mcortez

For the part you want to make stack-able, I think you can just add this to it's cfg -- via direct edit or MM: MODULE { name = ModuleKISItem stackable = true } If the part in question already has a ModuleKISItem, then just add the stackable attribute. No idea what happens if you stack items that have persistent data or anything that marks them as different from one-another. If I had to guess, they all become identical to the first one placed in inventory.

I wouldn't mind using stakes, as long as I could figure out how to "plant" 5 or 6 supports over rough terrain where all the nodes ended up at the same height (think base building where I'd like to get all the parts at the same height.) I have to admit, I've never actually use the stakes yet -- I usually use the Orbital Construction part from USI/OKS. Do stakes get consumed when used on the surface? If not, is it safe to assume that I could plant a -Y bounds stake, and then some kind of origin stake for the vessels center (X/Z) -- and then reuse the -Y stake and just plant another origin stake?

I'd also love to have something like this. In my case, I'd prefer something that looks like a girder coming out of the ground (like the stock launch clamp) and gives me a number of attachment nodes a couple meters above the ground, but I could just as easily do that with a foundation block and then attach a girder with a Not-Rockomax Micronode on top of it. Even better, but certainly in the realm of over top top super awesome optional feature, would be a way to configure the height of the nodes -- perhaps a right click menu slider that lets you move them up/down a couple of meters, with it snapping the height to say .1 meter increments -- along with something in the right click menu telling us the height above "sea level" of the node. The purpose of all this being that we could plant multiple anchors over rough ground, and level them all to the same height. Even without this build in, we could probably accomplish it with Infernal Robotics. Thanks!!!

Attach winch to separator, attach chute to winch, attach winch to Kerbal, eject separator ... profit? There have been a couple of mods that do add EVA chutes, a quick search turned up this one: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/23304-10vanguard-technologies-eva-parachutes-still-works/&page=1 It's possible to make a part visibly attach to a Kerbal upon when equipped, but I think it's may just be for visual appearances (the electric screwdriver, the KIS storage crate, etc). Although, now that I think about it, the KIS storage crate does continue to retain the right click menu to access it's inventory. You could try making your own part using the container as a template, but the chute functionality may just not work as expected: https://github.com/KospY/KIS/blob/master/Parts/container1/part.cfg edit: Looks like a cross post, you found what you needed. I wonder what all the differences are between using just ModuleKisItem versus ModuleKISItemEvaTweaker

If it helps any, you could think of it as 1 unit of supplies for every 2,666.67 seconds (or 44.44444 minutes (or .7407407 hours))) Or just write yourself a little MM script to set the SupplyAmount to a nice round number edit: okay, fixed that, decimal was off

Even better, new mechanic -- you loose some supplies every time someone enters or exits without using an airlock. MKS includes an airlock part as well that's almost never used.

You could use Infernal Robotics to actually put a working crane on a Karibou flatbed segment, or attach a MKS module to the rear of a Karibou with docking ports, or you can even go all MacGyver and use KIS/KAS Pipes or Winches to drag modules around with a Karibou. Heck, bigger Karibous might even be able to drag whole bases around on Minmus, although I suspect the bases would probably get twisted enough that they'd start breaking apart.

Great and I'm stuck at work with no way to get my contracts a-moving! Thanks for the quick fix!

I've been having a problem with station contracts not waking up for me as well, in my latest career save - started a few days ago. I've got CTT, with docking port, do Jr, and do senior unlocked. I've done a manned fly by of Mun, and flanted a flag on Minmus. I've also started doing anfull set of scans on both moons via ScanSat and DMagics orbital bits. The scan location for base on Mun contract has shown up, waiting on highres altimeter scan now. But station contracts haven't been green lit yet, and I'm not seeing them in the contract preloaded section of the persistence file either. I hadn't had any problems with the station contracts in my last career save from earlier January (bases - dcanning were having problems then.) Is there any possibility that something was updated with either the contract pack or contract configurator itself that might be messing up the start station contract?

