JadeOfMaar

I'm happy that you're satisfied with my maintenance work. It means a lot. But I cannot fathom how and why manually installing the mods makes trouble for you. If anything, you should be less exposed to problems than if you let CKAN install them. Some advice to installing these mods, and mods in general: Always delete a mod's folder from GameData to prevent the chance of files that have been renamed or removed during an update, to continue to exist alongside the files that replace them. Know where, relative to GameData, that the mod folder inside the zip file is positioned. It is likely that you accidentally placed an OPT folder inside of another mod folder which is the most obvious cause for duplicate parts and repeating patches. In CKAN, go to Settings menu -> Compatible KSP versions -> then tick the tick boxes for other KSP versions. In this situation you only want 1.9 and 1.10. Click Accept. Your OPT/CKAN troubles are now gone. Remove any mod that adds special effects to RCS ports. I assume somehow those mods are conflicting with B9 Part Switch. As far as I know, only mods that I've contributed to have configs for RCS fuel switching so this may be quite an edge case. My mod installs are very light and narrow of scope so I'll never experience for myself most of these conflicts and issues that people come up with. I assume you mean the "linear" one, not the retro, and definitely not the aerodynamic OMS. I'm not aware of an OPT RCS port with four variants. The ones that can change colors only have 2 options: gray; black.

@gilflo Yes I would recommend you use only one. They all do the exact same primary thing and they all target the same parts so you must choose one to use. If they try to operate together on the same parts, they will conflict and cause each other to do nasty things or complain very loudly. It's the same reason why you don't mix certain other kinds of mods like life support, and part failure mods. It's okay to have multiple fuel switchers installed since every other part mod has its own preference (like USI uses Firespitter, KSPI uses IFS (Interstellar Fuel Switch) and the WBI mods use WBI... but don't try to get more than one to be available in the same tank part. OPT supports as many fuel providers as it does because all of those are popular and easy to configure for, and I wanted to make it so that OPT works with your favorite fuel provider, not just mine. (Note: FS and IFS are not easy--actually quite a chore to configure for, so I don't support them).

@Tonka Crash @frozenbinary I created the patches that allow Station Parts Redux to detect EL and provide RocketParts storage. The patch does not activate, however, if MKS is present as I expected that MKS users won't care about RocketParts due to USI's heavy preference towards MaterialKits and SpecializedParts.

The only threat it brings is if you have a landed craft drilling up resources other than Ore. Some resources you've planned for may go missing and so will cripple your operations.

@alberro+ Rational Resources is optional (it is recommended, not depended on), and the same can be said of the resources that are added at random when you install CRP (as for mods like USI MKS).

@sturmhauke I'm entirely confident that it's a game bug, and a flaw of the drag cube system. A plane that is only OPT Humpback is fine, but one that has J, J-to-Humpback, and Humpback parts, will be very draggy. Moreover, Kipard's Skylon body is a fixed sequence of adapters and it has a whole new and terrible breed of drag problem with it that defies my understanding. With all my ability to tune drag cubes, I just don't get why I had to make the spoilered drag solution a thing. For an adapter, the drag cubes at the two bulkhead faces (that is, the pair of opposing drag cubes on any axis, in this case: Y+ and Y-) must have the same amount of area, however, one will be flat and the other will have some sharpness/pointy-ness due to the slope of the part. The smaller part that attaches on the small end of the adapter will have a smaller drag cube area at its bulkheads. Aaaand you see where this is going, right? The difference in drag cube areas between bulkheads is what adds up for the terrible drag effect experience.

