Cynor

Thanks for picking this up and making sure it's all updated/working right. Did you leave in the optional dimming stuff though in the menus? While I can understand the realism aspect, I wont lie and say that I feel like I still want the stars showing like in the older version, especially as otherwise the sky just looks kinda blah/bland to me. Doubly so when you have a custom skybox.

Hi all, I'm having a bit of an oddity that I think is user error, so I'm hopeful that maybe someone has encountered it before and can help me out. Basically I'm working on building up my first small (ok not that small really) surface base. I'm using mainly tundra parts connected with Flex Tubes to the ball anchor hubs. The issue is that even though the flex tubes seem to stay attached at first, it's extremely easy to literally knock them off the ball hubs and sometimes they just will fall off at random. This is using the "top" node and attaching it vs just dropping it. If anyone could help I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

Basically I'm having an "issue" where the dark side of things are, well, dark. But I mean pitch black no light no idea where the body is compared to you dark. I've messed around with settings in PlanetShine, even toggling it on/off, messed with ambient light levels in game options, tried another Ambient Light mods... But everything is just so dark and I have no awareness of where I am sometimes so it's annoying. So if anyone had some suggestions on a way to raise that somehow I'd appreciate it. I'm using quite a few mods and can list them all if needed, but for visuals I'm using the main combo of Scatterer, EVE, PlanetShine and then tossed on AVP and some textures from KSPRC. I made sure not to accidentally pull in EVE configs from EVE itself and just downloaded scatterer from spacedock by itself so it should be using the AVP configs. Indeed everything looks like it should judging from pictures... just again, so dark on the planets and nothing I do changes that even if I bump up things

Semi-Random but have you considered adding in an option like in stock where it takes science and turns it into funds/rep? I realize that this mod aims to totally revamp stock strategies with ones that make good sense and are more powerful, but I think that from a career mode standpoint there is a good use for the Science -> Funds/Rep strategy as eventually you just run out of things to research which makes science pointless. Even in my highly modded playthrough with CTT I'm reaching that point, and by the time I get out to another body (likely Duna) I know I'll be finishing it up with many bodies left to explore.

Thanks for the explanations, I'm going to guess that's what happened as I know I'm starting to use the Salamander a bit for landers (I like the looks of it) and don't think I dropped one on The Mun yet. Also I was reading the Wiki and did notice the bonus, but for some reason my brain decided that 100%2 was equal to 1*2 Obviously not how that works, but try telling a brain that's half asleep how to do math! Though oddly enough I worked a lot of the other math right rofl. Well due to my OCD I guess there's only one thing to do. To The Mun! With a Salamander.

Hey all, I'm having a bit of a weird problem(?) that I'm hoping can be worked out. I'm not sure if it's something I did, a mod conflict, or some kind of weird bug (possibly the thing mentioned above with Kopernicus, though I'm not sure where/how/what effect deleting the game option settings would have)... Basically for some reason Minmus has 100% in Geology, Botany, and Kolonization in the Kolonization Dashboard. While this doesn't seem bad, the issue is that I've really done nothing that should contribute to this. In fact, due to how close it is, The Mun is further ahead in things like Resource/SCANSat scans and crewed landings (I've only landed on Minmus once). However The Mun isn't listed at all in my Kolonization Dashboard. The only thing different about Minmus is I have a contract from the Bases and Station contract pack to scan for a base location on Minmus and I've already looked at potential sites with the resource overlay and used Waypoint Manager to mark one. At the end of the day a headstart like that may not be the worse thing for learning the ropes and production chains, but it still feels like I should fix it somehow and prevent it from happening again.

No. It's 4x small com sats for my minmus network. It looks a little funky because due to some glitch/mod conflict (or maybe setting I don't know about) the truss/interstage stuff for the default fairings don't work. So I'm using procedural fairings and their interstage nodes work for attachment/stacking, but you don't get the nice truss.

Here are a few images I took from a mission I'm running right now. Kind of hard to show off the whole thing, but this should give a general idea.

Good idea! TBH I haven't messed kerbnet much yet, but that seems like a great idea for a starting point. I also like to fly all my stuff at either 80 or 100k depending, so maybe I could make one for each and then if i'm between that for a rescue or something can go between them for a good point.

