Gilph

@sh1pman, @dboi88, Hi, I may have found an issue similar to #1110, regarding the hab multiplier, but it's with the 3.75 Kerbitat Look at the hab numbers in the picture. I have three kerbals, one 3.75 Kerbitat as hab common and the other as hab quarters. All kerbals have 11Y values: I land it in my colony. Right when I got into Physics range during the descent, it changed to the 335d number: And, that number does not change whether I turn off hab common or not. It will change if I turn off the hab quarter. Sound like the same issue?

Hi, I don't think anyone answered you on this. I believe anyone with a Github account can edit. @dboi88 and others did some amazing work on the USI Wiki sites. If there needs to be some access set up, they would be familiar with it. I would also offer help, but am really very visually challenged in trying to make things look nice. If you need descriptions or walls of text, would be happy to help.

Hi, had something very similar. On a base that was landed, I had lost about 8000 supplies when I went back to that base after about a week of warp. It seemed to have been partially fixed when the recycler fix was made. Nobody else had verified the problem, so I did a workaround that solved the issue. In short, I put an undersized nuke on the base, and when everything ran full tilt, was not able to keep up. But I had a central PDU to handle the shortfall, and it worked when the vessel is active. It seemed like, when the base is in the background, that the PDU part was being ignored, it ran out of EC and production stopped. But, that still doesn't explain why the supplies disappeared so quickly. My workaround was I stopped the efficiency parts and one bay. It dropped EC usage so that the nuke can handle it by itself, and all problems went away. If you can, try and reduce power usage and see if it gets better. I actually cant reproduce anymore because I replaced that base and disassembled it, so I have not opened a Github ticket.

Hi, there are a few scenarios to watch out for: If you start out using the Ranger Hab inflatables only on a base, the supplies and mulch storage are not warehouse enabled, so there is no way to pull supplies from a nearby container. You will need another warehouse container that is also set to Supplies attached to the base, like the inflatable warehouse, the mini packs, etc. If you are planning to resupply Supplies by landing containers or by using a disconnected base to make them, then the containers you use don't need to be large, they just need to be able to pull from those nearby warehouses I had a situation where I have unattended mining bases that have some hab capability, so if I need extra output, I can send an Engineer/Miner for a month or so to speed up drilling. I used the little mini pak of supplies on the base. It started running low after a while and I wanted to use PL to resupply. I forgot to land a Pilot, so I could not pull supplies from PL. But, since the base had a warehouse container and so did my lander, I can use local logistics to transfer supplies from lander to base, or just use scavenging to pull the supplies from the lander. So, make sure you figure out the flow of resources you wish to use. Always check in the VAB to make sure the containers you are using have the proper functionality, like warehousing. And note that scavenging is a pull function on request, meaning that unless something is consuming the resource and needs to get more, the transfer wont take place

Thanks to all for the replies. I'll also try and sandbox this over the weekend and look at actuals and not VAB. I started launching some stations in LKO to get a handle on it and will continue. FYI, the life support window will not display anything over 100 years, which means it's not Y.1K compatible.

Thanks, @jd284, I guess I misunderstood something. If it states 69 kerbal months and 6 crew affected, that is the same as 414 months with 0 crew affected?

Hi, looking at using the 3.75 Tundra Kerbitat. The thing is almost 10 tons, does only one out of four possible functions, and is not the best choice in any of the functions by far. Would it be a good idea to change the config so that it does two things? Choose between hab common/hab quarters AND recycle/purifier? It would make it relevant for both orbital station and landed base usage. Even with the current stats for each mode it would still not always be the best choice, but it would be a decent choice worth considering. I think there was discussion about greatly increasing the stats in each of the modes in the old thread, which was rejected, But enabling two modes together seems reasonable. Thanks

ATM, I have to Hyperedit the resources back once I get into orbit.

This was very nicely done, thanks. On the subject of science, I have thought the Ranger Comm module with the integrated science lab, was a bit awkward to use. As a Ranger part, I guess the value is a lightweight part to get Science going in far away places. But the very small data prevents you from analyzing all but the simplest experiments (the data values some experiments on far away planets can be pretty high), so it runs out of utility quickly. I think your idea in the last paragraph is great. Maybe the lab in the Comm module could provide the multiplier you spoke of.

Hi, just checked both my stations and the 5x hab common multiplier is working fine. Wanted to let you know.

