KSP Interstellar Extended Support Thread

[FreeThinker]

12 hours ago, Spacetourist said:

I can't get with the new Vista 10m engine the 7000KN of thrust but only 1200KN as the old 5m model , I have unlocked all the nodes improving the Vista engine.

sorry if I disappoint you but I have re-balanced the VISTA to more inline with the true VISTA engine and made it accessible earlier. Instead of an endgame engine, its now early fusion engine that gives access to very good performance for it tech-level. If you want better performance , you could use the Kerbstein with is a true endgame fusion engine.

[danielboro]

On 9.8.2017 at 5:14 PM, BlackMoons said:

 

I am sorry but what is 2% (by number)? 2 is a number sure.. but 'by number' is not a valid way to make a ratio of two items.

You can have by mass or by volume, maybe even by atom count.. but 'by number' is meaningless.

 

On 9.8.2017 at 5:37 PM, Ciro1983811 said:

i know, that's how it is written, i suppose 2%wt

its more likely to be by mol
in %wt it will be 0.02*718/(0.98*18+0.02*718)
45% UBr6 / 55% H2O wt/wt

[ss8913]

@FreeThinker - there seems to be something in my combination of mods that causes physics to stop working properly every time I dock -or- undock.  If I F5/F9 after either operation, things seem to go back to normal, so that fixes my carrier problem...

Question though, what controls how much power is required to start the QSR?  Seems like if it goes offline in flight, it takes a seemingly random amount of power to restart, anywhere from very low to impossibly high.. what determines that?

[Spacetourist]

5 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

sorry if I disappoint you but I have re-balanced the VISTA to more inline with the true VISTA engine and made it accessible earlier. Instead of an endgame engine, its now early fusion engine that gives access to very good performance for it tech-level. If you want better performance , you could use the Kerbstein with is a true endgame fusion engine.

Thanks for the answer, it's not a problem, I will put bigger Vistas on my freighters

[FreeThinker]

3 hours ago, ss8913 said:

Question though, what controls how much power is required to start the QSR?  Seems like if it goes offline in flight, it takes a seemingly random amount of power to restart, anywhere from very low to impossibly high.. what determines that?

1

It's not random. The amount of power required is inverse proportional to the gravity field minus any acceleration experienced. Which means at the surface power cost are infinate (not possible) while minimal in low orbit of a high gravity well like in Low Kerbin Orbit / Low Earth Orbit.

Edited August 11, 2017 by FreeThinker

[Khalkion]

This week I decided that my spaceprogram needs its own reusable shuttle. But all that big orange boosters.. meh.. they may be romantic, but we are in future now! and our answer is beamed power. I've spent couple of days figuring out beamed power, constructing and positioning base stations and trying to make shuttle capable of 50t payload with self mass less then 50t. Because beamed power offers so much...

While it was fun I found some oddities. Electric generators have mass proportional to maximum power of connected reactor or reciever but mass is different for the same power. For example I tested 8 MW setups:

Inline thermal reciever - 8t

Molten Salt Reactor - 10.9t

Pebble Bed Reactor - 12.2t

Dual Mode Thermal/Rectenna Reciever Inline - 16t

But cfg files of generator states that only dual mode reciever is right...In cfg we have two multipliers : 1/1000 of power and 2 of mass. And although I think I understand why more powerful generators weigh more I'm not sure about the differences in masses of the same generators. Also we have "legacy" tweakscale for generators, when bigger generators cost more but nothing else changes. So if I use big reactors and want generator of the same radius I have to pay lots of credits for nothing just inline structure. May be nowadays with automatic power to mass calculations we should have some sort of inverted scale for cost (since I believe that creating a generator of the same power but with less stringent size limitations should be easier ) or may be just bind cost to power the same way mass do?

PS Also I have some strange issue with physics range and transmitters. If I enter physics range of base station its transmitter switches to offline, but I think that it is cecessary inconvenience so I just have to move base station at KSC further away and increase it's power.

Edited August 11, 2017 by Khalkion

[Roostergod]

This thead has a lot of good info on how I interacts with near future power, but it's a bit lacking in the other near future mods. How does IE interact with them, specifically NF propulsion, kerbal atomics, and hydrogen tanks. Can I use the other nertea mods without NF power? Thanks in advance.

[ss8913]

15 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

It's not random. The amount of power required is inverse proportional to the gravity field minus any acceleration experienced. Which means at the surface power cost are infinate (not possible) while minimal in low orbit of a high gravity well like in Low Kerbin Orbit / Low Earth Orbit.

