FreeThinker

[1.7.3/1.6.1/1.5.1/1.4.5/1.3.1] KSP Interstellar Extended 1.23.8 Support Thread

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

@ss8913 Does the latest beta release solve your overheat problems?

It... "does" ... and I say it that way because the behavior is really weird... wasteheat dissipates under throttle, builds up slightly at idle, and goes kind of nuts when something like MJ2 cycles the throttle really fast.  Also, did you do anything with reactor mass (antimatter) or any aerodynamic changes (winged edge radiators) in this patch?  I had an antimatter powered spaceplane that few beautifully and would glide to a smooth landing at < 300kts (around 140 m/s at sea level) before .6/.7 .. now it falls out of the sky like a brick (there's sometimes a bug where FAR doesn't work at all; that's not what's happening here, did a lot of tests... ), and I haven't updated FAR or anything else that would be "obvious" here.  Also the MJ2/KER calculations for both dV and thrust in the VAB/SPH are way way off (see my screenshots from before).. this update has done some bizarre things, that's for sure.  Not sure which are intentional and which are not.

Also seems like ISP on antimatter+thermal ramjet has changed significantly (gotten lower), and the plasma nozzles (again with antimatter reactors) have had their thrust reduced noticably as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ss8913 said:

Also, did you do anything with reactor mass (antimatter) or any aerodynamic changes (winged edge radiators) in this patch? 

 

No, but I did reduce the mass of the antimatter container, perhaps its lower mass is causing you vessel to become unbalanced

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

No, but I did reduce the mass of the antimatter container, perhaps its lower mass is causing you vessel to become unbalanced

no, the balance is fine.. just the stall speed is 150kts higher than it was before.  I can see the CoM/CoL visually while flying, that isn't the issue.. it's a too much weight or not enough lift problem, and .. I can't explain why.. it's only the KSPIE-powered planes that are having the problem, which is even more weird.  My airliner using stock/stock-ish parts still flies the way it always did, and the spaceplane that no longer flies is using the stock Big-S wings.. only thing I can possibly think of is the graphene winged edge radiators used to produce significant lift and now no longer do.. but I don't recall the aero visualizer showing any significant lift from them before... Also of note is the fact that my landing gear were collapsing just sitting there pre-takeoff after this update, which led me to believe that something has significantly increased in mass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ss8913 said:

which led me to believe that something has significantly increased in mass.

 

mm, please check mass of generators, it is related to the maximum power of reactor, I might have forgotten the adjustment. the Antimatter have increased it maximum power by a factor of 20, this might affect the mass of the generator. Originally the mass of the generator would be 9 t on, but after the increase in power it would suddenly be 180 ton. Lol, This might cause your vessels to fall out the sky like a brik ;-)

Edit:

To fix the problem open AntimatterReactor.cfg and change into the following

thermalProcessingModifier = 0.0125

 

Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

mm, please check mass of generators, it is related to the maximum power of reactor, I might have forgotten the adjustment. the Antimatter have increased it maximum power by a factor of 20, this might affect the mass of the generator. Originally the mass of the generator would be 9 t on, but after the increase in power it would suddenly be 180 ton. Lol, This might cause your vessels to fall out the sky like a brik ;-)

Edit:

To fix the problem open AntimatterReactor.cfg and change into the following


thermalProcessingModifier = 0.0125

 

yeah an extra 180 tons would certainly explain both the landing gear collapse and the flight profile :)  thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Version 1.13.8 for Kerbal Space Program 1.2.2 can be downloaded from here

Released on 2017-05-19

  • Updated IFS to 2.5.1
  • Added ability of thermal engines to use Compressed air for propulsion
  • Balance Lowered initial mass antimatter tank but increased mass growing with scale
  • Fixed overheating thermal nozzle when throttled
  • Fixed Power Generators getting too heavy when connected to antimatter reactor
  • Fixed Antimatter Reactor overheating when connected with thermal nozzle
  • Fixed Magnetic Target Fusion reactor will now exclusively produce Thermal Heat
Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@FreeThinker - the 1.13.8 download from CKAN identifies as 1.13.8 (just confirmed, this is also an issue in the directc download from your link above) but the .version file in Plugins/ says:

 

{
    "NAME":"KSP Interstellar Extended",
    "URL":"http://ksp-avc.cybutek.net/version.php?id=152",
    "DOWNLOAD":"http://www.curse.com/ksp-mods/kerbal/236825-ksp-interstellar-extended",
    "VERSION":
    {
        "MAJOR":1,
        "MINOR":13,
        "PATCH":7,
        "BUILD":0
    },
    "KSP_VERSION":
    {
        "MAJOR":1,
        "MINOR":2,
        "PATCH":2
    }
}

 

