Jump to content

Terwin

Members
  • Posts

    1,606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Terwin

  1. The really depends on what you are doing. If you are trying to create a rainbow table(a long list of pre-and post encryption passwords that you can then use to look up encrypted passwords to know the unencrypted values), you would obviously want to use a GPU as you are calculating the encrypted value for thousands of potential passwords and that can be done in parallel. Other activities may work better on a CPU, it all depends on what you are trying to do. (example: a rotating cypher like Enigma, where the encryption state changes for each character) In short, GPU is good for performing the same task in parallel, CPU is better for performing more convoluted or distinct tasks, just as magnemoe said. Note: 'cracking codes or encryption' covers a very broad range of activities, you would need to be much more specific to get a specific answer.
  2. RoverDude was saying KSP\GameData\UmbraSpaceIndustries\MKS\Patches\MKS_CTT.cfg is the file to check for any references to that node. For example, @PART[Tundra_Kerbitat375]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = longTermHabitation } indicates that the Tundra 3.75m Kerbitat should be in the longTermHabitation module.
  3. If you read that article, it points out that, assuming a world population of 10bln using British standard of living for 2009(because they have those numbers, but they round them up 25% for convenience), we have enough uranium and thorium in the united states to power the world for 100,000 years with a fuel cost portion of the energy at $0.0004 /kwh (@$3000/kg) (ignoring all other sources of power such as solar or oil) Unless you look at harvesting Uranium from seawater, which gives us another 64,000 years(ignoring the fact that uranium in seawater is currently in a state of equilibrium, suggesting that there are available deposits to re-dissolve and presumably in-flowing sediment from rivers and streams that will replace much of what we take out, letting the natural leaching of rain water slowly collect those 2.8ppm of uranium in the crust for us without strip-mining the whole planet) umm, this page: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/thorium.aspx from 2017 claims that there is 6.3 mln tons available at $80/kg. Your article above found a study from 1969 that said 3B short tons(2.7B metric tons) should be recoverable @$500/kg($~3000/kg today)(not including sea-water extraction as it was from 1969) According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power Thorium is 3x as abundant as uranium in the earth's crust. Currently the cost of disposing of the unneeded thorium from rare earth mines is why we don't produce niobium in the US, as thorium is classified as a nuclear waste and makes such mining cost prohibitive compared to China.
  4. The community tech tree has a large number of nodes that may or may not be used by other mods. I strongly suspect that to fill all of the nodes, you would need to install enough mods that the conflicts would break your game. The alternative is to install the mod that hides empty nodes.
  5. There is one part(light globe) that does not work with KSP 1.10, you can either delete that part config(it stops on that part showing the path where to find it during game loading) or you can download an updated version fro github. Other than that, the latest version of USI-MKS works fine on KSP 1.10.1
  6. You will need to adjust compatibility so that you can see 1.7.x compatible mods. It is generally better to manually install, but you should see it in ckan if you check compatibility.
  7. You need an engineer outside your vessel, and I think some resources(materials kits and possibly specialized parts) to switch modules(Some parts need kits, other need kits+spec parts, others can swap with just an engineer, I forget which of those drills are) Generally if you have the 'X -> Y' with a button to change y, then a button to move Y into X, you require some resource that gets consumed, so I am pretty sure drills need more than just an engineer on hand to switch what a drill is harvesting. (for example: cargo containers just cycle through all options with one button, as they do not require any parts to change, so nothing is lost if you must cycle through several to get to what you want) The 50m parts('Atlas') are planed to be added along with W.O.L.F and they are slated to be added in the 'Next' version of MKS. (Originally 'next' was 1.8, I think, but then RoverDude got busy, and he has had less time to tweak the game balance/add finishing touches/etc. This delay *may* be related to RD contributing to KSP 2, or perhaps his real life just got busy). In any case, it is generally considered impolite to pester the modders about next/planed releases. (not that RD has ~180 followers[receiving email alerts] on this thread, ready to jump on W.O.L.F. as soon as it comes available, concerned about no more beta releases available from his twitch or anything)
  8. Do they have 2 SpaceX compatible man-rated docking ports? (plus one for the supply dragons) They need to keep one connected as an escape pod if tehre are any crew on board, plus one for bringing up additional crew. Also, I think Soyuz handles the refueling? So if Dragon does not offer that capability Soyuz will still be needed to top off the tanks.
