Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

379 Excellent

About Gotmachine

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Because the convention in the modding scene is that "LiquidFuel" is not hydrogen. The density doesn't match, the ISP and general engine stats don't match. It's much closer to kerosene or methane, and consequently the ISRU options are those of methane. Hydrogen is widely used in major mods as a distinct fuel, with corresponding engines and fuel tanks. You can do ISRU in Kerbalism to produce hydrogen that you can use in those engines. If everything could produce LF, there would be no point in having somewhat realistic ISRU chains instead of the basic stock Ore -> LiquidFuel conversion.
  2. The only really hazardous "space weather" are CME events. Which we are incapable to predict more than a few hours in advance, at best, so no, we don't really plan for it. Unmanned spacecrafts use radiation hardened hardware where that matters, and it is usually enough. Solar panels can be quite sensitive, so they need to be "turned away" when a CME happen. But it all depends on where the craft is. The closer it is to Earth, the higher the magnetopshere protection is. This is a huge issue for manned spaceflight though. While it is possible to design "radiation bunkers" where the crew
  3. So, just to be clear, as the OP seems to imply, the plugin read a pre-computed dataset for a specific body and duration (1 year / 5 years), right ? So what happens when the duration of the data is elapsed ? It cycle back to the beginning ? Also, you mention specific data at the KSC launchsites. What does that mean ? What is the difference between places that have this (more precise, I assume) data, and those that don't ? Regarding performance, took the liberty of quickly profiling this (1.0.2 lite version, ~50 parts ship in atmo) : You're consuming about ~0.25 ms per up
  4. Far from it. The code that handle comms was rewritten nearly from scratch for Kerbalism 4 The commit you linked was a quick and dirty fix in the middle of that rewrite, after that I rewrote the RemoteTech support entirely (it was either that, or dropping it altogether). It should be possible to backport the new 4.x comms implementation to 3.x, but even assuming you know you way around C# code, this isn't a trivial task. Those aren't minor, and the 3.x support code is borked in many ways (and TBH, the whole 3.x comms implementation is an ugly mess). That's why I rewrote it from scra
  5. The orbital survey data is a bit misleading in that it doesn't account for the atmospheric density, which mean that in reality you get 0.06 % of 12% -> 0.72%. Also note that this definition comes from CRP, not Kerbalism, and that the CRP abundance is generic for all atmospheric bodies, and can vary from 0.1 to 50%. IRL, Mars atmospheric water content is more in the ballpark of 0.02%. Regardless, last time I checked, the consensus on atmospheric water extraction on Mars (aka Duna) is that while it is theoretically feasible, it would be extremely inefficient. To get any meaningful am
  6. Which, like the content of your other posts, tell me that your making zero effort in searching for answers before spamming this thread. I don't really care and I have nothing against you, but don't expect me to make an effort answering you. And yes, the documentation and the mod aren't perfect. Far from it. This isn't a product, this is a very time-consuming hobby contributed by whoever has the courage or skill to help and share their work for free. We value people giving feedback and are usually open to discussion and accept contributions if they wish to help, but as I said, this thr
  7. 1. Most of your questions have answers on the github wiki. 2. Personally, I don't check that forum often and I don't think regular Kerbalism users come here often either. If you want to chat about Kerbalism, the Kerbalism Discord server is much more appropriate. Regarding you comments on the automation triggers, see https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/638 and https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/643
  8. Not 100% sure. They might work in the latest version as a side effect of the B9PS support I added for NFS. Pretty sure they won't work in previous Kerbalism versions. If someone is willing to test if the EC production rate is consistent in the planner / in flight / in the background, we could get a definitive answer.
  9. There are exceptions depending on what parts you are scaling, but as a general rule Kerbalism is not very compatible with Tweakscale. The habitat module is incompatible, and almost all modules we have some background processing for won't account for the tweakscaled values. The core issue is quite fundamental and while we could partially fix it for some modules, it would require a lot of effort. Moreover, our current development path will make support outright impossible in the future. This being said, we should probably have a support patch that remove the Tweakscale module from all
  10. Try keeping "Kerbin". If I remember right, with Kopernicus, the home body internal name is always Kerbin.
  11. You assume wrong. We consider ore to be generic regolith (because it is available everywhere). The carbon content of regolith is usually ridiculously low. Less than 100 ppm on the moon. There are potential localized source of carbon rich minerals on mars, but we simply ignore that. Also, while there are some studies that estimate a small energy efficiency advantage (with the whole system considered: ISP, storage requirements, etc) at doing methane instead of hydrogen for propellant production from regolith, both paths are too energy and infrastructure intensive for any kind of large scale op
  12. And Kerbalism explicitly re-balance that. How realistic our numbers are will always be debatable. The point is have an order of magnitude that result in relatively realistic possibilities with current technologies. I'm not sure what you are arguing for exactly. Our premise is that regolith is basically useless for any meaningful propellant production without industrial scale operations. If not due to power requirements, for the mass/volume of the equipment that would would be required to process it in those quantities. The molten regolith process is balanced as something that you c
  13. Inflatable and pressure mechanics are a bit bugged currently. They will usually finish inflating if you unload the vessel and timewarp for a bit. And yes, you need nitrogen to inflate them. No. As for ISRU, yes, ISRU in Kerbalism is hard, slow, and balanced to be relatively realistic regarding what you can make, and where. Meaning that your options are quite limited. The first thing you need to understand is that we consider LiquidFuel as an abstraction of methane, which effectively require an abundant carbon source to be produced. Our numbers are an estimation based on variou
  14. Note that following 1.11, this isn't true anymore since the EVA jetpack inventory item has it's own EVA propellant (in stock) or MonoPropellant (with Kerbalism) storage (5 units). There is also a "fuel cylinders" inventory item that carry 3 extra units of MP. Also note that : - On going on EVA, those inventory items will be (re)filled with the MP stored on the vessel (if any). - On boarding, the MP stored in the EVA kerbal inventory items will be transferred to the vessel MP storage, if there is some storage available.
  15. While we wait for @Sir Mortimer to update the OP, here is the KSP 1.11 compatibility release : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/releases/tag/3.12 Should be available on CKAN already. Updated for KSP 1.11 Monopropellant support for KSP 1.11 EVA jetpack and "eva fuel cylinders" (@gotmachine) Removed ability to disable habitats, to mitigate the (unfixed) bugs with pressurization (@gotmachine) Added radiation fields configs for GPP and GEP (@SirMortimer) Enable water recycler process on US2 Water Purifier wedge (@ccaviness) #690 : Handle B9PS switchin
  • Create New...