KSP-AVC therefore thinks it's out of date.  Probably not a big issue, unless this is actually 1.13.7 and the metadata is wrong...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found a problem with the all in one isru. It seems for the peroxide process, no matter the size it always consumes 5MW and makes 2.30 hydrazines per second, assuming you arent bottlenecked by power or htp or NH3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@FreeThinker the .8 update has solved all of the flight, heat, etc problems I was having with the antimatter reactors.  Now on to the QSR - it seems like these either are generating more heat, or the graphene radiators are less effective... It's.. very difficult to cool one of these.  Even with 7.5m or 10m tweakscaled umbrella radiators.  Intentional or is something out of balance?  By the time I have a craft big enough to cool ONE of these QSRs, if I want to go at a reasonable interstellar speed (at least 100.0c), I need two 5.0m or larger "large" alcubierre drives.  Which one QSR [no longer?] has enough power to drive at that speed, even with a warp-to-mass ratio over 3.0.  So I have to add more QSRs.  Then they overheat.  And even I'm into HX size 4 parts to be able to mount enough cooling.  Which makes my vessel seriously large and heavy and unmaneuverable.  Oh, and then I need more alcubierre drives.  Which I no longer can power even with 3 QSRs.  It's.. a problem :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ss8913 said:

@FreeThinker the .8 update has solved all of the flight, heat, etc problems I was having with the antimatter reactors.  Now on to the QSR - it seems like these either are generating more heat, or the graphene radiators are less effective... It's.. very difficult to cool one of these.

 
 
 

Well it true that radiators have become less effect (about 25%) but they also become lighter if you use static radiators. The QSR is meant to produce a lot of waste heat, but what that are you feeding it? hydrogen should produce the least  amount of  wasteheat.

Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

Well it true that radiators have become less effect (about 25%) but they also become lighter if you use static radiators. The QSR is meant to produce a lot of waste heat, but what that are you feeding it? hydrogen should produce the least  amount of  wasteheat.

static radiators are better even than the folding umbrellas?  OK, I can work with that limitation.  Yeah, I'm using hydrogen to fuel them.  I notice that they don't want to start, however, unless I cycle through all the fusion modes (it defaults to hydrogen, have to click the 'switch mode' 3 times to cycle back to hydrogen before it will start in the reactor window) ... that's not really a huge deal, easy workaround, but figured you should know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding de QSR, I have some new ideas of using the Hawking radiation emitted by the black hole, directly for photonic propulsion like a true black hole starship, this allows me to wrap up the power level (similarly what I did for the antimatter beam core) and use it as extremely powerfull photon propulsion, surpassing even the beam antimatter core performance (approaching close to speed of light). The big advantage is there would be no conversion losses and therefore much less wasteheat.

What I need is a some kind of engine which could serve as an photon engine nozzle

Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The particle accelerator seems to be giving me horrible frame rates. Like, it was fine in the VAB and on the launch pad, but about 15 seconds into the flight, my frame rate drops to like 5 fps and stays that way for the rest of the flight to orbit, and even after achieving orbit and going back to the tracking station and returning to the ship the performance still sucks, and I have a pretty beefy computer. I don't know exactly how the ksp timer works but it was yellow the whole flight and it took like 5 seconds irl for each game second. I tested it without the particle accelerator and it worked just fine, apart from the GC stutter I've been having but that's probably because I have a bunch of mods and is not really your problem to fix. Anyways, after I closed ksp and reloaded it the accelerator ship had playable  (~15) fps but still far fewer than a ship its size should get. Also if it helps, msi afterburner says that basically none of my computer components were anywhere close to capacity. Also, how does it work, just put it in orbit and supply a bunch of power and wait for science?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jumberlack said:

The particle accelerator seems to be giving me horrible frame rates. Like, it was fine in the VAB and on the launch pad, but about 15 seconds into the flight, my frame rate drops to like 5 fps and stays that way for the rest of the flight to orbit, and even after achieving orbit and going back to the tracking station and returning to the ship the performance still sucks, and I have a pretty beefy computer. I don't know exactly how the ksp timer works but it was yellow the whole flight and it took like 5 seconds irl for each game second. I tested it without the particle accelerator and it worked just fine, apart from the GC stutter I've been having but that's probably because I have a bunch of mods and is not really your problem to fix. Anyways, after I closed ksp and reloaded it the accelerator ship had playable  (~15) fps but still far fewer than a ship its size should get. Also if it helps, msi afterburner says that basically none of my computer components were anywhere close to capacity. Also, how does it work, just put it in orbit and supply a bunch of power and wait for science?

It's an issue with the model, it exceed a limit of the KSP engine. It worked fine back in 1.0, but it should be reworked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@FreeThinker I have to take back what I said about all antimatter problems fixed... I have a lot of ships that are powered by 4-5 3.75m antimatter reactors, usually only one of which is connected to a generator... using the plasma thermal nozzles.  This used to not be a problem.  However, now, in the VAB/SPH it shows that I need to cool almost 13,000 gigawatts of power - which is way up from before.  There is... well, I don't want to say *no way*, but I'd like to see an example of how it could be done... to cool this setup.  It just can't be done.  The umbrella radiator scaled to 10m has the highest thermal dissipation of any radiator, but you'd need like 40 of them and there's no way to put 40 of those things on a craft.

