Domfluff

More habitat pictures. MPLM and "ISS lab" are intended to be USOS-derived hab parts, MMSEV is the pressurised rover/lander/exploration vehicle multipurpose concept - I'm not sure how this is supposed to be docked here. Radiators, solar panels and a cryogenic transit stage.

Thank you - I think that makes it a lot clearer for me. The orbital module (+2 seats) in a Soyuz capsule (or the seats in a barebones station) are there as basic requirements for the job, so don't give bonuses. This would also apply to things like a Science Lab, since presumably the seats inside are dedicated space for scientists. Therefore, ISS modules would differ - the science/working modules wouldn't provide additional KM's, but hab modules would. Quality of life is there for Cupola modules. It might even make sense for greenhouses (especially massive ones like the ones in Silent Running), sports facilities or even a pub to provide multipliers, since the existence of somewhere serving space-beer has more effect than just on that module. Silly examples, but I understand I think

I'd be keen to help out with testing/balancing USI-LS. I've been doing quite a bit of thinking about some upcoming models for another mod (SSTU), which will need USI-LS patches. This mod is making models which ape historical spacecraft, without being replicas per se. Making patches for Salyut-style space station parts are easy - two seats in the station with a two person Soyuz capsule (four seats, including the orbital module) docked equals about 90 days hab time, which matches the historical figures without the need for any additional Kerbalmonths. Space for 3000 supplies (about 3 tons - approximately what you can transfer on a Progress vehicle) and no recycling (this is a low tech space station) makes this line up with the real world stuff nicely, without any further manipulation. This is great stuff. What I'm less sure about are hab multipliers. What they represent, or when they should be used instead of or in addition to just adding kerbalmonths. The cupola is clearly a dedicated "quality of life" part (which makes sense to me), but I'm not sure why large inflatables don't qualify for the same kind of bonuses. The Kerbitat-type parts are presumably supposed to be recyclers, but they already have a recycling function. The Karibou module combines both, presumably, but the multiplier seems huge by comparison. Since I'm going to be thinking about more advanced station parts as well, I think it would be useful to have a deeper understanding here. I'm not entirely clear on what constitutes a "multiplier", or what would justify it. Clearly it's important to be cautious about employing too many of them, as they can make the hab problem too easy to solve. As a related question - is Wear actually implemented at the moment? What's the actual game effect? (I vaguely remember something about heat adding to Wear, which I really like.)

Ah, I see what you mean. Understand the confusion, but I wasn't referring to the reusable fairings containing Energia's flyback boosters (etc.), but that a mod titled "Kerbal Reusability Expansion" doesn't have to be limited to "replicating SpaceX missions", since there are other reusable spacecraft, in practice or in theory (especially in theory). Therefore, even though the idea of a solid, integrated cargo bay/fairing doesn't jive with the reality of what SpaceX are attempting (as far as we know), that doesn't have to limit the options for modding. The swivel-and-fold-back fairings designed in the linked Reddit thread are probably impractical (and possibly unnecessary at that), but that doesn't mean that it can't be modded and played around with.

What aren't inside a fairing?

Although the reusable fairings don't match what (little) we know about SpaceX's plans for reusing fairings, I don't think it's a bad thing to develop in a "Kerbal Resuabilty Expansion" mod, since you're not making SpaceX replicas per se, just the tools to do the job. Equally, under the same banner there would be scope to include things like the Energia winged flyback boosters, an X-34 or Dreamchaser-style mini capsule, Roton's rotors, Vulcan's/Ariane 6's recoverable engine blocks, etc. Any kind of fully reusable vehicle would need the ability to launch payload and recover as much of the rocket as possible, and a closing fairing (or nose-cargo bay, perhaps) is as good as any. Really like what you've done so far. Looking forward to the trunk in particular, since that's a huge part of making this viable. I know I'd like this to be applicable to more than a 2.5m capsule. I haven't tried just doing a rescalefactor MM patch for this, but that might be all that's necessary.

Have to say, I'm quite excited about this. I'm a big fan of the line you've taken with Near Future - keeping a vaguely "stocklike" tone, whilst also demonstrating the fundamental limitations and challenges of the technology (e.g., SEP versus NEP, liquid hydrogen tanks being impractically huge sometimes).

Wow, you're making a beamed core antimatter drive? In terms of feasibility (assuming easy supply and storage of antimatter) that makes sense with the above, since it's mostly a matter of scale and some hand-waving... but that's an order of magnitude more powerful, isn't it? I'm pretty sure that's at the lower end of viable *interstellar* propulsion. Are you planning on making some larger/more advanced radiators?

