ChronicSilence

Just checking in @JPLRepo. Any ETA on a 1.12.1-compatible release?

Hey, just started working with your LMP mod, looks awesome! Couple questions. Some friends and I are looking to run a server in a "competitive" mode, i.e. career where nothing is shared and where you can't take over each others' ships. Is this possible? Specifically: 1) Can you run a career mode with each player having their own funds/science/reputation? 2) Can you prevent players from controlling the ships of other players? 3) Can you prevent players from destroying the ships of other players? 4) Can you restrict comm-net to only function for the player that owns the comm sats? 5) Can you restrict players from docking with another players' ship and/or transferring resources to/from it? 6) Can you disable craft file sharing, so each player just keeps their own local craft files/library with no limits? 7) Can you prevent contracts from being shared? 8) Can each player have their own roster of kerbals? Essentially, we want to have each player with their own space program, but with everything synced so we can "race" each other to different destinations, milestones, etc. Perhaps allow docking/transferring with permission of the ship's owner, but that's about it. Is anything like this possible? Thanks!

I don't mean to revive this thread from the grave, but I got a direct message request about this ship and I realized that the original links went dead many years ago. I've updated the links to the original .craft files. I'm sure work will be required to update this to v1.6, but it's a start!

We love you man!

Thanks for the shout-out! I was planning on continuing work with KMP but it just seemed to stop development for a couple months. So, if you need a hand with anything mod-related, let me know!

Not sure if this has been noted or not, but it seems there is a major glitch here. If you set one of the super stretchy tanks as the root part of a ship, it absolutely freaks out on a quicksave/quickload. To reproduce: - create new vessel - set "KI-9000S Super Stretchable Service Module" as the first (root) part - change its texture for good measure ('T' key) - go to launchpad - after waiting a couple seconds, go 'Esc' -> 'Revert Flight' -> 'Revert to Launch' - watch it go haywire Any thoughts about the cause of this? EDIT: revert to launch is the same as quickloading a quicksave that occured as soon as you went to the launch pad

Ahh, makes sense. So until that is released, the "Service Module" tank in StretchyTanks is essentially pointless (other than being able to store electricity)?

Question: I put a bunch of LOX/RP1 in a service module tank (which is pressurized, I believe), but when I try to do my second burn (circularization), the engine won't ignite because the fuel flow is "Very Unstable". Any idea why this would happen with a pressurized tank? The fuel level is very low at this point (~2%), but that shouldn't make a difference with a pressurized tank I would think.

Yeah, I saw that, but unfortunately a) I don't really know what "reflective support" is, and in the changelog it says "FAR support is very questionable".

If I may ask without reading through 48 pages of posts... what's the level of compatibility with this and FAR?

Yep, deleted them all (except the resource definition and part.cfg ones for HypergolicFluid, which are not in the root folder).

Hmm, didn't seem to fix it for me. The Centurion now has a value of 1 displayed in the catalog (both before and after placing the part on the rocket), but it shows as "Ignitions: Electric 8/8" on the engine in-flight. Could be a conflict with a different mod, I suppose, but I'm only using the ones recommended in the OP. You also keep dodging the question about cryo vs. non-cryo tank mass

Makes sense. Sign errors wreak havok . I was also unaware that the catalog values weren't correct, which is unfortunate and rather confusing. I wonder if there's a way to separately specify values that are read into the catalog vs. what are read by the plugin, so they could be manipulated to match... Any thoughts about the Amines/NitrousOxide or the regular/cryo tank mass inconsistencies?

You're too quick to respond, you missed the edits I made to the post Some inconsistencies then: - does it make sense that the Centurion, an L+ class engine, has 0 (unlimited) ignitions? - some engines (like Centurion) say 0 ignitions, some (like Signifier ®) actually say "infinite ignitions. - Centurion engine says 0 ignitions, which should mean unlimited, but actually has 8 according to the right-click menu in flight (this inconsistency is present with many engines, like the Prefect) - the Decurion, which has "-4" ignitions, shows 10 ignitions in-flight when set to Tech level 6. - are the Signifer and Optio engines, which run on Amines/NitrousOxide, really supposed to use <1% Amines and >99% NitrousOxide? That could just be me not understanding hypergolics though. - why are the cryogenic versions of super stretchy fuel tanks lighter than their non-cryogenic counterparts, while holding the same amount of fuel (roughly 50% lighter in dry weight)? I would think they would be heavier, with the extra insulation and all (and no, I'm not confusing it with the balloon tanks).

FYI Nathan, a couple bugs I've noticed with the RftS configs: - Looks like the two engines inside "RealismOverhaul/Parts/RPL" are missing EngineIgnitor modules. - The "Decurion" shows "-4" ignitions and the Centurion shows "0" ignitions in the VAB. - The number of ignitions shown in the VAB is not representative of how many you can actually do while flying (e.g. "Prefect ®" shows 1 ignition in the VAB, but if you right-click on the engine in flight it shows 5 ignitions).