revolioclockbergjr

Thanks for this. I came here with the same problem thinking it was a bug of some kind.

I think this is a major source of confusion -- certainly was for me. And it further distinguishes USI-LS from TAC. TAC is utterly predictable, and recycling its resources is simple and clearly documented. USI's documentation is catching up (THANKS ALL). But USI/MKS is largely about resource conversion; USI-LS forces the use of recyclers for missions, whereas TAC's simplicity encourages bringing more of the resources in the first place. Recyclers are an additional layer of abstraction/complexity a user has to learn about, very early on. So I'd say TAC is "easier" in most ways in that it requires... 1 part added to a ship, basically, until you leave the starting system. I mean, I'm highly motivated and basically live in this thread now, and I still only half understand the calculations in this set of mods. Of course, the complexity contributes to the appeal! Actually, if you guys could walk through how one might calculate life support stuff for an example base, what with efficiency and all other effects, I'd really appreciate it!

See direct comparison of TAC and USI-LS requirements: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/154587-122-modular-kolonization-system-mks/&do=findComment&comment=2941908

Now that the USI Kolonization toolbar button texture is correct, I can never find it. Purple square was ugly, sure, but it was highly visible! also i fear change

That will make it much easier to initialize a sustainable ColonySupplies system. Interesting! Thanks for all the work you're putting into this, RoverDude. Truly a joy to explore what you've built.

Thanks, that's helpful. Think I can just edit something in the save file? This is a huge base with every industral tundra module, and I don't want to rebuild the whole thing :C

Thanks! edit: Nope, still doing it, even after updating from 0.50.12 to current.

I have a single Tundra Ag Support using all its bays to convert Hydrates to Water. It is running now at 1362% load. I have an attached Ranger Workshop in efficiency mode with a 2-star engineer. If I activate the workshop its load is 358% and after a couple seconds the Ag Support module's load jumps to 34000% (34 thousand). My base's electricity suddenly drops at a rate of 7000/s. Is that kind of load normal? I can't supply enough EC to handle the workshop's boost of a single Tundra module.... and the base has all of them. Halp

There are no direct conversion parts for TAC to/from USI-LS. Both sets of requirements have to be met independently. I play with tons of mods, many of which offer TAC integration, or USI-LS integration.. And most mod authors don't expect someone to play with multiple life support mods. But I've not seen any real conflicts. If a parts mod has converters that work with TAC or USI-LS, those parts end up with converter-modules for both systems. And usually both can be activated at the same time. Frankly I expected it to be more of a challenge using multiple life support mods, and I did it mostly as an experiment. I tend to build more unmanned missions than I probably would without the LS mods, but very little else has changed. See if reloading fixes it. Quicksave & quickload. I haven't done empirical tests, but I have noticed crossfeed of some resources behaving differently after a reload, if I've been KIS/KAS modifying the craft.

I play with both USI-LS and TAC. They overlap in a roleplaying sense, but honestly TAC demands so little in comparison to USI-LS that it's borderline irrelevant. TAC, one kerbal one year, not counting EC: 443.5kg USI-LS, one kerbal one year, not counting EC: 7,370kg

That's got to be it!

I think I'm doing something wrong. I'm new to EL stuff. I have a KD Launchsite attached via KIS to the ground near a MobileVAB. I can't get it to show up in the GUI. All I ever see is "no sites found". Halp!

That was worth the google search. Possible bug, maybe someone else can test? I have an engineer in the Ranger Workshop. Every time she enters/leaves, her inventory vanishes. The workshop has eaten 4 drills and a bunch of EVA monoprop canisters. Seems to only be the case for the workshop.

Well, that is terrible news... guess I have to hack my save file to create a new Lode in that spot. No way I can move that base. edit: I could turn the base into a sandcrawler, but that'll take funds I don't have right now in my career :C And the nearest lode is 13km away

I have a Resource Lode issue which I have not seen addressed anywhere. I set up a mining base directly next to a Resource Lode on Minmus. I used KAS to put a Flex-O-Tube on my base and another on the Resource Lode. I connected them. Mining the Lode worked fine this way while the base was active. However, after I save/quit/reload the game and switch to the mining base, the Resource Lode is gone. The physical rock-like object is not present, and the Flex-O-Tube is just floating where it was attached to the Lode. In my persistent.sfs file, I see the Lode is treated as a DockedVessel of the Flex-o-Tube, as expected: DOCKEDVESSEL { vesselName = Resource Lode vesselType = Unknown rootUId = 3307739756 } I'm guessing that the Flex-o-Tube is not the preferred method of connecting to the Lode, and that is the cause of this problem. If that is the case, could we get a bit of documentation or further explanation of proper connection methods? Is the stock grappler the only way to go? Would the grappler-like parts in IR function properly? I'm playing a heavily modded game but I think the relevant ones are KIS and KAS, in addition to the full USI Constellation pack.