Ah yes, I see what you mean, carry on

None of the above engines are really fusion-powered, any more than a hydrogen bomb is a nuclear reactor.

As I understand it, the primary limitations of this kind of advanced propulsion are: - Technology level + Cost (modelled, via the CTT) - Heat (modelled, aside from structural issues, although Roverdude's "Wear" mechanic hand waves this now since heat adds to a part's "age") - Radiation (perhaps with a mod, or your WIP radiation mod, if that ends up existing. Call this optional for now.) - The difficulty of harvesting the required fuel. (e.g., the deuterium/helium-3 isotopes required for Project Daedalus were planned to be harvested from Jupiter's atmosphere for twenty years. Naturally that's a propulsion system an order of magnitude more potent, but it makes the point I think.) Roverdude's Karbonite+ mod has a number of Torch Drive-like engines, which run on a substance that (until a recent version) you couldn't find on Kerbin. He's lately changed this so that you can add this in the VAB, but each unit is still massively expensive, so although you can produce it on Kerbin, you probably shouldn't. To be honest, I suspect that might be sufficient limitation to show the ISRU limitations of this - if Nuclear Salt Water, Deuterium, Tritium, antimatter are all sufficiently expensive, then you'd be encouraged to launch these dry, and fuel them from a lucky asteroid or dedicated mining operation. Nuclear salt water might be produceable (MM patch) with one of your existing processors, and since Uranium is already fairly pricey, this all joins up fairly well and slots into stock ISRU.

I've said before, but one of the hurdles that I've certainly found in careers (with USI-LS) is the lack of decent habitation parts. Having single-piece (or near-single piece Almaz and Salyut-style stations would be great for that, since it gives you a nice early game space station for early rendezvous and orbital science processing. Of the above (DRM5), SSTU makes the propulsion bus and crew transfer vehicles extremely easy to replicate, but we are seriously lacking in good and capable options for the hab module. These kinds of modules are pretty much interchangeable with station parts, so anything of that ilk would be extremely useful. It's a shame that you can't be as high concept as you'd like with the station parts, but any work in this direction would be massively appreciated - space stations are where part counts get silly very quickly, so every integrated solar panel, radiator and RCS nozzle knocks this down significantly.

Perfect! The above works great, and it fits the requirements for a 90 day Salyut (more or less), including the supplies on the Soyuz capsule. Without any additional storage on-station that's 65 days and 90 days hab time. If the station can hold about 1000 supplies then that's up to spec. I suspect that might be all that's required to make the Progress-like capsule useful.

Going to be a silly question. I'm testing the above patch at the moment. This works fine... except that the container that's being modified is always the fuel tank of the Progress vehicle, not the cargo storage (which has the space available). I assumed this was the "@CONTAINER,0[*]" reference, and this tied to the baseContainerIndex of the part(?) (starts at 1 for this part), but trying this for 0,1 and 2 doesn't seem to make a difference, so I assume I'm missing something basic here. Redefining the whole module (or altering the part cfg) itself has this working as expected, but I'd like to maintain the MM patch as an optional extra, rather than tying this in hard.

Thinking about usi-ls support some more, and doing a bit of research - the DOS modules had a mission duration of 90 days, which with a crew of two implies a total of six seats (30 days per seat, divided by two kerbals) - this would mean that the station itself would have two available seats, with no bonuses on hab time. I think this is fine, since these are low-tech stations, more sophisticated hab modules would perform better. The other four seats come from the soyuz capsule itself. In terms of supplies, 500 supplies is enough for one kerbal/month, therefore the station needs to hold 3000 supplies, with no need for recycling (low tech). The early Salyuts had no resupply, so this puts a fairly hard limit on the station lifespan. Salyut 6+ could dock a Progress vehicle for supply, and judging by the mission logs, it looks like one Progress could supply the full ninety day duration. This implies that the Progress can hold 3000 supplies, or three tons of cargo. Since that mostly matches the real world, that's pretty straightforward. I'll write a basic mm patch when I'm in front of a pc, and see if that causes any other problems. Mir and ISS modules would require some more thought/research, as would inflatables or anything more sophisticated. Going the other direction, a MOL-like station would require minimal supplies and perhaps only one seat (for the lab) to match it's forty day mission duration.

