Serino

I think the big issue is that there's not really any new mods coming out since most of it has been done and what the majority liked has survived and what they didn't died out. TBH for me what has been making me play less lately is the lack of new stuff to do. Sure I can start a new career, again, and build badass space stations attached to class E asteroids, again, and build bases on every planet, again, but why it's not like I will be doing anything too different since I know how to go about doing all that. KSP just needs some genuinely new content to revitalize it but the question is what else is there to add.

in layman's terms one possible version, the kind that KSPI and Rover have, contracts space, imagine 1km of real distance turns into 1 meter of distance for you, so that you effectivly travel faster without actually having to while the other version, what helaeon and I are trying to do, is like if the ground under your car ripped free of the earth zoomed off to another place and then set itself back down. You and your car never actually moved from where you were, where you are just moved to a new location.

You don't even need two action groups just one which is set on a toggle for both engines. Even though it works by translation though it moves in the direction you are pointing and sometimes when activating your navball shakes or turns which then causes you to go in a weird direction. My advice would be to just give it enough throttle to activate and start moving you then wait for it to stabilize. Once it stabilizes it usually doesn't move and you can smooth throttle it to max with out problems, usually.

This may be a stupid question but where do I get the beehive/experimental version. All I can seem to find are the release versions. Edit: Nvm I could just use my eyes a bit more and I would have seen it.

I PMed you the formulas.

I have the formula for use with anything but by necessity it will have the inaccuracies I pointed out, they wont have anything to do with the calculation itself just realism accuracy. The formula isn't hard, I even have a formula to give the velocity at your altitude so that the game could theoretically set the SMA and eccentricity with it, but I just don't have time at this moment to try and code it since both my wife and daughter are sick. C# is also not something I have a lot of practice in, if this was C++ I would have already whipped up a class for it and submitted it but it's not, so if someone with more C# knowledge/practice than me wants to take a crack at it I would be more than willing to work with them by providing the formulas and continuing to search for a way to make it more realistic. @helaeon Yea I was looking at the cs when my daughter puked on me which ruined that pretty quick. What you said is true about a child SOI but in the interest of keeping this available for all I currently have it only take into account your AM around planet/moon. Anything else requires some thought, though while laying down last night I thought of a way to do it, thought again with my limited knowledge of C# I am not entirely sure it could be done. Nifty thing is that your inclination from one place to the other will stay the same because reasons. In all seriousness though without us building one in reality there's no way to know how inclinations would be so i say they would stay the same for now.

the problem isn't your angular momentum but the difference in the angular momentum between the planets/moons its the difference between coming in and having an orbit vs arriving and being on an escape trajectory. It has been a while since my last physics class but I am pretty sure that your true angular momentum is your angular momentum around the planet + your angular momentum around the star but we would only be able to calculate and use the angular momentum around the planet. That means we would be ignoring the almost double angular momentum that Jool's orbit around Kerbol has over Kerbin's orbit that's what I mean by inaccurate. In reality going from kerbin to jool with the alcubierre drive would still require you to add quite a bit of Dv to stay there rather than fall back towards the sun. If everyone is ok with that then I can start work on trying to figure out how to work that into Rover's code once my wife and daughter are no longer sick, or if someone wants to start work now I can give them the equations needed to do it.

I have the equations to do it but currently hunting through all of my textbooks that I can find, and some that a friend of mine emailed me, to convert it over to using velocity so that we don't have to worry about changing orbital parameters. Edit: nvm I figured it out once I realized that my equations already had everything needed to get the velocity when dropping out. Now to learn C# syntax and get a compiler so I can test my formula. Edit 2: While I have the equations to do this I have come to realize that the further from your starting planet/moon you go the more inaccurate the value for your angular momentum would become. It gets even worse when you go to or from SOI inside of another SOI, ie moons. Coding in those values would work but only for stock planets which would unfortunately make this incompatible with any mods that add planets or moon or change where planets are or mass, The point I am trying to make is that while Rover's isn't the turn on zip away turn off and angular momentum takes back over type of drive it is still pretty close to another form of the drive and getting the first type would be increasingly inaccurate with distance without locking this to stock worlds only.

@Bakase and @helaeon it depends on which version of the alcubierre drive is looked at one moves space time at a fixed speed in the direction you are pointing, there by conserving your angular momentum, or if you prefer your total energy (I don't think it really matters what we call it right now as long as we all understand), but there is another idea that was postulated in the paper written on the drive and metric in the you could use it as a "booster" where it would multiplying your velocity by a number while the drive is active but when it turns off you return to your original velocity, more of a warping space-time to create apparent velocity change without true velocity change. This would keep your velocity the same but move you around. Roverdude's drive works this way. Also @helaeon It is a whole lot more complicated than it seems lol. I had to bust out one of my forgotten college textbooks to find an equation of angular momentum in elliptical orbits. Rover the equations would require you to be able to pull the mass of whatever body the warp field is turned on and off in as well as write it a new SMA and eccentricity instead of letting it determine it for you. If you can do that without having to quickload it or something of that matter then let us know and I can give you the equations to do it. I would write the code and send that to you but I don't know what the mods are written in. I myself happen to be a C++ user with only a semi working knowledge of C, and a few other languages that wouldn't be useful in this situation.

You need to use the regolith extractor to mine with. The tranfer thing makes sense in the fact that asteroids are just considered ships so yea. I am actually turning my E class into an asteroid station right now before I bother with attaching another. The amount of Karborundum I have is so crazy that I ended up building probes with fusion drives cause hey why not.