@darthgently @DStaal @Nertea The issue of open nodes and drag is actually as follows: If the tail piece of a craft is pointy, then that's a good thing. The blunt end of a craft produces "rear drag" simply because it's a blunt face that is parallel to the airflow. If it has open nodes then these nodes provide the opportunity to attach something pointy on the end to reduce drag. Removing the node won't remove the drag but will remove the opportunity. The blunt face of the pointy part you attach on the end needs to have the same drag cube area as the blunt face of the back of the part being attached to, to be effective. In the case of an engine mount or multi-coupler, the blunt face drag areas of pointy bits attached to any number of its nodes need to add together against the drag area of the coupler. When you have non-zero AoA, the drag you will see is due to the ventral (or dorsal...or both) face of the part being exposed to the airflow. That drag is from deflection due to AoA. That's perfectly normal behavior but it will feel like a lot because either the particular part is very long, or stock aero's drag effect is excessive. If your spaceplane has cargo bays and cannot break Mach 1 then run back to the SPH and inspect: Every cargo bay. If, by chance, you attached a cargo bay by its inside node and not its outside node, then you break the cargo shielding system and suffer its side-effect of producing unholy levels of drag. If you have a cargo tail, temporarily remove it or attempt to fly with the tail open to diagnose whether its shielding may be configured in reverse to its animation (physically closed but effectively open). Anything you attached to a cargo bay but is too long to fit or is (offset) far from the center of the bay. If the center of a part is outside of this spherical silhouette of the bay, or is on the wrong side of any colliders at the ends or the walls of the bay then it is probably not shielded and is causing drag. Some players have the delusion that simply attaching something to the cargo bay makes it count as shielded. Unrelated to open nodes but still relevant to drag: If your spaceplane body has a chain of adapters (especially if it uses large bodies like OPT J to OPT Humpback, or Captain Kipard's Skylon) then it is exceptionally draggy. First-hand experience tells me that fuselage adapters and drag cube logic don't mix.

@EimajOzear I've updated the config to support (only the first mode of) multi-mode engines, such as that particular engine among those you named: the Stubber. The display name of the mode in the PAW helps to make it clear. I've also added details about the coming engines to the GitHub wiki.

@EimajOzear It took me some time overall and quite some mental processing time but I made it happen. It includes an opt-in system all you have to do is tag compatible engines. Compatible meaning it cannot be multi-mode and must have only one propellant (preferably LqdHydrogen). Welcome to the RR Nuclear Family Steps: It checks for tagged parts. It clones these parts for the Oxidating Agent variants. (And adds them under the CCK RR tab.) It modifies the sourced parts for the Reducing Agent variants. (And adds them under the CCK RR tab.) It cleans up the arrays of keys that are used for scaling thrust and Isp. The thrust and Isp values given in the B9 tool-tips are calculated by MM and so are unique for any and every engine. The config uses 3 engines from Kerbal Atomics for its demonstration.

Reconfig 2.2.0 Added KerbalChangelog support. Fixed OPTLH2O tank problem. (I hope) Updated FAR config: Added all Legacy wings. Added missing references to rotation transforms for OPT Main's elevons. DOWNLOAD :: SPACEDOCK

I updated it. The Legacy wings are all supported now. Let me know if they behave. View on GitHub. The VTOL engines aren't supported yet. I didn't think of them.

@Critter79606 I just could never see that I needed to make that particular fix. Thanks a million for spotting it. It's been generally impossible for me to see players installing Kerbal Atomics without CryoTanks.

@infinite_monkey Easily done. Should I provide this tank for the Mk3 and Mk4 Gojira bodies? ...Only the Mk4? @hemeac Resources are placed at known planets according to their chosen templates. Then resources placed by the RNG are removed in a pseudo-final pass :FOR[zRationalResources]. That leaves non-configured planets with no resources as if CRP itself was not installed. GPP and GEP have resources placed in a would-be template system that preceded RR. They are tagged (by OhioBob and at his request) that RR does not override them when installed together. So as you said, " GEP and GPP support is out of scope." I'm happy with the Grounded support too. I'll accept that.

The SFRJ has a caveat. It uses shock heating and ablation for its igniter so it needs to piggyback on something to get up to speed for that. The ion jet might will be incredibly useful, actually. I'll need to be sure of the propellant usage so it's not automatically wildly OP. With its pictured stats above, I do believe it is. Once I get that right, any craft that uses it will need to include appropriate masses in fuel cells or fission reactors. Regarding GEP's resource configs: GEP doesn't have RR configs / RR doesn't have GEP configs because I settled with @OhioBob that RR won't attempt to alter the placements made in it or GPP (which GEP originally follows after) which was the precursor project to RR. You will need to setup your RR configs as an Extras config including a patch to target the Tag values used by GEP, and delete the resource configs that use them. That said, I never considered this new idea of treating GEP as an extension to JNSQ, rather than to GPP, and so finding justification in overriding GEP's configs. If he changes his mind for this new perspective then that's good. Otherwise, it'll have to be made optional to not step on his toes.

