voicey99

If it's crashing on start then you're trying to use 1.2 mods in 1.3, which will never go well. What's the stated crew capacity for those observation windows?

The hab multiplier is only reduced if you are over capacity on the multiplier modules. While each module may have different multipliers, all multipliers and capacities will stack with each other (so if you have a part with 2x mult for 3 kerbs and a part with 3x mult for 5 kerbs you can support up to 8 kerbs all getting a 5x mult before the division kicks in). Normally the total habtime is simply divided by the kerbs on board-in your instance, the habtime per kerbal would still be (10y*10)/10=10yrs per kerb. The LS tab in the VAB shows the calcs involved.

if you're over the crew capacity for a hab multiplier part it multipliess your multiplier by [crewcap/current crew], so if you have 5 kerbs on a multiplier part rated for 4, the hab multiplier will be multiplied by 4/5=0.8x prev mult.

I was messing around with @RoverDude's Sounding Rockets, trying to get one to Kerbin escape velocity and suddenly realised-why not go the whole hog and fly one to another planet? I took this monster of an SRB stack... ...and landed it on Duna. I could probably have got further than that but, quite frankly, I've impressed myself enough by having the precision (it is made entirely of SR parts, no LF engine, other mod or even vanilla pieces in sight-that means no radial decouplers!) to get it to Duna. And the whole thing only cost 14,287 too.

It's a new mechanic so chances are nobody's added it to the wiki just yet-feel free to edit the relevant section or wait for the usual suspects (dboi, dstaal, notthebobo etc.) to do it. P.S. where are those gold-backed solar panels from?

The life support timer only calculates the time left based on how many supplies/EC the craft has and does not account for how much fertiliser (1 fertiliser is worth 10 supplies) you have (despite this being the most commonly requested feature on the LS thread) or power production. When you load your vessel, it triggers the catchup mechanism to give you the supplies/EC produced while you were away, refilling the containers and resetting the LS timers. The 6h of storage refers to the fact that catchup works by giving you your backlogged production in 6h chunks, and if your vessel has <6h of storage then it won't run the full processing cycle from that chunk since you don't have anywhere to put it-this is only an issue on bases dedicated to producing stuff and pushing it to PL for storage. At the end of each chunk, a full kontainer will push to PL and empty itself ready for the next batch-you should actually have >12h of storage since kontainers only empty down to half full when pushing to PL. Orbital stations cannot use PL, but a new and improved Orbital Logistics system (station↔station, station↔surface and planet↔planet transfers) will be making a return in the near-ish future.

@Roschnicron What I mean by that is (I believe) the percentage full they are of machinery acts as a production multiplier (so if it is 3/4 full production is multiplied by 0.75). An engineer can go out on EVA and activate a function to 'pull' machinery from containers on the vessel and others within 150m into the part to refill it or simply add a ranger/tundra workshop or assembly plant and, as long as an engineer is on board, it will automatically perform that task once per day on all parts for you.

I'm going to make a concerted effort to fill in all the gaps by adding missing biomes and exps that have nothing/only generics defined (stock+USI). This will probably take me a few days but it's going to result in seeing a lot less defaults (everything except the Station Science and DMOS experiments-if I ever get round to using them, I'll fill them in too). EDIT: ...the fact that I'm writing at least one unique report for every experiment in every situation in every biome including the new ones with somewhat limited time makes this a much longer-term project lasting weeks, possibly even months. Still, I'll be working on it behind the scenes until it's done and when it is, be ready for a massive pull request. PROGRESS LOG: MOHO: TO DO EVE: TO DO ---GILLY: TO DO KERBIN: COMPLETE ---MUN: IN PROGRESS ---MINMUS: TO DO DUNA: COMPLETE ---IKE: COMPLETE DRES: TO DO JOOL: TO DO ---LAYTHE: TO DO ---VALL: TO DO ---TYLO: TO DO ---BOP: TO DO ---POL: TO DO EELOO: TO DO

I can preempt the inevitable 'no, it'll be a support nightmare'. Just delete the DLL so you don't have to mess with texturepaths, but this might cause error spam and the animations on the habring won't work without the DLL (SXT has an alternative habring, but it doesn't look as good) plus so many other potential issues that plaster this in computer health warnings. Don't expect any support if you do that.

I game MKS a pretty comprehensive overview here, the section you are looking for is in the 5th paragraph after the chart. I believe the '10000' default setting for effmult is just an arbitrary number, divide by 10K to get the relative efficiency multiplier. This likely is a production multiplier for all MKS converters and drills, but I've never messed with it. See TauPhraim's post.. @JadeOfMaar Instructional video on how to use it here, link to the spreadsheet (works best in google docs) is in the desc. It also happens to be the first result on google.

