nezumi

Head's up, when I select KSP Interstellar Extended from CKAN, or try to update it, I get the following error (from CKAN): When I click on the link on the front page for v1.2 of Interstellar, the link is 404. (CKAN problem. Will take to the appropriate thread, if I can't troubleshoot it myself. Apologies, I thought it was a mod bundled with IE. Also, either the link is fixed, or my Internet had a really weird hiccup.)

@hazard-ish that is amazing. I love the video. Is there a trick to planning all of your gravity assists? Or is it just place PE/AP on the orbit and wait until you have a hit?

Hurrah! Works perfectly now. Thank you.

When the inertial fusion reactors disappeared, it killed a bunch of in-progress flights. I went to find the files from an old install, but I couldn't find anything by that name. What do I need to copy over so I can at least finish up those missions?

Thermal nozzles should be pulling /only/ from thermal power (which makes them ideal for early use with fission reactors, and your later fusion reactors can pair up nicely with the charged particle generator).

-deleted & consolidated-

I went back through just to see where the Hybrid Thermal Rocket is supposed to kick on, and here's what I found. All of this is with version 1.8.20, fuel switch 2.0.7, installed via CKAN. I removed Interstellar, deleted the cache, and reinstalled (not fuel switch though). I don't see a 'community tech tree' mod, so I didn't touch that. The front page says the Thermal Turbojets become Hybrid Thermal Rockets with Advanced Nuclear Propulsion. Digging through the ModuleManagerTechTree, Advanced Nuclear Propulsion is the ID name, but the displayed name is High Efficiency Nuclear Propulsion. I recommend changing this on the front page. Regardless, when I go to Advanced Nuclear Propulsion, aka High Efficiency Propulsion, it shows the engine accepts only atmosphere as a fuel mode. http://imgur.com/R8RJtih Based on the fact that I have that tech (see the image) and it's a "Hybrid" Thermal Turbojet, I think this is a bug. I did find a workaround; by replacing UpgradedThermalTurbojet with ThermalTurbojet, the functionality returns to normal. For some reason this already works fine in my sandbox game (also restored from months ago). Hopefully this is a result of dusting off ancient games and nothing more epidemic?

I already have Advanced Nuclear Propulsion (hence having Hybrid Thermal Turbojets, not just Thermal Turbojets. I also have magnetic nozzles unlocked, which is from the same tech.) It sounds like this is just a bug from loading a game across versions. I'll see about locking and unlocking it via debug and see if that fixes it.

Jumping back on after a few months away, the Hybrid Thermal Rocket no longer accepts anything but atmosphere as propellant. Is this an intentional change? I have the old files still, but I wanted to be sure before I "fixed" it.

Thank you! I'll tell you how it works out.

Mark IV Spaceplane System, https://kerbalstuff.com/mod/380/Mark%20IV%20Spaceplane%20System I see it added the Interstellar portion, but only added the three vanilla fuels. Since there's only one piece for each size, I believe the inherent mod functionality does the same. Is there an easy fix I can make for this on my own?

This is fantastic and saves me so much headache. Is there an easy way to extend it to fuel tanks in other mods (for instance, I have a Mk4 mod I'm looking to play with), or did you just hand-code and -calculate it for each fuel tank?

Thank you thank you thank you! I spent about forty minutes hunting for "mk3" updates with no luck at all. I was ready to spend an hour making manual changes, but this is DEFINITELY easier (and already tested and appropriately balanced).

I got frustrated trying to mix Interstellar and Mk3 parts, so I used the fuel mod to make the fuels switchable--and then realized (again) the fuel volume varies significantly between vanilla and Interstellar. I went ahead and bumped Mk3 up to match Interstellar volumes. I know liquid fuel is generally lower thrust and ISP than liquid methane. But... I still feel like I'm cheating pretty heinously. Is there a reason why Interstellar boosts the fuel volumes so much? (And more to the point, am I a cheater-pants for doing the same??) Edit: I guess my question is, is a vanilla engine + fuel tanks carrying ten times the fuel somehow overpowered contrasted with an interstellar engine + Interstellar fuel tanks? I do notice vanilla fuel tanks + Interstellar engines regularly run out of juice... but maybe that's just me sucking.

