KSP Interstellar Extended Support Thread

[raxo2222]

2 hours ago, falcoon said:

Anyone?

You meant antimatter reactor?

Power is limited to 5% as long as you don't use it with magnetic nozzle.

Its power was increased 20 times so you still get old performance at 5% of reactor power with other stuff.

This way magnetic nozzle gets 20x more thrust than it used to.

 

Can this Free Electron Laser positrons be used by AIM reactor?

What about antiproton producer? There is KSPI science lab that can do this, but dedicated part would be nice.

Edited October 28, 2017 by raxo2222

[SpaceMouse]

@FreeThinker, I noticed recently there no longer appears to be any configuration for a Xenon thruster in KSPI, while xeon performance is pretty poor compared to most of the available thrusters, it still seems like a oversight.

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, raxo2222 said:

Can this Free Electron Laser positrons be used by AIM reactor?

No but there is something better (in the latest beta), the Muon Catalized Fusion reactor, which is like a fusion reactor on Nitro, in this case the Positrons act like the Nitro. Of course you will run out of positron pretty fast. Fortunately you could bring a free electron laser with you to recharge it, or if you are willing to wait  a Tri Aplha in proton-proton fusion mode

7 hours ago, raxo2222 said:

You meant antimatter reactor?

Power is limited to 5% as long as you don't use it with magnetic nozzle.

Its power was increased 20 times so you still get old performance at 5% of reactor power with other stuff.

Actually power is now limited to 4% but the default 2.5m Beam Core antimatter has a maximum power output was increased 1 Tera Watt (was 0.72 TW), but only in Beam core proulsion mode (= Magnetic nozzle propulsion). Note that in thermal mode in can only perform at 2%. If you want more thermal propulsion power use the THermal Antimatter reactor, which runs on any type of antimatter and has twise the power of the Beam Core antimatter reactor in thermal propulsion mode.

Edited October 28, 2017 by FreeThinker

[SpaceMouse]

-

On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 12:39 PM, mrgreco said:

The Canadain Antimatter space station,,,, AKA the money maker

I like seeing my collector.

Edited October 29, 2017 by SpaceMouse

[falcoon]

7 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

If you want more thermal propulsion power use the THermal Antimatter reactor

So i did miss something. And I know why. This thermal reactor is in utility tab, while all the others are in electical.

[raxo2222]

8 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

No but there is something better (in the latest beta), the Muon Catalized Fusion reactor, which is like a fusion reactor on Nitro, in this case the Positrons act like the Nitro. Of course you will run out of positron pretty fast. Fortunately you could bring a free electron laser with you to recharge it, or if you are willing to wait  a Tri Aplha in proton-proton fusion mode

That fusion reactor can compete with AIM reactor when on D-Li6 mode

Edited October 29, 2017 by raxo2222

[Jestertrek]

On 10/25/2017 at 1:47 PM, Jestertrek said:

I'm having some problems combining the ISRU with the Aluminum Hybrid Rocket.

Somewhere along the way, the appropriate ISRU option for this rocket seems to have been changed from "Aluminum Electrolysis" (listed in the first post of this thread) to "Spudomene Processing". Spudomene processing produces (among other things) Aluminum and Liquid Oxygen from Spudomene. Fair enough. But places on the Mun that I've visited seem to be 2% or so Spudomene and 45% Alumina, which renders the ISRU/Aluminum Hybrid Rocket combination kind of pointless. It's taking forever to pull in enough Spudomene to run the ISRU.

Is this an oversight in the composition of the Mun with the change to the ISRU, or is there an option in the ISRU to bring back Aluminum Electrolysis that I'm missing? TIA!

A little help on this question? @FreeThinker? Anyone else? There doesn't seem to be any parts that can process Alumina any more.

[aaronsta1]

On 10/27/2017 at 2:20 AM, FreeThinker said:

Technically your not doing it wrong bug need to understand some of the reasoning behind beamed power technology. The main reason to use beam power technology is a matter of efficiency and cost. Instead of outfitting every vessel with an expansive heavy reactor, you keep the reactor on a ground or space station. Besides lowering the cost of your mission vessels, the reduced mass allows these vessels to reach potentially higher performance than bringing your power source with you. Beamed power should be viewed as kind of space travel infrastructure. It allows vessels to get arround the solar system for only a fraction of the cost then without. Of cource building the infrastructure is expansive but if used properly can significantly make colonisation of the solar system easier.

