Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by danfarnsy

  1. Hey @Nertea, figured you'd like this. A University of Michigan group took a Hall thruster and ran it way past its design power without getting big losses in efficiency. https://www.futurity.org/hall-thrusters-2864142-2/
  2. I'll be playing. But, jeez, that's a lot of features not even ready for Early Access by February. Pick up the pace!
  3. The CryoEnginesRestock patch modifies Vector, Skipper, Rhino, and Mammoth to use LH2/Ox. You can remove that config file if you don't want it.
  4. Yes, parts on the same craft. But a single craft can have more than one heat loop. Example: If I have a small nuclear reactor providing electricity, it will run at a temperature around 750 K (or something), and it will need a few small radiators to match. So in the VAB, I right click on those parts and make sure they have the same Loop ID. If you don't specify a loop, all parts you add will default to Loop 0. But if you then add a larger nuclear engine from Kerbal Atomics, which runs at a higher temperature, you can set it and larger radiators on a different loop ID running at the engine's higher temperature. Everything on the same loop will come to the same temperature.
  5. For System Heat, it doesn't matter. Heat sources and radiators have to be on the same assigned loop, but can be placed anywhere.
  6. You're right, solar gameplay isn't blocked by the absence of a procedural part, but now that you have created the tools for a great looking procedural part, there are a lot of other places (solar included) where it could be used to make awesome lower-part-count ships. Structural trusses for space stations or antenna masts or Stowaway-style centrifugal ships or the like come to mind too. Is there a need for it at release when you've got deadlines? I don't know. But your team has certainly opened the door for some cool stuff that looks good in a way that procedural parts modding in KSP 1 couldn't reach. Hopefully modders can hook into that for KSP 2, if your team doesn't go beyond radiators. Great looking procedural parts that scale their textures and models correctly is a huge deal. I'm stoked.
  7. Hey @Nertea, when are we going to get an update on Heat Con... oh, Oooohhh... very nice
  8. Brief test: On old computer, i5-4670 @ 3.4 GHz, GTX 780M, and plenty of RAM, scatter on the Mun looks fine at the right height. I previously had turned off scatter because the bug was creating floating rock fields. I didn't notice a performance hit or anything now. Did scatter there previously have more variability in size and spacing? Things seem a little uniform, but like I said, I've been playing without it for a while. I didn't really look at shadows, but I'm already using scatterer.
  9. Are you using TUFX for your color adjustments? You're matching the brightness, contrast, etc. of NASA photos about as well as I could imagine from KSP. I tried to get there with a TUFX profile, but yours is fantastic.
  10. Google! Search "KSP far future technologies" and this is the second result from the forums. Your mission reports should be stickied, they're that good. In my current career, there's enough fusion-powered crypto mining that I can export He3 from the Mun to pay for my other missions. Full canister goes for almost 2 million space bucks!
  11. If you're still wondering about this, here's an example: https://imgur.com/6BkfJ8L I used Throttle Controlled Avionics to keep the thrust balanced.
  12. I tried to change the config files for the Frisbee, so that it generates full heat (360 MW) at all lengths and adds increasing amounts of radiator capacity, instead of reducing heat output with increased length. I didn't do very well with adding SystemHeatRadiator to the B9PS subtypes (similar to how Heat Control radiators are patched by System Heat). B9PS gave me a lot of errors upon game load. Is there a problem with adding SystemHeatRadiator to a part that already has SystemHeatEngine? Or am I just doing something dumb? I was trying to do this because I'd like to have the radiator mass curve adjust more smoothly with throttle cap. A Frisbee capped at 90% throttle should only put out 324 MW of heat, while a 102m Frisbee should be able to reject 336 MW on its own, only needing extra radiators for the last 24 MW up to full throttle at 360 MW. Instead, the 102m Frisbee still requires 21.6 MW of heat rejection from extra radiators at 90% throttle. This gets weird, where a 20m engine with thrust capped at 10% throttle still requires about 10 tons of extra radiator mass, about 50 tons total. A 20m engine capped at 30% throttle ends up being almost 70 tons with enough radiators. 55m engine at 50% throttle cap with radiators weighs almost as much as 110m engine. Example for what I tried with one of the subtypes:
  13. A few pics of a station. Dual axis arrays are handled by BG servo on an orbit-long timer.
  14. Yes. The CryoTanks included in this mod have a patch for the stock ore converters to make methane and hydrogen.
  15. Yes, that worked out. A few lessons learned for He3 scooping: Hydrolox boosters (Etna or Fuji) have much better thrust to weight, require no radiators, and have infinite fuel below 188 km. You only need maybe 80-150 m/s to circularize at 350 km after leaving atmosphere, so you can keep your wet weight down. Fusion aerospike eats a lot of He3 on the way down and up. Mk3 doesn't properly handle largest containers. Maybe you can shield it with fairing, but using the Mk4 mod makes it easy. The trip from low Jool orbit takes a while, so if you don't want to make lots of trips, a big plane is probably worth it (5x-ish the payload, 3x the weight, and 1x the flight time). Drag at target altitude (below 106 km) is no joke, especially if your speed drops near Mach 1 (900 m/s). Fusion aerospike or "Project Eeloo" engine on closed-cycle can do the job if you get leveled out and climb slowly, but hydrolox did much better. This drag is also why I didn't get any trips to work with deployable heat shield. My Mk4 scoop powered by an Etna had 30 m/s^2 acceleration, and drag peaked at about 27 m/s^2 even with a low angle of attack. Stick the pilot in a pod in the cargo bay. You don't have to put harvester scoop on the front, but you only need one. Front is a great place for the scoop without trying to use the Mk3 or Mk4 cockpits. This was fun.
  16. Stock Visual Enhancements, Scatterer, and TUFX with this profile. I was going for less cinematic and more of the crisp high-brightness photos you see from NASA EVAs.
  17. You quoted me as well when you said this. I wasn't looking for a change to the mod; I was looking to see if somebody had examples I could follow because I haven't figured it out yet.
  18. Big caps and a couple of MX-1s can power a Cyclotron VASIMR ... for a little while I kind of like how the radiators match Sarnus
  19. New Garnet MX-1 has a very high power to weight ratio compared to 2.5m and 3.75m reactors, dry mass even lighter than MX-0. Models look great.
  20. Like I said Just go ahead and play it. All the space resources stuff is extra.
  21. They can be launched, but some of them get very expensive. A filled 3.75m round container of He-3 is almost 2 million space bucks. There are harvester parts (exospheric and atmospheric) that allow you to collect some of the fuels, as well as telescopes and detectors to help you find where they are. Space Dust has a nice visualization of it in map view. There's a bit of a resource refining chain for fission fuels, I think some of it dependent on what other mods you have installed. Getting fission fuels from ISRU is not dependent on Space Dust or atmospheric resources. Also, the best sources of He-3, like the Mun and, I think, parts of Dres?, are not Space Dust resources.
  22. The patch for MKS also patches for Ground Construction (which is now Global Construction) and will add a material kits requirement if you have that installed. The total mass to orbit is similar to that without MKS or GC, though, since the patch lowers undeployed mass by 60%. edit: That is to say, if you didn't have the material kits requirement, that centrifuge would weigh 2.5x on the launch pad. So it would still be too hard.
  23. Anybody have a working He-3 scoop example for Jool? 110 km altitude is tough to get. Either my scoop (the only part exposed out of the heat shield) explodes, or I slow down so much I can't get the momentum back again (even with the fusion aerospike), and keeping control authority is hard. I'm wondering if, once loaded with scooped fuel, it's too heavy? Earlier version: Latest version: Edit to add view from front, scoop protruding through heat shield:
  • Create New...