You may have already figured this out, but if you use the old texture replacer and copy the files from AVP > Skybox over to texture replacer > default you should be able to get both any of the KSPRC textures working you want while still maintaining the skybox. Note that I haven't installed any of the KSPRC textures just yet, but I have gotten the skybox used in AVP working with (what I'm 99% sure is) the old texture replacer this way.

A little after that post I actually did make a totally vanilla/stock/zero mod (not even kerbal engineer or trajectories) just to be sure. I had the same fireworks display in the sky that I've come to know and love. HOWEVER! Well... derp! I feel really silly now for trying to have the nose around 0-5 deg (that's how I read the shallow decent thing) and this totally fixed all the issues. I did overshoot the main runway the first time, coulda landed at the island rofl, but at least I'm not exploding now which lets me figure out where to put the node, where the lines go, etc. I'll be trying your suggestion on where to deorbit and see how that works. Thanks!

You're not 100% wrong there, and indeed that is the easy solution I may use, but ideally I'd like to find/write a patch that adds the option to toggle between the two. There is one for Interstellar Fuel Switch posted earlier, but one for B9 would be nice since I'm not 100% sure if that is in my mod list atm and I know B9 is.

Hey all, I'm recently coming back to KSP after a bit of a break and getting myself back into trying to use these crafts (especially the SSTOs) as I really like the design. However note the "trying" part... I'm having a pretty hard time with actually landing the Space Plane, specifically the SR-21A, and I'm not 100% sure where I'm going wrong. Every time I try to land it it ends in a fiery explosion due to the cockpit going critical. I've tried to keep the angle super low, under 5 degrees on Nav Ball, but the results seem to be the same every time. Although I am using mods, admittedly a decent chunk of them (though I've seen more highly modified versions), I don't believe any change the spaceplane parts or re-entry heat. The fact I can get to orbit just fine 100% of the time seems to confirm this for me too. So this really makes me wonder what is going on and if anyone could help I'd appreciate it. I should note here that it's quite possible I'm not setting up the de-orbit burn correctly here, it's been forever since I flew a spaceplane period, and even then I wasn't the best. Right now I'm using the Trajectories mod to line up the marker over the KSC, but I'm not 100% sure how well that plays with spaceplanes since I believe that does put my PE into the planet. I'll try some other de-orbit burns later, but if anyone could assist before then it'd be appreciated.

So I'm trying to figure out a way to make ONLY the LV-N use LF due to breaking some old designs, especially SSTOs, and so I'd also be interested in this. I've actually started to dig around and trying to edit this, but am not having much luck. While I'm not a wiz by any stretch with MM and B9 Part Switch, but I imagine something could be cobbled together by looking at code for various parts like the Cryo Engines/Tanks to figure out how to add B9 to it possibly... I've found where the change to the LV-N happens is located, but I'm not 100% sure if it is as simple as copying over a few lines from the fuel tanks and stock LV-N cfg to make it work or not.

Ooooohhh! I'm going to echo a ton of people and say thanks for reviving this! Though now I'm so torn between this and SVE cause both look great. However after playing awhile with this I do have a small request. Do you think it would be possible to tune down the lightning strikes somehow? I feel like they are happening way too quickly and it would be nice to slow them down

I'm not sure if it will help or not, but if you're on 1.3 try going into the contract pack and changing REQUIREMENT { name = PartModuleTypeUnlocked type = PartModuleTypeUnlocked partModuleType = Antenna partModuleType = Power } to REQUIREMENT { name = PartModuleTypeUnlocked type = PartModuleTypeUnlocked partModuleType = Antenna partModuleType = Generator } In the individual contracts themselves. This line is normally right near the bottom. I had an issue when I did a fresh install of 1.3 with Remote Tech, this pack + Config that was fixed by this, however that was contracts refusing to show up in general so I'm not sure if this will work or not.

Hopefully this is the right place to post this, it may belong more in the remotetech contract pack thread, but I figured it may help here too. I just updated to 1.3 and decided to start a new playthrough with a clean install of everything and (maybe) less (or at least different) mods. However while most contract packs that use this seem to be working fine (at least , for some reason the remote tech one seems to be pretty borked. Only two are "offered", though I don't meet the requirements, and they are com networks for Ike and Gilly which seem really random. In looking at the output_log I noticed that it was saying things about When I changed REQUIREMENT { name = PartModuleTypeUnlocked type = PartModuleTypeUnlocked partModuleType = Antenna partModuleType = Power } to REQUIREMENT { name = PartModuleTypeUnlocked type = PartModuleTypeUnlocked partModuleType = Antenna partModuleType = Generator } All of the missing ones immediately showed up. Also in regards to those getting instant fails, this may be part of the reason as I was able to accept the base communication ones no issue.

