[0.25]KSP Interstellar (Magnetic Nozzles, ISRU Revamp) Version 0.13

[Angelo Kerman]

I just got to warp tech for the first time and wow, it's a blast! I'm figuring out how to navigate and it's definitely weird; the whole retain your momentum makes sense and creates challenges. I like how the plasma engines become quantum engines and it occurred to me that if KSPI had quantum RCS thrusters, then I'd not need monopropellant tanks. Do such things exist? Also, what is the optimal orbit around Jool for collecting antimatter? I've gotten to the 570mg/sec range but thought you could get up to 590mg/sec. Does Kerbol have a higher collection rate?

Edited June 20, 2014 by Angel-125

[AndreyATGB]

I think it's 5Mm? I know it's a rather even number.

[awc.sorensen]

I just got to warp tech for the first time and wow, it's a blast! I'm figuring out how to navigate and it's definitely weird; the whole retain your momentum makes sense and creates challenges. I like how the plasma engines become quantum engines and it occurred to me that if KSPI had quantum RCS thrusters, then I'd not need monopropellant tanks. Do such things exist? Also, what is the optimal orbit around Jool for collecting antimatter? I've gotten to the 570mg/sec range but thought you could get up to 590mg/sec. Does Kerbol have a higher collection rate?

The highest I've managed to get was 640mg/sec and that was at 8Mm above Jool, given that Jool is a Jupiter counterpart it has an amazing magnetosphere and it currently hold the record in the Kerbol system!

Here's a bunch of graphs that helped me find that sweet spot, http://imgur.com/a/g313g#0

[Rabada]

The highest I've managed to get was 640mg/sec and that was at 8Mm above Jool, given that Jool is a Jupiter counterpart it has an amazing magnetosphere and it currently hold the record in the Kerbol system!

Here's a bunch of graphs that helped me find that sweet spot, http://imgur.com/a/g313g#0

I believe a 9Mm circular 0 inclination orbit above Jool is optimal and would be slightly better than 8Mm. /nitpick

In my opinion the only good places to farm antimatter is 900km above Kerbin and 9000km above Jool. With Jool being around a 100 times better than Kerbin

[Donziboy2]

Yes, I am well aware that it will not activate with safety enabled, and with it disabled it will kill kerbals when you use it, therefore what I am asking is how can I stop it from killing kerbals when I use it.

I am using this engine for heavy lifting on Minmus, it acts as a 'hopper', landing on Minmus at my ore processing station to fill up (Huge Procedural Parts container) and then take it to the orbital launch station. Problem is, in order to fill it up I need to land near the station which is occupied by a team of kerbals.

I am going for minimal part count here, so an auxiliary set up would be redundant (may as well go with methane/LF & Ox in that case).

So.... since I need to turn off radiation safety in order to land, it kills my kerbals. Honestly it doesn't make any sense at all that radiation is not implemented and yet it is indeed working for one single engine, very frustrating and pointless IMO. So if someone could be a savior and explain to me how to disable this 'feature', I would be most appreciative!

P.S. I am well aware I could move the kerbals, thing is....what I really want to know is if I can just disable this feature from the vista engine. Browsing the dll file, seems like I may need to change 'GameConstants/public const double rad_const_h = 1000.0;' or perhaps something under 'VistaEngineController' in order to disable this, am I wrong? Not really experienced with programming so any help would be appreciated.

There are 2 different radiation schemes in Interstellar. One for the Vista which was implemented first, the second was for a working radiation system that would give kerbals radiation based on the environment and what protections they had.

If I remember correctly the DT Vista kills Kerbals(and everything else) because of the Gamma radiation it would produce. It is one of the only shortcomings of the engine and is made to balance its insane ISP ability. You could try using a pair of Plasma engines to lift off and land and then switch inflight to the vista.

The second system is still a WIP and currently does nothing to kerbals, just gives a display of rads.

I'm not really referring to that, I know that ATM effects the warp drive texture but I was more referring to Kerbal Joint Reinforcement's physics stabilisation thing, where it actually freezes the physics when something goes on/off rails and stabilises all the joints on the craft. It does this everytime you enter timewarp or activate the Alcubierre Drive... It freezes for a set time and by the time it finishes I am past my mark for deactivating warp. All I want to know is if I can set the minimum warp speed to a smaller fraction of light to give myself more time to get more precise and on time warp exits.

I would have thought it would just be a config edit but it seems as if it's embedded within the actual plugin.

I also had difficulties with simple cfg editing to make a full version of each antimatter tank, (for testing purposes), using my basic knowledge of copy-pasting didn't do the trick and ended up screwing with save integrity/kraken encounters...

Since 0.23.5 came out there is very little need for KJR.

