Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'science'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website


  • Developer Articles

Found 193 results

  1. Copenhagen Suborbitals put up a nice vid about how regenerative cooling works, featuring a cross-section of a failed engine. They also talk about laminar flow cooling and water hammer effect.
  2. New, it's well forgotten old. I have not played a career in KSP much over a year, and having recently undertaken, I faced that a very useful mod by xEvilReeperx are outdated and has not been updated for a long time. I wrote to the author and he gave me permission to adapt it to the new version, and here it are. Sure, i need feedback about how it work from community. When is is it time for science? Who knows! The game provides no feedback when you've crossed a biome barrier, a new crew report is available or when you've forgotten to run a goo experiment. Wouldn't it be cool to stop guessing? (c) xEvilReeperx What it does: Features: Audio and visual cue when science is available Configurable science filters for experiments Configurable option to stop warp when an experiment becomes available science threshold to ignore low value reports Optional SCANsat integration Dependences: Toolbar (do not forget to do button visible ) Installation & Usage Download the plugin and extract in your KSP directory like any mod. Actual use in-game is simple. When the button is lit, at least one experiment onboard matches your criteria. If the flask is animating, then a new experiment just became available (animation will stop when you have viewed the new experiment list). There are lots of per-experiment settings to choose from. left-click - to open the list of currently available experiments, right-click - opens the options menu, SCANsat support Enable SCANsat integration in the additional options menu With this option enabled, you will only receive biome-associated alerts if you have mapped that portion of the planet's surface Non-biome specific alerts will still occur as normal Known Bugs: if you transmit science report(s) using a transmitter's action menu, the reports queued for it won't be taken into account until transmission is complete [not a bug] Available experiments and report values may suddenly change when going on EVA. This is because your Kerbal may be in a different "situation" -- for example, sitting on the pad might trigger an EVA alert for LaunchPad but you go on EVA and the alert stops. This is because the game considers the Kerbal to be "flying" while holding onto a ladder while in the air. source github DOWNLOAD SPACEDOCK DOWNLOAD CURSEFORGE
  3. Problem is that the science is new and it will not load , states that the science lab already got this. Last landing i was on a new spot so im sure its not "old" data. Hooked up another lab, and it loaded all the unusable data. What is wrong ?
  4. Okay, so my first station was in orbit about 85 km above Kerbin. Kerbin Station Alpha is pretty basic -- two Hitchhikers and a cupola, with a pair of Clamp-o-tron Jr., some batteries, and solar panels to charge the batteries. On a whim, the commander went EVA and took an EVA report, which produced some useful science (because it was "above Kerbin's shores" or some such -- in other words, I was low enough for biomes on Kerbin to matter, which is a science realm I haven't touched). I'd love to get this science, since it'll be nearly free (just add some instruments to modules already planned for addition to this station -- barometers, thermometers, goo cannisters, etc., cheap and easy). However, there arises an issue, and will arise another: initially, how do I get the data Lufrid generated down to Kerbin so R&D can do something with it? The station has a high-gain antenna on one of the Hitchhiker modules, but it's not the one with the working hatch (the cupola and other Hitchhiker hatches are blocked by solar panels and docking port, respectively), and when I tried to immediately transmit the EVA report I was informed there was "no antenna within reach" or something of the sort -- and when Lufrid had re-boarded the station core and transferred to the module with the antenna, I couldn't find the EVA report to transmit. Longer term, once I can reliably transmit my science from Kerbin Station Alpha, have instruments, and have a scientist aboard, will that scientist be able to reset experiments from inside the station, or will he/she have to EVA (presumably within a certain distance of the experiment) to do so?
  5. Just returned to the game after a long break, decided to start a new career with a few mods (mostly engineer and contract configurator). I habitually take a scientist on most missions as their description says they boost science return on the vessel they are in. As an experiment I decided to work out how much extra science it was making from my typical Mun mission with and without a scientist. To my surprise I found that my level 1 scientist (its early game OK! ) was not boosting the science return of my vessels by the advertised amount (5%) and the science return was the same no matter my crew composition. I have already tried the same test in a new un-modded save with the same result. Have I misunderstood the scientist description text or am I doing something wrong? Cheers.
