-MM-

Hello everybody, I haven't been able to attend to this mod lately and I would like to let you know that linuxgurugamer will adopt the "Kerbal Research & Development" mod from now on. If a moderator reads this, please close this thread if linuxgurugamer asks you to do so, so that he can tend to this mod from a new thread. Thank you all for your support and keep researching.

Hello everybody, I haven't been able to attend to this mod lately and I would like to let you know that linuxgurugamer will adopt the "Kerbal Space Transport System" mod from now on. If a moderator reads this, please close this thread if linuxgurugamer asks you to do so, so that he can tend to this mod from a new thread. Thank you all for your support and keep on launching.

Well, there shouldn't be a Kerbal in it. If there is you will have to safely land him or her before you can save that mission. And the pod can't be the payload in that circumstance either. Think of it like the space shuttle: If it is manned, you will have to return it and deploy some other payload. If you want do record a simple one-way mission, it would be easier to simply use a probe core, which can be discarded once the mission is over. If I misunderstand the problem, maybe you can post a picture?

Hm, I assume you have an empty command pod on top of a rocket, which is controlled by a probe core further down? You should try to make that probe core the root part in the vehicle assembly building. Or in other words: Start building your rocket beginning with the delivery vehicle and adding the payload you want to decouple at the end.

I've uploaded a new version of KRnD which I have recompiled for KSP 1.4.2 (see first post in this thread). I didn't change any features and as far as I can see it seems to be working as expected. The only minor annoyance I found was that some engines display the wrong thrust and the note "*** upgrades applied ***" in the menu of the assembly hall. I'm not entirely sure where this comes from but the mod should still work its magic as it did before. If anyone finds any upgrades that have stopped working in this version, please let me know.

If you want to share your question / issue with the entire group, the forum would be best. Maybe it is something that isn't really an issue with the mod itself. If you have a specific bug on the other hand, which needs fixing (ideally including the broken piece of code) and you want to get notified personally once it is done, feel free to post an issue ticket on Github.

Hello, I've just uploaded a new version of KSTS (1.10; see first post in this thread), which is now compatible with KSP 1.4.1. In addition to the recompilation for the new version of the game, I finally got around to adding support for the Stage Recovery Mod (thanks to Fumblesneeze for the Pull Request). I've done a few basic tests and everything looks fine so far. If you have any trouble with this new update, please let me know.

Hello and thank you for your interest in this mod. I will take a look at 1.4 in the coming days and if Squad hasn't changed too much, there should be a new release of this mod shortly thereafter.

Hm, that would be a completely new mission-type, because for recovery you would have to prove that you are able to land with the captured cargo, not just take off. Anyway, I can see why it would be nice to recover a probe which can't land on its own to get its sweet science inside. I will put an item on my Todo-List to look at how we could implement some kind of science recovery at least.

Hello, I've just uploaded a re-compiled version of KSTS for KSP 1.3. I've done some quick testing and it seems to be working well. You can find a download-link in the first post of this thread.

Hello, I've just uploaded a new version of CLLS (see first post). There are no new features, I've just recompiled the mod for KSP 1.3. Additionally I've fixed a bug which caused the list of tracked vessels to fill up with Kerbals on EVA even after they've re-entered their vessel. @Waxing_Kibbous: Hopefully this also fixes the issues you were experiencing.

Just wanted to let you know that I have uploaded a new version of KRnD which should now run fine with KSP 1.3 (see first post of this thread). I've done some testing and it seems all that was needed was to recompile the mod for the current KSP-version. Hope it works for you as well.

Sorry for the long absence, I'm usually only working on my mods and reading the forum when I'm playing an active KSP-Campaign. But I've still gotten the notification on my Github Bug-Tracker that there is supposedly an issue with KSP 1.3 and KRnD. When I've time I will upload a new, fixed version this or the next weekend. It will however just be a compatibility update, probably no new features... Regarding the license: Anyone is more than welcome to create a fork of this mod and maybe develop it in a different direction. That's why it's publicly available on Github as Open Source

Hello, I've just uploaded a minor update which adds the ability to upgrade the efficiency of Nuclear Fission Generators (see the "Near Future Electrical" mod) with the existing generator-efficiency upgrade-option. Not really life changing stuff, but this was something I was missing while building my latest nuclear-powered spaceship ;-) Hm, I don't think this is a KRnD problem. This mod's netkan-file doesn't reference any contract-mods. When you've selected a part in the editor and the little KRnD-Window tells you to "Select a different part to improve", this basically means that the given part either is blacklisted or does not have the KRnDModule installed. The latter issue would be some problem with ModuleManager which I have no control over. You could check the part in question against the blacklist though. I could probably log messages about blacklisted parts, but I can't do nuttin about possible ModuleManager-Issues. You can improve the vacuum and atmospheric ISP of any type of engine. But all that does is it will increase its fuel-efficiency under those conditions (and slightly raise its maximum thrust as well). The main problem with air-breathing engines however will be the intake-air. While you will be able to fly more fuel efficient in higher altitudes, the lack of air will still kill your engine. I assume you mean the new function which allows some parts (mostly engines) to get better when certain tech-nodes are researched? This function is not supported by KRnD yet. If it works better than it currently does in a future KSP-release (there was a little discussion about this some pages back), there might be a release of KRnD in the future which uses that system. But for now it is ignored, just like any other mod that tinkers with the part's stats while in-game.

