TheTaleteller

Hi K.Yeon, I have recently building spaceplanes with your parts and still love them. However there is one kind of part I feel to be missing that would perfectly match in the set. Its OPT-J to MK2 Bicoupler and Tricouplers. Since the J fuselage height is pretty much the MK2 width three in row would match perfectly. Might be the ideal mount for MK2 expansion engines and such. I would have tried to model them myself but cant find the model sources anywhere.

The theoretical specific impulse for H2O2 + Hydrazine is 2760 Ns/kg as for LOX + Methane I found 3580 Ns/kg. In energy methane is superior, but handling tanks with hydrazine and H2O2 is easier thus should have lighter tanks.

Damn i made a translation mistake, its not NO2 its simply Nitrogen N. German Wiki got the compositions in paragraphs text, we dont have detailed composition, New Horizons i.E. did not land on Pluto, for a measurement.

Wikipedia, German version and Nitrogen dioxide.

Titan (pressure about 1.5 atm) NO² - 98.4 % Argon - 1.6 % in higher atmosphere Methane - Traces Triton ( pressure at ground 1.5 to 1.9 pascal): NO² - 99% Methane - 1% (weirdly lot of) CO² - Traces Pluto (pressure at ground 0.3 to 1.5 pascal): NO² - 99.5% CO² - 0.5% Methane - Traces

After this video, i think we need a "Dark Energy Reactor". Two mind blowers from it: a) there is a negative pressure in vacuum space b) conservation of energy does not apply to an expanding relativistic universe *wtf*

Well sometimes I would like the K parts to be slightly thicker than 2.5m because at times radial attached items on cargo wont fit. Its not always enough to have only two parts placed left and right.

Hi there I am not sure if its any help, but I got Blender with the MU importer working on my system. This is a converted J cockpit: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ux713pt540it73k/j_7m_cockpit.blend?dl=0 However, i am no modeller at all, but if its any help I like to convert all existing models to blend format that way.

I like the idea. But UFT should be a prerequisite to build this reactor, and no efficiency upgrade. Somehow i feel the techtree became too short for this. This reactor and a 10m warp drive would make way for epic huge spaceships.

He probably forgot to fix the path as i mentioned ;-)

Erm, its micrograms not milligrams - planck mass. But since we need to produce an artificial event horizon using gravity, instead of the actual black hole it wont matter anyway. 20GW sounds reasonable, we could also assume igniting the reactor requires like 1g of antimatter directly. Optionally the reactor could produce tiny amounts of antimatter while running, since hawking radiation might contain both kinds of particles.

Well OK lets ignore the big issues, its hard SciFi anyway. Actually i think the energy demand to produce a singularity like gravity field is way lesser, of what a warp field would require. besides Kerbal Alcubierre is extremely efficient compared to real world. I think there is another way we have not thinked of and its closer to the Dt-Reactor, and probably more controlable. Lets take the fast evaporating black hole to our advantage. Lets create very very small black holes at a high rate, induce matter for energy conversion, and let them also evaporate at high rate. The energy output wont be that insane, we might be able to direct the particle stream, and there is no insane inert mass we have to carry around. Antimatter is required for starting the process. This would be an "Antimatter Induced Nano Blackhole Reactor", and its output is supposed to be 95% charged particles. Fuel can be anything, density would regulate the maximum output. Its weight at least about a heavy warp drive. How about that?

If you got enough energy to create a stable black hole in the first place, there is no point of creating it, because there is nothing to gain for you. It cant give you more than you put into, its more like a battery than a reactor when feed with energy. The better usecase would be feeding the hole with plain matter, like rocks or gas. That way e=mc² comes into place. Such a system would still be highly unstable and hard to control. Anyway, when your able to build a FTL, you are most likely in possession of the grand unifying theory. This gives you control not only over gravity but all four main forces. To gain high amounts of charged particles all you need to do is influencing the nuclear bounding. Your pretty much beyond the requirement of a black hole, you are probably even beyond the requirement of antimatter for more than giving starter power. As you mention influencing gravity. KSPI-E has FLT, but why dont we have repulsor engines? It should be a breeze to cancel out a planets gravity for take off and landing when your able to fold space. Technically you would gain that ability long before your first FTL space folding test.