Here's the WIKI for all things USI : https://github.com/BobPalmer/MKS/wiki Volunteers are still trying to get things updated with all of the changes in the last month or so, so the wiki still has some out of date things. More volunteers updating the WIKI are always appreciated.

I was watching @RoverDude on KSPTV last night when he mentioned the possibility of working on a future rover that would fit inside the Karibou's cargo bay. I decided to fool around and see what I could come up with, using currently available parts and I now have my new favorite mini rover. Uses the AES Pod, the PackRat's wheels and mini-batteries (which I think I got from the sounding rockets.) Due to the use of the not-rockomax micro nodes, there's a lot of attachment points, for things like a 2nd AES Pod for passengers, or DERP solar panels. Would be easier to build if the AES Pod had attachment points on the side (had to use tweak scaled radial attachment points) -- and getting the under-slung docking port to the right height was a little finicky, but it works -- it can re-dock, at least during testing on the runway. Next stop, minmus... I suspect I may need to add some kind of SAS or RCS thruster to keep it on the ground there though....

Isn't that what the BEFORE and AFTER keywords are for? From the mod-manager wiki: "Patch order The BEFORE and AFTER (and FOR?) keywords can be used to control in what order your patch is applied. The value passed to BEFORE or AFTER is the name of the mod, defined as the name of the directory directly under GameData? This lets you patch patches or patch patches of patches, as deep as you'd like to go."

You are right sir! Had a bunch of 3 star DMagic science and RemoteTech contracts that kept popping up. After another dozen or so, the hotel contract finally popped up.

Do withdrawn contracts get offered again? I did the investor tour and completed it for the hotel, and have been waiting for the hotel construction contract to come up. I've gone through 12-15 other contracts without seeing it and I had reason to poke around my persistent.sfs file for another issue, when I noticed the hotel contract was in there with State = Withdrawn.

I never got a confirmation on it, but based on what I've picked up I made this post a couple of pages back: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/105202-105-usi-life-support-036-bug-fix-update/&page=61#comment-2385425 Basically, I think there's a max benefit of 50% total supply reduction from recyclers. However I'm not sure if that jives with what you're seeing

I actually sort of know why this happens. It has to do with having a part with VesselType = Base in the part configuration. I was just experiencing this problem with some of Roverdude's parts over the weekend, I did some research and turned up an old forum post that explains what happens during docking: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/72037-docking-and-vessel-type-rules-0235/ And having a single part on board with VesselType = Base, can cause your station to keep flipping back to that vessel type since it takes precedence over VesselType = Station. Of course, this then causes problems if your using the Bases & Stations contract pack -- because when your station becomes a base, it sometimes "forgets" you have a station and you get new contracts to launch a "first station."

I've got the M700 unlocked and have done some random scanning with it. I did get one of the "scan for a suitable location" contracts for Minmus, where you need to scan for "Fuzzy Resources". I was able to complete that. I do also have ScanSat installed, with stock scanning turned off, but I just go the M700 in the right orbit and scanned away until the contract completed. Just never seem to get any of the follow on contracts. That's kind of what I was starting to suspect on the station contracts -- I've since fixed the part I was using, so that it's vessel type is Station rather than Base to prevent it from happening in the future. Oh and out of curiosity, does anyone happen to know under what conditions docking with your station results in the new parts being added to the station, versus the station being added to your new parts (ie, the station taking on the name and ID of the new vessel rather than the other way around?) In at least one case, my station apparently became a part of my habitation expansion rather then the expansion becoming part of the station (whole thing changed to a ship and took the name of my expansion vessel.)

