TBenz

Some people without dual monitor setups took extreme issue with the suggestion that Intercept "waste" any amount of development time on a feature they wouldn't use.

I believe this came up before, and if I recall correctly, the answer was 'out of scope'. Due to the way USI and SystemHeat both handle converters, compatibility between the two requires significantly more than just a patch. Nobody has tackled that issue yet, as far as I am aware.

Another option is to bring some small chemical engines or suitable RCS for making fine adjustments.

I know who not to ask for legal advise. ALWAYS CYA.

Truly glorious.

It should be possible to install both Restock and Restock+ then delete all the restock patches and whitelist all the stock patches. That's a quick and dirty way to do it, and would cause your game to load ALL the stock and restock assets when it won't be using most of the Restock stuff. But it should work and not require a ton of jumping through hoops and testing.

It appears it was intentionally removed back in 2017. https://github.com/post-kerbin-mining-corporation/StationPartsExpansionRedux/commit/d5815a646e56631284ffeaaccea6a7bd1f61ea2d#diff-ba7de6ff63c9a0fde898a50882762103cd32df0b39fd2625793c11324bc8bc88

My guess is that the Science Lab has an integrated telescope, and the part on the right is a standalone version for when you want to run that experiment without lugging a 5m lab across the kerbolar system. Then the part on the left is a small greenhouse part for when you need just a little bit of snacks. 1.875m form factor, presumably?

One thing I've seen done for parts without proper IVAs is to just create a solid black IVA cube inside the part and place the kerbals in there. That way you can at least see their portraits. When mods don't include any IVA at all then the Kerbal portraits won't show up, which is annoying. I've also seen mods reuse existing IVAs from other parts, the Mk3 passenger module could be a stand-in for anything less than16 kerbals. Loving it. This looks to be more of a living area, in contrast to the sleeping quarters focus on the PXL-2 Shelter (flat 3.75 hab)?

I squealed like a schoolgirl when I saw this. Absolutely gorgeous.

Thinking further, I believe you are correct. My mistake was in assuming that the reactor could "under heat" the propellant should it not be outputting enough energy to heat it all and maintain core temp, but now that I consider it, I'm not sure that is possible in a practical NTR.

My thermodynamics are pretty rusty, but I think that's correct behavior. The reactor power setting indicates how much energy over time (power) it is generating that can be transferred to the propellant to increase ISP. The core temp is just an instantaneous measure of energy in the reactor. We only care about it because we want it at a certain point to safely and efficiently run the reactor.

Stock fuel cells work like other stock converters, they use a "catch up" mechanic where the game attempts to calculate how much power they generated and how much fuel they used once you load them back in. I would assume TACLS handles that by assuming that an active fuel cell has enough fuel until you load the ship back in, which would mean you could generate more power than you have fuel for if you leave it unattended for long enough. It may be possible to utilize the same system here, in lieu of background processing. It's not exactly great, but it's "good enough" for all the stock power generators.

Yeah, they can function with core heat. They have their full ability to cool core heat and system heat simultaneously.

System heat does not integrate into MKS, both use their own extension of the resource converter and resource producer modules that don't interoperate. MKS still does work fine when system heat is installed, because system heat doesn't remove core heat. However that means you need to consider both system heat and core heat when designing cooling systems.