DStaal

Could you do a 'link/unlink symmetry' button someplace to give the user the choice? If not, I'd vote for not reconfiguring all of them: With a bit of work and time, you can create the other situation in-game, whereas if you set it so they're all reconfigured together in flight the player can't do one different on their own. ---- Oh, and another thought that the above discussion made me think on: It might be a useful idea to have the Power Pack 'default' to Lf+Ox mode in both storage and generation - then newbies will be able to slap it on and have it work, and if it stops they're more likely to go 'well, it did work, so what am I doing wrong' than 'it's not working! It must be broken!'

Almost always these are a case of mis-installing the mod - typically either nesting GameData folders or unpacking the USI folder for RoverDude's mods.

The not saving changes in the config screen is sorted in the next release. The recyclers are present now.

I haven't checked, but I suspect the experiments in the Sounding Rockets pack will fit nicely - and work well with their intent of being single-use experiments.

Just as a thought, but have you tried either bringing Oxidizer, or switching the flex-fuel to a mode that doesn't require it?

On the overheating+exploding thing, I have a theory... (Even though I know it's been addressed.) What it sounds like is happening to me is that KSP is playing catch-up with the heat generated while you were gone. It then distributes the caught-up heat, cools the part that was generating heat for the time away, and finally applies heat effects. Note the sequence: Generate all the heat for the entire time away, then push it to the rest of the ship, then apply cooling to the original part, then finalize. The problem is that the two middle steps are backwards - since the heat is distributed first and then canceled out, the super-high heat from the entire time away gets distributed. Since cooling is then applied to the original part, it stays intact - even though the rest of the ship overheats. Anyway. Just a thought on what appears to be going on. If this is the case, it's a stock bug. (Though I don't know if there's a way to test or work around from here.)

Another idea is if there is another part on that base that can hold stored data - or if you can attach one via KAS/KIS - you could use Ship Manifest to transfer the science to that part and see if you can retrieve it from there. (Or you may not even need to retrieve it, if you can attach your return ship directly.)

The RT-500 actually follows the formula given: 0.6 tons of mass / 1 kerbal = 0.6 recycle percent. Note that the guidance in the wiki uses 'number of kerbals' in this section not to mean 'number of kerbals that fit into this part' but to mean 'number of kerbals this part recycles supplies for' - those Kerbals may be in that part or in another part entirely. To quote the wiki: So the fact that the part has a seating capacity of zero doesn't mean that it's crew recycle capacity can't be 1, or 5, or 10, or whatever, and the guidance should apply to that. If the part is multi-purpose, you should decide how much mass is dedicated to each part of the purpose and calculate based on that. So, if your part is combination recycler and storage ideally some of the mass should be dedicated to handling the 'storage' and not included in the formula. For example a 2.5 ton part that includes a storage bay might decide that 0.5 tons is dedicated to holding the storage, and then if you decided that it had a crew recycle capacity of 5 it's percent would be 0.4. (2/5) I hope that helps and clears things up. If you have suggestions on how to clarify the wiki I'd be glad to hear them.

A couple of additional notes/corrections/clarifications: Anyone can drive in a survey stake, not just an engineer. (At least that's the intent.) I typically use my surveying pilot. Survey stakes with the same name make up a launchpad/survey site. You can have multiple launchpads with different names. The range to the stakes varies dependent on the pilot's level. I believe 200 meters is with a 0-star pilot. A 5-star pilot will enable a range of 2km. The center of the ship (or of the root part, I'm not sure) will be over the average of the locations of the stakes defining the launchpad. (Assuming they're all in normal mode.) So if you place one, it will be directly over that stake. If you place two, it will be between them. Etc. Setting the direction is complicated - what you need to do depends on whether the ship was designed in the VAB or SPH, and there are lots of options. But a quick and useful thing to know is that if you put a stake on top of whatever nearby rise you have, and set that stake to '-Y bounds', the vessel will spawn so that it clears that rise. (And that stake won't affect the location it spawns at - just the height.) This greatly reduces the number of ships spawned underground and therefore exploding. I'd also highly recommend you use Keridian Dynamics 'LaunchSite' EL stake variant - it works exactly the same as regular EL stakes, but it has the advantage that if you unfold it and turn the light on (without rotating it) it will point out which direction your ship is going to be facing. (Assuming it was built in the SPH.)

...Ok, that's a very broken install. I'd actually recommend to re-download KSP and start over: I'm not sure you haven't compromised some core game files. Things to note: Mods go in GameData, not GameData/Squad. Never touch GameData/Squad. (Basically 'Squad' is the mod that is the core of KSP.) Many mods are shipped in archives that unzip to a top level folder with a few (or a lot) of files, with a GameData folder inside that. You need to copy the contents of that GameData to your GameData. You're on a Mac. (Yay!) Macs don't merge folders by default when unzipping - they rename to be unique. Make sure you only have one of every folder. Hopefully that will get you started a bit on getting things installed a bit better. Have you tried with a pilot in the survey station?