I believe a 9Mm circular 0 inclination orbit above Jool is optimal and would be slightly better than 8Mm. /nitpick

In my opinion the only good places to farm antimatter is 900km above Kerbin and 9000km above Jool. With Jool being around a 100 times better than Kerbin

True, and sadly there is a bug that allows you to run a reactor at higher output then your collectors would actually collect.

[raxo2222]

Well I came at optimum height for sun, and got antimatter flux of 65.6 mg/day. I think there is no better place to mine

antimatter. Flux is at 7.6e-4

EDIT: So Jools maximum flux is 10 times higher, somewhere at 62e-4?

Edited June 20, 2014 by raxo2222

[JonBar]

There are 2 different radiation schemes in Interstellar. One for the Vista which was implemented first, the second was for a working radiation system that would give kerbals radiation based on the environment and what protections they had.

If I remember correctly the DT Vista kills Kerbals(and everything else) because of the Gamma radiation it would produce. It is one of the only shortcomings of the engine and is made to balance its insane ISP ability. You could try using a pair of Plasma engines to lift off and land and then switch inflight to the vista.

The second system is still a WIP and currently does nothing to kerbals, just gives a display of rads.

Ok, I will restate what I said before.

Going for minimal part count, auxiliary engines would be redundant in the minimal part sense.

So, how can I disable this feature?

I don't need another explanation on why it is this way, just want to know if I can disable this feature.

I have looked at the source code and see that if I change the '2000' value (rad kill distance) it should take care of the problem. Thing is when I try to edit it in the dll I get a 'ambiguous match error' so I cannot get to that part of the code.

So please, someone, explain to me how to disable this 'feature'. It would be nice if this was a feature to be toggled.

Edited June 20, 2014 by JonBar

[Schilcote]

Is the atmosphere scoop actually good for anything?

[Donziboy2]

Ok, I will restate what I said before.

Going for minimal part count, auxiliary engines would be redundant in the minimal part sense.

So, how can I disable this feature?

I don't need another explanation on why it is this way, just want to know if I can disable this feature.

I have looked at the source code and see that if I change the '2000' value (rad kill distance) it should take care of the problem. Thing is when I try to edit it in the dll I get a 'ambiguous match error' so I cannot get to that part of the code.

So please, someone, explain to me how to disable this 'feature'. It would be nice if this was a feature to be toggled.

I don't recall anyone ever disabling it. Or atleast anyone ever mentioning disabling it. I can look when I get home.

[JonBar]

I don't recall anyone ever disabling it. Or atleast anyone ever mentioning disabling it. I can look when I get home.

Well, if it is not possible to disable (seems that would take more work than it is worth), I just wanted to change the distance at which it will kill kerbals.

Wanted to change the 2000m range to 1m.

You can see it here in the source code on line 61.

But when I try to open 'VistaEngineController/OnUpdate() : Void' I get thrown that exception error 'Ambiguous Match Found', using Net Reflector.

I am by no means a programmer, so I could be going about this the wrong way, although this seems the most direct way to go about it.

The balancing of this engine part makes sense because of its power, but the thing is... until a 64bit version is implemented to allow/handle more parts, I find it imperative to use as little parts as necessary to get the most out of this game.

Unfortunately this 'balance' to this engine makes it a requirement to have more parts to any ship using this engine.

Now, I don't want to go all out cheating by using mods that are less realistic, but I think some sacrifice must be made, which is why I feel comfortable by at least reducing the range of the radiation killer.

Heck, if there where ways to protect kerbals inside my landed base that would also do well and I wouldn't have the need to change the radiation range, but since that isn't available I see this route as my only option.

Edited June 20, 2014 by JonBar

[Donziboy2]

Well, if it is not possible to disable (seems that would take more work than it is worth), I just wanted to change the distance at which it will kill kerbals.

Wanted to change the 2000m range to 1m.

You can see it here in the source code on line 61.

But when I try to open 'VistaEngineController/OnUpdate() : Void' I get thrown that exception error 'Ambiguous Match Found', using Net Reflector.

I am by no means a programmer, so I could be going about this the wrong way, although this seems the most direct way to go about it.

The balancing of this engine part makes sense because of its power, but the thing is... until a 64bit version can allow/handle more parts, I find it imperative to use as little parts as necessary to get the most out of this game.

Unfortunately this 'balance' to this engine makes it a requirement to have more parts to any ship using this engine.

Now, I don't want to go all out cheating by using mods that are less realistic, but I think some sacrifice must be made, which is why I feel comfortable by at least reducing the range of the radiation killer.

Heck, if there where ways to protect kerbals inside my landed base that would also do well and I wouldn't have the need to change the radiation range, but since that isn't available I see this route as my only option.

Unless im mistaken(its been a long day:confused:) that part of the code determines if the system will prevent you from running the engine, if you set it low it would not prevent you from killing them when you power up.

[JonBar]

Unless im mistaken(its been a long day:confused:) that part of the code determines if the system will prevent you from running the engine, if you set it low it would not prevent you from killing them when you power up.

