FusTek Parts [.20][Munox, Karmony Modules, Station Parts, Docking Nodes] [19.X]

[fusty]

FusTek Parts

NO LONGER MAINTAINED: CONTINUED BY Sumghai HERE

Welcome to FusTek, a world of infinite possibilities and sudden unplanned death!

MUNOX 2.0 is HERE!

The Munox can carry 18 kerbals to orbit in luxury, and terror. Complete with IVA and Utility ring that holds RCS and has lights (found in the Utilities section).

NOW WITH MORE! In Addition to the Original Munox, you now receive a separate cockpit-only 2 man pod. TWO 16-passenger compartments with CARGO HOLDS.

Command Pod Tab:

Munox Original

Munox Cockpit

Munox Aft Passenger Compartment + Cargo Hold

Munox Aft Passenger Compartment + Jumbo Cargo Hold (fits more 1.25m things)

Structural Tab:

Munox Aft End Cap (For the ends of your cargo holds)

Munox Aft Jumbo End Cap (For the ends of your cargo holds)

Utility Tab:

Munox Utility Ring

Click for an album of new goodies!

Download on Kerbal Space Port

Karmony Module

The Karmony Modules (one with 1.25m ends and another with 2.5m ends) hold 6 kerbals and make great station modules. They vaguely resemble some ISS components. You can grab these along with my gigantic static solar panels and gigantic K1 Truss section in my station parts pack on Kerbal Space Port.

Download the FusTek Station Parts Pack on Kerbal Space Port

Common Berthing Mechanisms (Docking Nodes of varying size)

4 sizes of docking ports in two visual styles (all docking ports of the same size will dock with each other, 1.25m docking ports will dock with vanilla 1.25m docking ports, same with the tiny ports and the probe-sized ports).

Download the Common Berthing Mechanisms on Kerbal Space Port

Kappa Pod

A one-man escape pod complete with parachute and onboard RCS capable of forward/reverse translation.

Download the Kappa Pod on Kerbal Space Port

Publicly available and re-usable props for IVA builders/modders!

These props should help you clutter up IVA's a little bit. More will be posted in the future.

Download the FusTek IVA Prop pack on Kerbal Space Port

To Install Any Of My Mods just place the FusTek folder into your GameData folder and make sure the folders Merge and don't Replace.

Edited April 11, 2014 by fusty
.20 Folder Structure Update

[Karriz]

I downloaded the space station parts and Munox a couple of days ago, are these updated now?

Edit: or you prpbably just updated the forum links to SpacePort?

Really great looking parts, they fit well with the somewhat cartoony Kerbal style.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Karriz

[fusty]

Indeed Karriz, though a Munox update is only a few days away! Cargo bays and separate cockpit, passenger compartment sections incoming!

[Immashift]

Good to see you back in action sir!

Wonderful parts as always.

If you need any specific screens I'd be glad to take some for you

[TheRawDizzle]

...idk what I'm doing wrong with the Munox mod...but i can't get to pull up in game. I dl'd the mod like usual, unzipped, and threw it in the parts folder...still can't find the pod in the game. Am I missing something?

[czokletmuss]

Hi fusty, if you want some screens you could use some from my AAR thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/24560-AAR-The-Grand-Tour-AAR-Jool-of-Kerbol-system?p=306690&viewfull=1#post306690

[fusty]

...idk what I'm doing wrong with the Munox mod...but i can't get to pull up in game. I dl'd the mod like usual, unzipped, and threw it in the parts folder...still can't find the pod in the game. Am I missing something?

It is not just parts. It also has an IVA which requires a folder named UniKarmony to be present within KSP/Internals/Spaces/ and another couple of props in KSP/Internals/Props. So if you're throwing the parts/ folders in the right place, be sure to do the rest.

[Immashift]

Fusty sir! I've discovered a slight issue with the CBM's. Might be by design, unsure. Basically here's what I built:

Pay no attention to the x-small, unless the issue appears there too...

So basically, you see how I have two smalls (both active) between my main tank, and my smaller tank/engine? What's happening is with the CBM's, fuel won't flow from the top of the middle stack to the bottom across the ports. If I replace the CBM's with normal clamps, I get the full tank of fuel for the engine, but with the CBM's, only the tiny tank is able to be used unless you manually transfer.

I'm just wondering if this is by design or indeed something that should work but doesn't, cause the CBM's look and act so much better there.

[shadowsutekh]

How goes your update process? Also what are the little raised flat areas on the bottom of the current pod for?

[loppnessmonsta]

I'm curious. I know functionally the docking ports are identical, but what's the difference visually? I haven't gotten around to actually docking anything with them, yet, but would like to get an idea of which are cooler looking first.

[Eric S]

I'm curious. I know functionally the docking ports are identical, but what's the difference visually? I haven't gotten around to actually docking anything with them, yet, but would like to get an idea of which are cooler looking first.

Visually, I like the CBM stuff much more. Low profile and look like real life modern docking ports.

[loppnessmonsta]

I should have specified. I meant between the Active and Passive versions.

[Eric S]

Ah. I think I like the active better, but I can't remember what the passive looks like so I'm not sure why I think I like the active better.

[fusty]

I'm curious. I know functionally the docking ports are identical, but what's the difference visually? I haven't gotten around to actually docking anything with them, yet, but would like to get an idea of which are cooler looking first.

Personally, I like the active sides. They are slightly slimmer, and have more doodads on them. The passives are more plain.

[loppnessmonsta]

I finally got around to playing with them more, and I agree. The actives look cooler.

[Carraux]

Pardon me, but what is the functional difference between "active" and "passive" docking ports? I don't get it.

[loppnessmonsta]

None. Functionally, they're identical to the vanilla docking ports. Except for sizes. Visually, the actives have more doodads and have a straight edge, while the passives have an angled, more pronounced edge.

Edited April 25, 2013 by loppnessmonsta

[Eric S]

Found a mistype in the config files. All the ones I've checked have "breakintTorque" instead of "breakingTorque".

[fusty]

Found a mistype in the config files. All the ones I've checked have "breakintTorque" instead of "breakingTorque".

Nice spot, thank you!

[Rusk]

All combinations are possible? I just tried Active-Active and it didnt work. Ships just bumped into each other, separated and no evidence of any magnetic force. Speed was 1-2m/s. Any ideas?

Also then I lost my temper slightly and pressed "decouple node" which surprisingly actually separates the node from the ship. I'm cool, I think.

[Fyrem]

Rusk, then it would seem that you put them in upside down.

[Ariellus]

err the speed was 1-2m/s ? try it again with 0.1-0.2m/s

[cxg2827]

I have a station using the docking ports. Active-active works, passive-passive works too. Dock too quick and it just bounces off

[loppnessmonsta]

Rusk, then it would seem that you put them in upside down.

Sounds like this to me. I've noticed a tendency for these to attach inside out in the editors. Perfectly avoidable... if you notice it. You should be able to see red bits after you've attached the Actives. The passives should have little... plates? i guess? sticking in from the outer edge. If you've got them backwards they'll just look like hollow white cones.

[Rusk]

So Doc whats your expertise?