I'm playing career and suck at doing contracts, so I'd be happy with the standard ones being cheaper The 650 price I believe is based off of the vanilla RCS Thruster Block (which is 620). A 5% to 50% price increase for retractability seems reasonable. However, I'm a little stumped why the price for the baseline resistojets is 2-3.4k. Reading the description, it's just super-heating the fuel. My inclination would be to drop the cost of the baseline resistojets to closer to 1-1.8k, with the retractable ones at around 1.5-2.5k. (But again, I don't know why the baseline ones were priced as they were.) If the baseline resistojets are priced properly, I'd put the retractable ones to 3k (50% more than the four-directional resistojet).

I'm showing resistojets as 2,000 or 3,400 for the RCS blocks, but the super-cool retractable one is only 650.

Are you running 1.0.5? Last I heard, MechJeb hadn't formally been released for that yet, and has plenty of bugs. (Not that it didn't have a few odd behaviors in 1.0.4. I generally avoided any automation except prevent flame-outs while in atmosphere.)

Mechjeb likes to throttle down for a lot of reasons; terminal velocity in the atmosphere, jet engine flame-outs... actually, that's all I can think of. You can change those specific settings in, I believe, Utilities, by unselecting those two. I've never seen any Interstellar pieces move the throttle notch next to the NavBall.

Figured it out! It's the darn ISRU. When the engine drops, the fuel flow was dropping too. Turning off the ISRU, fuel flow returns to normal and the engine kicks back on. My guess is, the engine would pull from the four nose cones until they're empty. The ISRU would fill the nose cones preferentially, so the engine sees a trickle more fuel in there and would start feeding again--but only at the rate the ISRU produces. If the ISRU is off, only then it'll switch over to using the main fuel tanks. Engine heat is a function of fuel flow, so a total red herring. Thank you for bearing with me on this. Good to be able to get into orbit!

I've been playing with it as well on my other box, which is 1.0.5, using both the current and a more dated version of Interstellar. There's definitely some play between the engine and the two Thermal Control Systems I have on. The ship was steady around 2062K for a long while with one panel open. The craft shook abruptly, then the temperature dropped (slowly) to 1880K. Retracting, it jumps back up 2062K. Extending both, it nosedived to 1576K. BUT there's no loss of thrust. I may go back to 1.0.4, remove the heat control systems, and see how it operates then. Thank you for looking into this though. Now that I know it's not intentional, I can experiment a little more, and cheat with a clean conscience

Sure, here's an image. http://imgur.com/U5IITkw There's no separate reactor; just the Closed Cycle Gas Core Engine, using Uranium Hexaflouride, burning liquid fuel as propellant. I can post the craft files as well if it would help. (This could also have been an ongoing issue, but I've never had an instance where I require such a long burn before. If it dropped off while doing course corrections and such, I honestly wouldn't have noticed.)

Did a reboot, no change. Before launch, thermal power is 4.4GW_th (which is maximum). Max Power Output is 4.37 GW (also max). Core temperature 9859K (after launch the engine temperature climbs from around 466k to around 1500K, with some variation. Not sure how that works out.) Before launch status is Active, at 0.1%, but at launch immediately goes to 100%. About a minute after launch, thrust abruptly drops to 241.2kN, engine temperature falls, losing about five degrees a second. Once it drops below around 1200K, thrust drops to 68.5kN. Watching the reactor system interface, there's no change; max power is 4.37 GW, thermal power 4.4 GW_th, status is 100%, active. I may try a reinstall to see if that fixes anything.

Nope. The ship is Closed Cycle Gas Core Engine, stock ISRU, ore storage, ton of fuel tanks, passenger compartments, science experiments, solar panels, batteries, radiators. I'm still running 1.0.4. If it were acceleration issues, than I'd expect it to kick back up as my speed drops. Instead, once it runs for a certain amount of time (and I get my speed up), it throttles back. Acceleration shifts back to zero, and then negative as gravity takes over. Thrust only returns if I shut off the engine for a while. I imagine if I turned it off long enough it would return to full thrust... but I hit the ground before that point.

Alright, so I'm having an odd issue. I have a ship I landed on Moho (with some struggling). It's 250 tons of fuel and a closed cycle gas core engine. When I go to lift off again, the engine temperature rises to around 1500k and I get proper thrust, then unexpectedly starts to drop. Thrust goes from 862 to 68.5. I lose about 1 degree/second, then seems to bottom out around 790 until I crash into the ground. Turning the engine on and off gives me short bursts. Waste heat is 0 (for the ship and the part) thermal power is full, uranium hexaflouride is near full, electric charge for the ship is full (although the part shows .18). It's using liquid fuel. Is this intentional behavior? What's it in reaction to? Is there a way to reduce it?

I run KSP-I on Linux with no issue. Like Freethinker said, try removing the plugin entirely and re-install.