rasta013

Uhm...doesn't this define the output? Seeing as there is no Output_Resource defined below it...?

Only quote I grabbed here but RE: Antennas... If any of you use DMagic Orbital Science he has 3 parts with very powerful antennas on them (I haven't done any Grannus testing with these yet): Soil Moisture Analyzer (Universal Storage module): 50G no combine, up-gradable to 100G Combinable Soil Moisture Analyzer (stack mount): 100G no combine, up-gradable to 200G Combinable Undersize Signals Intelligence Satellite - stack mounted, 1T no combine, up-gradable to 2T Combinable Oversize Signals Intelligence Satellite - Nose mounted (has fairing), 10T no combine, up-gradable to 20T Combinable I've not done any testing with these antennas and Grannus yet (no spoilers! ) but I've used them in the past for linking multiple solar systems in Kerbal Galaxy so...20T Combinable is a massive amount of range, just sayin'...

It never had to do with ore working or not. Ore is way too light. It's density in stock in ridiculously low. So, to simulate the difficulty of ACTUALLY extracting real metal of some sort the choice was made to use MetalOre instead and Taniwha controls the density of that material in the CRP. This allows him to control for the unrealistically light Ore.

Well this is why text conversations get confusing sometimes...LOL. Never wanted anything for non-combinable antennas to show up properly... If you review the images that are in my post you will see that I have 2 Comm-16 and 2 DTS-1 antennas, not the 16S The quote from me "2 DTS-1s and 2 Comm-16s" is confusing because I'm trying to make 16 plural. So, NOT COMM-16S but rather 2 Comm-Sixteens and 2 DTS-Ones... Here's my log. Please don't mind the contract errors on Field Science from Contract Configurator...I'm working on that independently in my install to get it running under GPP. Just for info's sake...I double checked and the antennas are stacking properly as far as the game is concerned. It's just the antenna helper window that's not reporting it... Here's my log... EDIT: UPDATE Ok, so I've been doing more testing of course and have more info. Interesting it is actually... I cannot replicate the above instance...exactly. BUT...I think the two things I reported may actually be one and the same thing. Here's what I've noticed. When I open the AH window the first time after I have attached antennas it will show everything that is attached properly and correctly combine all the antennas it should be. However, once I start swapping things around the reported antennas in the AH window don't match up from then until I save and reload the craft at which time the window catches up and displays everything properly again. In the original report above I had already been swapping antennas around and I'd been opening and closing the AH window most likely leading the the picture above that seemed like it wasn't properly stacking the antennas. If this description is unclear in any way I'll be happy to document how I'm seeing this and replicating it in my game with screenshots. Thanks for the help!

Ok so quick question and at least one, probably two bug reports... Question: Don't antennas of the same kind e.g. 2 DTS-1 or 2 Comm-16 stack together? Bug Report(s): So, provided the above is true, notice the first image states "2 of 6" antennas can be combined? There's only a total of 5 antennas on the craft. The 2 DTS-1s and 2 Comm-16s (VSR models) and the probe core. The craft originally had 6 including the core when I first opened Antenna Helper. No matter how many I add or remove it always shows 6 - unless I remove all antennas in which case it shows 5 as in the second image. The second report of course is the non-stacking multiple antennas as reported. In game, unless I'm very mistaken, antennas of the same type will stack with each other.

Excellent. I've got a stack of them I've already written for my own game ready to upload!

It should probably go to the Git. K/K+ are one and the same mod now so it may get confusing pointing them somewhere else.

Wow, that is surprisingly simple and definitely un-intuitive for such a basic method... It's the powerLevel values I never got right I'm pretty sure but it's been a while since I goofed with them. I'll take this info back to my toys and see what I can do with it though... Thanks man!

Personally I love the idea. I'll take as much control over coloring as you're willing to code. If it's basic and a single section/mask - so be it - if I get to do more, even better. I like having as much control over the appearance, assembly and performance of my rockets. You've given me as much control as I can get for two of those three and this would go a long ways towards giving me full appearance control. Gimme gimme gimme...

