DrScarlett

When you say antimatter here, which engine are you actually referring to? The magnetic nozzle?

OK I try that in my medium Alcubierre drive FTL setup. Still gives me the 30GW, enough to run the rig at 20c (20xlightspeed). I do not know yet if that is enough. Looks like I need about 48GW to run at full warp power. If I replace my Kerbstein with a magnetic nozzle, I get a much lower TWR, which means that when I arrive and drop out of warp, I need hours to break into orbit (depending on my starting vector and the relative vector of the target body). Even though I am using all my particles with the nozzle, I see no advantage for my circumstance. The Tri-alpha gets me up to 14GW, scaled to 5 meters. Next size tier I need to switch to the big Alcubierre drive so maybe that works, didn't test it. But the 14GW are not enough. Good enough to charge, but not enough to create the warp field. I wouldn't get to the warp speeds the 30GW get me either, even if it does work. The antimatter initiated reactor (at 3.75 meters) with both generators theoretically gives me some 38 GW, charges up nicely, but warp initiation fails at 35% critical power (not sure how that works, what it means, why the 38 GW do not get me running). Maybe its because of the added mass (156 tons as opposed to the 122 tons of the antimatter drive setup). Anyway, it looks like the antimatter reactor still has the best electrical power to mass ratio, despite the 5% conversion limitation. Probably he whole picture changes if I scale up to the large Alcubierre drive and test out all these power setups again. Which kind of makes me think. And ask: What electrical power setup for FTL do you guys use in the largest scale (large Alcubierre drive, full warp capability)? Is there any way to efficiently power a small craft with a small Alcubierre drive? Hopefully even up to full warp speed? What is max warp anyway? How is it that going lower than 1c also costs incrementally more power, what is the scientific reasoning behind that?

Done, edited the post Naaa, I don't like to muck around with the .cfg's. I'd rather bat my eyelashes @FreeThinker and ask pretty please, could you chalk this one up for the next release? From my perspective even nicer fix than the AM Lab production bug Strike that, didn't read @Ciro1983811 yet @BlackMoons thank you for checking it out!!

Here's what happens when I add a thermal generator on the other end as well. It gives me some 21 more GW which drops down to 13 GW in use when my heat management balances out. A bit better, but I am still wasting most of my charged particles in the same way as before. Inactive: Whilst charging Alcubierre:

Yup, you were right. The generator size (and it was indeed a charged particle generator, lol) doesn't change jack. Not the mass, not the output. But it does list a max power output of 30.8 GW (not visible in the VAB but it shows when right clicked in space), and its power output is indeed limited to that. Maybe I attached it upside-down or something... So.... how do I get more powerrrr? How do I put that beautiful antimatter generator to use (hopefully without increasing the reactors size - just to improve the generator)?

Hi @FreeThinker and interstellar crew, This one is another one asking for advice or feedback. I have used that nice antimatter to start testing my FTL capability, the ultimate goal being to colonize another star system with MKS. Here is a pic of the rig I manage to fly to Jool in under half an hour easy. The braking engine on the back is a Kerbstein drive. They are awesome! So basically I have two-and-a-half questions: 1a). I seem to need an antimatter reactor to get the power I need for FTL. I have tried fusion, but I could not manage to keep the craft light enough and get a small or medium Alcubierre drive to work with that, so I am guessing to get some payload in long distance FTL I will need antimatter power - is that correct? 1b). The antimatter reactor here is 2.5 meters and can go up to 685 GW. But it has no generator or convertor, so I put one on it. But I had to boost that thing up to 7.5 meters to convert enough power, pushing the mass already beyond the reach of a small Alcubierre drive. It looks really out of place and still only delivers less than 5% (30GW) of the power the antimatter reactor can give. Is there a more elegant solution to this (obviously without moving towards beamed power)? 2). My solution for heat dispersion also has been bugging me. Here I have this floating ring of radiators. Mweeeeh . Is there a method that supplies enough heat management that attaches more realistically, but that does not make your craft look like a bristling porcupine (a crazy number of unfolding radiators) or an oversized dart (oversized triangular fixed panels)? I am looking for realism, practicality, but also elegance for the looks of the craft. Anything out there that I missed? EDIT: I think this one got answered by @FreeThinker's last post. Deployable fixed graphene radiator panels look better and work better. I'd like to have something more stylish, but hey, it's space travel, not a fashion show Anyone, any time you take to put me on a nice path regarding these questions, would be very much appreciated! Thanks a lot again in advance, Dr. Scarlett

Hi @FreeThinker and other KSPI experts I think it is nice to post a success story every now and again. With your help, it looks like I have got antimatter collection down pat. I got stations around Kerbin and Jool with 10 meter sized antimatter collector parts. That's right, if you wanna avond the Kraken, go big Launched in 5 sections each and connected with construction ports. Fairly easy to make and with a manageable part count. The Kerbin one is at 900 KM and does 797 milligrams of antimatter per day. The Jool one is at 9000 KM and does a whopping 114.5 grams of antimatter per day. But exactly the same rig as the one around Kerbin. The 5-launch convoy to Jool was a lot of fun to do. So now I got that going I am ready for the next steps. I am looking for some advice there, but I will put that in the next post. Cheers, Dr. Scarlett

Aaah I understand. I had CC first, and need IFS to get that specific IFS cargo container, not yet used in my save. I will check the existing CC changed tanks yto see if they are affected in any way. Thanks again!