Thanks - this appears to be matching up with observed behavior, after a few more tests on my end... So I think my strategy is, launch my HyperPod carriers and activate the QSR just above 70km while coasting to circularization burn (usually I park these at around 1500km for easier FTL departure) and make sure there's enough radiators so that at no point does the QSR shut down due to overheat.  It's really bad when you're between stars and you have to drop out of warp for a course correction, and in the process of recharging the FTL drives you overheat the craft and lose the QSR... it's almost impossible to charge the thing up for a restart that far from a gravity well without overheating it *again*

[BlackMoons]

17 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

It's not random. The amount of power required is inverse proportional to the gravity field minus any acceleration experienced. Which means at the surface power cost are infinate (not possible) while minimal in low orbit of a high gravity well like in Low Kerbin Orbit / Low Earth Orbit.

Does this mean I can start it by blasting my ship to 20km on SRB's and letting it freefall while I start up the reactor? Potentially with retrorockets to prevent drag from causing g forces? Because that sounds AWESOME.

[ss8913]

4 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

Does this mean I can start it by blasting my ship to 20km on SRB's and letting it freefall while I start up the reactor? Potentially with retrorockets to prevent drag from causing g forces? Because that sounds AWESOME.

I think that's too low.  It won't start within an atmosphere at all.

EDIT: My strategy, above, works great, though.  start the reactor(s) while coasting to your apoapsis when the craft is not experiencing acceleration.  Charges in about 5 seconds or less at that altitude (just above atmosphere) and then just make sure you don't overheat them and make them shut down later

Edited August 12, 2017 by ss8913

[raxo2222]

Something wrong is with lithium modifier for QSR.

[FreeThinker]

Ever had the problem that your fusion reactor would die on you when running out of fuel?

Well there is a solution for that now:

Notice It will now automatically switch to another fuel, saving the day and possibly the mission.

 

Edited August 12, 2017 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, raxo2222 said:

Something wrong is with lithium modifier for QSR.

It should not be affected by it.

[raxo2222]

Just now, FreeThinker said:

It should not be affected by it.

Well thermal energy production is lowered a lot.

[FreeThinker]

2 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

Well thermal energy production is lowered a lot.

I see now, well to fix it, simply add the following line to InterstellarInertialConfinementReactor in QuantumSingulaityReactor.cfg

powerIsAffectedByLithium = false

 

[FreeThinker]

Uploaded final Beta 1.15.0.6: which can be downloaded frpm here

* Added X-Ray Free Electron Laser Turret (by @Eleusis La Arwall )

* Added Diamagnetic Antihydrogen storage container (by @Eleusis La Arwall )

* Added ability of Diode Laser Turret  to transmit in Soft X-Rays

* Added improved convection for submerged radiators

* Added Plasma Jet Magneto Inertial Fusion Reactor

* Added Added Blanket Rectenna Receiver

* Added automated alternative fuel type selection for fusion reactors

* Added Science Dril

* Added Improve Interface Regolith Processing

* Added exit Apoapsis and exit Periapsis to Warp Control Interface

* Added resource switchers ISRU Processor

* Added IntakeLqd pump capacity to universal drill

* Added Mean Anomaly and DeltaV or Orbit to Alcubiere Control Window

* Added Inflatable Crashpad Gas Tank

* Added Double Pivot Photostatic X-Ray Receiver

* Re balanced cost thermal radiators

* Re-balanced beamed power

* Balance: Reduced minimum Nuclear Engines my 50%, this will also reduce Thermal Electric Power Output by 50%

* Fixed Regolith processing ability to function offscreen

* Fixed Antimatter Electric Power generation

* Fixed Reactor resource output, implicitly fixing premature actinides poisoning

* Fixed Deuterium refining from Regolith

* Fixed loss of power after docking

* Fixed spamming Universal Drill Gui

* Fixed Mass growth for Tweakaled Radiators

* Fixed Exploit staged Thermal Reactor

* Fixed active ad offline fuel usage nuclear engines

* Fixed thrust unbalance with multiple nuclear engines

* Fixed Issue where vessels with antimatter would explode when being unloaded

* Fixed issue build In thermal electric generator not functioning properly, like Timerwind

* Fixed exception log spamming on Timberwind

* Fixed Interstellar Tanks Methalox container amounts

* Fixed bug with QSR affected by lithium resources

Edited August 13, 2017 by FreeThinker

[raxo2222]

Can beam wavelengths get proper SI prefixes" That is all wat to 10^-12m for hard xrays

Also it seems like only xray producer has >10m of aperture size, can universal beam generators produce xrays

Also it gets negative mass when tweak scaling

By the way some beam network parts have too big tweakscale limits - when rescaling them whole computer freezes due to lack of RAM - I have 8 GB of memory.

 

Now QSR doesn't throttle down.

 

Edited August 14, 2017 by raxo2222

[Khalkion]

I can confirm negative masses, but have no problem with rescalling parts up to their limit of 40m. With which parts exactly do you have a problem?

[raxo2222]

4 minutes ago, Khalkion said:

I can confirm negative masses, but have no problem with rescalling parts up to their limit of 40m. With which parts exactly do you have a problem?

Blanket receivers for example.