Some bug reports (none of these are show-stopping): "Enable parachute staging" works fine, but doesn't appear on the staging track. This may be by design, but something you said earlier makes me think it may not be intentional. (As an aside, the SSTU parachutes are a little counter-intuitive with how KSP chutes work now, and especially the stand-alone docking ports/chutes, which don't have integrated drogues. They do work fine, but I've certainly lost capsules in testing to having overly aggressive atmospheric entries. Perhaps your docking ports should have the same inbuilt drogues as the ones built into capsules). SSTU-SC-B-SM (Apollo-like Service Module) - "Jettison fairing" for the engine doesn't seem to appear in right click menus, nor functional when set as an action group. SSTU-SC-A-OM (Soyuz-like Orbital Module) - Enable docking lights" doesn't turn these on. All SSTU Fuel tanks and SRB's - will not radially attach at first attempt, instead these need to be attached via a node, and then can be attached radially. SSTU-SC-GEN-MHS (modular heat shield) - the modular heat shield isn't resizing anymore (I'm sure I've seen this work in a previous build). The connection is re-sizing fine, but the heat shield itself stays at it's default size. All size limits - these are now correctly applying in career mode (thank you!), but the same limits apply in Sandbox - i.e., if you have unlocked 2.5m parts, then sandbox will also be limited to 2.5m parts. If it was one or the other then this is probably the better option, so it's not too serious, I think.

In terms of integrating with USI-LS - giving the parts hab time bonuses and/or multipliers, and probably recyclers is one thing (and could be done entirely within a MM patch - I'd probably write one for myself anyway, so I'd be happy to knock one together if I can work out some approximate numbers to aim for, probably based on Salyut/ISS mission durations), but the main part-saving function you could provide would be to allow amounts of supplies and fertilizer to be configured as part of your tank config code. Further on from that, some kind of integrated processor part (the USI-LS greenhouses) is pretty much required for any long duration mission, but this is not necessarily required for transit - having a decent recycler level is sufficient for most long term LKO space stations, and most bases can grow food in-situ.

Landing a Bigelow module on the Moon: (The tubes are fuel tanks). Covering with Regolith (1963): Obviously both modelling radiation and digging up the actual surface of a body are well beyond scope here. Most base concepts do involve heavy equipment, usually stripped down and folded up for space-use.

I believe the intent is to assemble modules in orbit, then land them vertically. I'm trying to find a concrete reference, but I'm not sure if there are thrusters under the legs there, or these would detach. Roverdude's upcoming Konstruction mod will give you some other options (aliens-style power loader claws, forklifts, etc.). In KSP or reality that would imply a certain amount of infrastructure already in place, At the moment, assembling in orbit and landing vertically probably makes the most sense, but clearly this is more suitable for the Mun/Moon than anything with atmosphere.

Since you were asking about inflatables, with mind to reducing parts but especially as you mentioned greater integration with other mods - I thought it might be useful to share something from my current career save. (Relevant mods used here: SSTU, Ven's Stock Revamp, USI Life Support.) At the moment, there are a paucity of parts that really suit long-term habitation. The following is a design-reference-mission sketch of a manned Duna or Eve flyby - conceptually similar to some of the Apollo Applications plans. For reference: Apollo Manned Venus flyby - this wet workshops the third stage into a hab module, and replaces the lunar module with storage and life support. Stowed. This is using the larger inflatable hab from Ven's Stock Revamp. Third stage not shown. Not supposed to be a recreation in form, but more or less in function. This hab module consists of the following parts.: Inflatable hab (10 seats) Hitchhiker module (4 seats) 2x gigantor solar panels 4x nom-o-matic greenhouses 2x 1.25m fertilizer tanks 1x Cupola module 1x SSTU small docking port USI life support provides hab time based on available seats. Some parts provide bonuses to this, and others provide multipliers. The hitchhiker pod provides a few months extra hab time, and I should write a MM patch for Ven's part as well, but the Cupola provides one of the multiplication effects, which is really important for creating long-duration missions. Guidelines from the USI-LS docs: Four greenhouses is one more than necessary here - each can process a little over one kerbal's Mulch - but this kind of (semi) closed-loop life support is vital for reducing mission mass as well. The actual stowage here is awkward, because Ven's inflatable can't attach from the other end. You can fit that part radially, but (a) that feels a little like cheating to me, and (b) this is really just a proof of concept. Deployed. This has almost two years of hab time, and the greenhouse processing provides just about enough supplies for a free return round trip (about a Kerbal year), but more could be added here. Those solar panels should be sufficient for power to Eve or Duna. Obviously the solar panels would be needed as the fuel cells won't last the duration. This specific design has some minor issues - getting this out of the petal interstage is going to involve rather more RCS ballet than usual (attachment is on the wrong end), and the above is pretty much limited to a free-return (ish) style flyby, since the third stage would be used to send this away from Kerbin. The ship has more hab time than supplies (2 years to 1 year) right now, but that could be changed easily. There are also no recyclers in the above, and they could be added trivially. Still, I think this is a fairly practical and minimal way of building a hab module, and is a practical example of some of the limitations that I've been running up against, and ones that I'd like to think that a dedicated part could help solve. It fits into something approaching the form factor at least.

