ZodiusInfuser

Is that the only pack you downloaded? The reworked parts are in a separate download.

To expand on what Gaalidas said, there seems to be some underlying rules in KSP that govern the docking/undocking process of two craft (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79594). Some situations work with docking ports on the end of IR parts some don't. I've only recently become aware of this so there's been no testing as to what rules work with IR and what don't.

Darn, I really should have got my IR rework themed electric fans done before I went on hiatus. Are yours bottom or side mounted?

I suspect it's not a big talking point because many people have just come to accept that it causes problems, so have stopped asking about it. The general issue with docking ports and IR is that they change the hierarchy of the vessel when the dock/undock occurs. This means that IR can end up with its robot arm (for example) being mounted backwards, which it doesn't like. As such we advise to avoid having docking ports at the end of anything robotic. Having them elsewhere on your craft is fine, as this won't affect the hierarchy. It's interesting that you post this today though. I was watching a stream last night and this piece of information came to my attention about the rules that govern docking (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79594). Maybe there's a set of rules that can be followed that will allow for docking/undocking of vessels without the hierarchy being altered for the areas IR is used.

I've just been watching DasValdez's stream and this useful piece of info came to my attention: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79594-Docking-and-Vessel-Type-Rules- He did some testing and it seems that if you make the thing you're docking to a lower priority then the side with the IR parts will remain as the parent. Maybe some people have time to test this and report their findings? Would be nice to add more info to the current red text about IR + Docking ports.

I was just thinking it would be cool if you applied

Wow! That's exactly what I was hoping for from a large cargo transport! Much better looking than the MK4 profile imo. That frontage looks far better than your original concept. Edit: Is it me or does the texture filtering look off compared to the stock parts. If you compare them in the second and third images there's a lot of aliasing on the OPT parts compared to stock. Of course the image resolution doesn't help matters, but I don't think that's the cause.

KottabosGames just did a preview of this mod, for anyone interested:

The third one . If you want to remove the old one's just delete the Legacy folder. Note that not all parts have reworked equivalents.

That's mostly correct but not the full story, as there's a few additional clauses from Marce that need to be accounted for, that I need to review when I return to KSP modding. This will be some time after KSP 1.1 launches, since IR will get broken by the new PhysX and need an update.

That is a very nice looking cargo transport cockpit you got there! Almost thunderbird 2 like! It's hard to choose, but given that only one can be made, I think the second one has a better side shape, but I do like the texturing of the first one more. I notice that the MK2 side sections of the K profile are slightly larger than the MK2 size. What was the reason for this? I'm just thinking that if it wasn't then making a MK2 air intake that could go either side of the cockpit would blend a lot nicer that it may do with this shape.

Nice! This looks like it could replace the MK4 profile for me. Any chance of seeing more views of the new K profile? No problem. Take your time

There's two classes of struts, one that's the stock strut and decoupler in one, the other that is reusable in flight. It's the latter that doesn't work in the current KSP.

I've not abandoned this, just been very busy with my PhD work, since I'm now entering the final year and still have an awful lot to do (who would have thought making modular transforming robots would be so hard ) Anyway, I needed a break today so decided to finish modelling the reworked adjustable rail (slidertron) I showed a while back. Here's how it previously looked. Here's how it now looks: I'm happy with this, and as the image shows they can be stacked easily. There's a few other parts I'd like to make that use the same profile but I've got to give them a bit more thought. Anyway, I'll return to lurking mode now

I was curious more than anything, as I couldn't tell if the part was symmetric/asymetric or whether its large curve was larger than 3.5m or exactly 3.5m (for some planned 3.5m adapter maybe? ). Could you show a front on view of the profile? I haven't got a particular use case in mind for a plane capable of transporting 3.5m parts. There are a few space station parts from Nertea that are 3.5m that a large bay could potentially be of benefit for (http://imgur.com/a/k6qrA#3). As for the MK4 parts, they look great but are not sleek enough for my liking. Perhaps if the bulge was centralised rather than just on the top side? The original does look nicer though, and as you show fits in well with the existing J profile. Maybe have a K-XWB profile that is just bays?

These new parts a looking great! Just what I wanted from a larger cargo capacity bay!. Btw, is the new JX(tended ) profile similar to what you showed earlier when concepting it? I'm trying to judge whether it would fit 3.5m parts. Also if that's a flat bottom I'm seeing then this profile is asking for a rear cargo ramp for driving rovers in and out!

You could always ask for a few more nodes. That's how I got Nertea to add Advanced and Experimental Actuators for IR. IIRC Experimental Motors is actually a stock node that Squad never added anything to, so you could make use of that without needing CTT.

It would confirm that the parts are being loaded by the game correctly. I think I've experienced this before. Look back at your tech tree. If you have nodes already unlocked and add in new mod parts they don't automatically get enabled even if the node is unlocked. You have to go and unlock each part individually. I have no idea why KSP does this.

Note that this method removes the texture sharing method I implemented so will make the parts use more RAM than necessary. There's an example in the IR Trailer that uses the Foldatron parts for legs, but for further inspiration maybe check out this youtube channel.

The magnet works fine without alteration with the latest KSP and KAS, the Grasper needs to have a module changed from GrapplingHook to Harpoon, and the LandingFoot works without issue. The only one that may have problems is the Surface Sampler as that uses a custom plugin (I have a 1.0.3 version locally but not a 1.0.4). Also, the Movatrons work without issue. I will eventually return to update the mod I swear.

It should be possible to put the strut on in mirror symmetry then the track on each side separately. If this is not the case then I'm not sure what would be causing that.

The problem you show in those pictures is a known issue with the KF parts and node attachment. There's a particular orientation the parts need to be set up in Unity for node attach to work in mirrored symmetry, which Lo-Fi didn't know about back when the parts were first created (because the Stock wheels are set up wrong too). The solution is to re-export all the affected parts with the correct orientation, which will break everyones existing craft.

I think Ziw has already seen your message so no real reason to post again in the main thread. No, the stock module does this automatically, every frame I suspect. All I had to do special with stock was change what it thought the forward axis was.

I'm not sure what you're meaning in this context, and without knowing the IR code I cannot say if that is done or not. I am waiting, but haven't really had time to test the newest dll of yours anyway due to IRL. I know the Mecanum wheels work, but I've not had time to configure the other wheels to use KF. Also did you get around to making "Update Steering" occur automatically when a wheel gets rotated on a craft? That was the main thing (after you fixed the orientation issue) that was holding me back from updating my other wheels to use KF over stock.

Yea about that, just had chance to test it and it's certainly an interesting craft to fly . Made a few tweaks to the structure (such as fixing the orientation of some rotatrons) and changed some of the control bindings. It will certainly be added to the mods example craft collection when I get around to releasing it. Smjjames was one of the luck ones who got a beta release before I went on hiatus. Still no ETA on when I'll do the next IR rework release. I was waiting for Kerbal Foundries to update but it looks like that's got a long while left before it is ready.