I've started on this new [little] project, the RO config(s). It will be some time before I get far enough that I can share it for testing and feedback. Also I now understand how to measure wings for a FAR config so that can finally happen for all of the Legacy wings. And finally, I've been working on localization and moving some parts from Legacy over to Main to reduce somewhat, the need to install Legacy. After having merged some RCS parts down, I think it's time to hard deprecate some parts, so be prepared (again) for some craft files to break!

Two more concept engines are on their way: My interpretation of the highly anticipated electric jet engine, the Microwave Air Plasma Thruster. I treat it as a rocket and not a turbojet as it does not make use of ram or turbojet behaviors to produce thrust. IntakeAir/IntakeAtm usage still subject to change. And super-efficient SolidFuel Ramjet with two "Velocity Modes." Restart-able and can be throttled (down to 40%). The Airliner mode is inspired by known supersonic cruise missile tech and allows comfortable cruise speeds just under Mach 3. The primary Ascent Booster mode's specs (works up to Mach 5.6) and the whole actually cursed idea for this engine are thanks to @WarriorSabe (who also helped with the specs for the MAPT).

@GoldForest Wings and elevons that use stack nodes can't be placed in any kind of symmetry otherwise all steering input becomes roll. Benjee's wings are clearly not made to be placed in symmetry so they can get away with it. I learned this from my experiment with OPT wings. There's another spaceplane mod whose wings and elevons use stack nodes and it also manages, but those wings are composite pieces (left and right wing welded together) that attach inline, and its center of lift is in the fuselage, not in the span of the wings.

@O YEAAAAAAH Mr Crabs Technically yes I can do that. But I'm not an RO user. 2.7x with life support, pressure and gee limits, and maybe a failure mod are all the challenge I'll ever need. Considering the web of configs that is OPT Reconfig as it currently is, and my lack of knowledge of RO, I would need a detailed list of every aspect that needs to change or be newly inserted in OPT, and maybe links to the relevant reference configs on the KSP-RO GitHub for me to start.

@darwinpatrick Yes. The patch download for one mod won't contain fixes for another mod. That's how OhioBob structured them.

@Selphadur : WBI's Atmosphere resource is used by any part such as "gas turbine generators" which generate Compressed Atmosphere for WBI's air-breathing RCS. Airships/Heisenberg and Buffalo are the mods I can call with certainty. For clarification: The problem remains that while Endurance works well with Kerbalism, Ranger's trying to use Kerbalism's own resource for a reason unfitting for that resource's purpose. WBI is actually not contributing to any problems and doesn't need to be pruned. Things will only get messy if you plan to use WBI's blimp parts or air-breathing RCS. I wouldn't know the slightest about this menu for adding reactor fuel. But if it still exists, I have a good guess that it doesn't appear for crewed parts. Or maybe it's that Endurance's parts that have a fusion reactor are using WBI DSEV's unique reactor module which won't be supported by any other mods. I guess you would have been pulled in by Propellium having a higher density than LH2, making it less difficult to build ships fueled by it, and notably more mass-efficient while still getting equivalent Isp buffs of LH2 (the reasons for this are complicated). The IntakeAtm (CRP) and Atmosphere (WBI) resources are treated the same way: mainly for consumption by RCS and engines. Atmosphere (Kerbalism) is treated entirely differently. Endurance originally had no support for these and would use stock IntakeAir which is defined as breathable and is only available on worlds that have Oxygen enabled. You don't get tanks for these except for the tiny amount in parts that have the intake module. The Ranger has its own built-in intake and so needs to have that tiny tank for IntakeAir/IntakeAtm/Atmosphere.

@DoubleUU OPT (Main)'s wings have FAR support. No wings in OPT Legacy have it. The distinction is very clear, actually. Here's hoping I can count on you if I make more wings in the future. I'm well aware of demand for box wing pieces for OPT.

@DoubleUU Sorry. I don't use FAR. And I don't have the deep knowledge of lift surfaces or Blender necessary to produce FAR configs for the newer wings I've made.

I finally did this too. (Restore all-white as a variant option.) It was requested sometime ago actually. Now on GitHub. The brown is still default. Let me know if that should change as well.

oh crap. thanks for spotting that!

@EimajOzear I created not only the Extra, but RCS-ColdGas.cfg (affects the cloned parts) and RCS-Vernier.cfg (affects the vernier) which are not extras and are in GameData\RationalResourcesParts\CRP as hemeac said.