  6. So I was wondering, if you had a time machine and could go back in time or bring someone back from the past, what would be the current science topic or discovery you would enjoy explaining to a past scientist, and why? Maybe it's providing the confirmation that his/her theory was correct to a scientist that never lived to prove their conjectures, or maybe you would like to show someone how far off from the truth they were, etc. Special points if you re-enact the conversation with the old scientist.
  7. So, I wanted to make an 'all in one' tug/explorer (vanilla parts) to export almost all of the Kerbol system. Criteria was that as much of the ship as possible should be reusable at each stop, and it can refuel itself along the way. My plan was to have three main components: a driller (for refueling), a science lander, and a tug to transport the other two components. The driller was pretty simple, with a 4500 ore capacity: Note the large docking port atop, that will mate to the 'back' of the tug. The harder part was building a lander. I started a lander that would handle MOST of the standard planets (Mun, Eeloo, etc) a single stage land/takeoff that would have about 3000+ dV. Added chutes and drogues for Duna and Laythe. For Duna and Laythe, I added a removable inflatable heat shield, connected with a docking port so I could add or remove it as the mission required via a docking port: Experimenting with the inflatable shield was VERY interesting. A few lessons: If you inflate it and it touches an atmosphere, you can't deflate and re-use it. Which means I'd need to bring one for Duna and one for Laythe. When you deflate it, it *VIOLENTLY* explodes. So I separated it as much as I could, and experimented to make sure after the peak of re-entry heat, I could turn the ship prograde, drop the shield, and then flip back retrograde before finishing the landing sequence (in some cases just turning sideways and firing the engines to get the heck away from this giant bomb I'm carrying). Otherwise, the air resistance forces the shield back into the craft, with another BIG BOOM. So, that being said, my tests with Laythe still didn't work because of the high dV needed to push through the atmosphere. So, I added another optional stage I could also add with a docking port: It's super ugly, and the lower engines gimbal way more than they should, making it a difficult craft to control. But I get an extra 1630 dV from the lower stage, coupled with 3670 on the upper stage (if I use the drop tanks, but a bit less otherwise), gives me about 5300+ dV total, enough to land and take off from Laythe and Tylo. Note that I have to cut the fuel cross-feed (otherwise it robs the upper tanks first) and the stage cutover is a manual redocking/staging sequence, but not too awful. So, now I have all the planets covered, except for Eve, of course. So, here is the assembled tug, powered by a dozen nuke engines: Note the two 'extra' sections being carried: - Fuel/Engine set for Tylo - Thermal balloon for Duna - Another set of both for Laythe And, of course, a science lab. Fully assembled and fueled, she has about 5000dV. Getting ready to run the full system test!
  8. TWR Problems...

    So umm, a couple months ago I was lazy and used mods like Kerbal Engineer for data readings. Soon I became interested in collecting those data values myself. Soooo I headed to the cheat sheat in the KSP wiki. I learn’t ‘The Rocket Equation’ quite easily and then moved onto TWR. But whenever I plugged in the numbers it would turn out wrong. So I spent hourrs trying to solve this problem with no results. Here is the formula off the wiki: Where Ft is thrust m is mass g is the gravitational acceleration I’m also using a scientific calculator for these calculations. Any help would be appreciated whatsoever!!!
  9. Insane Science in Career Mode?

  10. Hello, This is the release section for my latest and most developed to date mod, Kerbin's KSP overhaul. what it adds: a more challenging career mode with less science at the begining new replacement resources more labs and most importantly MOAR SCIENCE! what makes this different: normaly, career tech tree mods require community tech tree however Kerbins KSP overhaul like my other mod 64x overhaul require only Module Manager DOWNLOAD KSP overhaul hope you enjoy!!!!!! coming soon: PARTS! thats all from me, the rest is all down to your imagination (with the career limits of course!)
  11. hello, welcome to my KSP overhaul development thread, my second mod designed for KSP this mod aims to add: more fun buttons to press within the IVA... more fun resources to play around with! and a better career system? to do list: Resource utilisation... IVA modded IVA Licence: All rights reserved DOWNLOAD! KSP overhaul dependances: Module Manager update - (15/12/17) Figured out science defs, thanks @DeltaDizzy! Screenshots to come on monday so are new experiments, new parts (maybe) IVAs (more than likely), certainly bugfixed expect releases on monday!
