Show and Tell - New power generation modules for colonies!

[Thundy]

Just now, Nate Simpson said:

I'm excited to see Howard's music getting so much love here. I'm forwarding these comments to him as they pop up. 

We've already picked out the music that'll be on the next show and tell video! It's really pretty, too.

More music, Yay!
I hope there are Situational/Dynamic Music in there too, If so, I'd love an entire episode on it and how it works; I want to enjoy listening more of it.
I hope Mr. Howard took inspiration from Álvaro A. Lorite's suggestions in this video.
KSP Dynamic Music (How I would do the soundtrack) - YouTube

[MechBFP]

I am liking the music direction for sure (assuming that will be in the game of course).
On one hand I love the original KSP music, and it is going to be weird having something different, but at the same time it's good to have new stuff too.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

I'm excited to see Howard's music getting so much love here. I'm forwarding these comments to him as they pop up. 

We've already picked out the music that'll be on the next show and tell video! It's really pretty, too.

Will be waiting for it eagerly!  (or I guess )

[Dr. Kerbal]

@Nate Simpson When is the next show and tell video coming up. cant wait! 

[DanDucky]

On 2/8/2021 at 1:07 PM, Nate Simpson said:

On 2/7/2021 at 9:28 PM, DanDucky said:

Not sure I like the size of these reactors, I'd rather it be a small reactor but lots of interchangeable parts to customize them, like radiators and such. The idea of having huge pre-built machines isn't my favorite. Like, for example, we have the fuel generators in ksp but we need to design where the radiators and drills go. 

We're sensitive to this -- you still need to place radiators and drills for these (and in the case of radiators, you'll need quite a few). For the reactors, if we broke them down into smaller chunks, they would no longer be recognizable as reactors. We'd have to do something like separate cryostats and steam turbines or something? I'd actually love to see a mod that broke these things down to such a granular level -- but I suspect it's a little too fiddly considering how many other things you'll be keeping track of when you develop a colony...

So, rewatching the video I could see what you were trying to say by your response, but I think (seeing how there are walkways and such on the reactors) there is room to remove things from the base reactors. We can build walkways and stairs, all we need from you are the parts. I'm also concerned about the possibility that the game may run smooth but only as a result of these all-in-one parts. for example, how would an 800 or so part craft handle? are there new physics optimizations for things like aerodynamics?

[Nate Simpson]

3 hours ago, Dr. Kerbal said:

@Nate Simpson When is the next show and tell video coming up. cant wait! 

Now that we have @KSPStar, we're going to hopefully be getting these out a little more frequently. Now there's a person whose job is to remind us to record stuff!

[JIMMY_the_DOG]

3 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

It's really pretty, too.

 

Edited February 12, 2021 by JIMMY_the_DOG
argh i keep replying to old posts.. my apologies

[Dr. Kerbal]

3 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

Now that we have @KSPStar, we're going to hopefully be getting these out a little more frequently. Now there's a person whose job is to remind us to record stuff!

Wow!

[TheWeeklyKerman]

This looks insane, Can't wait to see more

[magnemoe]

On 2/10/2021 at 2:02 AM, prestja said:

It's really the best form of propulsion, isn't it?

Antimatter beat it a lot both in ISP and failure modes
And it require magnitudes more power to produce, think kardashev 1+ for more than probes. 
 

 

[KerikBalm]

On 2/6/2021 at 12:05 AM, Nate Simpson said:

There are facilities that are extremely power intensive. I bet this group can make some pretty informed guesses as to what that might be.

Honestly, aside from antimatter production, its pretty hard to imagine what you would need something better than a fission reactor for.

Of course, it may be a matter of what fuel type is available, and a massive fusion reactor may not produce so much more power from a compact fission reactor.

Consider the 400,000 ton ITER is supposed to generate 450 MW net thermal power, and the 13 m diameter/2750 ton reactor of an Ohio class ssbn  produces 220 Mw thermal power. Of course,  the ITER figure includes the building and such, and a lot of stuff that wouldn't be there in an actual power plant (but at the same time it lacks stuff from an actual power plant) - the vacuum vessels alone (without magnets and other equipment) is over 5,000 tons. Having a hard time finding the diameter of the torus (just the figure for the cross section of one of the vacuum vessels

On 2/6/2021 at 12:11 AM, Apelsin said:

Hmmm.

