fatcargo

Hi ! To chime in, as i was browsing through ZI rework parts i noticed that some of them are missing. I have previous expirience with finding on purpose hidden parts (obsolete, authors used MM to hide them) using filters. That way i found those missing parts (i used tech level filter). I tried to look through cfgs to see if any are (un)intentionally hidden but everything seems OK. I'm playing in sandbox so all parts should be visible. Tome make things worse, similar problem appears with other part packs. Does anyone know of this bug and maybe a solution ? Question may seem OT but it covers this part pack as well.

Hi! I too was looking for a way to reduce part count in-flight using proc parts for MKS/OKS bases. I won't comment on resources offered by proc parts - enough to say everything is where is should be. However i do hope that proc tanks could benefit with few textures from EL, TAC-LS and OKS/MKS. For example, MKS/OKS licensing is open enough to transfer textures to proc parts to allow more seamless looking crafts/bases. Does similar apply for EL and TAC-LS ?

Thanks, i've tested the latest proc part pack and my old problem with displaced attachment nodes seems to have disappeared. I love the Life Support and EL tanks, these will do great !

One last bit : Usually i add new packs and then immediately run game to check what was added and changed (yes, there are "readme" sections but sometimes i find them too obscure for quick addon tests). Couple of days ago i was adding several plugins and have found new MFT-configurable resources (related to life support) that have been added to parts like fuel tanks. I suspect TAC-LS did this as it has quite extensive MM configs utilizing MFT modules. To conclude : I'm aiming at having a tank that can be rescaled, has Regolith/MKS resources and its volume (re)allocated with MFT. And TAC-LC configs came darn close to that. That way, when doing orbital construction at my LKO station, i won't have to add too many resource containers to station, they will be large enough to build entire SOI-to-SOI transfer ships, not capable of surface landing. I just haul one or two mega-sized shipments of rocket parts to station and start building. In-flight resource reallocation is attractive for players that know how to minimize number of parts for colonies and/or know how to do advanced colony re-tasking. For now, having MFT/Regolith/Tweakscale config in VAB/SPH will do fine for the time being. The mention of other plugins and off-topic was inevitable since MFT works on such a basic level as resources.

Now that you mention it, author of Multipurpose Colony Modules for MKS OKS has already solved it for its own resources. More to the point the "Multipurpose Storage Module" is what we should be looking at. At a glance the difference is that MCM (an OKS/MKS extension) can only switch among predefined sets of resources (further derived from Regolith framework), but it can do it in-flight (there even was a resolved bug with module type switching lockout because "old" resources were left inside a module). As for volume limiting, i agree. But i have a problem with the following : If this happens in-flight, the player could be locked out of efficiently using a tank. The above action should preceeded by a warning dialog or note to player about degrading tank to lower usage. A side question : i've seen in MKS configs some MM references to MFT, but i've found no editor option "Show UI" for relevant MKS parts. Should MKS provide this ability or do i have a bug in my GameData ?

Thank you for making a separate tab, i wish others would follow this method. The Utility tab is a mess.

Or you could allow switching among resources that require same tank mass or LESS. That way you keep realistic part and make it more flexible. Hmmm, maybe allowing player to change tank mass in editor by adding a single unit of resource that requires max tank mass (and add all others that are of real interest), thus making it usable for all other resources in flight. BUT, once resource compartments in tank are defined and tank is launched (for exmaple 1234 unit of LF, 4567 units of LOX etc) they STAY locked and can only be used by another resources, their basic volume is fixed. Another round-about way of doing this would be to drag the whole tank using KAS (or risk recycling the whole vessel) to a MCM skydock and recycle it, then use a "blueprint" from SPH/VAB/subassembly list and rocket parts to recreate it with new resources.

Now THAT would be GREAT ! Similar functionality already exists in Multipurpose Colony Modules for MKS/OKS , but MFT's resource re-allocation method is way more flexible. I hope plugin authors notice this idea. Additionally, resource-switching in MCM for OKS/MKS is done via context menus, so it's open to some degree of automatation by kOS, now you can imagine what that would mean.

Hi ! I'm trying out EL/MKS/OKS/MCM combo and i have question : how is vessel orientation determined when spawning it from orbital shipyard or mobile launch platform ? Is it possible to add option to set orientation of vessel prior to finalizing it ? Is there a way to display a "ghosted" version of vessel or at least a bounding box to let player know about bad orientation ? With new editor option to set root part (which can be at odd angles) this issue may be even more important. PS: i did try to find posts with same problem but found none.

Firespitter is up to date and i've reviewed my installs. I had incomplete Regolith, only cfgs from MKS/OKS, no DLL file. After completing Regolith, the MCMs now work. This is one of those odd "bugs" where failure to load one plugin ends up disrupting something different. PS : When i wanted to find MCM parts without rummaging through the overgrown "Utility" section i chose to filter by manufacturer and ended up showing all parts, including ones that are hidden that had "Upgrade" at end of their name. Most of my confusion came from there. OP should be updated with note about this.

Hi ! I just started using MKS/OKS combo and soon after found this addition. It quickly became obvious choice because it allows containers with specific resource (i'm a heavy user of MFT and this pack closely follows the same de-cluttering philosophy). Now, here is my problem : in SPH editor, i started testing various parts and with exception of MKS/OKS parts, most of Multipurpose Colony Modules parts have two problems. First is mutliple-mesh problem. I have noticed that those parts can be picked up from catalog but can't be attached and have overlapping parts. I have recognized this because i had similar problems back when B9 Aerospace was patched and re-published several times just to work under on of older KSP versions. Second problem is that parts that can be placed in editor, do not have options for configuring resources present in right-click menu (like those shown in original post, second image in gallery). I tried to analyze the problem and all i could find so far is that "FSmeshSwitch" module is not showing it's menu items (there is no "Next Variant" button). When i compared MCM parts with same-name module definitions in B9 parts i found no errors. I don't know what else there could be. And i really would like to have reconfigurable storage, just like MFT does for fuel tanks.