@danielboro, heyhey thanks for the warning. What wired thing? And if I have it, is that then good or bad? @FreeThinker Thank you again for your replies! @FreeThinker Here's a pic of a station with four labs

Ow, another question, I am trying to find LithiumHydride containers, and when I read around here I think I need full IFS for that, not only core - but according to CKAN it conflicts with configurable containers from Allista (used in Ground Construction and TCA, both via ATUtils dependancy). That true, or am I good to manually install it?

@FreeThinker, waow, thank you! That simple, eh? Thank you, thank you, thank you! I hope you do not mind I ask a few follow up questions. First up, see this : I have been trying to add enough heat management to get this in the green, which resulted in ridiculous amounts of panels, and my generators dropped in efficiency over time any way, resulting in my power seeping away. Q: Is it not necessary to get the heat management in the green, and if it is, any idea what i had been doing wrong when you read this? Then this: This looks to be a copy of your setup. Q: Does this fusion reactor not need any "startup power" - is that no longer necessary at all? Q: 21 micro grams? That's the bug, right? Q: If I want to go for the full 5 GW I just need to bump up the size of the reactor i guess? Q: Up to now I have been trying setups of reactors without built-in generators/energy converters, and the heat management always killed my setup, because generator efficiency would always drop into the cellar over time (see above) Any advice on that, maybe? Thanks a lot, man, whatever you are able to answer me is fine, at the very least I have something to work with now! Dr. Scarlett

Hey again guys, just to simplify my previous question, could anyone provide me with a simple setup to test a vessel that has any fission/fusion setup for producing a constant 5GW of power. I need to test it to see if I am not going crazy. Either something has radically changed since I last played KSPI, or something is really wrong with my mods. So any 5 GW setup (not beamed). I just need to know: which reactors, which generators and which heat management systems. Been testing things left and right, and nothing is working - I am going crazy. If I have anything that I know for sure should work I have a reference. If anyone could help me out with a setup like this that should work under normal circumstances, I would be much obliged. Thanks in advance!

Hey KSPI peeps, I am doing another KSPI build and i am starting into antimatter collection. I've been trying various things that require a lot of power but my setups seem to fail, I don't know if it's the waste heat or whatever, cannot figure it out. Would anyone be able to show or link me a build of a self-powered anti-matter lab that should work in theory? I can try to build that and use it as a benchmark to see if there is anything wrong with my build or my mod layout. My science tree is maxed out. Just a starting point, even a short description, would help me out. Thanks in advance.

Looks like the cruising on a hover plane with additional maneuvering engines has vastly improved with the last update. Much less pitch wobble. Thanks, @allista!

Ahhh, due to the high speed and weak engines it starts breaking very early. That makes sense, nice catch!

Hi @allista, thanks for the excellent video, many enlightening bits in there for me!! Including some tools and functionality I didn't know about, like the visual aid when setting bearing. Really useful. I have one question. I wouldn't necessarily even need to come out of TCA mode if I could fly the plane at it's max speed. But in my test plane, when I go to cruise mode and bump up the speed, at some point the plane starts to pitch wobble as if some helper is trying to slow down the plane with the VTOL engines. Any idea what could cause that? My plane handles ok in free flight and in TCA VTOL landing and takeoff otherwise. Only thing I think I am doing different is not use VTOL mode. And also a random question here. Have you ever considered adding a 'plane mode' (or maybe 'aerodynamic lift' mode) to the smart engines? Something that would allow us to keep TCA running whilst piloting (or auto piloting) the plane with the VTOLs off and closed? I do not know how much you are actually going into aerodynamics when you calculate thrust, and whether that matters at all. Thanks in advance, Dr. Scarlett

Hi @allista, I would love to see his, been experimenting with H/VTOL, and cant seem to get the hang of it completely. Trying to use Quiz Tech gimballing VTOL engines (two VTOLs in the wings one gimballing H/VTOL on the back), but I cannot make the transition work.

IAR 1.2.1 is currently in CKAN, but i cannot install it; it says t's for KSP 1.2.2.

Hi @allista! I just wanted to give you a big THANK you for this mod. I have been playing KSP for a long time, but never tried TCA. Now that I have, I discovered soooo many more fun stuff i can do. I am having a big blast with your mod! Thank you!

Hiyas again, so regarding @RoverDude's remark that I can drop the crew down, I only need one guy to operate an ASM. How does that work, is that one guy dedicated to that module? Can he operate multiple modules? Its it the same for all modules that need to be crewed - Tundra, Duna and Ranger (disregarding profession bonus for a minute)? How do I calculate how many Kerbals I need on a certain base? EDIT OOPS WRONG FORUM. disregard,plx

Hiyas all, two questions for this beautiful bunch of planets! Can I expect to play it with scatterer? If not, any e.t.a. on a fix? Can I install the CKAN version? It says it is 1.2.1 compatible. Version on CKAN is 1.2.7.7.

EDIT 2: Never mind Would be nice to have a strong spotlight that is surface mounted. But colored stock spots will do Thanks again!

Awesome - I love this mod, main source of beautification for me. You think you could add a bit beefier surface mounted spotlight in the future? No rush at all EDIT: Or let me check the new effect on the other stock lights...maybe it's not needed

Noticed that, but do you happen to know if the patch is at 12 o'clock or at 6 o'clock (at 0 degrees or at 180 degrees)?

@RoverDude, is there any way to know which side is "up" on the construction ports? Or which way to mount them so that the up direction is zero degrees on the snapping?