Sufficient Anonymity

I've done exactly the same thing in the 32 bit version. Jump charge has a density of 90.01 - I imagine the disintegration occurred due to the probe being unable to support itself, and the crash as KSP wondered what on earth to do with several hundred tons of beacon suddenly trying to burrow through the launchpad. So yes, you do have to be in space, for the practical reason of your ship remaining intact due to the forces on it, rather than the pluggin checking where you actually are.

Oh. I love how straightforward it is at the moment - I've steered clear of Lazor System/Skillfull as they seem a bit bloated if, like me, you're looking to jazz up planes and some larger starships and for an amusing way to clear debris.

I think the percentage is variable depending on impact resistance (still simpler than Skillful though).

If it's really inefficient, I suppose that'd make sense (Xe present as an impurity in what's being mined and so the converter can pull out tiny quantities of it) - could probably have some fun with the descriptions too... "Ventrally mounted drill: The chaps over at exploration and development assure us this drill just extracts Karbonite. We're pretty sure it sucks up all sorts of other gloop too. Whatever it does exactly, the converters they supplied seem to cope though."

Not involved with this project, but my two cents would be that it makes sense to be able to convert to hydrogen in reasonable quantities, but Xenon and Argon, being noble gases, shouldn't be available via a converter. If you wanted to obtain them, the only way I can see that makes sense would be to have a specialised atmospheric intake/converter that uses a heck of a lot of power to strip tiny amounts of Xe or Ar out of the body's atmosphere.

Has the option for triple canopies been removed from the radial chutes?

That looks like a practically complete HL cockpit EDIT: I'm guessing the existing cockpits will be going over to those monitors, too? If so, please can the S2 have more than one functioning monitor?

I'm pretty sure I'm running 32 bit though - whenever I've run KSP_x64.exe it says it's the 64 bit version at the title screen. EDIT: yup, certainly running 32 bit, and been able to replicate it again - with this mod installed, I launched a rocket and the launch clamps reappear somewhere 7km mark traveling at the same speed as the craft (which then pulls away from them as it's still accelerating, then the clamps jump to it again and so on). On an identical launch without this mod, nothing happens. Either something really improbable is happening, I'm being an idiot, or it's this mod. I'm leaning towards some combination of the last two.

I'm having some weird launch clamp behaviour with this mod installed. They jump to the craft when you travel a certain distance away from them. The pictures below are from an otherwise clean 0.24.2 install (the craft continued to accelerate away from them, hence the 2.8km gap).

I would love to see translational parts - with the current selection of parts I've been able to do everything I wanted to in terms of spinning stuff around, though there have been a few times where some sliding gantries or pistons would have really come in handy.

I think @Joshwoo69 is asking about the HUDs (which, as I understand, will eventually have some borders and will flip up and down). EDIT: Also, that is one beautiful cockpit.

SSTO testing. It still works in FAR, and Bill was only sick once.

He's safely back on terra (Kerra?) firma after a somewhat hairy reentry in my light SSTO. His mission did, however, confirm that all my pre-FAR planes (this being the last one to test) do still work, aside from a little canard-position-tweaking. It only spun out once, though Bill might have been a little sick at that point. At least glass cockpits are easy to clean.

I can only hope that the kerbals in my science stations get on with each other very well - the eight in my career LKO station have been there for years.

After further tweaking, I think I'm finally happy with this... ...though I expect that'll change when Bac9/Traverius update B9 (they're back, and more HL fuselage stuff is hopefully coming).

*picks up jaw from floor* That's awesome news. I cannot overstate how excited I am about those massive parts. I remember when you teased them, but I'd pretty much given up on them ever being released.

Further testing of my "Single Stage to Anywhere" I've thrown in a couple of IVA shots at the end - I love how good a bridge the B9 Mk2 cockpit makes - sadly this has dropped the default capacity to two (though it'd be easy enough to add some hab modules to the payload bay).

Single stage to anywhere, using KSPI and B9 (and FAR, of course). Capacity of four kerbals (pilot and co-pilot plus two) and whatever you can fit in the bay - you run out of room before hitting the limit on lift capacity. Note that the plane in the last shot looks slightly different to the others - it was modified after it was discovered in *ahem* simulations, that the original plane was unlandable due to an oversight regarding the control groupings and a lack of airbrakes. Even with the changes, it's utterly terrifying to land - the engines take an age to spool down, even from 10% (I only put the throttle higher when on other bodies, or during ascent to orbit), and it just won't slow down - it'll happily glide along at just shy of 200m/s for ages. As such, to land somewhere specific you have to line everything up about 10km out, then cut the thrust and come in low, just gliding along, to bleed off the speed - and then that leaves the fun of timing pitching up and deploying the air brakes correctly - too early and she stalls, and too late, she'll slam into the ground and kill the four crew.

Single stage to anywhere, using KSPI and B9 (and FAR, of course). Capacity of four kerbals (pilot and co-pilot plus two) and whatever you can fit in the bay - you run out of room before hitting the limit on lift capacity. Note that the plane in the last shot looks slightly different to the others - it was modified after it was discovered in *ahem* simulations, that the original plane was unlandable due to an oversight regarding the control groupings and a lack of airbrakes. Even with the changes, it's utterly terrifying to land - the engines take an age to spool down, even from 10% (I only put the throttle higher when on other bodies, or during ascent to orbit), and it just won't slow down - it'll happily glide along at just shy of 200m/s for ages. As such, to land somewhere specific you have to line everything up about 10km out, then cut the thrust and come in low, just gliding along, to bleed off the speed - and then that leaves the fun of timing pitching up and deploying the air brakes correctly - too early and she stalls, and too late, she'll slam into the ground and kill the four crew.

I can only imagine the scenes at mission control... "WHO GAVE JEB THE REMOTE CONTROL? You know why he's got got a flight ban? It's so he can't do things like driving state-of-the art rovers off the edge of a cliff... oh, he made it down safely... right. Dammit, Jeb."

Either mount it on the centreline of your lander/rover or use other components to counterbalance it. Whilst it's hard to see in the image below, I've placed it pretty centrally, and then used other components to account for the weight of the wheels.

I've always really liked the style of your parts and I must say, that IVA is absolutely gorgeous. I have been radially attaching the B9 Mk2 Cockpit (with RPM) as a bridge for larger vessels, but when you full release that pod, I think my cruisers are going to have to get upgraded A kinda cheeky aside (as, much as it pains me to say it, I can't say I'm a massive fan of ion engines at the moment), how easy will it be for users to change which resources are displayed on the small rectangular screens? I'm guessing they're just specialised RPM displays so it'd just be a matter of me playing around with a text file?

/u/avaslash started an arms race over in the KSP subreddit, so I felt it necessary to respond...

The image below is of the station after a successful launch, however, on the first time of launching the crew/science module (that's the top three quarters of it), the launcher broke up just before I started my circularisation burn (around Kerbin, not the Mun). The module then proceeded to reenter and break up. I do 95% of my launches uncrewed, and then send kerbals up later in my ultra-reliable crew bus, so normally I wouldn't have minded about losing a module like this - there's no money yet, after all. However, this was the second time I'd launched such a module (there's an identical station in LKO), and so I'd launched it fully crewed. I must admit I reverted the flight, rather than burn eight kerbals.

I tend to mock them up in the VAB, then split them into subassemblies, launch and redock. I do the same with my interplanetary ships, which, incidentally, tend to end up sharing some station components - I have standardised fuel and habitation/science blocks, then specialised sections, like drive stages and shields which only get used with vessels, and reactor blocks, which only get used as part of a station.