Can we get those numbers scaled up to where a Kerbal is around 2m tall though? You know, for perspective Joking aside, no I do I get it and think it's a good idea. Again you're totally right in it's not really that different than the "grumpout" grace period. But again my point is that because it IS the same idea as the supplies grace period, wouldn't you expect it to be the same time period like @damerell says?

@voicey99 I did think it was something more on the USI-LS type thing, but since that really deals more with supplies I thought I'd post here. That said, I fully understand how things are calculated and how it all works. My point was simply that it seems very odd that the timers are different. If I launch a mission knowing I have 15 days of "supplies" (read starving) because that's the way the mod was designed, I'm expecting the same for Habitation by default. I'm not expecting to have to go through and modify settings like @danielboro mentions so I can actually still just launch a MK-1 Command Pod to Minmus and get it back.

I'm not 100% sure if this is the right place to ask or if it's more of a USI-LS type thing, but I was watching a youtube video earlier today that raised up some questions/interesting things with how Habitation works. To be precise I noticed that the way things are setup by default Kerbals can "starve" for 15 days before the ill effects take place. This was done, if I remember right, to allow for missions within Kerbin's SOI to be completed without problems. However the base/stock pods only seem to offer 7 days of Habitation without any modifying parts or extra modules. This seems to be extremely counter-intuitive to the idea of allowing for missions within Kerbin's SOI to be completed without problems if you can't even get TO Minmus (I think it takes around 9 days generally? Been a little since I went there) without running out of Habitation time by default. While I realize this can be changed in settings, it does seem weird.

Loving all these crafts, especially the SSTO stuff. I've always had an ok grasp of SSTOs/Space Planes but the DV and how many engines and stuff needed for orbit always just flubbers me some, so something like this is awesome for me. However I do have one small question that is giving some pause that maybe someone can answer. Namely how friendly are these designs to small tweaks of certain things. For example I normally don't like using fuel cells/RTGs and just use solar panels, but it seems like most of the designs don't use solar panels. Another consideration I have to make is that while I don't use many* mods I am using life support (TAC-LS atm but moving to USI soon) so need to factor in that. *Well more so many mods that radically change systems as I do run a few part packs and utility mods

Wow that was a quick update lol. Everything seems to be working pretty well now too, I loaded up the admin building and had a new base scan contract which is nice. However there may be an issue with something still as almost immediately the supply run I had available (which I think had a few days left to accept) cancelled out and a medical emergency popped up. However then in the process of alt-tabing and starting to type this post (maybe 1m) I wanted to go check something in-game for this post and the medical went away to a crew rotation. The crew rotation seems to be stable now, so it could have just been a hiccup on the upgrade but I thought I should mention it just in case.

So I know the general basis behind making and flying/landing them to a degree, but at the same time I know I'm missing a lot. For example designing my own feels sluggish/"standard" (aka following a design like from Scott Manley). I also struggle to figure out good flight plans and how much fuel to include for said flight. Oh and landing at the KSC (or even with the nose up) seems to be an issue with my designs atm. For example one I have I can get to orbit by basically staying at about 10 degrees the whole time, but if I throttle down to avoid some mach/heat effects I don't have enough fuel left. If I stay at mostly full throttle I get up and circularized around 80k with about 400 DV (4x rapiers) leftover. However I almost blow up the MK2 cockpit in the process, the temp gauge bar get so close to the end I feel like there are less than 10 pixels left. Other than that it flies and lands pretty well, though I feel it may be nose heavy when empty as I had to do a fairly steep dive to be able to get enough speed/lift to pull the nose up for landing. Not to mention knowing where exactly to aim for the deorbit... last time I wound up in the far desert despite aiming for the sea past the KSC with my orbit path. Anyways, the point/end of this is I'm wondering how everyone else likes to do things like design spaceplanes, fly them in terms of ascent paths, etc.

Glad to know that that is the reason and in future I should either just reject it or do it. Also glad I could be of help with the finding a couple things to look at.

That may be it then. While I didn't accept it (or decline it) I do have the supply run offered to me at the moment. It literally popped up right after finishing the first so I was like "meh don't need this just yet".