For me, the Ranger stats are better. Used the Tundras in my very first station, and have not used since (except the ring...love that thing) Having two Ranger habs allows the 83 month extra time and the 5x multiplier, and one on each side of your station core gives a nice balance. The non-ring Tundra inflatables have less extra time and no multiplier, iirc. Then you need the 3.75 habitats to get the multiplier stats, but it could make the station core too long. Aesthetics do suffer a bit though.

@RoverDude, thanks, much appreciated...I have recently figured out a workaround and I may be the only one with this configuration because I have not seen others report it, so there is no impact at the moment and probably not a priority to the community. I'll put in a Github as a problem statement first and work on a simple save to show the issue. Thanks

And, I tripled this. I really hate Mun. The surface is a joke. Am putting a very small MKS system in place and will have a small orbital station, but no more than 2 at any time, other than to plant flags for XP and some science points.

@rottielover, @dboi88 is correct that the Life Support window in the VAB is the best place to do that, but the screenshot doesn't include the very useful information that is usually at the bottom, which is the parts you have used and their Extra Time and Multiplier values. Looking at the formula, you can get a feel for what is useful. First is the max number of crew spaces, but it is then reduced by 1/4. It can be pretty easy to use simple parts to create a lot of seats (like, 22), but that reduction means it has the least impact. Next is the Extra Time. That is not reduced by anything and added directly to the (maxcrew*.25) result. They are usually the Hab inflatables, from the small Rangers to the large Ring, and the Kerbitats. They are configured with names like "Hab Quarters", or "Habitat". When you add them to your vessel in VAB and set their mode, open the LS window and scroll to the bottom. You will see the total extra time in the formula, and the individual components that supply that number. Lastly, you see the Multiplier. That gives the opportunity for a large result, because it is a multiplier. The biggest ones go to just over 5x and are inflatables and Kerbitats that are configured as "Hab Common". By adding combinations of crew capacity, extra time, and multipliers, you can reach your goal. Also note the denominator at the end. it increases with every kerbal you actually have resident, which means it lowers the entire numerator. The fastest way to reduce hab/home duration is to fill up you vessel with Kerbals. You will need to start thinking that you need to build a vessel that has capacity of 10 kerbals and filling it with 3 Kerbals (for example) if you need longer durations. Hope that helps.

Hi, can I ask if you have updated to at least 0.50.13? There were some fixes to deal with that issue. When I updated, the problem of huge loads went away. But, I still have some pretty good numbers. My crusher as an efficiency part runs at 356%. My ASM runs at 324.66% per bay with a two 3 star engineers. My Kolonization bonus is 150.8%.

I believe it adds X to each bay., if I understand your question correctly. If you have only one bay active and turn on your smelter, the bay will be at, for example, 150%. If you enable a second, it will also be at 150%, and the third will be the same. If they are all set to produce the same thing, they will be at 450% total.

Update on earlier issue about supplies disappearing. Installed the new version of LS and have not seen the cycling issue after a few attempts to trigger. But, I did see that about 200 supplies were reduced from PL after a three day warp in KSC, even though I produce 300+ surplus supplies per day. So I started looking into whether the power consumption calculated during catch up processing could be an issue. My AM base (two Tundra AM) has 27K battery and a 1.25 nuke directly attached. If I enable all four bays (3 cultivate(S), 1 agroponics) and the two Ranger greenhouse efficiency parts, the nuke jumps to 100% and batteries get drained within a few seconds. Then, they draw from two PDUs nearby and everything runs fine. I just tested stopping the efficiency parts, which dropped the bay load enough to be self reliant on the nuke (75% load) and no PDU help was needed. Did a three day warp in KSC, went to the base, and the supplies increased by the correct amount after the catch up processing finished (about 100 surplus per day). So, I would ask that the calculations for power availability be looked at to see whether they are reflecting external PDU support correctly, especially if an underpowered power source is already attached. With everything enabled and nuke at 100%, I can still be drawing power from PDUs every 10-15 seconds, which works when the base is active but may not be reflected correctly during catch up. Will also put a Github issue.