  9. I like using KIS/KAS, as that adds a few tools(wrench and power screw-driver) that allow engineers to attach and detach modules. There are range limits and a weight limit based on the number of kerbals in-range, but those can be changed in a config file if they get too bothersome, or, you can install RoverDude's Konstruction mod which has parts that add to the amount of mass an engineer can move around using KAS(fork-lift parts, crane parts, etc) This also allows me to remove things that are no longer needed like engines, wheels, and reaction wheels, and reduces/eliminates the need for lots of docking ports(if I remember correctly, the number of available docking ports in physics range has an exponential impact on frame rates due to each one checking if each of the others are in-range)
  10. That looks sort of like the orbital construction yard for EPL(?) that I think is still included, but is hidden/disabled. You may need to move the config file out of a discontinued directory or something to get it back
  11. Being able to use uninflated ranger modules certainly sounds like a bug, and the auto-turn-off is likely related to that bug. Kerbals can go Tourist for multiple reasons. If they go tourist due to lack of EC or supplies, they can be brought back with EC or supplies, if they go tourist due to lack of habitation, they can be brought back by either improving habitation or a med-bay, if they go tourist due to an expired home timer, they can only be brought back by a med-bay. A med-bay uses colony supplies to reverse hab and home timers, but unlike a colonization module, it can reverse expired timers as well as unexpired timers(but it takes more colony supplies and the kerbal must be inside the medbay). I do not think the timers stop when a kerbal becomes a tourist, so if a kerbal has been a tourist for a long time, it is probable that only a med-bay can revive them. The mods made by Roverdude should be fine, and the GC, IR and Extraplanetary launch pads mods should also be fine(GC and IR are currently supported and EPL is formerly supported), that seems to leave the visual mods(which may or may not do more then just graphic enhancements), Better time-warp(anything that messes with offline processes is suspect and this mod may or may not do that), Instantiator and ModularFlightIntegrator First, try reinstalling all the USI mods manually as CKAN is notorious for messing up mod installations. If that does not work, it is time to start uninstalling mods one at a tie to determine the culprit. Instantiator says it is only compatible up throutgh 1.3.1, so I would try dropping that one first , followed by modularFlightIntegrator, then better time warp. I am pretty sure I have heard people mention using MKS with Kopernicus systems, so if the above steps do not work, your options are trying a fresh install or removing the visual mods to see if one of those is the culprit.
  12. Green is not the ideal color for photosynthesis on earth, but it was just what was left over as the pink/purple bacteria of the day were sucking up the easier to use wavelengths with competition too fierce for multicellular plants to evolve. You only see earth-clones on TV/movies because space-suit mock-ups are expensive, heavy, clunky, and uncomfortable, so they are not used unless essential for the plot, and that means earth-like worlds. Also, if you have the choice between building your base on an earth-like world and an equally strategic barren rock, which would you choose if you care about the morale of your workers/troops? Planetary ring systems are temporary, Saturn's rings are a geologically recent event and will be gone 'soon'(less than 100 million years). It is entirely possible that Jupiter, and even Earth may have had rings in their (distant)past, they just do not last very long when talking about planetary life-spans(and the in-fall is not great for those living under them).
  13. Once we have a few decades of experience with long-term space habitats, it should be fairly trivial to make one with lots of spare parts/resources, some high efficiency engines(probably something ion if nothing better by then),, and an etra-large fuel tank, and send them off to the best candidate systems. Especially if parasite craft would let it harvest any essential consumables from gas giants and small moons, even if the destination system does not have anything you might want to live on.
  14. If a full tank can pass through a vacuum portal, then a pipe passing through vacuum can also pass through a vacuum portal. Even if our current industrial vacuums are not up to snuff, I expect the cost incentives would ensure a solution is quickly found to allow a portal to be created in a terrestrial vacuum chamber which can have a pipe run through the portal.
  15. 1) You need a version of GC that allows manufacturing a kit off kerbin, I do not think that this version is currently included in MKS, so you probably want to install GC separately. You cannot select a different vessel for an already constructed kit, the vessel is set when the kit is created. 2) no clue, I never tried, this, I would build the bits then use KIS/KAS to add them to my base 3) GC has multiple components that can build kits, including a mobile construction unit(you still need to add wheels). I do not remember which MKS parts can build kits, but I think it should be any of the parts that let an engineer assemble specialized parts from refined materials.