That's awesome...please share. I've played around with the effects from time to time also and never really had any luck. It just wasn't important enough to me to pursue...but now you've figured it out...I MUST KNOW!

Thanks for the update! I'll be throwing this back on to play with some more since I highly value the info you're providing. I would like to add my request - which you already have on the road map - for in flight displays and a massive request for relay transfer stats, preferably in flight but at this point I'll take them any way I can get them... Thanks again!

It paid off for you at least once buddy. I never played the second one but destroyed the first one so many times I still dream about it and you gave me a good chuckle...especially since I just recently got my latest report and it kinda made me feel the same way...

Yeah I think so as well....didn't have time to look at the KSPWheel code last night and frankly, it does me only a small amount of good as I can only just barely read code. IIRC he had some tiny issue with playing effects as well but I'd honestly have to dig through the thread to remember...could've been someone else. LOL

Yup. Specifically it was this part : https://github.com/shadowmage45/KerbalFoundries2/blob/master/GameData/KerbalFoundries/Parts/KF-APU.cfg Now...what I don't know is whether he fixed it in code in Foundries or whether he did his magic in the KSPWheel plugin but that's the part he switched around. In the config above you can see he calls KFAPUController as the module to handle the fuel consumption so there's the relevant bit...

That was exactly the answer I was expecting to be honest. The foregone conclusion being that SSTU was installed was part and parcel of my question too as I expected it would be needed for access to the plugin. Mostly I was just curious to see if it was even going to be exposed to hook into and the answer is yes - albeit with a fair amount of work and difficulty. Thanks man!

Just out of curiosity - are you running Ven's Stock Revamp? I am, and I'm almost betting this is how it's getting a tech node assigned... I'm seeing this little issue too but thought it was a temporary thing while people worked on phasing out their AmpYear ships so I didn't report either. As for the above mentioned idea regarding VSR, I haven't had the time to trace down the MM configs for it yet but since it does change how the batteries look (for some, not all I think) it may be tied into that. As @DStaal just mentioned, the "TechRequired = none" is the way that I also use personally to avoid having parts show up, especially if I'm deprecating something from my game.

AMAZING IDEA! Good thinking on both your parts! I'm sure a number of other mod/modders would be interested in this kind of capability and I know that users of the feature would love to see it propagate so, will there be any way for others to hook into this feature through the plugin and adaptation of their texture sets?

You might touch base with Shadowmage. He recently solved this same issue that was used for the LoFi generator from Kerbal Foundaries. That part had its thrust transform removed and was using that hacky method as well but he just coded a small fix for it and has real fuel consumption (properly) and no thrust... ...it will yes. The LoFi generator used to cause the same issue. NOW...that said...you will almost never see it unless you use the part on a smaller craft. The thrust output is so low that it's meaningless on anything with even a small significant mass.

I totally missed that in this thread and apologies for not searching it beforehand. I'm working on tracking down another weirdness with science definitions in GPP and this one had acted goofy on me. Oddly, it helped expose the problem for me in GPP too but I didn't know this about [x]. Thanks!

I'm game also - will d/l and give this a run. Thanks for the extraction work on the old mod! off topic...nice scope setup, observational or do you do imaging also?

HERESY!

Just...just...

Look here : https://github.com/Angel-125/Pathfinder/wiki/Anatomy-Of-A-Template This gives you all the detail for how to do it. Once you've done it in once, you can easily move it to others if you need too. That page right there though will be invaluable for you in doing this but yeah...you'll need to cover it a bit widely if you want vast functionality for MKS.

Generally speaking I've found it's always better to create a new template to do what you want for any given piece of WB that you want to add it to. Modifying the original workshop templates ultimately will leave you hurting during update times and also means you're sometimes dealing with getting through all the connected pieces in other configs. Having your own template is full control of everything leaving you largely unaffected by upgrade processes.

OMG....that was awesome. I laughed so hard I should've filmed that...it would've been as funny.