Hi, thanks for the reply. The math is not matching up at the moment with respect to the recyclers. With the colony active, I set a timer for exactly one day and looked at how many supplies were created, also taking into account that Kerbals were also consuming. Supplies were increased by 307 and 30.3 were consumed with functioning recyclers, so 337.3 supplies should have been created. 7 Kerbals total, without recycling, is 75.6 consumed per day, so I am still 261.7 net positive. I can't fit that 261.7 number or the 75.6 number anywhere at the moment. At T0, I had 1497 in PL;T+5 had 1816, an increase of 319; T+10 had 1480, 17 less than T0;T+15 had 1799, another increase of 319. What does the math suggest? At every other 5 sec point, it looks like it adds the amount of supplies created per day, minus 17. On the alternate 5 sec. points, it just subtracted the 17. So my first thought is why do I seem to be losing one day out of every 2 in my supplies production? I should never be going net negative in Supplies consumption for any reason, I'll post when the save is ready, but still not sure how to trigger it. Thanks

Hi, having a weird issue with Supplies on my Minmus base. Will attempt to get a USI save working. I have Kerbals in three bases in my colony: Agro base (making supplies), ASM base (making water), and Miner Base (drilling). All bases have supplies and there are supplies in PL. Every 5 sec, The PL Supplies inventory oscillates between a lower number and a higher number, like: 1497, 1816, 1480, 1799. Each time, the higher number and lower number are reduced by 17. The ASM and Miner consume about 17.4 supplies per day total, so maybe the catch-up processing is doing that. But, the AM Base (two 3.75 AMs) is consuming 13 supplies per day and is running 1 agroponics bay at 727% and three Cultivate (S) bays at 727% each. That is a lot of supply production. That number should be increasing, regardless of if it's regular or catchup. And, only Supplies are oscillating, no other resource is doing this. Eventually, my PL supplies will go to zero, but since I have a net positive supplies production, PL will slowly start to increase again if I keep the flight scene at this colony. I hope this makes some sort of sense. I will look to reproduce better, but I have to wait on getting PL surplus again. In this case, I was doing things in Duna for the first few game days before I visited this base, so the catchup processing may be a good candidate. Thanks

No issues here either, cant replicate.

Found out bullet three the hard way. To be more specific, the supplies/mulch storage in the Ranger HAB inflatables are not shareable (maybe others), but there are other supplies/mulch containers that are, like the inflatable warehouses and the Kontainers. I tried a "hotel" base with just Hab inflatables, and it would not pull supplies, and my AM did not pull the mulch to process. To get around that, always have a Warehouse-enabled container for supplies/mulch, even if it's just the small one. I know warehousing/local logistics are being redone and that may change how this works. Or, put your large Hab/Home devices attached to your AM so that mulch will accumulate locally, and you will only need the small container on the other bases so they can push/pull supplies and mulch from the kerbals that have to live there. My workaround was that I kept the hotel and enabled all the hab quarters/hab common to share it with the other bases in range. Moved all the kerbals out of the hotel. My ASM base has a Tundra pioneer and the small supplies container. Enabled the recycler and put two kerbals in. Put the rest in the AM base and enabled recycling on that Pioneer. I did loose some overall base capacity and the hotel-attached recyclers are unused, but it still works, overall.

Yep...Rendezvous Maneuver to the rescue, again. To keep it simple, I launched the relay and just snuck it out of Kerbin SOI, so it was just next to it in a solar orbit. Imported that into RMP and picked Kerbin as the destination. Changed the Mean Anomaly at the destination until I got the spacing i wanted. It was a 760 ms burn, and a slightly larger one 1Y80D later. Thanks again.

@Arrowstar, Thanks very much for the update. Have been thinking about putting a relay station for interplanetary support. I was considering putting a relay in orbit around the sun with the same radius as Kerbin, but at a 90-120 degree angle so the Sun will never be blocking. I guess this means a two burn solution: going into solar orbit to some apoapsis, and then returning to the Kerbin orbital track, only Kerbin is ahead/behind by 90-120 degrees. Can TOT calculate that? Thanks

Sure: Loaded save with a vessel orbiting Minmus, selected it, stayed in flight scene Start TOT 1.5.6, pr4, set to Kerbin time Compute porkchop from Minmus to Mun, parameters are in my post Selected Compute departure burn, imported the active vessel orbit parameters, shown above. Mean anomaly is negative. When I hit compute, i get the error message. When I checked after Phineas posted, I brought up the Mechjeb orbit screen. The ordinal part of the imported MA matches what MJ displays, but MJ does not display the sign. It counts from 0 to 180, then counts down from 180 to 0. When it is counting down, TOT imports a negative MA number. Not sure if that's useful, but it's the only other mean anomaly indicator I have.

I just checked..am using the version included in the prerelease4 download. Recopied, compared files to see I had the correct one, still have the error