Ok, that may not be the line then, maybe here? I dunno, not a programmer

In any case I think reducing the radiation range would be the way to go.....that or having radiation protection on certain parts/pods

Edited June 20, 2014 by JonBar

[Atrius129]

-snip

I like how the plasma engines become quantum engines and it occurred to me that if KSPI had quantum RCS thrusters, then I'd not need monopropellant tanks. Do such things exist?

I love this idea.

[Atrius129]

I'm not really referring to that, I know that ATM effects the warp drive texture but I was more referring to Kerbal Joint Reinforcement's physics stabilisation thing, where it actually freezes the physics when something goes on/off rails and stabilises all the joints on the craft. It does this everytime you enter timewarp or activate the Alcubierre Drive... It freezes for a set time and by the time it finishes I am past my mark for deactivating warp. All I want to know is if I can set the minimum warp speed to a smaller fraction of light to give myself more time to get more precise and on time warp exits.

I would have thought it would just be a config edit but it seems as if it's embedded within the actual plugin.

I also had difficulties with simple cfg editing to make a full version of each antimatter tank, (for testing purposes), using my basic knowledge of copy-pasting didn't do the trick and ended up screwing with save integrity/kraken encounters...

Did you even try what I said? I did mention the texture but that was not what I was focusing on. Like I said, I had issues with activating and deactivating the drive, until I performed that fix.

As far as the AM Tanks, just make them tweakable. To do this go into Gamedata>WarpPlugin>Parts>Resources>ResourcesNuclear.cfg and mod the AM to be:

RESOURCE_DEFINITION
{
  name = Antimatter
  density = 0.000000001
  flowMode = STACK_PRIORITY_SEARCH
  transfer = PUMP
  [B]isTweakable = true[/B]
}

That should be it. I don't think you have to edit any parts if I remember correctly. This won't break your save but your current saved ships in the VAB will need to have the tanks replaced to be tweakable. Works for things like Tritium and He-3 as well. This is great for testing out new AM craft but I would recommend the Resource Recovery mod for long term AM use that isn't game breaking.

I should probably change flowMode to ALL_VESSEL.

[ArcFurnace]

I like how the plasma engines become quantum engines and it occurred to me that if KSPI had quantum RCS thrusters, then I'd not need monopropellant tanks. Do such things exist?

Plasma-thruster RCS doesn't exist right now. I've definitely thought about it before, although I haven't mentioned it, so I will put this out there now: Fractal, if you can manage to implement plasma-thruster based RCS thrusters (especially QV plasma thrusters), that would be totally awesome, because then I could build that totally propellant-free ship I keep wanting to design.

[Makeone]

There is the new RCS module, called moduleRCSFX by Iadal... (something, sorry about that, lol) that enables more complex RCS systems than stock system. I recall that Nertea (NFPP fame) was planning to a electrical RCS system, so QV RCS should be possible.

And just for correction, Vista engines shoots neutrons out of its tailpipe, hence the great danger to everything living.

[Angelo Kerman]

Well, I'm willing to dive into the code and build a 3D model for a QV RCS thruster. In the tech tree, I can see it being available when you've researched warp drive.

Edit: So, it looks like there is a field for ModuleRCS called requiresFuel. It isn't persistent, but a simple module could set the flag to false upon startup. I think that module could then request, say, .01 MJ when RCS is running. I have WaveFunctionP's warp plugin source, I'll play with it and see what I come up with.

Edited June 21, 2014 by Angel-125

[Atrius129]

Well, I'm willing to dive into the code and build a 3D model for a QV RCS thruster. In the tech tree, I can see it being available when you've researched warp drive.

Edit: So, it looks like there is a field for ModuleRCS called requiresFuel. It isn't persistent, but a simple module could set the flag to false upon startup. I think that module could then request, say, .01 MJ when RCS is running. I have WaveFunctionP's warp plugin source, I'll play with it and see what I come up with.

Could you not use the ElectricEngineController module (MPD part.cfg) added to an existing RCS port model? maxPower at something like 2500? I can't wait to see some of the models you have in mind. They could just look like little disks that you stick onto the ship. They start glowing in relation to the direction they fire.

I LOVE it when people get working on something like this!

[Angelo Kerman]

Could you not use the ElectricEngineController module (MPD part.cfg) added to an existing RCS port model? maxPower at something like 2500? I can't wait to see some of the models you have in mind. They could just look like little disks that you stick onto the ship. They start glowing in relation to the direction they fire.

I LOVE it when people get working on something like this!