Another thing you should realize is that thermal receiver is only one of the many receivers and they are potentially most effective on SSTO which ferry cargo from the surface into orbit and back. Once in orbit, you should switch to electric propulsion which can use the beamed power directly to power high-efficiency electronic engines to get you anywhere.

after looking around and digging into the mod i figured out why its doing what its doing and its not a bug or anything.. 

the thermal receivers have a core temp of only 3200k.. which makes any thermal rocket attached to them use a lot of fuel because of the isp calculation.. it makes these useless for 1st stage.

[ChrisSpace]

I really apologise if this has been asked already, but I'm having problems with the Epst- I mean, the Kerbstein Engine. I've managed to get the D-T VISTA Engine to work, but nothing seems to get the Kerbstein to run. I also couldn't get the massive million-isp fusion engine to produce any thrust, although it did make an exhaust plume.

[tmbomber]

I was noticing that HexCans are still in the parts folder. I'm running a carer game and haven't stumbled across them yet. When I went to check the part.cfg file 

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\WarpPlugin\Parts\FuelTank\RVUranium2\part.cfg

it indicated:

name = HexCanUraniumN
module = Part
author = Vaporlynx & Fractal

(snip)

TechRequired = none
entryCost = 20000
cost = 20000 
category = none
subcategory = 0
title = RV Uranium Nitride Tank
manufacturer = Geomax Plc.
description = A resource canister containing a supply of Uranium Nitride pellets sealed up in Pyrolytic Carbon and Zirconium Carbide fuel casings.

So, tech required = none.

That had me looking at other parts and I found that "tech required=none" is present in most parts.

How are parts placed in the tech tree? I went digging through source code and couldn't find how it's happening.
I ask because it appears HexCans are not there any more and I wanted to check.

Were HexCans deleted, but the parts left in the fueltank sub-directory to avoid killing existing save games?
 

[danielboro]

49 minutes ago, tmbomber said:

I was noticing that HexCans are still in the parts folder. I'm running a carer game and haven't stumbled across them yet. When I went to check the part.cfg file 

C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\WarpPlugin\Parts\FuelTank\RVUranium2\part.cfg

it indicated:

name = HexCanUraniumN
module = Part
author = Vaporlynx & Fractal

(snip)

TechRequired = none
entryCost = 20000
cost = 20000 
category = none
subcategory = 0
title = RV Uranium Nitride Tank
manufacturer = Geomax Plc.
description = A resource canister containing a supply of Uranium Nitride pellets sealed up in Pyrolytic Carbon and Zirconium Carbide fuel casings.

So, tech required = none.

That had me looking at other parts and I found that "tech required=none" is present in most parts.

How are parts placed in the tech tree? I went digging through source code and couldn't find how it's happening.
I ask because it appears HexCans are not there any more and I wanted to check.
 

 

 

thay are not
tech required = none. is used to keep deleted parts from deleting ships

 

50 minutes ago, tmbomber said:

Were HexCans deleted, but the parts left in the fueltank sub-directory to avoid killing existing save games?

exactly

[ss8913]

So.. I've re-figured-out how to use ISRU to create hydrazine, but... it takes over a year to make 3000 units of it; that's.. uselessly inefficient, unfortunately.  The bottleneck seems to be in the conversion of 'water' to 'lqdwater' - i'm not sure what form it's coming out of the ground in, but.. first of all I don't understand why it needs to be converted at all, and secondly, why is it so slow?  it's like 2 orders of magnitude slower than converting nitrogen to lqdnitrogen(or the other way around), and it doesn't make sense as to why this is.  Is this a bug?  am I doing something wrong?  why can't water electrolysis work on water in any material state?  These are the questions I'm faced with

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, ss8913 said:

The bottleneck seems to be in the conversion of 'water' to 'lqdwater' -

1

lqdWater is mend more as a raw non consumable form water, contaminated by a variety of salts and poisonous elements, while water is a pure form, non contaminated form of water . Conversion from Water to LqdWater should always be fast while the other way around should take some effort.

