Snark

Short answer: It needs only xenon fuel. No regular fuel required; don't bother adding a regular fuel tank. It needs a lot of electricity, so have plenty of solar panels. It needs to be in a vacuum. Don't try to use it until you're in space.

Other things that can stop you from being able to transfer fuel: If you're in a career game, and you haven't upgraded the R&D facility to at least level 2 If you've got the "Fuel transfer obeys crosfeed rules" option turned on, and there's some "No Fuel Crossfeed" part in the path between the two parts you're trying to exchange fuel.

My solution to this particular conundrum is that I play deliberately finite careers. That is, when I set out to play a KSP career, I begin with a particular "story arc" in mind. In particular, a very important criterion is the goal: what does "done" look like? Depending on how ambitious / committed I'm feeling, the goal might be something modest, or it might be something big and complicated that would take a long time. Other than the goal, the other part of deciding on a story arc is deciding on which game play-altering mods, if any, I'll use in that save: is life support a thing? is the solar system modified or replaced? etc. Once I've picked out the set of mods and chosen my "done" criterion, then I set out to play the career. Length varies based on complexity of goal and how much spare time I have available for playing, but typically it occupies me for a month or two. Then, when I achieve the goal, yay! I win! I pat myself on the back for a job well done, and I'm finished. When I feel like playing KSP again-- which might be right away, or might be later-- then I pick a new set of mods and/or a new goal, and start a brand new career. I make an effort to make each career something different and fresh (by picking different goals and/or mods). That's how I keep KSP "fresh" for me over the years, and why I never get bored of it.

I've successfully flown an electric propeller-driven plane on Duna that worked pretty well and can also do VTOL. A pair of counter-rotating pusher props on the trailing end of the front wing. A pair of coaxial counter-rotating helicopter rotors on top of the fuselage for lift at lower speeds or higher elevations, and for VTOL. Works pretty well, but it only cruises at around 100 m/s so it takes a long time to get anywhere, and like every rotorcraft I've ever tried, I can't use physics warp on it or it goes kablooie. But it works. The other context in which airplanes have worked well for me is when they're designed not for cruising around, but rather simply as an orbital descent/ascent vehicle. A rocket-powered plane works great there; just give it a lot of wing area so it can get its glide speed down. I put some linear RCS thrusters on the underside, which I turn on for landing to allow it to reduce to a reasonable speed (otherwise it's hard to build a plane that lands on wings alone at less than 80 m/s and they tend to wipe out on landing). It's not a VTOL, they just provide a bit of lift assist when landing. Such designs are pretty easy to make, but not well suited for long-distance cruising since they'd run out of fuel pretty quick.

Yah, I thought the Johannes Cabal stories were fun. I didn't think it seemed much like Douglas Adams, though. If anything, it felt more like a darker shade of Terry Pratchett. If you like Sir Terry, you'll probably like these.

An interesting use case. Also, you're not the first to request it-- it's a reasonable ask. However, the answer is no, it's not possible; this is solidly in the "ain't gonna happen, ever" category. Reason: SAS doesn't care about roll at all, in KSP. It does pitch and yaw, but not roll; the only roll influence it has is "hold current". There is no functionality built into the game to maintain any sort of roll attitude. Therefore this mod can't do that, and never will. (Of course it would be possible for someone to write an autopilot mod that would control that sort of thing... but that would be a whole different kettle of fish from this mod, which is deliberately small and simple. I'm not in the business of writing autopilot code, and never will be. That's lots of work-- just look at the size of the MechJeb codebase sometime. So perhaps some mod may do that, either now or in the future, but that mod would not be this one.) I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help.

Captured a Class H comet. Though, given that the rock is over 70,000 times more massive than my probe, the term "captured" seems a bit of a stretch. Rendezvous was a real bear-- the rock's orbit is solar retrograde, steeply inclined, and highly hyperbolic. Highest dV requirement I've needed in a while.

Kinda surprised that no Portal 2 fans have been suggesting "Wheatley"...

Might I suggest "Mim"? As a tribute to Mimas.

Hi gang, I've released v1.6.2 of IndicatorLights Community Extensions. Thanks to @Tonka Crash for supplying all the additions to this version, namely: which-way-is-up indicators for docking ports various ReStock fixes (Screenshot provided by Tonka Crash) Enjoy!

Because, as I mentioned,

Ha, I was reading what you were writing and the first thing I thought was, "I bet he's on mobile." The forum software works fine on mobile for reading, but when it comes to editing, it's a bit... flaky. Always has been. The only solution I've ever found is to stick to very rudimentary editing when on mobile and don't quote people (and don't even get me started about @-pinging and other idiosyncrasies), and save the fancier posts for when I'm on desktop.

Some content has been removed. Let's please play nice, people, and stick to having civil discussion without diving into making personal remarks, which are not only unhelpful but also against the rules (2.2.d). Thank you for your understanding.

More content has been removed, due to further personal remarks from folks who should know better, directly after being asked to drop it. Please play by the rules. Thank you.

A lengthy digression about metallic hydrogen (and whether it's realistic, and whether it matters whether it's realistic, etc.) has been split off into another thread devoted to that topic. Please try to stay on topic, folks. Thanks!

Hello, and welcome to the forums! So, I don't know about Mac, but at least on Windows, the place where you should be able to find the DLLs is: Go to your main KSP folder (the place where the main KSP_x64.exe lives) From there, navigate to the subfolder KSP_x64_Data/Managed That folder has a whole slew of many DLLs in it, including Assembly-CSharp.dll. That said: the above description is for Windows. I have no idea how similar or different the setup is on a Mac. If the above doesn't work for you, then hopefully someone with a Mac can chime in.