  12. Hello, I recently had to reinstall all my mods because I hadn't played since before 1.3's release. I didn't have much trouble updating all the relevant mods and getting them reinstalled and my game now opens and works correctly. However, the only issue I have is that when I tried to load up one of the specific ships I made earlier, it fails and says that it can't be loaded because it requires a missing component 'scienceModuleAdvanced'. Does anyone know what mod this component might be from as I may have missed one of my mods while reinstalling or something. Thanks Image of error
  13. Using ModuleManager, I want to edit the tech tree or all the parts (including modded parts) to make everything be unlocked from the start of a career playthrough. This is to make a contract-focused mode that is basically the opposite of science mode
  14. Well, basically this is the question. After complete the tech tree, you still play in the save or you just stop? And why?
  15. Light Speed and Sound Barrier

    Question: When lightning strikes afar off, we see the light almost instantly and the sound waves race at different speeds to us with the shortest wavelengths first (crackle sound) and then the rest in a rolling sound as each frequency reaches the ear one after another with lower and lower pitch until the largest wavelength finally finishes the race. This makes sense because Speed=Distance/Time. The shortest wavelength travels less distance to the ear because it’s journey is closer to a straight line. The largest wavelength travels more distance because it must ascend and descend a good distance before making much forward motion. If the electro-magnetic spectrum includes large wavelength radio waves, medium wavelength visible light, and very short wavelength gamma rays, then why does it not follow that light must travel at varying speeds and not constant. If gamma rays and radio waves both were moving at 186,000mi/sec wouldn’t the radio waves be slower than the gamma rays since Speed=Distance/Time. The radio waves takes a longer journey than the gamma ray because the wavelengths are the photons ascending and descending and not moving purely forward at 186,000mi/sec. If we do observe all of the spectrum being constant at the same speed, wouldn’t that mean that radio waves move faster than gamma rays to make up for the greater ascension and descension? If all light is constant in speed then isn’t all light moving faster than the speed of light because 186,000mi/s (I assume) is the speed of light from point A to point B in a straight line in a vacuum? Light must be traveling faster than that figure to make up the extra distance, right?
  16. Scientific Naming of Kerbal

    This is small, just a little idea I had: the scientific classification of Kerbals. Domain Eukarya- cells have nuclei Kingdom Animalia- moves, eats Phylum Chordata- Has a spinal chord Class Virentia- Latin for "green things"; a cross between Mammals and plants Order Primates- walks upright Family Kerbalidae- Kerbal-Like Genus Kerbo- Kerbalized version of Homo Species hebes- Latin word suggesting at Kerbals' not-all-that-intelligent-ness. Thus concludes the scientific classification of Kerbo hebes.
  17. I can not find this part in the technological tree. Saved ships they already own, can not be thrown (even in the sandbox). How will I recover science from my probes? Note: Sorry for spelling errors, I'm translating on google.