[Khalkion]

Checked blanket recievers too (up to 1024m and it is ridiculously huge and can cover the entire KSC but still not even microlag). It's some problem at your end, all my parts are scalling without any problem. And if i understand correctly the difference between scaled large and small parts is only a few bytes, it's not something that can consume your ram. As we are using the same textures and models, just asking game engine to draw it a little bigger. 

Actually tweakscale is a good way of  preserving your ram, because you can delete lots of the same parts of different sizes and use their scaled versions. It was very usefull when there was only 32bit KSP, but still usefull nowadays, allowing to have more mods simultaneously.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Khalkion

[Khalkion]

By the way, for everyone interested - I just tested some VTOL concepts with KSPI-E and infernal robotics in conjuction and it was partialy succefull. While there are no problems on KSPI-E end, interstellar engines and reactors are all about flight further or faster or bigger and infernal robotics don't really like these words. So I have to create copy parts of IR with multiplying their masses by 50, 100 times, so basic rotatron weigh 10 tons  And it still wobble by itself with attached active engine so I have ro restrict all other possible directions with struts. 

[raxo2222]

28 minutes ago, Khalkion said:

By the way, for everyone interested - I just tested some VTOL concepts with KSPI-E and infernal robotics in conjuction and it was partialy succefull. While there are no problems on KSPI-E end, interstellar engines and reactors are all about flight further or faster or bigger and infernal robotics don't really like these words. So I have to create copy parts of IR with multiplying their masses by 50, 100 times, so basic rotatron weigh 10 tons  And it still wobble by itself with attached active engine so I have ro restrict all other possible directions with struts. 

Do you have KJR?

 

1 hour ago, Khalkion said:

Checked blanket recievers too (up to 1024m and it is ridiculously huge and can cover the entire KSC but still not even microlag). It's some problem at your end, all my parts are scalling without any problem. And if i understand correctly the difference between scaled large and small parts is only a few bytes, it's not something that can consume your ram. As we are using the same textures and models, just asking game engine to draw it a little bigger. 

Actually tweakscale is a good way of  preserving your ram, because you can delete lots of the same parts of different sizes and use their scaled versions. It was very usefull when there was only 32bit KSP, but still usefull nowadays, allowing to have more mods simultaneously.

Weird my hard drive was going crazy when I upscaled part above 256m... how much RAM and graphics (video card) RAM you have?

I have 8 GB of ram and one GB of graphic memory.

Edited August 14, 2017 by raxo2222

[Khalkion]

24 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

Do you have KJR?

 

Weird my hard drive was going crazy when I upscaled part above 256m... how much RAM and graphics (video card) RAM you have?

I have 8 GB of ram and one GB of graphic memory.

Yep, I have KJR, but it is not very helpfull with moving physics parts, it is more about preventing movement afterall. As far as I know wobble with IR comes from Unity engine restrictions as it consider light parts connetcions weak. And when I try to attach something with 16t weight and 3 MN of thrust to a rotatron of 100kg, robotics parts are just torn apart the moment physics load. 10t versions can survive full thrust of such engine and remain operable, but can't provide enough hardness for controlable flight without the help of struts. But with 3 MN of thrust (and I have 4 of them on my test vehicle, so 12 MN) additional 40t means nothing.

Well, my gaming PC is 16 GB RAM and 4 GB VRAM, but it's not the answer to problem with rescalling. I never see KSP_x64 uses more then 4 GB of RAM (which is pretty sad for 64 bit application...) and I have something like 90 mods in my active game and when KSP tries to eat more then 4 GB it just crashes. Neither do VRAM because KSP mainly uses CPU, not video-card. The main problem for KSP is physics, not fancy picture, but there is no physics in VAB/SPH, so your problems with rescalling come from another source.

Edited August 14, 2017 by Khalkion

[raxo2222]

This bigass powerplant produces XASER (laser but with xrays)

I guess I need bigger gun to produce 7 TW worth beam

 

40m xray gun can use 2 TW of power.

 

It seems like buffer is broken

Short hard xray beam has really awesome range.

While only 20% of total energy gets converted, it can be used to power small probes and to conserve reactor fuel on missions.

How spotsize is calculated?

 

 

Edited August 14, 2017 by raxo2222

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, raxo2222 said:

How spotsize is calculated?

Spot size = distance-to-spot * wavelength / (aperture diameter)

rewritten:

distance-to-spot = Spot size * Aperture diameter / Wavelength

that would mean your 16m aperture X-ray transmitter (configured at Far Hard X-ray)  would be able reach full power to a 10m X-receiver at 16000000000 km, which is twice as far as Pluto (real size at 7500000000 km distance)

 

Or in the kerbalized version , a default size 1.5m aperture  X-ray transmitter is able to reach twice the distance of  Plock (the Outer planets representation of Pluto) on a 10m diameter X-ray receiver

Edited August 14, 2017 by FreeThinker