Quite a bit of content has been removed, due to, being off-topic (e.g. arguing about arguing) telling people what to do or not to do making personal remarks Folks, let's please remember that we're all pals here and conduct ourselves accordingly. It's never okay to make personal remarks about other people. It's also not okay to tell other people what to do-- you're not a moderator. And please stick to the topic at hand, e.g. discussing metallic hydrogen as a KSP2 fuel, without haring off into off-topic blather about whether someone is arguing "appropriately" or not, or about their posting habits, or the like. And take it down a notch, please. People are getting way too worked up about this, to the point that they're slinging insults around. Please try to keep a sense of perspective. To be clear, here are some inarguably true statements: There are people who like that KSP2 will have metallic hydrogen, for what they believe to be good reasons. And this is a perfectly reasonable position to take. There are people who dislike that KSP2 will have metallic hydrogen, for what they believe to be good reasons. And this is a perfectly reasonable position to take. There are people who don't really care about the issue, for what they believe to be good reasons. And this is a perfectly reasonable position to take. All of those people are perfectly entitled to their own opinions. It's perfectly okay for all of those people to state their opinions. The mere fact that their opinion happens not to agree with yours does not constitute an attack on you, so it's not something worth getting worked up about. It's perfectly understandable to feel compelled to argue against someone, if their opinion differs from yours, and if their stated reasons seem like "bad" ones to you. It's a natural human impulse, because, well, duty calls. But please remember that the same things aren't important to everyone. Different people have very different priorities, and nobody is ever in a position to call someone else's priorities "wrong". So.... remember that, please. If someone has a different opinion than you about what's "right", most likely it's because they simply have different priorities than you, not necessarily that they're "misinformed" or being "unreasonable". Their opinions are reasonable... given their priorities. We now return you to your lively discussion, already in progress. Please try to keep it friendly, folks. Feel free to explain your opinions, but please try to keep the discussion focused on your rationale, and on metallic hydrogen and/or its role in KSP2. As soon as you start focusing on other people's behavior and why they're "wrong", you're veering off the rails, so please try not to head off into the weeds. Thank you for your understanding.

Sounds like there's a bug in handling ReStock. What's supposed to happen is, if you're running IndicatorLights plus ReStock plus IndicatorLights Community Extensions... the latter has a patch that's supposed to make IL play nice with ReStock. If it's not doing that, then looks like there's an issue with the ReStock patch in ILCE. I don't actually author or test any of the content in ILCE (don't have the bandwidth, and don't use the mods it patches for)-- I'm basically just a curator. So thanks for raising it, will need to wait for someone to step up with a fix they can submit. Thank you for calling it out!

Some content has been removed, due to various folks "necromoaning" (complaining about someone else reviving a long-dormant thread). Folks, please don't do that. You're not a moderator, it's not your place to enforce rules, and necromoaning is especially frowned upon (forum rule 2.4.b). If you've got a concern about something, by all means report the post and the moderators will have a look-- but beyond that, it's not your place to tell other people what to do or not to do. That said: The project associated with this thread appears to be long dead, per the edit to the OP. Accordingly, locking the thread to prevent further confusion. Thank you for your understanding.

Various content by various folks who ought to know better has been removed. Folks, I'm sure we're all familiar with the forum rules (right?), but perhaps a brief refresher is in order: Please don't pester mod authors for updates. It's rude; it's a poor way of showing gratitude for someone who's giving you shiny toys for free and owes you nothing; and it's against the rules (specifically, 2.2.p). Please don't respond to people pestering for updates (or who are otherwise breaking rules). You're not a moderator, so it's not your place to tell anyone what to do or not to do. This is called "backseat moderating" and is, itself, against the rules (specifically, 3.2). If you see someone behaving in a way that you believe is breaking forum rules, please just report the post and the moderators will have a look at it. Please stay on-topic (rule 2.2.o). Discussing this mod is on-topic for this thread. Discussing other people's habits and etiquette is not. Thank you for your understanding.

Sure. To the degree that you trust it, by all means go and play with that.

There's no reason why this mod itself shouldn't work on any future KSP versions. The issue is with the Kopernicus dependency, especially since the folks who've been maintaining Kopernicus all these years decided to hang it up after the version for KSP 1.8.1. It's done. That said, there's nothing legally stopping anyone else from maintaining Kopernicus forks going forward, given that it has a fairly permissive license, and indeed some folks have done so. It's just that now you'll need to decide for yourself how much risk you're willing to take on, based on how much time & effort the maintainers of the newer forks may be able to put into it.

It's not a bad idea, will bear it in mind-- thank you for the suggestion. Not guaranteed to happen, though, and definitely not soon, as, 1. it would take some time to implement (and IRL is kinda busy), and 2. it's not a feature I would actually use myself, ever, and 3. I tend to be very parsimonious about features, as a design philosophy, especially when there's UI impact-- which tends to make me reluctant to add features for which I don't have a strong use case. Like I said, though, I'll bear it in mind, and perhaps at some point in the future.

You want the "Build" menu, from the main menu bar. Hotkey for rebuilding your solution is F6.

Hello all, Apologies for the very long delay, but I've finally released IndicatorLights Community Extensions v1.6.1. This incorporates several fixes from the community (mainly around ReStock+) that have been languishing for a long time. Thanks to the following folks for their contributions: @Poodmund, for addressing the science box @Tonka Crash for addressing antennas and docking ports @linuxgurugamer for pulling together the above, and testing it out Enjoy!