What triggers base contracts? I've gotten and completed station contracts for Kerbin, Mun and Minmus -- but haven't received a single base contract other than the one for scanning for a base location, which I completed. And for station contracts, am I supposed to keep getting new contracts for stations on those bodies? I've gotten at least a couple of new prospective "first station" contracts for each of the bodies in Kerbin SOI -- even though the existing stations are still there and working. I did notice that I was adding a part to them that would cause KSP to flip them over to "base" as their vessel types, but I switched'm back to Station in the tracking station.

Right, doh, sorry!

Super awesome! Question on older Station/Bases contracts -- what triggers base contracts? I've gotten and completed station contracts for Kerbin, Mun and Minmus -- but haven't received a single base contract other than the one for scanning for a base location, which I completed. And for station contracts, am I supposed to keep getting new contracts for stations on those bodies? I've gotten at least a couple of new prospective "first station" contracts for each of the bodies in Kerbin SOI.

The most pessimistic configuration setting from both files takes precedence. So its best to change both if you're trying to improve the lives of your kerbals.

The USI-LS currently ignores the resource disable switch for supplies. Little red disabled button or not, the Kerbals will consume the supplies if they're attached to the vessel. If you really wanted to violate the spirit of the mechanic, you could put supplies containers inside a KIS inventory, then use an engineer to take those out and periodically mount them on the vessel. There really is no way to completely prevent a player from ... getting creative in a sandbox game. The intent however is that all attached supplies are accessible to the Kerbals and they wouldn't allow them to sit around unused while they go hungry.

Howdy all, I was hoping I could get a clarification on this Mod's license -- I am working on a Mod of my own, where I would like to have a custom KIS Inventory Part Module that only allows certain types of parts as inventory and I would also need to have a custom KIS Item Part Module that has some additional functionality. The ModuleKISItem class already has all the necessary methods marked as virtual so that I can override them as needed, much like the included ModuleKISItemBook or ModuleKISItemEvaPropellant current do. The ModuleKISInventory class however would need to be slightly modified to accomplish what I need, essentially adding in a pair of virtual methods that would allow a subclass of ModuleKISInventory to determine if it would allow a part to be added. The additional code to support this is fairly small. My KIS Items would be completely compatible with and operate exactly like all other parts when used in the inventory of an existing ModuleKISInventory. My questions are: 1. If I create a new Part Module that sub-classes ModuleKISItem, can I redistribute my new Part Module? 2. If I modify ModuleKISInventory to accomplish what I need -- can I redistribute the new Part Module? The new module would clearly have a different name (probably something like ModuleEquipmentBay) - it would still require KIS to be installed. I would be happy to provide attribution to KospY and include a link to the KIS repository & license (and if KospY thought the additions would be helpful for others, I'd be happy to submit it as a PR on github to be added to the core.) Thanks!

I've added another note to the What's New Page for this. https://github.com/BobPalmer/MKS/wiki/A-What's-New-Page @RoverDude Can you confirm that this is correct, so I can add an example to the Life Support page in the wiki: Given: Pioneer Module and a couple of crew cabins as the vessel. The Pioneer's 75% Recycler is theoretically capable of reducing the total supplies by a max of 60.75 (5 Kerbals * 16.2 * 75%) 5 Crew Scenario: If the vessel has only 5 crew, their total daily supply requirement is 81 units of supplies. Because of the max recycling limit of 50% per vessel, recyclers can only reduce the total usage to 40.5. 8 Crew Scenario: If the vessel has a crew of 8 however, their total supply requirements would normally be 129.6. This allows the Pioneer's recycler to operate at max efficiency, and reduces the total ship's requirement by the full 60.75 units. The ship therefore only consumes 68.85 units, for a 47% total savings (and does not trigger the max vessel limit.)

Correct. Most of the recyclers will reduce the supply used by up to 5 kerbals by the percentage specified. For any one kerbal, it'll be reduced by the largest recycler available. My understanding is if you have say 7 kerbals, and two recyclers one with a rating of 50% and one with a rating of 25% then the supply requirements of the first 5 will be reduced by 50%, and the remaining 2 kerbals will have their requirements reduced by 25%.