Last thought - if the structural girders could either all have ladders integral, or just be climbable like ladders, then that would improve building minor things on EVA as well with KAS.

My career modlists almost always begin with most of Roverdude + Nertea's mods. SSTU has recently joined that list, after some wibbling over whether I was happy including the procedural parts. (Thank you!). Aside from Welding being something that Roverdude is releasing soon (so, potential conflicts), the main thing I've been lacking are habitation modules, ideally inflatable ones. The ones in Ven's stock revamp are fine, but a little overpowered in some regards (you can stick them anywhere, and they compress to a ridiculous degree). Porkjet's are rarely up to date with the current KSP build for obvious reasons, and the 1.25m end nodes can make them a little awkward to use. I do think it's sensible to keep to 2.5m as the standard module size. KSP Shuttles tend to use the Mk3 cargo bay, which is ideal for 2.5m parts. I really like the idea of rigid torus sections - there's no really good way to do this right now, and with welding this would be excellent. I do think this would be sensible if there was (in addition) a non-EPL way of managing these - perhaps something to increase the mass limits for manually attaching via KAS? (e.g., the manipulator pods from 2001 - if this was inside the KAS range for attachment, this limit would be increased significantly, or perhaps the pod itself could act as a really strong Kerbal for KAS. No idea if that's possible. If that *was* possible, then this is also a property that a Canadarm-like part could have - rather than trying to actually animate it as per Infernal Robotics (etc.), if it's possible to design for effect, and use a nearby arm to increase KAS range/mass limits then that would make a lot of sense to me, I think.) One option would be to have the ability to convert (through an Engineer) modules on the fly somewhat - possibly as a Wet Workshop or similar. This could be important earlier in the tech tree than later ISS-like or Von Braun Wheel-like stations. Integrating science modules is a thing. Whether this is just the stock modules or including some of Dmagic Orbital Science's modules, having a single 2.5m part with multiple experiments would decrease part count by quite a bit, as would integrating antenna with a science lab. Stations in KSP have a few uses - they are good for research labs, as propellant depots, and in orbital construction (all-up, or just as a staging post for holding a stage or two for a while). UKS is going to push a few of these further, especially as far as logistics is concerned, but full details aren't available on that quite yet, but Roverdude has hinted that he wants his own EPL solution at some point, and I'm fully expecting that propellant depots will end up being automated in a similar manner that Planetary Resources are currently. With 1.2 they will presumably also be good as relays for comms networks, however that mechanic will actually pan out. This means that the main parts to develop would be those that help construction, store fuel, transmit data and science. Since you're not trying to make a "gameplay" mod so much as a "parts" mod, this means you are limited in some of the things you can do. One major part that I haven't seen anyone build is a zero-boil off propellant depot, with a deployable sun shield: In terms of having this make sense in KSP terms (since you already offer ZBO tanks) - perhaps these have a lighter tank structure than the ZBO versions, but they only offer zero boil-off when the shroud is deployed? They could also be lighter on the EC use (therefore fewer batteries needed for the trip through the dark side). Atomic Rockets has a link to this paper: http://mikesnead.net/resources/spacefaring/tech_paper_architecting_rapid_growth_in_space_logistics_capabilities.pdf Which proposes a logistics/orbital construction station looking like this: The hangers are there for (apparently) Dreamchaser-sized spaceplanes and capsules, allowing for unloading cargo in shirt sleeves (so, quickly).

Might be worth pointing out that Roverdude's upcoming "Konstruction" mod (which may or may not be the next iteration of UKS) is also going to have "welding" added to the stock docking ports.

Interesting. I've only come across this (excellent) mod for the last couple of releases, but it's never been restricted in career for me.

Are the modular part sizes supposed to be restricted to different tech levels? I found the config file for this under data. I'm not finding them restricted in-game, and I wonder if I'm doing something wrong.