Thats still not sound. Due to laws of thermodynamic we cannot create mass out of nowhere, and an artificial gravity field, no matter of its density is not equal to an black hole of the same mass. I can imagine the generation of an black hole by feeding an artificial gravity well with plain matter, harvesting the resulting hawking radiation as charged particles. But i see no way feeding such an converter on energy since it would exceed the output of any energy source by far. The Antimatter reactor is converting milligrams, imagine a thousand tons. Thats nothing you can switch off, it will evaporate exponentially or in more plain words ... explode violently. Besides nothing escapes the schwarzschild radius. Hawking radiation is based on virtual particle pairs, where one partner escapes while the anti-counterpart falls into the black hole, reducing its mass.

Hmm ... in terms of thermodynamics, this would require to feed the reactor with the equivalent of that mass in the first place, as well as getting rid of it without destroying the ship after warp, since warp does not change your newtonian vector and you may like to enter a valid orbit.

I see a "little" theoretical problem with a black hole reactor. There may be no real minimum size for a black hole, and small ones do evaporate due to hawking radiation. However they do it exponentially, and to have one not vanishing in the friction of a second it has to have mass of 1000s tons. Additional black holes at the brink of vanishing seem to get absurdly hot, its like packing Kerbol in the trunk. Given that high mass, its inert moment might get the ship pretty much immovable in classic terms. Its that way at least in our universe, maybe someone really good in math can calculate the values for the KSP universe with its slower speed of light. I consider micro black holes as powerful weapons in space battles, however Kerbin seems not to be be scheduled for an invasion fleet soon ;-)

Well we could imagine directing solar protons towards a tritium target. Another way would be to get Kerbals a little step higher on the Kardashev scale. Like with building really huge solar collectors, harvesting its energy and breeding fusion elements like He3 by pure power.

I like that as well. Since we are pretty close to the sun, would it be an option to harvest the solar heat for power generation? I imagine an umbrella radiator sized collector in front, a thermal generator in the middle and cooling radiators on the back.

I like that idea. Have you considered to contact BobPalmer, because USI has a system called Planetary logistics, storing harvested resources in a virtual Warehouse, exchangeable between outposts. That sounds pretty much like the idea of storing resources on other planets in this tread. Would be cool to implement a generic storage solution instead of reinventing similar wheels all over the place.

Sounds interesting, is such a system possible with KSP? I thought money is the only "resource" accountable when building ships.

Whats if i harvest antimatter in space and land it down at the KSC, would it gain science or prestige?

Rarity is not the only mechanism of challenge possible. For obtaining He3 from surface harvest, it would require to land a pretty massive rover, with adequate equipment and power. You would be required to actively drive it for harvesting, making it a new gameplay mechanic for otherwise mostly useless vehicles. We could also imagine He3 to be more common on poles, since abundance is higher in darker and bumpy regions. I see it more like an addition to gameplay than just another way of getting resource.

Well, He3 Abundance is theoretical for both our Mun as for Kerbal planetary bodys. In reality we also wont be able to mine nuclear raws at the given rates. I am not only thinking about the Mün, but other barren worlds like Moho as well. Getting fuel around Kerbin is rarely a problem, on the outer System we got Jool which is fine, but there is nothing on the inner worlds. Personally I like to colonize my system building shipyards around other worlds by utilizing local resources.

Besides, why cannot He3 be obtained on munar surfaces? From what I know its said to be present in the topmost regolith layer due to solar wind exposure. I would suggest a harvester, mounted on a driving rover, since drills wont make much sense.

If it were for a real spacecraft, superheated pure oxygen would probably be the last thing I would like to have around. ;-)