  18. A note to start off: This is quite a long post with stuff that might be boring for some of you. If you just want to know the conclusion, skip to the end. So this all started while I was reading through this thread in the game-play questions. Being a bit of a turbohead myself, I figured I could help out at least a little bit with the aerodynamic efficiency of the propellers, even if electric engine types weren’t really my thing. As I read through, I encountered @Geschosskopf who believed from his extensive experience with Kraken and Ladder drives, as well as his (excellent as you will find out) spidey senses for potato physics that stock propellers must exploit physics somehow, his hypothesis being that they were taking advantage of some kind of artifact of the game’s collision physics that ignored Newton's 2nd and 3rd laws. The idea being that the propeller was dragging the plane along without “feeling” the plane. The very good reasons for this idea are summed up in the following argument. “How many RTGs do you put on a shaft? 4-6 at most, maybe less? Each RTG makes 0.8 EC/sec. The accepted conversion rate to real units is 1 EC = 1 kJ, so 1 EC/sec = 1 kW ~ 1 hp. Thus, you're only putting 3.2-4.8 hp into the shaft, which is the about what you get from a small lawnmower engine. How are you even going to taxi, let alone fly, a multi-ton aircraft with that little power?” - Geschosskopf I knew ladder drives and kraken drives took advantage of some strange physics, but I couldn’t wrap my mind around the idea that the physics of collisions between basic craft (like the propeller shaft and the plane) could be messing with things, because that would imply some very wonky effects would be seen any time two crafts were in contact. That being said, I may have been a bit biased since I regularly work on stock turboshaft helicopters. We struck up a lively debate in a private chat, which took place over the course of 3 days. His arguments usually went into the workings of the game, looking at how it (probably) models collision, trying to insure that the collision meshes two parts on different vessels are not clipping into each-other, and moving them a bit if they are. Meanwhile mine usually stayed more on the player side of things, using thought experiments such as a caged jet (this will be followed up on later) to show why it didn't make sense that the propeller was pulling the plane in ignorance of Newton's 2nd and 3rd laws. Eventually I decided to actually run a few KSP experiments to determine the viability of the wonky physics idea, and otherwise determine what was going on. The first experiment was with a Mallard carrying an orange tank. The Mallard had the orange tank inside the cargo bay mounted on a decoupler, with cubic struts and I-beams positioned around it so as to act as a cradle for the orange tank, preventing it from moving when decoupled. The configuration can be seen here. The idea being that, if collision physics work properly, the plane should take off at exactly the same speed if the orange tank remains attached to the plane as if I decouple the orange tank and let the cradle of cubic struts keep it from moving. If the collision physics are wonky like Geschosskopf theorized, then the plane should take off at a lower speed when the orange tank is decoupled, because the game will think the plane is only lifting itself, and will only teleport the tank along to prevent clipping. I made the first run with the orange tank still directly attached to the aircraft. I was a little late with the screenshot, but it took off at 76.1m/s. I made the second run with the orange tank decoupled and held in the cradle. I made this screenshot on-time to see the takeoff once again at 76.1m/s. Exactly the same as the previous takeoff. Sequential trials produced almost identical results, thus appearing to imply that the collision physics worked properly, obeying Newton’s 2nd and 3rd laws. But I wanted to be extra sure, so I devised a second experiment. The second experiment I called the “Caged Jet Experiment”. The idea was to simulate the pushing of a stock propeller on an airframe using a jet engine. Just in the same way a prop-shaft is restrained to the airframe of a stock plane or helicopter by a bearing, a jet engine would be restrained to the airframe of a Mallard by a “cage” once again composed of cubic struts. The idea being that a jet engine would stand in for a propeller shaft. If the collision effects ignore Newton’s 2nd and 3rd laws in the way Geoschosskopf theorized, then a jet held in a cage should make the plane move much faster than one directly attached to the plane, because the jet engine doesn’t realize that it is pushing the big heavy plane. I didn’t take many pictures of this one because I didn’t have an autopilot installed to allow me to hold a certain altitude precisely, so as to be able to quantitatively measure the performance of the plane. However I testify that it performed nearly if not exactly the same when the engines were decoupled and trapped in the cages as when they were still directly connected to the plane. The only difference was that with the decoupled engines, I could not reduce throttle for landing afterwards. Good thing the Mallard was a seaplane! Another experiment I proposed, but did not perform, was to attach a 5 ton trailer to a 3 ton rover using a stock pin-in-hole joint. If the collision physics work correctly, the setup should behave exactly like what it is. A rover pulling a heavy trailer, with all the associated performance losses. However if the collision physics are wonky, the rover should still have the same performance