Well.. shape lock can be (ab)used to whatever end. My idea was engine shrouds. Your idea is worthwhile too, especially if you want to add radialy attached parts to main tank and then you want it all hidden from drag with shrouding. BUT. Please note that in my example i left the front fairing to properly hold shrouds in place. PFs really are not meant to be attached to anything else than their own fairing base / interstage adapter / fairing base ring, if you consider their effects with FAR. You could use them as decoration too (stock aero won't be affected as much as FAR), but don't consider them structurally strong. Note also that adding PFs to tank just enlarges the cross-section (and thus drag). Most tanks are already aerodynamic. If you are willing to add Modular Fuel Tanks plugin, you could configure various tanks to hold whatever fuel type you want. DUHH ! I just realized my example in previous post has wrong part description. Replace "fairing base" with "fairing base ring". Details like this can make things difficult later on.

You are right. Please wait while i try to pull my foot out of my mouth.

What happened with GameData\TweakScale\plugins\TweakScaleInteraction\TweakScale_ModularFuelTanks.dll DLL is gone from zip ???

Then get Alcubierre Warp Drive by Rover Dude and fix them all in one go Zip-Fix-Zip-Fix-Zip-...

Umm it could be possible to use KAS to remove a part from craft in flight, then upgrade KSP with newer KER (which has option for partless mode). Kind of roundabout way of doing this, but this is actually a mission on its own.

Personally i'm a sandox player but i too agree on step motion actions that kOS could use. It reminds me of Stepper motor part that really should be in this pack anyway (robotics without steppers are just weird ).

As it is now, the PFs work great. If/when Squad makes their own spin on them, i'm afraid whatever unintentional bugs get introduced could be unsurmountable obstacle for PFs relying on that code. Ofcourse i'm not speaking againts Squad, without them there would be no KSP at all, but when it comes to functionality there are only two outcomes - either it works or not. And for now, PFs WORK. As for invisible interstage - if you want to make a hole behind PFs, you can remove the whole interstage (and making a hole in front is a bit weird, but doable). For example engine shroud to reduce drag (if using FAR, and even stock KSP in future versions) or make a cool-looking crafts. Note that the following example is using fairing base rings, not interstages. Add a base ring (with proper orientation), stack engine on it (you can even add multiple engines using thrust plate from PF pack), then add another base ring rotated to face the first one (you should see that proper shrouding will be constructed by seeing blue guide lines fitting between base rings). Then add shrouds from structural parts, right-click on them for menu and use shape locking option. Then just detach the rear base ring and you've got nice hole an engine can burn fuel out of it.

Hmmm so KSP itself gets from phyiscs engine a stream of data about part flexing and (eventual) breakage event, but nothing in between. Part flex (or bend or whatever) is just a spatial value, not a force vector/value ?

Thank you Aqua for clarifying this. At least we now know where we stand with this.

Ah yes, i you don't mind "bending the rules", you could use quantum struts placed on IR parts and periodically turn them on/off in sync with motion, though it requires KOS to work smoothly. Manual control via action groups would work, but it would be no fun to cross 100 meters that way.

How well they hold under stress ? Do they flex under larger loads ? Does scaling them up help raise connection strength ?

As far as languages are concerned, my preference is Pascal. I does not allow various ambiguities both in program structure and use of variables. If i remember right, there is "engine" for Pascal Script, which is open source, so reviewing for implementation in Jebnix should be a matter of time and effort, not royalties nor side-stepping vulture squadrons protecting intellectual property.

Please confirm is Jebnix still developed ? From what i saw at github, last activity was in July of 2014, with one branch updated 10 days ago.

I am trying to enumerate resources of per-part basis and so far i had success on my test craft with "MK1 5m Universal Fuselage" from "B9 Aerospace" pack. It is tagged as "FUSELAGE" and modified with Modular Fuel Tanks. Below is both command and output (there is no text copy from KOS terminal that i know of, except logging - i manually typed what is shown in terminal). Dumping list of all present resources for desired part. PRINT SHIP:PARTSTAGGED("FUSELAGE")[0]:RESOURCES. LIST of 4 items: [ 0]= RESOURCE(LiquidFuel,100,100 [ 1]= RESOURCE(Oxidizer,200,200 [ 2]= RESOURCE(MonoPropellant,300,300 [ 3]= RESOURCE(XenonGas,400,400 (NB: missing closing parenthesis at end of line for item in printed list ?) Detail about desired resource. PRINT SHIP:PARTSTAGGED("FUSELAGE")[0]:RESOURCE[0]:NAME. LiquidFuel Shouldn't be there something like PRINT SHIP:PARTSTAGGED("FUSELAGE")[0]:RESOURCENAMED("LiquidFuel"):AMOUNT. 100 Or better yet to avoid errors in script by checking first PRINT SHIP:PARTSTAGGED("FUSELAGE")[0]:RESOURCENAMED("LiquidFuel"):EXISTS. True As far as i can tell, there is no such suffix. Until then, KOS script first has to list all resources and match indexes to names before acting on specific resurce by name. Also where is option to lock specific resource from being used ? All i know this was already mentioned and there were no direct solutions for this, except when using Diazo's Actions Everywhere which locks all resources at once. Another idea : log to clipboard. That way player can dump all output and paste in browser, text editor etc... Example: LOG SHIP:PARTSTAGGED("FUSELAGE")[0]:RESOURCES TO CLIPBOARD.