Maybe there was a temporary problem with Github. It works for me at this moment. But when in doubt, you can simply go directly to the following release page: https://github.com/mmoench/KSTS/releases

This is actually just a setting in the KRnD mod. You should take a look at the "parts.cfg", it has a settings like "ispVac_improvementScale" which are currently all set to 1. The formula of how much a level improves a given part per improvement-level is: improvement * improvementScale ^ level So if you set "improvementScale" to something less than 1, each further level will yield smaller percentages, eg: Level Scale 1 Scale 0.75 1 5% 5% 2 10% (+5%) 8.75% (+3.75%) 3 15% (+5%) 11.56% (+2.81%) Now, if you want create some kind of "realism overhaul" of KRnD you would simply have to create your own Module Manager Config, which installs your own KRnD-settings on the parts you want to behave differently (you can even set different settings for different parts / modules). The trick here is that KRnD simply installs the default Config on all parts which are not blacklisted and don't already have KRnD-Settings. You simply have to write your own settings in such a way that they are applied before the default (take a look at Module Manager's "patch order"). Afterwards you could upload your patch to CKAN and like minded players can use it. Hm, I guess the easiest way right now would be to have parts that implement multiple EngineModules. KRnD will iterate through all of them and update them accordingly.This way we can currently improve the stock engines which have different modes for atmospheric- and vacuum-flight. The job of the part in this case is to switch the correct module on and off, which gives you the desired behavior. Can you try to find out which module on the parts causes this problem? Maybe we can simply add the offending module to the blacklist (see file "blacklist.cfg")?

At the moment the Kerbal which is going on EVA will take the maximum amount of life support from the ship he can fit into his suit (1 unit). If you have only 0.5 left in your vessel with multiple Kerbals, they will die when someone goes out for a spacewalk. This does not seem to be very fair, I will try to address this in the next update.

Hello Platonicsolid, RCS are counted as engines during the recording phase, meaning that they should remain switched off. The idea is that your payload is basically dead weight and must not contain any part that your craft needs to attain its orbit. The incompatibility is not conceptual, but as far as I remember the problem was, that Modular Fuel Tanks uses the pre-launch phase of your flight to set up the actual tank configuration. When the craft is created directly in space, as it is done with KSTS, this gets skipped and the tank will have its default-settings. To fix this fix this the guys & gals from Modular Fuel Tanks would probably have to change their init-behavior to also handle vessels which spawn in space. But this is just a guess however.

Thank you, that is greatly appreciated. Hm, I see. I guess the problem here is that you are using "TakeCommand", which lets you spawn Kerbals outside of a command-part. The way this mod works at this time is that the Kerbal will get equipped with the life-support resources when he goes on EVA, which is why your Kerbals are dying. I will take a look at this and try to find a way to let Kerbals spawn with full life-support.

That is a good idea. I haven't really played with 1.2.2, but so far it does seem to work. I've just created an update on github. It should be available through CKAN shortly. Hm, I haven't really tried "probes plus" before but as far as I can see only the parts that this mod upgrades through the tech-tree are affected, right? Sadly that is to be expected, modifications like this usually don't stack.

While there is nothing I can recommend for you in the VAB at this moment (except for pen & paper), in the Space-Center Scene you should take a look at the "Record" tab of the KSTS window. In every scene except the flight-scene it will show you all your recorded profiles with the option to rename and delete them.

A very clever solution for keeping the cost down ;-) The time required to complete a mission is actually only the time it took you from the launch until you released your payload. So you can take as much time as you want on your way back and even stop for a "quick" refuel...

The "no original-stats for part 'kerbalEVA'"-Exception shouldn't break anything, it is probably thrown when KRnD tries to update a Kerbal on EVA, because the part that simulates him (or her) is no longer included in KSPs global part-list "PartLoader.LoadedPartsList". KRnD should simply do nothing in this case. I have however implemented a new, configurable part-blacklist, which excludes the boy- and girl-parts for EVAs. Until there is a proper release you can download the latest build from Github: https://github.com/mmoench/KRnD In case this fixes your issues, please let me know and I will create a proper Release for this minor change.

I've uploaded another small updated (1.7), fixing an issue reported by "TheRhodanist", which caused struts and fuel-lines not getting properly attached on new vessels. Additionally I've also made the highlighting of payloads a little bit prettier.

Hello, I've just uploaded a new version of CLLS (1.1) in which I've made a few tweaks to the electricity-consumption during time-warp and added a second, bigger generator. During higher time-warp factors the consumption per physics-tick will now be capped at 25% of your vessel's battery capacity. This way you should not immediately drop to zero electricity at time warp 1000x but if you don't have a high enough production-value via solar power or RTGs, your lights still will go out. And regarding the points made by tjt: I agree, the consumption-rate of the generator seems a little high at first, but keep in mind that you can adjust the production-rate and thus the consumption during your flight. Additionally if you were to build a base on the mun which is in the dark for much longer or, even better, if you were to mount an expedition to the outer planets, relying on solar power and batteries won't cut it. In situations like these you'd probably have to build vessels and bases which include nuclear reactors (like provided by "Near Future Electrical") to provide a reliable amount of electricity. And to be honest, I kinda like the idea of more massive, nuclear powered interplanetary vessels