DStaal

That's not a tower of solar power - it's a *cooling* tower, using 12 of the largest radiators from NFT. (My Kerbals refuse to thaw the ice cream core of Minmus with a heat pump - even if it is radioactive.) It's a bit overkill, but they wanted to be ready to size up. As for the labels:

A quick check to see if anyone else is seeing this behavior - it's quite possible it's some mod interaction: When I launch a ship with octo-girders in 'mission support' mode, the batteries start uncharged. This normally isn't to noticeable to me - the launch clamps will charge your ship, as will the alternator on most engines, so they'll be moderately charged by the time you reach orbit (not to mention if you have solar panels or some other generation in place you'll be charging them that way) - but I recently l was building an extension on an LKO space station, and shipped up a *big* truss without much in the way of power generation (figuring the battery - intended to help the station last through the dark cycle - would last the time needed to get to it without a recharge), and had to abandon it when my orbital manuvers took longer than anticipated. (Related: The octo-core can't go into hibernation mode like most probe cores. That could be a deliberate choice, or just not updating them for the latest mechanics.)

Since we were discussing bases recently, here's the current state of my Minmus colony. First off: an off-world construction base, intended to be temporary. (To be replaced when RoverDude gets around to releasing his larger GC revamp parts, or I find something else I like. ) Built out almost entirely via KIS, using parts shipped up in the large container in the back. The container in the front was built on-site using EL, when we realized we needed a bit more storage space to stage inflation materials. It's designed to build using either GC or EL, and to pull resources to do so from planetary logistics. Initial concept had used a Duna module instead of the Tundra module, but it would have taken two Duna modules to do the same job. (It's both logistics and EL survey site control.) Next is the longer in process logistics base: This has evolved over time, built out mostly via direct launch (and local assembly via KIS or construction ports), but also some GC builds as well. It's intent is to be a *receiving* station: resources are shipped up to land in the large central flats, and then transferred to PL. As a side add-on there is some mining for fuel, Uranium, and water. (Though the nuclear fuel processing plant is likely a mistake to have here - it would be easier to have it at the other end and transfer the raw materials via PL, instead of refining here and shipping the EU manually via those truck trailers.) A bit more of a pull-back look at the same base: In this you can see two partially-disassembled resource landers (one for fertilizer, and one for supplies), the small greenhouse, the uranium miner, the mobile builder, the main base, the PAL construction helper, and on the right a science station (above) and a fusion pellet production plant (below). Power is mostly from the central base's nuclear reactor. (As well as a couple of Lynx trucks configured for various purposes.)

Yep. Pathfinder even ships a whole set of configs that integrate Pathfinder functions into KPBS parts.

Use both!

Ok, first off: You should mention which life support mod you're using. From inference, I'm guessing USI-LS. (And really, this question should therefore be asked over in that mod's thread, so you'll attract the attention of those who know about the mod.) Next: CRP (Community Resource Pack) resources work just like stock resources for the extraction mechanic - as they rely entirely on stock to do the work. (The CRP just defines the resources, and KSP does the rest.) Beyond that... Honestly, I’m confused by your jumble of questions. Slow down, think it through, and sort out what you need to know - quite often just doing that will help you figure out the answer, and even when it doesn't it helps others answer them.

I'm going to disagree: You might have all the dependencies - but you haven't installed them correctly. Inside that MKS_0.50.18.0 folder there should be a folder called 'GameData' - you need to move *it's* contents into the folder we're looking at.

Honestly, I think there's only about two parts in KF that are unrealistic. Most of the parts are wheels and tracks - which are arguably *more* realistic than stock.

One comment if you're looking into things again: I find the inline dock needs a slightly larger radius. As it is, if you connect a part to the small end, that part clip into the docked OTAV. (Ideally I'd like to put two inline docks end-to-end and be able to dock two OTAVs...) But I'm really looking forward to finally getting my hands on the inline 12...

1. Two things: Did you attach it to the ground, and are you using the latest version of MKS? That was a problem I had a few versions ago, but recent versions have been fine as long as I actually attached the hub to the ground. (Not just set it on the ground.) 2. I carry the Ranger modules in Kerbal's inventory regularly. You do have to make sure the inventory is nearly empty (basically - equip your screwdriver and don't carry anything else), but they should fit. Weight-wise, they should be within a single Kerbal's weight limit - if they are empty. (Some of them default to having resources in them, which will make them to heavy to carry.) If you do find you have to location-hop them, I find 'dropping' them a bit above the surface tends to make things work better. 3. The crew tubes don't fold up - they can fit in the larger containers, but not in the smaller. (You'll notice they are bigger than the container...) For this size base I'd use flex-o-tubes, but you could have shipped the tube on the outside of the container somehow. Note that crew tubes are also to large to fit in a Kerbal's inventory - though they are light enough to maneuver and to push around. 4. Known issue with KIS and inflatable/expandable parts. It affects a few other mods, but not many use inflatables as much as MKS. (The only other that does, Pathfinder, has an imperfect workaround in place that masks it but causes other minor issues.) As for what you 'should' be doing - you should be doing whatever works for you. MKS works with a large range of base styles - I've done bases like the one you're building, I've landed Duna modules in self contained packages, I've built stuff out using EL, I've connected up Tundra modules that were shipped up separately, etc. How you physically set up the modules is up to you. It *is* complicated, and has several long resource chains, but there is no 'right' way to do it. (There are a couple of 'wrong' ways...)