Also, launching one with insufficient (obviously) cooling, has one of three effects, and reverting to launch/vab will "roll the dice" on which one I get, it seems:

1. Wasteheat ramps up to 99.9% of max and stays there and nothing bad happens (which is probably a bug)
2. Wasteheat ramps up to 99.9% and the reactors shut down (which is what I'd expect)
3. Wasteheat ramps up to 99.9% and the reactors don't shut down but simply produce less power and, as a result, less thrust (this also seems like a bug, since the reactors don't shut off as in case #2).  This has the same net effect as #2 but requires the reactors to be manually shut down, cooled, and restarted.

a 10m GSR does not contribute nearly as much to heat as 5x 3.75m antimatter reactors now.  However, a ship big enough to carry a 7.5 or 10m alcubierre drive needs this level of power in order to burn off the dV deficit at the destination, so "use less reactors" isn't so much of an option, since you have to burn off 5000-20000 m/s of dV after dropping out of warp, usually, and you have to do it rather quickly.. anything significantly below 15 m/s max acceleration doesn't really cut it :(  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The helium cryostat is missing from my download.  I reinstalled the latest version, but it is not in the files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uploaded release Version 1.13.9 for Kerbal Space Program 1.2.2 which can be downloaded from here

Released on 2017-05-22

  • Added Magnetic nozzle will require more power depending on fuel flow
  • Balance: reduced mass of flat and truss graphene radiator
  • Balance allows truss graphene radiator to be scaled up larger
  • Fixed emissivity and heat conductivity truss radiators
  • Fixed Beam Antimatter reactor power generation efficiency
  • Fixed excessive waste heat spikes when disabling thrust
Edited by FreeThinker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CheckYoStaging said:

The helium cryostat is missing from my download.  I reinstalled the latest version, but it is not in the files.

The classic helium tank is no longer in KSPI. It is replaced by a much better looking cryostat model

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISRU refrigerator doesn't seem to consume compressed air and distribute to intake air on the Thermal Nuclear Ramjet, or if it  does so, is doing so at such a rate the compressed air drains in seconds even when only adjusted to a 5% compressed air > intake air setting. Fuel container it is drawing from has 50,000 compressed air.

Null Reference error after download when attempting install via ckan.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Maelstrom Vortex said:

ISRU refrigerator doesn't seem to consume compressed air and distribute to intake air on the Thermal Nuclear Ramjet, or if it  does so, is doing so at such a rate the compressed air drains in seconds even when only adjusted to a 5% compressed air > intake air setting. Fuel container it is drawing from has 50,000 compressed air.

Null Reference error after download when attempting install via ckan.

That's because you need to switch engine propellant to "CompressedAir", not Atmospheric, and set the sliders on the compressed air tank and the ISRU Refrigerator all to the left (CompressedAir). That way all the Atmintake are fed into the refrigerator, that fill the compressedAir tank, that feed the engine.... !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey,

I played this mod for some time now and encountered a few bugs that I haven't seen mentioned here yet. Some I noticed already in 1.12.xx (I don't remember the exact version) but some appeared with the recent updates.

Magnetized Target Fusion Reactor resource storages and waste heat

The magnetized target fusion reactor only supports fusion modes involving deuterium and tritium. Deuterium ist stored as lithiumdeuteride instead of plain deuterium like in other reactors. It works this way, so maybe I'm missing something here? The Lithium-6 storage however seems redundant to me. A second potential bug that I noticed is the estimated waste heat prodution in the thermal mechanics helper in the VAB. It shows a waste heat production between 2.5 and 3 MW for a default 2.5m reactor.

Ablative Laser Nozzle turns all recieved power to waste heat when idling

It's fine when running as the waste heat is used up. It also seems to heat up much faster while in the atmosphere compared to 1.12.x but I guess that's intentional.

Antimatter Collector collect less Antimatter while unloaded

Image

Four antimatter collectors at 900km for 12 days. Right storage was the active vessel during time warp and has exactly the expected amount of antimatter. The storage on the left was unloaded and collected considerably less. For my actual antimatter collector array the discrepancy was much larger.

Warp drives prices are very inconstant

Not a bug but a balancing issue. The two smaller Warp drives with 4t and 8t cost 4.5 Million while the heavy drive costs only 1.1 Million. With TweakScale the smaller drives become pointless in career mode. In my opinion the heavy drive should be more expensive while the lighter drives should cost alot less.

Edited by Cholerix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ciro1983811 said:

That's because you need to switch engine propellant to "CompressedAir", not Atmospheric, and set the sliders on the compressed air tank and the ISRU Refrigerator all to the left (CompressedAir). That way all the Atmintake are fed into the refrigerator, that fill the compressedAir tank, that feed the engine.... !!

Thank you for this. I haven't seen it able to toggle over to any other fuel yet, but I will try tonight. CKAN collapsed after downloading the upgrade, but appears to have successfully applied the patch despite the bizarre null reference error.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is InterstellarFuelSwitch necessary? Because it conflicts with Configurable Containers, which is needed for Roverdudes mods, which I'd prefer not doing without.

Also can you "mine" the materials available in this mod?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.