7 hours ago, ChrisSpace said:

I really apologise if this has been asked already, but I'm having problems with the Epst- I mean, the Kerbstein Engine. I've managed to get the D-T VISTA Engine to work, but nothing seems to get the Kerbstein to run. I also couldn't get the massive million-isp fusion engine to produce any thrust, although it did make an exhaust plume.

The Epstein engine is a fusion engine which does not provide its own power but needs a powerful external power source. A tri alpha on LithiumHydrate fuel, should work well ,as they both use the same fuel and produce minimal amount of waste heat.

Edited October 30, 2017 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

On 29-10-2017 at 8:51 AM, aaronsta1 said:

after looking around and digging into the mod i figured out why its doing what its doing and its not a bug or anything.. 

the thermal receivers have a core temp of only 3200k.. which makes any thermal rocket attached to them use a lot of fuel because of the isp calculation.. it makes these useless for 1st stage.

4

Useless? Have you tried combining it with Hydrazine,  a 3200k thermal engine should provide an effective isp sqrt(3200) * 21  * 0.744 = 882s, which is still twice a good as any chemical rocket engine. This will technically allow you to build a single stage to orbit. Combine it with a ramjet and you can haul a cargo into orbit and land it back at KTC without any propellant.

On 29-10-2017 at 8:51 AM, Jestertrek said:

A little help on this question? @FreeThinker? Anyone else? There doesn't seem to be any parts that can process Alumina any more.

This might not be clear but hidden in the (electrolyzer) ISRU menu there is an option to "Electrolyze Aluminia"

Edited October 30, 2017 by FreeThinker

[Jestertrek]

4 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

This might not be clear but hidden in the (electrolyzer) ISRU menu there is an option to "Electrolyze Aluminia"

Thanks for your reply!

And that explains the problem: I'm carrying the wrong part entirely. I'm carrying an ISRU Processor when I apparently should have brought an ISRU Electrolyzer.

[Mine_Turtle]

Is this a known problem with nuclear reactors?

 

[tmbomber]

12 hours ago, danielboro said:

thay are not
tech required = none. is used to keep deleted parts from deleting ships

 

exactly

Gotya...

I see there are some larger replacement tanks that'll fit the bill.

I went looking for them because I'm just getting back to being far along enough to use them and went looking.

I use to like the look of the HexCans and used them often. Like this:

Album oc0ItWY will appear when post is submitted

[ss8913]

13 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

lqdWater is mend more as a raw non consumable form water, contaminated by a variety of salts and poisonous elements, while water is a pure form, non contaminated form of water . Conversion from Water to LqdWater should always be fast while the other way around should take some effort.

The Epstein engine is a fusion engine which does not provide its own power but needs a powerful external power source. A tri alpha on LithiumHydrate fuel, should work well ,as they both use the same fuel and produce minimal amount of waste heat.

Water to LqdWater is excessively slow, at least for me.  It may be a bug?  as I said it's far, far slower than Nitrogen conversion.  It should be fairly simple to reproduce... tank of water, cryo tank to convert.. etc..?

[ChrisSpace]

14 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

The Epstein engine is a fusion engine which does not provide its own power but needs a powerful external power source.

I know. That's how I got the other fusion engines to run.

14 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

A tri alpha on LithiumHydrate fuel, should work well ,as they both use the same fuel and produce minimal amount of waste heat.

This did not work at all.

[mrgreco]

 

• Project Manager: FreeThinker0

• Kerbal Space Program
• 17,288 Monthly Downloads
• Supports: 1.3.1
• 348,530 Total Downloads
• Updated 2 days ago
• Created Oct 8, 2015
• 317 Favorites
• Project Site
• Comments
• Release Type: Release
• License: Custom License
• Newest File: KSP Intersteller WarpPlugin 1.16.1                                                                                                         i dont understand this, it says its bin updated 2 days ago but nothin looks to be changed, am i missing somthing???????

[aaronsta1]

so i been playing around with beamed power in sandbox mode and im trying to figure out some things.. as there are pretty much no documentation about it and what i can find is from like 2014 and way outdated i figured id ask.. 