It doesn't have a special RSS cfg-does it need one? It has some for some of the other RO mods though (CLS, DRE, FilterExt, RemTech, TAC-LS and KAS plus a few more non-RO mods). If you write any patches for one of the mods not yet integrated, be sure to refer to the balance guidelines (watch the instructional video, and download the doc in the desc). Help is always appreciated so it would be great if you could pull them into the github repo if you feel like sharing them (if you don't know how, send them to me and I'll do it for you).

Airbags have their limits. They will soften your landing for when you're going slightly too fast, but they can't land you on their own (unless it's Eve and terminal vel is walking pace).

Are there no unique reports for new biomes because they're incompatible, or they just haven't been written yet? If it's the latter I'll write some to bring the mod up to speed.

Airbags can make your craft massively unstable aerowise when inflated and they are often used in conjunction with chutes, meaning an autodeploy would both be unnecessary and potentially dangerous. I don't think even a hefty airbag will save you from smashing into the ground at 135mph. The 500m/s rating is purely nominal, at high speeds the deceleration g-forces will clip your craft into the ground or itself and destroy it anyway. They are good for final landings, but it's best use them in conjunction with a chute, even if just a drogue. The heavier the ship, the slower landing velocity the airbags can take before g-induced clipping wrecks your craft.

To add, MKS' EPL patch is not officially supported, so it may not work properly.

I think the distinction between turboprops and propfans is that in turboprops the propeller is the intake fan, and in propfans the blades are more directly coupled to the turbine axle and are *always* counter-rotating, and the blades are built into the nacelle as opposed to hanging off the front of a gearbox. I see your point, but to me the alcubierre is still bad physics and shouldn't exist. Can we put this storm in a teacup to rest now? We can call it what we want. I described how the mass-efficiency system equates above, but check out the balance spreadsheet (and instructional video) and plug in the numbers. Assuming your crash tolerance is 50m/s and you have no crew slots, a 70% recycler for 8 crew should only weigh 3.388t.

I'd rather not add 42 at 60% (since there are so few situations that would need to support such a massive population), but it's more of proof-of-concept to show that this approach is viable. The mass added by each additional % uses a slab system, so each additional % from 0-50 adds 1kg to the mass, from 51-60 it adds 5kg, from 61-70 it adds 25kg, from 71-80 it adds 100kg, from 81-95 it adds 500kg and from 96-100 it adds 100kg. Excluding the mass added for crew slots (0.1t per slot), the crew affected mult (a simple multiplier) and the crash tolerance mult (±5% for each m/s away from 8), a 100% recycler would weigh a minimum of 9.35t. EC/s also follows a similar slab system (except no dip in cost at the end).

The spreadsheet says it should weigh 0.119t, so it almost does. The law of diminishing returns applies strongly with USI-LS recyclers, since adding 1% to 60% adds a LOT more weight than adding 1% to 50%. The big SXT cabin can support 42 kerbs at 60% for 21.5EC/s

According to the guidelines I can do 63.5% for 20 kerbs in a 5t part for 21.25EC/s. That good enough?

The Orca has an excellent recycler for 6 kerbals, but it's really heavy. I can amend my SXT patch again to turn the big orbital hab into a 73.5%/6-person or 70%/12-person recycler if you want. What about Deimos (if that's in RSS)? I consider it cheaty (as the AD is a piece of very contentious and highly theoretical science), but I don't whinge about it-I just don't use it myself. I'll refer to it as 'highly speculative warp drive' from now on, then.

As you may have picked up in the past, I do try to avoid it in favour of more traditional methods. I guess it's a little more important in RSS.

THERE IS NO KILL LIKE OVERKILL! How many kerbs can that thing support indefinitely? How much ΔV has it got (excluding the cheat drive)? I usually stick a stock cupola on the end of the Orca for a tiny bit more hab and to avoid the unsightly adaptor frame. The habrings also seem to act as wheels-if only they were flywheels too.

I also saw you buffed the turbofan ISP-they really needed that to compete at all with the other engines. I'd have pulled it in as well if you hadn't done it.

I was a little busy with landing it so I didn't take any. Luckily for you, I had a backup save from which to re-enact it more or less the same way. As you can see, the left wing has no gear. I don't know where I lost it but I took off by flying off the edge of the ice wall so it might have clipped the side. In this instance, as with the original, the plane hit the water at an angle so the left wing got shredded on contact, pinwheeling the plane enough to wreck the front section and (very fragile) engine and take a chunk out of the right wing too.

I was doing a science mission to the south pole and flew all the way back to final approach at KSC before realising I had lost one of the three sets of landing gear on takeoff and was now stranded in the air like the very first episode of Thunderbirds. Unlike that show however, after several failed landing attempts, I realised the only way I was getting down was to pull a water belly landing in an aircraft with a 60m/s stall speed. It was going to be hairy. Needless to say, not all the parts survived the resulting Miracle on Booster Bay, but Val and Henzon are alive-if a little shaken. The loss of the expensive engine, more expensive nosecone sensor and most of the left wing will be overlooked in light of their piloting skill.