I've not heard of ElectricEngineController. But with that said, if you're willing to live with the stock RCS 3D model for now, and can help test the solution, here's what I did:

1. Download the QVRCS zip file I created.

2. Unzip the contents to GameData/WarpPlugin/Parts directory. Final directory should be named QV RCS.

3. Play with the new part.

I haven't balanced the part but I found that the standard RCS block lets you specify the resource it consumes and the amount. From the part config I created:

MODULE

{

name = ModuleRCS

thrusterTransformName = RCSthruster

thrusterPower = 1

resourceName = ElectricCharge

resourceMass = 0.0001

atmosphereCurve

{

key = 0 260

key = 1 100

}

}

The items in bold are the ones I need help play balancing. Once we've got that figured out, I can try my hand at creating a quantum vacuum RCS 3D model, and maybe Fractal will include it in an update.

I think the disks idea is workable. The place anywhere variant will be the RT-100 Repulsor

Hope that helps!

Edited June 21, 2014 by Angel-125

[awc.sorensen]

Since 0.23.5 came out there is very little need for KJR.

I have to disagree with you, since 0.23.5 I haven't had much luck with joint stability, it's okay with stock parts but when you load a few mods that haven't quite been optimised well enough you run into problems. That's why I'm saying I actually need KJR, because the physics stabilisation actually keeps my kerbals alive!

I wish that it was easy to change the minimum speed of the Alcubierre Drive easily, it would have solved my problems long ago... Also why doesn't changing the antimatter tank from empty (Antimatter=0) to full (Antimatter=10000) work? It keeps giving me the Kraken, am I missing something?

[Atrius129]

I have to disagree with you, since 0.23.5 I haven't had much luck with joint stability, it's okay with stock parts but when you load a few mods that haven't quite been optimised well enough you run into problems. That's why I'm saying I actually need KJR, because the physics stabilisation actually keeps my kerbals alive!

I wish that it was easy to change the minimum speed of the Alcubierre Drive easily, it would have solved my problems long ago... Also why doesn't changing the antimatter tank from empty (Antimatter=0) to full (Antimatter=10000) work? It keeps giving me the Kraken, am I missing something?

Are you ignoring my posts or what? Delete the folder I told you to. & Make AM tanks tweakable. Problems solved.

[Atrius129]

I've not heard of ElectricEngineController. But with that said, if you're willing to live with the stock RCS 3D model for now, and can help test the solution, here's what I did:

1. Download the QVRCS zip file I created.

2. Unzip the contents to GameData/WarpPlugin/Parts directory. Final directory should be named QV RCS.

3. Play with the new part.

I haven't balanced the part but I found that the standard RCS block lets you specify the resource it consumes and the amount. From the part config I created:

MODULE

{

name = ModuleRCS

thrusterTransformName = RCSthruster

thrusterPower = 1

resourceName = ElectricCharge

resourceMass = 0.0001

atmosphereCurve

{

key = 0 260

key = 1 100

}

}

The items in bold are the ones I need help play balancing. Once we've got that figured out, I can try my hand at creating a quantum vacuum RCS 3D model, and maybe Fractal will include it in an update.

I think the disks idea is workable. The place anywhere variant will be the RT-100 Repulsor

Hope that helps!

Amazing. I'll be able to try it out tomorrow night. Keep us updated.

[NeoAcario]

So I now have all science gathered in the Kerbolar system besides one: Impactor Science. I haven't tried it since it was new and a little buggy... Question: How many impacts, roughly, to achieve 99.99% of the science for this experiment? 4? 10? I honestly don't know.

Someone help me out here,

~Steve

EDIT:

This question assumes, naturally, that I will have sensors placed at 0, 90, 180, 270, and the north and south poles.

Edited June 21, 2014 by NeoAcario

[awc.sorensen]

Your reply wasn't up when I posted that...

Thanks for the AM tank tip, it works good! However...

I did try to get rid of the folder, it didn't do anything for me, I liked the black anyway

I'm know that the KJR physics easing is causing this, it disables all input to the craft in order to halt all movement.

All I want to know is how to lower the minimum speed of the warp drive! I know why the warp drive won't deactivate quickly, it's because of KJR!

Edited June 21, 2014 by awc.sorensen
avoid double post

[Donziboy2]

I have to disagree with you, since 0.23.5 I haven't had much luck with joint stability, it's okay with stock parts but when you load a few mods that haven't quite been optimised well enough you run into problems. That's why I'm saying I actually need KJR, because the physics stabilisation actually keeps my kerbals alive!

I wish that it was easy to change the minimum speed of the Alcubierre Drive easily, it would have solved my problems long ago... Also why doesn't changing the antimatter tank from empty (Antimatter=0) to full (Antimatter=10000) work? It keeps giving me the Kraken, am I missing something?

Since 0.23 I have not really needed KJR. So please share with me what ungodly thing you launched cause I had no problems with this thing. (other then partcount lag lol)

As for setting AM levels at launch.

I would say instead of playing around with configs and such just install TAC Fuel Balancer, when your sitting on the pad or runway you can edit tanks to whatever level you want.