Wow, this is gonna be helpful!

Could you describe this part's use a bit more? It makes a big red cube recycling area, where we can land ships and move rovers and stuff and have it be recycled? Does it happen immediately upon entering the cube? Excited to play with it, just don't understand how it operates.

Lookin good!

Can you folks share your math or spreadsheets or whatever accurate system you've got going for sustainable bases? e: also more (moar) base & station pics

Oh there's no way I could have overl-- okay yeah crossfeed. Somewhere. THANKS for that! Ended up just moving the tank right up next to the greenhouses. But I share this screenshot because I docked a kerbal on EVA into the claw. This game is so wonderful sometimes I weep tears of joy.

Another question for you folks: it looks like I have a couple Ranger Ag modules in Cultivate(S) mode that say they're missing water. But I have lots of water. I have the best water.

I am also having recycler math problems. But I'm playing with tons of mods and this is my first time with USI/MKS, so my first thought is that I'm just doing things wrong. Here's my math workflow -- I would love to have this truly figured out! Intending for this to be copy/pastable into someone's own notes, leaving the bold stuff and filling in the rest for their own situation. ~~~~~~~ HOW TO MINIMIZE YOUR SUPPLIES USAGE: This worksheet tells you how many recyclers you need on your vessel to achieve the lowest rate of supplies consumption. ALL VALUES PER SECOND UNLESS SPECIFIED Set a headcount goal: 30 kerbals, in orbit, not dead, for a while. Identify the vessel's most efficient recycler (see: Recycler Math on USI-LS wiki): Tundra 3.75 Habitation Module, in Recycler mode, for efficiency of 86.5%, covering 4 kerbals. Determine the life support "floor" (theoretical supplies consumed if ALL kerbals were covered by the most efficient recycler, above). This is the lowest rate of supplies consumption possible on this vessel: kerbal_headcount * consumption_rate * ( 1 - highest_efficiency ) = floor 30 * 0.0005 * ( 1 - 0.865 ) = 0.002025 supplies/second floor = 0.002025 supplies/second Determine the life support "baseline" (theoretical supplies consumption if the most efficient recycler were the only one present). This is the rate of supplies consumption after considering the effect of the best recycler, but with no additional mitigation: best_recycler_coverage * consumption rate * ( 1 - highest_efficiency ) + ( kerbal_headcount - best_recycler_coverage ) * consumption_rate = baseline 4 * 0.0005 * ( 1 - 0.865 ) + ( 30 - 4 ) * 0.0005 = 0.013 supplies/second baseline = 0.013 supplies/second Subtract the floor value from the baseline value. This represents the rate of supplies consumption that you can mitigate with additional recyclers. baseline - floor = best_possible_mitigation 0.013 - 0.002025 = 0.010975 supplies/second best_possible_mitigation = 0.010975 supplies/second Divide that value by the mitigation provided one RT-500 recycler part. This represents the number of additional RT-500 recyclers you'll need on the vessel to hit the "floor," or lowest possible consumption rate. best_possible_mitigation / RT500_rate = RT500s_needed 0.010975 / 0.0003 = 37 recyclers needed <-- round up ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This follows precisely the math from the wiki, but that may be outdated for all I know. Also, I haven't accounted for efficiency -- I don't know how efficiency math works at all. What I do know is, my station with 30 kerbals sees no benefit from the 37 RT-500 recyclers and 3.75 Tundra Hab Recycler on board. Supplies consumption appears to ignore them entirely. My cargo pilots are whining about the extra supplies shipments, but all I care about is whether my math makes sense.

HEROIC, sir. No amount of googling or use of this forum's search function revealed that to me. Thanks so much!

I'm unable to transmit science from a Joint Experiments Module. It's full of science, and I get the transmitting status messages, and the transmission complete message, but no science leaves the JEM or appears in my science pool. Known bug? I have a billion mods so it's possibly an interaction.

I'm not clear on the current status of this project. Could someone explain the features currently available/unavailable, compared to "old" KAS/KIS? Obviously this is still in development. I just can't tell if I should switch to the beta or wait a bit longer.