper fix though), and now my large ship works too almost every time. I've submitted a pull request to mrsolarsail, and hopefully he'll include it in the next release. If he appears to be AFK, I could probably release the modified plugin if there is interest in it. I think the license allows it.

Thanks for your work, this really helps me in planning out my base in advance. Could you add a switch to show the production numbers on different timescales? Like per-second, per-hour, per-day, per-month?

Thanks, it makes sense now. Normalizing output on total module mass is actually some pretty good game design right there. It lets me focus on building stuff and having fun... instead of awakening my evil OCD minmaxing alter ego I do have some more questions though. First, do Tundra hab modules have multiple bays too? Actually, I'd be interested in the bay counts of all modules, I can't seem to find it on the wiki. Second, I read that Ranger production modules can be used as boosters for the Tundra/Duna series (again while keeping output/mass consistent). What are the conditions for that to work? Do the modules need to be directly connected? On the same vessel? In scavenging range? Which ones need to be manned?

I was browsing through the wiki recently to brush up on all the changes since I last played MKS, and I noticed that the Ranger inflatable modules (greenhouse, workshop, even the hab to some extent) have significantly greater productivity than the Tundra series modules. I would've expected it to be the other way around. Is this intentional? Is there a caveat that I'm missing?

Should I take that to mean I should stop looking at this too? I think it would help the mod a lot - also it has been on CKAN before, up until KSP 1.0.4 (OPT release 1.7). The metadata just needs to be updated again. Although I prefer the new J/K class parts to the old ones, there's something to be said for the B class cargo bay: it opens on both sides. Really comes in handy sometimes.

Just noticed now that a new version went up on SpaceDock. Thanks for the great work guys! Are there plans to add CKAN support? If there's no-one working on it, I volunteer to do it. I'll just need some help with some of the metadata, like: full list of people to credit mod dependencies suggested companion mods

DL is on the top of the previous page. But I completely agree about SpaceDock.

You can find the download in this post: Copy-pasting simple parts is usually okay, but B9 PWings has its own plugin, so it's to be expected that it has problems. It has been updated to 1.1, there are 2 community-maintained forks (both available in CKAN), so try it with those.

Hmmm... And are those separate meshes, or baked into the regular ones? Meaning: how easy would it be to resurrect them from old files? It's got to be better than large black boxes.

I'm getting the same attachment problem with the J-type docking port. Interestingly, the streamlined cockpit from the Mark IV mod has the same problem, so it could be a stock issue. If anyone figures out a fix, I'd gladly hear it. I can't remember: did this mod ever have IVAs? I never really noticed, but it has suddenly become a lot more important in 1.1. That cutaway view is a real sleeper hit

Oh yeah! This was literally the only thing still missing that I was waiting for, before starting a 1.1 career. Great work guys, it seems good mods really can't die @Steel Dragon some of the stuff you have on those planes look interesting, can you help me out identifying them? From the small plane, I'm interested in the underwing pods and the main engines. From the large one, the cockpit / body / cargo bay area. What mods are those from?

Using version 1.0.11, the MX-02X "Fire Storm" has a typo in its velocity curve definitions, which leads to insane thrust at 6.7 mach.

The cryostat, as long as it's powered, has much lower boil-off.

Ah, right. Well, there's one big problem with the thermal receiver: it operates at only 1400K, and you get abysmal ISP from it. Although for a LKO ferry, that might not be a problem. Also, you can get crazy amounts of power, and can afford to use pure liquid fuel, which offsets this somewhat. That's weird, I've never seen that, my wings always had thickness. It's in fact adjustable, separately for the root and tip. Paradoxically, airless worlds are a lot harder to land on once you have fusion (well, technically you don't need fusion to land a plane, but you won't be coming up again). On atmospheric worlds, you don't need a single drop of fuel to land after the deorbit burn. There's also the problem of orientation. My guess is you would need to make a plane with legs on the top and bottom side of the wings, so that it can also land on its tail like a rocket. It would be terribly unstable in the pitch direction, and the tiniest slope would make it topple. But if you have KAS, you could put winches with grappling hooks on the top and bottom, angled backwards. Land on tail, fire grappling hooks, maybe tighten the uphill one a bit, and profit.

I've played around a bit with SSTOs. Bear in mind I use FAR, your experience will be very different without it. I found that basic fission just doesn't cut it, way too little TWR. Once you get fusion though, it gets feasible. I recommend you use the 2.5m hybrid turbojet; better TWR than the 1.25, and having two separate subsystems is just wasting weight. Because the foldable radiators will be ripped off with prejudice during ascent, radials must be used. There's no way you can cool a fusion reactor with them though, so it must be shut down once you stop burning. Include the smallest fission reactor to serve as starter motor and standby power. If you can afford the memory, I also recommend you use B9 and Procedural Wings. The first for its awesome fuselages, and the second will make it a lot easier to have big wings that don't flop around and break apart. Lower part count helps too. Also, the turbojet gulps down an unholy amount of air, you need lots and lots of intakes to saturate it, and B9 has some nice big ones. Check your reactor on the way up: if it drops under 90% before you are at the edge of the atmosphere, you need more of them. With basic fusion and LFO as vacuum propellant, I managed to get a 45t plane off Kerbin comfortably with a few thousand delta-V to spare. On Eve, I could just barely leave (the ascent angle had to be just right), not because of fuel, but a thrust deficit. With upgraded fusion? You can do the same with pure liquid and have an interplanetary SSTO, or just use LFO (how does a TWR of 6 sound?) and blast out of the atmosphere like a boss

How about a part that would act as EC storage, with capacity equal to one game tick's worth of energy based on its MJ/s rating? Anything entering it is made available as MJ. As long as it's the lowest priority part (do sources have prio too, or only sinks?), it shouldn't set up an infinite loop with MJ->EC conversion. Maybe. I think.

@WaveFunctionP I managed to get Interstellar features to work around PlanetFactory celestials, starting from your branch. If the changes I had to make are not too disruptive, consider accepting my pull request. I can't be the only one playing with a PF-modded system + KSPI.

Feature Request: could you please offload the science multipliers into a config file, instead of having them hardcoded? I'm currently playing with Alternis Kerbol enabled, and the effort/reward ratio is way off for some places. I've also thrown in some PlanetFactory stuff: haven't been to them yet, but I suspect they will give no science at all.