as if it were driving on its own, and pull the trailer along as if it is nothing. I’m guessing the people I see on here building semi trucks every now and then that a truck most definitely is affected by carrying a trailer behind it. So, the collision physics didn’t seem to be the root of the problem, so another idea came up. That was that KSP didn’t know how to properly get the thrust of a stock propeller, however this was quickly disproved by the point that a propeller is quite literally a number of wings moving a circle. KSP doesn’t have to do anything to find the thrust of a propeller or lift of a rotor that it doesn’t have to do to find the lift of a plane going into a slip-turn. So then there was my hypothesis that the 1EC = 1kJ standard was incorrect. I devised an experiment to try to prove or disprove this. So how it went in my head was that I would measure the torque output of a reaction wheel in relation to the angular velocity. Using these values I could determine the power output by the equation power = torque x angular velocity (P = τω). By comparing this to the electricity drawn (EC/s) by the reaction wheel, I could find the energy content of a unit of electricity. For the experiment I created a kOS script which can read the angular velocity, and use that to determine various other statistics. I also created a special vessel with which to perform the experiment There is a probe core, a fuel tank, a reaction wheel (the 0.625m type, which has a constant electric charge draw of 0.25 EC/s), and two spider engines on the sides directed so as to create torque. The engines are a known constant source of torque, calculated to be 7740 newton-meters. So what the script does is activate the engines, and then take a reading of the angular velocity and labels it Ang_vel0 at a time desginated T0. It then waits a short period, and measures the angular velocity and labels it Ang_vel1 and takes the time as T1. It can now calculate the angular acceleration as (Ang_Vel1 - Ang_Vel0)/(T1 - T0). It can then calculate the moment of inertia of the craft in the roll axis using α = τ/I => I = τ/α. Moment of Inertia = Torque / Angular Acceleration Note that I use the infinite propellant cheat during this experiment to make sure the moment of inertia doesn't change as the engines fire. Anyways, so the script shuts off the engines again, since it needs no disturbances for the next part of the experiment. I use timewarp to bring the spin back to a halt, so as to have no influence from the previous bit that determined the moment of inertia. The script now locks the ship's roll control to full clockwise (would work counterclockwise just as well, that's just what I picked), and uses the same procedure of finding angular acceleration using = (Ang_Vel1 - Ang_Vel0)/(T1 - T0). It displays this value as well as the angular velocity** Since it now already knows the moment of inertia, it runs it the other way to find what torque the reaction wheel is producing. τ = I*α It displays this value** Now with the torque and the angular velocity, it can calculate power via P = τ*ω It displays this value** **All these are updated over time, allowing changes to be observed By plugging all the displayed values into a spreadsheet, I was able to create charts displaying various items such as torque curves. To my intrigue, at near-zero angular velocity, the 1EC = 1kJ conversion rate was true (so in the graph I put EC/s as W for watts), but as angular velocity increased, the reaction wheel appeared to be developing more and more power from the same constant power input. I and probably a lot of people here knew reaction wheels were broken due to lack of conservation of momentum, but this demonstrates just how badly they are broken. At just 9 radians per second, the reaction wheel is multiplying the power input by a factor of 150. Thus you can give an electric plane spitfire performance with the electric power equivalent of dinky little lawnmower. I have yet to perform the experiment up higher angular velocities, however it would be interesting to see how the trends continue. I want to add some more tests into the experiment as, now that I think about it, I'm wondering if torque is actually constant, and the apparent change is due to the spider engines stretching away from the tank due to centrifugal forces, thus changing the moment of inertia slightly. Perhaps I can devise a method of testing that does not require any off-axis parts.* Current conclusion: Stock propellers in of themselves are not exploitative, however electric props take advantage of broken reaction wheel physics to generate power a couple orders of magnitude greater than what is put in! So neither Geschosskopf nor I were entirely correct! *Update: After further testing using a reaction wheel and a tank with no radial engines, I have found that the torque output of reaction wheels is constant. Using this I plan to calculate the MOI of numerous parts, which could be useful for the construction of mechanical contraptions. Thanks for reading! Also thank you Geschosskopf for the fun debate and the push to question the workings of the game. This all was quite interesting to work out. For anyone interested in examining the script I used you can find it below. The order of the display of values and their labels have been modified slightly to be more user-friendly, but all the math is the same. Not that the variable labeled "Torque" is used twice in the script. In the first section it is a fixed value, designating the torque from the two engines. In the second section it is overwritten and is the calculated torque output of the reaction wheel.