That's a Tardigrade, aka 'Water Bear' - known for being able to go into a hibernation state where they can survive pretty much anything, including direct exposure to outer space.

Yep. IIRC - sorta on the first. There are random interactions that can destabilize it. On the second: The primary purpose of the RTG is to provide the maintenance power for Deep Freeze, which can (configurable, but by default I believe) draw a small current to keep the freezer running. So it's needed. (The EC/s is even set to just barely over the amount needed by default - barely over to account for math effects.) I've actually tried this approach with an MM patch (it's earlier in either this or the dev thread someplace). It worked with the previous version of DeepFreeze, but doesn't with the current version (without the large buffer) - The previous version allowed the charge to be drawn over time, while the current version needs it all in one block. I mentioned this to JPLRepo, and he said the change in behavior was non-intended - but no fix was incoming at the time. (Actually, just checking the thread: He'd edit-replied to my post (which I didn't see...) and it likely has something to do with a change in the behavior in stock.)

Just looking back and noticed your edit here... (Sorry, don't always check the thread - I typically rely on the emails, and they don't cover edits.) And yes, by my last test this is not working as described above. I had a generator designed to one-shot generate the 3000 in a few seconds, and it's power was being dumped overboard as far as I could tell. The same generator had worked pre-1.2.

A fair amount of the math has already been done: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/slowerlight.php#id--Go_Fast--Bussard_Ramjet The lower end of the range sweet spot depends on the efficiency of your collectors, and the amount of material in the local interstellar medium. (Note that Earth is in a bubble of low-density space...) Upper range is around 0.12C. If you want to get *really* speculative, there's nothing theoretically stopping you from collecting most of the energy that's being turned into drag and using it instead - which would negate the upper end of the range. (But we have no clue how to even approach figuring out how to start the research to do so at this time.) General consensus is that you can actually do better with more conventional nuclear rockets and carrying your fuel with you. But I see no reason that should stop us here.

Yep, I've got them. They make things easier. (Though my current preferred solution is the docking ports from Feline Utility Rovers, actually.) Doesn't change that the stock docking behavior makes docking on the surface more difficult than it needs to be.

It's that 'held steady' bit that's the problem, actually. KSP requires parts to be precisely aligned in five axis (by stock - there are features to require full six axis alignment, but stock doesn't use them) to dock - and attempts to help by giving the docking ports some attraction force to pull each other into that alignment. Friction of wheels against the ground (and the fact that most ground in the game isn't level - so you're often off in two or three axis by a small amount) is often enough to overcome that, so that the vessels can't get themselves aligned the last few degrees automatically. You have to do it manually instead, by being *very* precise. In space it's less of a problem, as the ships will have full six axis of freedom to line up - the only thing the docking force needs to overcome is the mass and relative velocity of the ships. On the ground you're often missing several axis of freedom and the docking force needs to overcome not only the inertia of the vessels but also the friction against the ground and gravitational effects to get the vessels into alignment. It works, and I do it fairly often - but the docking system definitely feels optimized for space to me.

The interior of the area is the IVA - So I'm not really getting what the difference is.

Then I wonder when this was changed - I know I've done that before. (In fact, I thought it was happening on my Minmus base last time I visited - though it didn't need it, so I didn't check.)

Take a look at MOLE, it has modules to re-purpose it's tanks. (The module is shared by many WildBlueIndustries mods, but MOLE probably has the best tanks pre-built.)

I suspect they could in theory pull with a pilot - but they don't have a seat to put a pilot in...

The jobs should be in MKS, not USI-Core, so it shouldn't be a problem if you just want this mod.

For the second: It's always possible to switch to IVA mode, and see the interior. Try pressing 'C'. For the former: Can we see a pic of the ships? I have very little trouble - taking into account that docking in KSP isn't really designed for bases/rovers, so it's kinda fiddly. (Also: You wouldn't happen to have my KPBStoMKS pack installed, would you? It adds some visually identical - but incompatible - construction docking ports.)

I'll see if I can re-create it. It was a weird situation.

Yep. I personally use a dedicated folder for these types of patches, but you can put them anywhere. Ideally of course Angel-125 will get a chance to include it in the main mod someplace - though for that, I'd want to go through and consider all the basic contracts, and which parts from this should apply to them, not just this one contract. You could do a PR to help out. (I don't know much about contracts, and I don't really have the time at the moment.)

That's controlled by the contract's config file - each contract specifies which parts are allowed. This should be possible with just an MM config file - here's a slightly modified version of Planetary Base Systems's that should work: @Contracts { @Base { @PART_REQUEST:HAS[#Part[cupola]] { Part = WBI_Spyglass } @CREW_REQUEST[#Part[cupola]] { Part = WBI_Spyglass } } @Station { @PART_REQUEST:HAS[#Part[cupola]] { Part = WBI_Spyglass } @CREW_REQUEST[#Part[cupola]] { Part = WBI_Spyglass } } }