-He3 production.

-Uranium enrichment/reprocessing

-Antimatter production

Wonder what else.

He3 production can be done efficiently by fission power. In this case, you want neutron production (tritium decays into He3, a fusion reactor would consume tritium)

Uranium enrichment/processing doesn't take that much energy, you'd easily get net power using a uranium reactor

On 2/8/2021 at 4:28 AM, magnemoe said:

My guess: Producing stuff like metalic hydrogen not to talk about antimatter. 
Yes also powering colonies however this looks like gigawatt level reactors. 

Now the small one with the radiator looks more like something to power an colony. 

Metallic hydrogen production (ughhhhhhhhhhhh) shouldn't need more power than a fission reactor can give you. The specific impulse of undiluted mmH fuel would be less than you get from even a liquid core NTR, so even including efficiency losses, one reactor sufficient for use in an LV-N should provide similar amounts of power as what is needed for mmH production (ughhhhhhhhhhhhh)

Could we have colonies supporting 100k kerbals? because that's what I imagine when I see a reactor that big, even with mining, manufacturing, and greenhouse power consumption factored together.

On 2/8/2021 at 7:34 AM, Wubslin said:

Ooh, something else I'm not sure I've seen anyone consider is fabrication facilities for rocket hardware itself. It would obviously suck down a lot of power to take regolith and be able to turn it into KS-25s. The same goes for colony modules. Maybe we'll need to power huge metal foundries or something.

Shouldn't take that much more energy than it does in real life, and in real life a few dozen fission plants is all you'd need for an entire country.

 

When I think of giant power sucks, I think antimatter... and beamed power propulsion.. which I doubt will be in the game, but it would be so awesome if it was.

Then I'd hook up one (or several) of those reactors to a giant capacitor bank, and a giant laser (oh,with say... a few peta watt output), and laser launch my way into space. It would also be a rather good planetary defense fortress should the need arise.....

Edited February 17, 2021 by KerikBalm

[Terminal Velocity]

First of all BIGGGGGG. Second, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GO BY FAST 2021 I WANNA GET ksp 2!!!!! Third, What planet is the reactors showcased on (probably a secert)

Edited February 17, 2021 by Rocketry101

[Dr. Kerbal]

1 minute ago, Rocketry101 said:

First of all BIGGGGGG. Second, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GO BY FAST 2021 I WANNA GET ksp 2!!!!!

That fine and all but do we want a half done poorly done KSP2? No. We want a good one. I don't want to see Cyberpunk 2077 reflecting off of KSP2.

[KerikBalm]

18 minutes ago, Rocketry101 said:

Third, What planet is the reactors showcased on (probably a secert)

It is always good to read the thread before commenting. This question was answered on the first page.

Certain other threads that often get locked here have a lot of commenters who do not read the thread before commenting. This behavior should be frowned upon.

Anyway, your answer:

On 2/5/2021 at 10:10 PM, Nate Simpson said:

While the ground texture is from the game, I believe this is a test scene. The terrain system is still evolving, but I believe we are tracking toward something that looks better than this does.

 

[attosecond]

Looks like the ICF system is loosely modeled after the STAR driver concept, but I only count 128 beamlines in a decidedly unbalanced geometry. No beams from the top? Remember laser-driven ICF requires fuel... is there a separate target manufacturing facility for fabricating the cryogenic D-T targets? How are targets transported to and injected into the system? Hohlraum targets and indirect drive are the only option given the geometry you've selected, but these targets are more expensive and have issues with electron pre-heat. I'd suggest switching to a symmetric implosion geometry and going for direct-drive targets... would look even cooler and is more in-line with the future direction of real-world ICF.

[Sesshaku]

On 2/11/2021 at 6:17 PM, MechBFP said:

I am liking the music direction for sure (assuming that will be in the game of course).
On one hand I love the original KSP music, and it is going to be weird having something different, but at the same time it's good to have new stuff too.

Indeed. I like the sound design. However, I know this is a long shot. BUT. @Nate SimpsonCould you ask the music department if there's anyway to add some sort of homage or reference to this oldie classic.? It always sounded peaceful, anciente, progressive, spacey, hopeful, mysterious, I can't put it into words. But that track always sounded really special and nostalgic to me. I realize it's impossible, and perhaps doesn't agree with the overall sound they're aiming at. But still, worth the shot.