 

it says the size of the transmitting antenna doesn't matter in the wiki.. but it does.. a 2.5m part will do 10gw and a 3.75m is 20gw and a 5m is 40gw and 10 is 90gw. i got that and understand.. 

what about multiple antennas? or even multiple transmitting stations? do they add up? or is the strongest one picked and you get what you can see? is there any reason id want to use more than one transmitter and a bunch of relays? 

what about relay antennas? does the size of them have to be the size of the transmitting antenna? can you push 100gw through a 2.5m relay?

what's the deal with all the bands?? red, yellow, blue, violet, far infrared, near infrared, low infrared.. x, k, ka, microwave.. laser.. im guessing they each have some strengths and weaknesses.. but what are they? is there just a best one i want to focus on and not worry about them all?

i noticed some are switchable only in the vab and some in flight.. is there a reason why i would want to switch them in flight? also can i put a microwave and laser on the same ship? assuming i had the excess power? can i power the laser from received microwave and just use one generator in orbit for everything? 

and also the gigantor xl solar panel.. it gets a beamed mode.. but what band and what type is it? it doesn't say. does it even work? i tried and got no results.. 

 

[danielboro]

2 hours ago, aaronsta1 said:

and also the gigantor xl solar panel.. it gets a beamed mode.. but what band and what type is it? it doesn't say. does it even work? i tried and got no results..

i tryed Long IR, sort IR and yellow
yellow works very good to power my mun miner and rovers at night
sort IR only gave me me low power long IR didnt connect

[FreeThinker]

2 hours ago, aaronsta1 said:

it says the size of the transmitting antenna doesn't matter in the wiki..

where?

2 hours ago, aaronsta1 said:

what about multiple antennas? or even multiple transmitting stations? do they add up? or is the strongest one picked and you get what you can see? is there any reason id want to use more than one transmitter and a bunch of relays?

Yes transmission capacity add up, capacity is added linear, diameter is added with square root of the sum of the diameters (meaning you need 4 to double the diameter of a transmitter group)

2 hours ago, aaronsta1 said:

what about relay antennas? does the size of them have to be the size of the transmitting antenna? can you push 100gw through a 2.5m relay?

relay capacity limit maximum relay power and effective diameter when acting as delivering relay.

Edited October 31, 2017 by FreeThinker

[aaronsta1]

16 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

where?

i dont know it could have been an outdated post on here.. i just checked the wiki from the github page and it doesnt really mention transmitter size at all.. maybe you can say.. i know the larger ones and output more power.. but do they also increase range? is there any reason to use one of those large dishes vs those 300 deg phased arrays at say 5m? 

 

i guess im asking does the receiver diameter do anything for transmitting or is it just power output vs distance?

 

i saw you edited your post to answer my other questions.. i think i understand now.. 

Edited October 31, 2017 by aaronsta1

[FreeThinker]

3 hours ago, aaronsta1 said:

what's the deal with all the bands?? red, yellow, blue, violet, far infrared, near infrared, low infrared.. x, k, ka, microwave.. laser.. im guessing they each have some strengths and weaknesses.. but what are they? is there just a best one i want to focus on and not worry about them all

2

Besides the mechanic that narrower wavelengths are harder to create ( and therefore less efficient) atmospheric absorption varies with wavelength. For reference look at this picture

Notice there is an atmospheric window at 10 micrometer, aka, long infrared wavelength. Also, notice the the visible spectrum, atmospheric absorption becomes progresively higher the shorter the wavelength is until nearly everything absorbed. If this wouldn't be the case, we would get blind and get sun burned in a matter of minutes

1 hour ago, aaronsta1 said:

i guess im asking does the receiver diameter do anything for transmitting or is it just power output vs distance?

3

It certainly does, the diameter determines the minimum spot size at a particular distance and therefore it effective maximum distance.

spotsize can be calculated the following way:

Spot size = 1.44 * distance-to-spot * wavelength / (aperture diameter)

notice the smaller the wavelenth or larger the diameter, the smaller the spotsize becomes.

Edited October 31, 2017 by FreeThinker