  19. I feel like this could be done with a simple patch but I really don't know how to use MM. Is there anybody who can enlight me about this ? Thanks in advance
  20. Hi, I'm having a KSP freeze/crash when performing a science experiment where the Science report GUI doesn't even get to appear. The KSP screen freezes and I get the windows 'processing/waiting' circular mouse icon. The experiment has been both a stock and moded item, so I don't think the part is the issue. I've checked both the log files and had the console open when replicating the issue to try and get information, but the game freezes before anything is written to those possible data sources so I'm left with no direction to track the issue. I've tried to leave KSP overnight in that frozen state and it never has come back, so it's stuck doing 'something'. I've removed a few mods related to science (CrowdSourceScience & [X]Science) but the issue still persists, but is at times random. When I take the same vessel to a separate game using the same install, there are no issues at all and the Science GUI appears as expected. So I'm not sure what to use to get some additional information. Is there are any other tools that can help isolate what might be causing this issue? Log file -> Mod list below in case it's an obvious conflict someone knows about.
  22. I currently am orbiting Duna with a probe containing several DMagic Science experiments. When i arrived on Duna i forgot to calculate how far Kerbin would be, so i cheated to extend the antenna's range. It communicates fine, but i cannot transmit science. i tried reloading but still nothing. [EDIT]-I fixed the issue by completely restarting the game.
  23. Artificial Intelligence: Can we redesign the world? So I have thought about how AI systems are become so much more powerful and complex. So along those lines could computer system AI become self learning enough like google DEEPMIND project to improve just about everything? : Antivirus software with DEEPMIND rooted together so that another computer system could repeatedly attempt to hack with various viruses, then after such a point the Antivirus software with DEEPMIND becomes aware of creating a defense or destroying the virus as soon as detected. Redesign the virus attacking computer to become aware that it has still not found a route of taking control of the device, as this cause the DEEPMIND system would be added to the virus computer to make that happen. As well as come up with combinations of the current viruses to learn and then create more complex viruses of it's own to unlimited possibilities. This in turn could maybe help some networks get an antivirus software that would be incredibly unbeatable. "Antivirus software" is a relative term as to what software it would actually be called, would be up to the designer of course. DEEPMIND self learning AI could possibly learn the capabilities of the current computer system the AI is working in then calculate all kinds of different computer technology improvements. For example the move from HDD to Solid State Drives, seem to be a great step. Of my own curiosity would multiple flash drives being so small, be converted together easily enough to make like say a 40-500 Terabyte Solid State Hard Drive of sorts? This might be the ultimate kicker if two computers are running DEEPMIND and they both begin communication with each other, in an effort to improve their AI. Would it be possible for the DEEPMIND AI on each machine to learn to create just about anything. Such as a biological organism 3D printer for lack of a better term, in which case tissue of a person could be sampled to create a whole new organ within hours. This is just another thought of no evidence or research yet. With such efficient ways to have computers redesign various capabilities of current technology, I believe I read that the DEEPMIND AI developed a way to reduce cooling cost of googles systems by 40%. Along with all those aspects imagine the future designs this system could create for Aerospace, Rocket design, Possibly another way to enter space in a vehicle made to take flight and at a distance predetermined to quickly speed up the the Earth's atmosphere. Although if such technology becomes available likely this won't be a issue. Alien technology UFO you may think of in this case to explore space more quickly than we have ever before. These are just various comments on possibly some ways DEEPMIND AI could help advance the world. In no way do I say these are feasible or close to even happening at this point. With an Artificial Intelligence system and nano-technology and creative ingenuity, seems like most anything is possible perhaps probable. Just some interesting thoughts in my opinion. Have a great day. Thanks, for reading
  24. Flying Saucer

    A revisit of my previous Kraken Drive fairing flying saucer, re-equipped with infinite fuel engines. It's loaded with science equipment, which are all activated with action group 0. It's got a walkable interior that your kerbals can stretch their legs in. While supposedly it has artificial gravity generated by thrust, the game doesn’t understand it so if kerbals are in the craft interior while the craft is flying they’ll just bounce around on the inside.
  25. Is it possible the MM patch the MPL back to the old functionality where it just boosts the available transmission of an experiment? I found @Snark MM patch to cut out the 5x multiplier, just wonder what else to add for the transmission part? Oh - just in case someone suggests it - I know about Dmagics science transmission mod - however I was just hoping for a MM patch level of change - I've already got 112 mods and the spacetime fabric seams in my game are starting to go...