  16. If atmosphere does not spill out of a space suit during transit, and a fuel tank does not spill during transit, then why not just run a pipe through the portal? Just pipe the hydrolox straight into the engine with powerful earth-mounted electrical pumps, no need for anything but a combustion chamber and engine bell. Even just high-pressure steam would work fine, you would not even need actual combustion on your 'rockets' If you don't want the pumps on earth, you need to switch to a 'transporter pad' type of arrangement, where you have distinct 'beaming' events. (or go with the 'existing network of precursor gates' as suggested above. 'Magic' technology that is not properly understood is often a good reason why the technology has not been optimized for human use)
  17. This is exactly *why* urban and suburban amateur astronomy is implausible, too much light pollution already exits from terrestrial sources. your problems have nothing to do with Starlink. You will never get the 50+ car dealerships which turn their neighborhoods bright as day to turn off their lights, that is the most cost-effective method under their direct control to prevent their stock from being stolen, and they have plenty of local political clout to ensure no law will impinge upon that. You can argue and complain all you want, but the political reality is, this will not change. If your solution requires that this change, then your solution will not ever work, and if you really want something that will work, you need to find a different solution. *Lots* of hobbies get short shrift when they are not convenient, yours is not the first, and will not be the last. If anything I would think you would be happy about StarLink funding Starship/super heavy, because this should lead to a much more cost-effective fix for your city-council sitting car dealership owners: a dramatic reduction in the price of orbital astronomy. If the cost to orbit gets down to the same scale as a good home set-up, then you get to the point where a small club of hobbyists can get their own satellite(s) up and no longer be restricted by time of day or neighbors with awful taste in outdoor lights. Personally, the only out-door lights I have outside of December are front and back porch lights that are both under roofs that limit the light to downward angles, and usually only on for a few minutes at a time.(unlike my neighbors that have uncovered lightbulbs that ruin my night vision any time I look their way, often left on for months straight) Give up asking for a solution that requires that people not be idiots, and look for a solution that can actually work.
  18. MKS manufacturing parts require kerbals to work at full efficiency, the more stars on your highest ranked kerbal of each type the better. Scientists aid agriponics and other organic related processes Engineers aid inorganic processes(refining raw materials like metal ore or minerals for example) Pilots aid with logistics(if you put one in a rover, then your local logistics extends from 100m to > 1km I believe) Only the highest ranked kerbal of each type counts(scientist or engineer, the rank of the pilot does not matter I don't think) Also, Colony supplies are less life-support and more luxury supplies to keep your kerbals happy(Kolony modules stop/reverse the habitation and home timers), and no longer matter if your habitation is high enough(pilots stop home/habitation counters if there is 1 year of habitation in the current vessel, Engineers and scientists require 5 years of habitation) Once you have a station with enough habitation, the only utility of colonization modules(and colony supplies) is for growing your colony(not sure of the details, but you do need at least one male and one female on board for this to work, and it is not quick). Personally, I just go with a large hab-space for most of my colonies and do not mess with colony supplies 5% sounds like you do not have a scientists on board to boost your agriponics. You get the same efficiency on the ISRU with no engineer on board. note: the nom-o-matics from USI-LS are not affected by kerbal rank, and I find that they are usually an easier way to turn mulch back into supplies because they only need fertilizer and power. Also, they always produce at the same rate, making them easier to plan for.
  19. Modern air-to-air and ground-to-air combat seems to be more and more focused on missiles. The smarter the missiles get, the the more scenarios where their performance envelope and disposability make them superior to a manned vessel. Drones also seem to be largely functioning as missile platforms, giving them greater range and utility. I see no reasons for this progression to change. Anything in space is expensive enough that missiles and drones will clearly have a superior price-point and performance envelope over anything that needs to cater to humans. Drones would be a bigger thing if the long range engine is expensive enough to be worth recovering, otherwise a MIRV type weapon would work just as well and be less expensive. As such, I would expect in-system space combat to consist of mostly of long range missiles with terminal guidance. Depending on the target type, the warheads could range from a payload of ball-bearings(to deny useful orbits to the enemy) to scatter-shot, to kinetic kill vehicles consisting mostly of a large solid shield hiding the guidance thrusters(protection from lasers and other anti-ordinance weaponry), or even nuclear warheads(probably mostly for dug-in targets like underground bases or basses hidden deep inside a reinforced asteroid).
