DStaal

For reference, MKS greenhouses do use BotanySkill (and Machinery). Note that under MKS skills and wear are separate mechanics, that both can impact the productivity of a part. (Though RoverDude is still tweaking wear, which is Machinery, so you may want to hold off on that for the moment.)

Other science mods that might be interesting to you are Station Science, MOLE, and SEP. All of them add various experiments that take time - and usually a special facility - to complete, and Station Science and MOLE require the science to be returned *physically* to Kerbin. If you're a completionist you can get quite a bit of science out of these, but you'll spend quite a bit of effort to do so.

They are the time to AP that the mod will try to maintain at those points in the turn. At the beginning it will try to accelerate until AP is ~60 seconds away, and then it will let the speed/angle fall until it's just 25 seconds away. (Subject to the sensitivity, which is the lowest throttle setting it will allow until AP is at the orbital altitude.) I'm guessing the shuttle stack has some solid-rocket engines that can't be throttled, based on those numbers. The mod will adjust the start time to AP in that case to whatever it was when the solid boosters cut out.

The AP start/stop are the time to AP at the start and stop of the gravity turn. The gravity turn starts when you launch, and ends when you get to your orbital altitude, so you're basically saying to gradually shallow out your turn during the ascent. Pressure cutoff and size of the atmosphere don't really interact - the pressure cutoff is the pressure of the atmosphere against the ship, not the pressure of the atmosphere at a height. So it takes into account the speed you're flying at as well as the thickness of the atmosphere. (At, least, that's my understanding.) When the pressure drops below a certain amount, the fairings will jettison. What depth you are in the atmosphere that happens at will be complex.

They prefer to node attach, actually. But yeah, it's just a rescaled/reskinned KAS pipe - just smaller than the normal size. Ideally if you wanted to support the would be a small texture change: the 'plug' is two-pronged, so a couple of darker slits in a circle on one side would make it look like there was a place to plug it in. But I think that's probably over-complicating it. And you should check out the mod, I think you'd like it. It's a bunch of experiments based on the Apollo experiments, that you have to set out with an Engineer and calibrate with a Scientist, and then let run. They take some time before they return science, and their return depends on the scientist you used to calibrate them.

Would something like StageRecovery be a good place to start?

Here you go: You may or may not want to disable overlays.

It's to late anyway - the modpocalipse you could cause has already hit epic proportions...

I just ran into an odd one - I tried to follow a mod, and it asked me to create an account. Now, the obvious thought would be to make sure I was logged in - but I was. On the same screen as the 'please create an account', I had a pull-down with my name and links to my profile, etc. So I'm simultaneously logged in and not logged in. (And I still haven't received any emails from Spacedock since at least November sometime...)

It's a bit focused on MKS, but here's a spreadsheet and a link on how to use it that can do some of that for you:

I don't believe so, at least not directly. Nor does USI-LS actually calculate the cubic meters per kerbal anywhere, that I know of: It works off of actual seats, habitation bonuses, and habitation multipliers. So, really the cubic meters per kerbal is more theoretical. It's more for parts makers to think about: If they're making a large space, they can assign some of that space to habitation bonuses mentally, and create configs that match that.

May I suggest a solution? Build a rover, and let it drive:

It's considered an 'ordering' statement - it gives when the patch should be applied in relation to other patches. It's needed if you want to define a mod - and therefore a place in the patch order - with your patch, but not otherwise. Notably the latest version of MM throws errors if you try to specify more than one of: BEFORE, AFTER, or FOR on the same patch. (Technically it's never been a good idea - but before multiples were silently ignored.) After all, they all try to define when the patch should be applied, and would contradict each other.

Thanks, I'll take a look.

Obviously there's only one solution. You need a bigger monitor.

I don't know. But I suggest you start by looking for the parts provided by *this* mod, as a baseline. If you can't see them, it's possible you have an install issue.

Well, to start with that's the interface to Ground Construction, not OSE Workshops. I think you need the K&K OSE Workshop, not the K&K Workshop.

You know, you could be a bit polite about it. I mean, there is a reason: It integrates the same resource chain as everything *else* MKS does. So you don't have to be hauling around extra tanks and converters for one supply path to build things when the *other* way to build things uses the same supply path as inflating and repairing things. You could also notice that MKS has been doing this for *years* and it's been a standard part of MKS for all that time. The way it does it is even built into EL, and part of the official support - taniwha has even mentioned he's surprised more mods haven't made use of it. Or you could take a bit of attention and notice that the patch to do this is written as a stand-alone patch, easily removed, and in fact is supporting PatchManager to make removal easier. Remove this file, and be happy: GameData/UmbraSpaceIndustries/MKS/Patches/PatchManager/ActiveMMPatches/MKS_EL_Resources.cfg

Persistent Thrust doesn't appear to *calculate* these trajectories. It just makes flying them less annoying. I may be wrong there - I haven't looked to closely. (And Solar Sail Navigator might actually have some helpers for this, though it's still listed as in alpha.) And yeah, it's not a very useful thing to try with the Stock engines. There's only one ion engine, and it's not really worth using for anything more than a small probe. And you always can boost to a higher orbit and do your burn from there, or split the maneuver into several parts and do those instead. You rarely *need* this trajectory class, and it's hard to set up and use. However, with some of the modded engines (NFE + NFP come to mind), you can build decent-sized ships using ion engines, and it would at least be interesting to me to be able to attempt this style of burn and compare. A large part of the purpose of playing KSP to me is learning the answers to the question 'what would it actually take to colonize a solar system?', as well as just learning what works and doesn't work in doing that. I find these an interesting option, and I'd like to be able to play with them to see when and if they're useful. And even a few hour burn would be worth comparing on this - the orbital period of my standard 'orbital separation' orbit of 80km is ~30 minutes, so a two-hour burn is four orbits. Again, I can split that up, or move to a higher orbit before calculating the burn, but I would find it interesting to try this instead sometimes.

Some of the WildBlueIndustries science labs have this capability. Check out the MOLE mod.

I've put in a PR to do this. It might be worth thinking of making it into a disabled-by-default Patchmanager addon though.

I figured that - but if the stand-alone version were to support mod-defined classes, at lower/higher costs than the standard cost, then it would be doing everything he needs his version for, and more capable in the bargin. So it might be easier for him to strip it out and no longer have to maintain that codebase. It's a hope. Either way, I can see those features being useful for a variety of purposes and I could see other colonization-style mods (or even just other mods in general) making use of them. So whether or not MKS uses it, I could see it becoming an interesting and useful addition to the modded KSP landscape.

I'm guessing this means I could define my own classes now? If so, I have one more request on this. (And if you can do this I'll then be seeing if I can talk RoverDude into using this rather than the embedded version in MKS) - could we have a cost multiplier on a per-class level? So that one class could cost say 75% of the 'base' cost.

Nope, not really. The idea for these would be that - like the other MKS classes - they'd be cheaper than the full-powered main three classes. So, especially early-game it'd be cheaper to have two 'Daredevils' than two pilots, for instance, and you'd have the same amount of control. Of course, later in the game those Daredevils can't do much more than pilot a ship around, and you need to make sure they have habitation that you wouldn't need to worry about with a pilot. I just find it interesting to balance into the game.

I know, I know... (And I've thought of doing one for three of the classes I've written - they're renames of the three base classes. They don't get any of the colonization bonuses or extra skills - but are good for the early game and for more routine missions, or for missions where the special skills don't come into play.)