Darinth

If you (or anybody else) wants these, they weren't generated in the most scientific of methods (I used the limited knowledge of geometry and trig to calculate conservative guesses based on in-game observable size comparisons), but these should be reasonable if a bit conservative guesses on the capacities for the bi/tri/quad couplers and the mini-to-small and large-to-huge adapters.

MKS 0.50.18 indicate that the MPS processing rates for fuel were increased, however the configs don't appear to have actually changed. MPS still processes ore > LFO at a 5:1 ratio, not 1:2. Am I misunderstanding the patch notes or did a change that was intended to be made never actually made?

Can be safely ignored for now. Taniwah will get around to fixing it at some point, hopefully is just a recompile.

Also won't quite do what I'm looking for if I'm reading it right. It can't actually throttle a vessel up; it simply changes the throttle limits of engines. Meaning that a vessel that is already throttled down still won't fire it's engines.

While I know enough about coding in general that I could probably make this work, I'd really prefer not to have to go through trying to learn another modding API, etc... I was hoping this would be a simple enough part that it would be something you'd be willing to entertain making yourself. I understand if the answer is no. I never get upset with a modder who doesn't want to take on more work at somebody's request. <3 Ohh wow. I wasn't aware that mechjeb even had options to activate certain controls in response to staging or action groups. That's awesome. How does tweakable everything have capabilities for setting throttle? I'm looking at the thread, it doesn't seem to have anything related to setting throttle. o.O

Would you be willing to entertain the idea of parts that when staged or activated by an action group executed a vessel control action, such as activating SAS or setting throttle to a specific value?

I was just watching a couple of youtube videos on kOS and they were also using smart parts. I could almost do everything I want with smart parts, I just wish it had throttle/SAS controls.

I wasn't awere of kRPC. Thank you for pointing me towards it, if only for informational purposes. While both of these would technically work, I was hoping for something that involved writing less script. It's not that I can't (it's actually my job) , it's more that I was hoping to avoid the need for writing scripts when it really felt like an 'advanced staging' system could easily fit the bill. Ohh well. I'll probably poke at least at kOS, possibly at kRPC. Thank you once again for the suggestions.

I'm constantly annoyed by the lack of the staging system. Don't get me wrong, it does the basics fairly well... but there's way more that I feel needs to be available for staging... like... everything. Is there a mod available that A: makes everything that can be assign to action groups available for staging, B: even more (such as throttle control, SAS control, etc...)? As an example, I recently wanted to put a pair of backwards facing twitches on my orbital stage such that when I reached orbit I could stage that section and have it automatically deactivate the main engine, point prograde, activate the twitches, decouple, throttle up the decoupled craft, and make sure that the decoupled craft had SAS set to hold prograde. This kind of thing is a fairly regular occurrence for me. I can often make due with action groups, but even action groups can't do things like setting SAS or throttle (let alone setting them on decoupling stages).

Sorry, wrong topic. This can be safely deleted.

Sounds like some awesome new stuff! Orbital space station construction sounds awesome. Look forward to being able to play with it.

I knew the panel was a snapshot of it's predictions, I just wanted to make sure the USI wasn't actually going to take any actions based on those predictions. So as long as when I switch back to the colony/vessel and it performs it's catch-up processing everything is fine, EC and supplies displayed on the panel are functionally irrelevant.

Also, to what extent can this be ignored? My base actually has plenty of power. Will my base equipment (such as kerbitats, recyclers, etc...) continue to function normally when the LS panel's 2d2h runs out? Will my kerbals stay active and working when the LS panel 2d2h life support runs out? What about when the 15 days runs out?

I'm trying to understand where the EC number is coming from, make sure that my USI:LS is working properly, and determine to what extent the EC number on the Life Support Status panel can be ignored. I have a mun base with 4650 EC available (4x 400 batteries, 2 Duna modules with 1000 each, 1 ranger power pack, one mk1 command pod). That base has 4 solar panels and a scout-200 power pack. Enough power to meet all of it's EC demands both in the day and night. My Life Support Status panel shows only 2 days of life support and indeed if I go over 2 days without refocusing the base, the life support panel shows out of EC and begins the 15 day count down till my kerbals go on strike. Increasing or decreasing electrical demand doesn't seem to change how long my EC will last. Turning on and off electric-consuming items such as the various habitats updates the LS panel with new habitation times/supply times, but doesn't impact the EC times. Nor does increasing or decreasing my electrical generation. If I remove the solar panels during the day, I still only seem to have 2d of EC. Adding/removing batteries does seem to effect it, roughly proportionally to the amount of battery power I add/remove. Is this normal behavior? If so, am I missing something to increase my max EC beyond just increasing the amount of EC storage on site? This doesn't seem to be operating correctly to me for some reason. Are the EC calculations really not supposed to take into account any electrical generation/consumption and just be displaying an amount based on you max available EC?

I'm relatively certain that neither a wrench nor a screwdriver is actually sufficient for about 95% of the work that I do with KIS. I'm assembling space ships using parts that almost always have to be hermetically sealed together in order to allow things like the crew transfer capabilities. I've always assumed the wrench/screwdriver to be representative of a 'wider variety of tools' needed to perform these tasks. With that said, I considered recommending additional requirements like more advanced tools or higher level engineers to perform the assemblies, but it seemed like too much work for such a simple concept. And I'm actually running a patch atm which simply multiplies all KIS storage volumes by 4 to accommodate this, but I do actually like the physics realism and don't like to accidentally do things like store MKS modules full of machinery on accident. Thus is why I'm here.

Now that I look back at my post... I guess I a very key point in the concept. My apologies. The idea is to have the option to store disassembled parts in KIS containers to reduce their volume. Lots of parts in KSP if disassembled would become a lot smaller in terms of volume. The parts which would be impacted the most are tanks and other storage containers. An assembled tank has enough volume to accommodate all of it's contents, a disassembled tank could reasonably have in excess of 90% volume reduction. A lot of other items could benefit from similar reductions, but even many items like pods could receive fairly reasonable volume reductions by storing them as 'disassembled' parts.

Any chance of the ability to store KIS inventory items 'disassembled'? I.E. an empty tank could in theory be disassembled into components that could be field-constructed to produce a complete tank. Should only be able to be done with empty parts. Right now I'm actually increasing by a massive amount KIS inventories in order to accomplish this, but that has the side-effect of allowing me to store containers full of items/materials inside of containers. It's easy enough for me to simply not abuse this most of the time, but I occasionally learn that I've benefited from it unknowningly when I put something in a KIS container that comes prestocked with materials I didn't realize it had. I'd be fine with it taking engineers to 'assemble'. It still seems odd though that in many cases I'd rather just attach the things I want to send to a rocket the old fashioned way when I have these nice containers specifically designed to deliver parts to locations.

In case you run into the same issue as myself, the github zip releases do not contain AT_Utils/Configurable Containers. I was still running on the old versions of those which prevented the parts from getting most (all?) of their modules. Easily fixed by updating those mods.