  20. Keep track of them all. My ISP did not seem to care about them, until I tried to terminate my service(moving out of the service area) and they refused to stop charging me until I returned my modem(to their service desk(at HQ), during normal business hours)
  21. From my understanding, the 'boost' function is intended to allow lower tech/smaller modules to participate in more advanced processes. The total boost is supposed to be equivalent to having the same tonnage of advanced components working as you have less advanced components boosting(ie output of 10 tons of refinery+10 tons of crusher boosting components = output of 20 tons of refinery). Total output and total consumption of machinery should be identical for the same total mass of components regardless of the proportion that are boosting vs processing. This is supposed to keep your early components from becoming useless once you have added your later components.
  22. How high would the balloon need to get to reach a usable temperature, and how heavy would the working fluid+insulation for that be? (assuming you used a series of intermediate balloons to provide support so that the tube would not need a huge amount of strength to hold it's entire mass)
  23. Keep in mind, the average relative speed is roughly 1/2 of the dV that the tether will provide to the craft. For a tether that gives 100m/s, you need close to 50m of graple-hook for each second of response time for connecting, and in space rapid maneuvers cost a lot of dV. Furthermore, when your graple-hook goes taught, you have a large jerk that could shatter any insufficiently sturdy vessel/tether, giving a dry-mass structural cost(for both tether and vessel) in addition to the graple-hook cost for every additional fraction of a second you gain in your rendezvous window. (and for biologicals, handling a large kinetic shock in one direction, then a smaller but prolonged acceleration in another direction is a significant design constraint, and it only gets worse as you try to increase the utility/dV of the tether, while chemical refueling makes no real difference in difficulty if you are transferring a few m/s or several km/s) Also, tethers are not magic, just a storage device, so you need to restore any dV that they give to a vessel or it will eventually fall out of orbit. A wheel would reduce part of the difficulty, but it is still just as challenging as shooting down an inbound ballistic missile at orbital speeds, and this is not something we can currently do at sub-orbital speeds. And if you miss in the wrong direction, you destroy both your vessel and the tether. Far better to transfer the additional dV in a potential state(aka orbital refueling) as opposed to a kinetic state(That potential energy will need to be delivered to orbit to be given to your vessel one way or another, but docking at 5m/s relative velocity is much easier than docking at 500m/s relative velocity, even if both can give you 1km/s additional dV). After all, gas stations allow refueling via chemical potential as opposed to those spinning wheel things on the sides of some toy car tracks. This is basically the same choice.
  24. One of the big problems with Tethers(beyond actually needing to put them in place before hand) is that you really only get one try to connect two objects with a high relative speed or else your flight plan is busted. (at the moment of contact the relative velocity should be close to zero, but that is a transient state and you do not get any re-tries. Off by a fraction of a second or a cm or two in any direction and you have 'missed' and your mission is SOL. See the missile defense system tests to get an idea on how close we can get at sub-orbital speeds. Hint: they usually measure the miss distance in miles, and this is without needing to sync up with both the object and the tether rotation) What sane CEO or project manager wants to 'bet the company' on a one-shot chance with no chance to retry? Especially if you have alternatives with a high chance of success(even if they cost a lot more). Sure you could 'try again next time their orbits sync' but you will miss any later windows in your flight plan(you want to orbit Mars? Sorry, you missed your tether-boost, and when you caught it 3 hours later your trajectory no longer brings you close enough to mars to achieve orbit with the available fuel. Also the three flights after yours will now need new flight plans because the tether will not be in the expected position/orbit)
  25. That sounds a lot like 'When there exists a commercial SHL vehicle, we can stop paying the SLS 'insurance premium' which is currently being paid to make sure that such capability comes into existence' Personally, I was kind of expecting them to wait for multiple commercial options, just to make sure they always have a backup should one of the options become unavailable for some reason. (which may still be the case, as Blue Origins will probably launch in the next 4 years in addition to Starship) That sounds eminently sensible... and entirely unlike congressional appropriations...
×
×
  • Create New...