Yep. I'm not sure if NFE can do it without actually attaching the EU tank to the ship (UKS has some other disconnected logistics things that it does, so that's part of that), but 'part of the same ship' is always close enough. (I don't use NFE myself - it twiddles a bit more with the electrical systems than I want - but I know that it has a method of transferring spent EU out and new EU in.) Note that mostly I'm giving this advice as 'try it the way the mod makers intended it to work before you start overriding them - you may find they thought it through'. Top level should be fine. Just take a screenshot of it. If it's more than what's going to fit on one screen, make sure EL is in the image. Another option is to post a log file - it'll have the info in there as well; the interesting part is pretty near the top. Either way - just find a site that'll let you upload it and put a link here. (Dropbox is good for text files, imgr is good for images.)

Note the rest of my sentence which you cut out of the quote: 'Could we have a pic of your GameData folder?' It's possible you're overlooking something.

Yep, that's the intended way to handle that situation. The idea is that while most building materials are fairly easy to handle, that's a hazardous material and requires special handling. (Note: I'm not sure what mods you are using - I know a couple of mods use EU, and I believe they all include a way to do transfers using an Engineer on EVA. In UKS, you click on the reactor and 'Perform Maintenance' while there is a supply of EU nearby, and they'll do the transfer.)

It is entirely by design that craft are created 'dry': Building a tank out of steel doesn't mean you have the fuel to fill it, that's created separately, in a separate process. However, if you design a KIS container with parts inside they will be built. (I'm not entirely sure if the items inside it are filled with transferable resources if they exist - I would hope not, but it's an odd place to check. People have pointed you to UKS - that's not your problem. UKS never removed the ground stake - it was required to build using UKS. (The current version doesn't remove anything, but that in particular means your problem isn't an old install either.) My guess is an install issue - Could we have a pic of your GameData folder? There are examples in the Extraplanetary Launchpads folder, but I'd actually recommend against going that route. EnrichedUranium is hard to transfer by design - and the mods that include it include ways to transfer it when you need to; you should use those. Usually that means having a store of it nearby, and sending out an Engineer to do the transfer.

A common way to approach that problem is to just distribute your .cfg file as an MM file that dupes and modifies the original part. That way you aren't distributing the original part, and you can easily credit the original part maker. (By mentioning what parts/mods are needed for your .cfgs to work.)

Yep. With the note that they don't have any built-in docking like we're talking about, so you'll have to come up with something there. But it's not hard.

Since it'll be a while before I really get a chance to test: How do the survey lights interact with ScanSat? (Which can have partial scans of bodies.)

Right, so the Kerbal in Kerbinstationary orbit will have traveled 0 meters in 1 orbit, while the Kerbal in an 80km Kerbin orbit will have traveled ~503km. Of course, that's assuming Kerbin as the reference frame. They'll both have traveled quite a distance in the Kerbol reference frame - which you may think 'why do we care?', but if they were traveling to/from Duna then you might care. On the other hand, if we are working on Kerbol reference frame than your Kerbal can travel at ~9km/s just by stepping out of the building on Kerbin. Even calculating just based on current SOI has issues, as again you'll get things like someone in a lower orbit traveling further - and Kerbals in stationary orbits not traveling at all. You could come up with a system that worked - but it'd be arbitrary and there would be a lot of choices made by fiat, for no other reason than 'we have to make a choice here, and I like this one.' Which tends to spark internet forum wars, as people argue over the imagined merits of the various choices.

I think it does - but only a little.

What storage mode do you have the Conestoga in? Due to the way KIS works (I think) the inventory screen has to be set up the same regardless of the inventory space if the inventory space of the part can vary. (That is: The UI is static, even if if the capacity is dynamic.)

That looks better. Note that I wasn't saying 'don't use CKAN'. I was saying 'don't blindly trust CKAN'. It's a good tool and a lot of people like it. (It doesn't work at all on my computer, so I don't have personal experience.) But we also get a lot of 'I must have installed it correctly, I used CKAN!!!' posts when something's broken, so it's good to know that 'installed using CKAN' and 'installed correctly' aren't necessarily synonyms.

Don't trust CKAN to much - it's not as fool-proof as many of those mod managers for other games. (Where everything has to go through the mod manager, and therefore follow it's standards.) It's always a good idea to know how to install things yourself. And usually the first troubleshooting step people will ask for if you're having trouble is to delete and re-install manually, just to make sure CKAN isn't acting up again.

You do have a few of those mods mis-installed. As an example: On the left you can see that UKS contains a GameData folder - the contents of that folder should be in this folder, not nested in a sub-folder like they are. USI-LS is similar, as is SpaceY, and a couple of others I can see in there. You also have two copies of ModuleManager - one is enough. If think if you fix those you'll get a few of those tech paths having parts, but I'm not sure if all of them will.

I'm sure if we really wanted to we could come up with some convoluted workaround that would be closer to 'realistic', but a reaction wheel works.

A thought: On the solar panels with the light vanes on the end, have you considered giving them a very small reaction wheel capability? The point of those vanes in real life was attitude control via variable light reflection, so a very weak reaction wheel could duplicate that effect.