@Helaeon you are right the real one conserves momentum and even if its not explicitly stated also your momentum vector, if my knowledge of physics isn't failing me, and while that would be a very awesome way to implement this I don't even know if KSP has a momentum variable. It seems to me that it would just be easier to do some simple equations with velocity to determine orbits and such. It would be a nightmare to code in all the information for the warp drive but Roverdude could fake momentum conservation rather than velocity conservation. I wouldn't want him to work on that right now though I would prefer less kraken or more importantly larger drives, which if I remember right he is already working on.

I have noticed some shake when running some ships. Its similar to the flexing you get when you have a long space station and SAS is trying to stabilize it after a bump only with the Drive as the non moving center point of it. I can't find any rhyme or reason behind it, there seems to be no pattern behind when it will or will not do it. Longer ships seem to be more susceptible but even then it's not every warp and sometimes I even go warp after warp with nothing or have it just randomly start in the middle of the warp. It does seem to be more frequent when the SAS is "far" from the drive though.

Just as an expansion to what was said about stella shining light it happened to me on eve but not until I quickloaded. Until that point I was having no bugs and had flown multiple missions but I had to quickload after a random part failure and thats where it started for me.

I think it was just a corrupted file cause I redownloaded and reinstalled and it worked just fine.

Wasn't sure if this thought should be here or in MKS/OKS thread but since this does deployable tanks and such inside an asteroid what about the greenhouses or habitats from OKS. Expanding greenhouses and habitats into the asteroid makes real-world sense and would allow for a lower part count and something to do with the asteroids after emptying them of resources besides just fuel tanks especially if 1 expandable greenhouse part can be used to take the place of all needed greenhouse parts. It could tie into the crew part for the people needed for efficiency. I always ran under the assumption that each biomass module needed its own greenhouse so if I am wrong then this is a useless idea.

I haven't seen an answer to this (unless I'm blind) but even on a clean install I cannot get the stella system to show up at all. No matter the zoom out that I do, all the way to just a tiny dot for the entire system, and even trying to tab to them brings up nothing. I installed the Kopernicus core and the expansion (and the dependancy is says it needs) is there maybe something I am missing. EDIT: I forgot to mention I am using ATM on the fresh install as a precaution, since if I get it working I will be using several mods with it.

Thanks for clearing that up and yes I use ART so it seems that I will be figuring out how to link 2 asteroids together 1 for ART tanks and 1 with all my nifty stuff. I will say you might want to tweak the Karborundum numbers though cause my 23% E class netted me about 4.5ish k Karborundum which I promptly abused by building a fusion SSTO (it needed more than one stage to originally launch it since it was empty until I docked and filled it) with 90 km of Dv and a TWR of over 1 no matter what planet I landed on. It didn't even use up half my stock from that 1 asteroid.

Hey rover I was using the claw/extractor combo on asteroids and was getting proper amounts but figured hey why not get resources faster with a couple of lasers. Unfortunately for some reason they were only mining rocks, does the laser mine resources in order or was it just being a weirdo? I haven't tried the laser again cause I wasn't sure what to make of that and I am mining an E class that is 23% Karborundum so I didn't want to risk losing any if it was being weird.

Ok I edited my post for an MM patch for the warp drives. As I said in the edit notes unless RoverDude decides to have modules that produce EM there is no need to do anything other than target the warp drives themselves for edit. I do agree with RoverDude though the EC requirement is plenty to ensure that you have to plan for interplanetary voyages but I personally think it should start with 0 EM. It makes more sense than having it full. Unless we do some handwaving about the way the EM is used that much negative matter would cause many crafts to be experience acceleration away from the planet due to gravity.

An MM patch could be made to change the requirements for EM production to Karborundum pretty simply that way when new parts come out you don't have to change any values on the part itself over and over as it is redistributed @PART[uSI_WarpDrive*]:HAS[@MODULE[REGO_ModuleResourceConverter]] { @MODULE[REGO_ModuleResourceConverter] { @RecieveInputs=Karborundum,X { } Just replace X with whatever amount of Karborundum that you think should equal 1 EM and tada. Edit: Not sure if that module is just your own invention for the warp drives RoverDude or if it is shared by other parts so I will correct this if other parts use that module. Edit 2: There it's fixed to only do the warp drives so no problems later with regolith. Unless RoverDude decides to do modules to produce EM there is only a need to target the warp drives themselves.

Darkoflame if it uses the same nodes that interstellar does then the nodes are already in CTT and as long as the part names are the same then my cfg for interstellar "should" work. I dont use the lite version so not sure how the parts are that's why I said "should".

I personally like the bubble size restriction. By necessity of how you are containing the negative matter/energy you would build a ring and space time would only be warped near that ring, especially since the ring would only be able to contain a certain amount of matter/energy safely preventing unlimited size.

That would be a jump drive or wormhole you are describing. The Alcubierre Drive works by generating what basically amounts to a wave, in the form of a 4-dimensional sphere, that accelerates to, theoretically, 10c. Since the bubble is moving through space time it isn't instantaneous and there is a travel time. Other than the already mentioned niceties behind not needing to carry reactors to generate lots of power for your craft, even in kspi it was only really necessary for the MPDs and the AD, it also helps with weight so in career mode you spend less money on your accent stage as well as the cost savings, and frame rate savings, in part count. Outside of career there isn't really a use, just started an NFT play instead of KSPI to see which one I like better so I can't comment on if it helps with those parts.

I seriously had to find this after finally setting up all my solar sats in kspi so I could pull 3-400 GW of power for my warp drive. Well there goes my save and half of the reason I still use kspi, the other half is the power beaming.

I don't use DR, it didn't want to play nice with FAR so I got rid of it a few versions ago and never checked back up on it, but I have lithobraked manned pods under the g-limit but over what a standard pod could survive normally so it is possible just not recommended if you are returning just the pod.