Fractal_UK

They were made unselectable in the VAB a few updates ago, you can use any intake (stock or modded) now.

Yep, it's currently calculated from a fixed value so they show up the same. I've fixed this for the next update now.

Don't know how this happened but is obviously some kind of copy/paste error. It will be fixed in the next update.

If your generator efficiency is that low, you'll need to a lot more radiators. You need to use the thermal helper in the VAB, it will tell you about resting generator efficiency in space - testing on the pad is useless because your radiators will convect heat away into Kerbin's atmosphere and drop the temperature to that of the environment. Edit:

The limits actually apply after efficiency is taken into account, so that's why you will see different maximum values with each propellant.

Nope, existing reactors from pre version 0.10.X have current and max fuel values multiplied by 1000.

It won't break your ongoing mission at all, you could either 1) send out some more crafts to take advantage of the new impactor system or 2) re-enable the stock science on the accelerometers (which is a one line change in science.cfg). Yeah, the fuel density and quantity of nuclear fuel has been changed but there is an automatic upgrade system to switch existing reactors over to the new values. You may need to replace reactors on your craft files saved in the VAB with a fresh part from the VAB but your existing missions won't be affected by this change.

That's what the dusty plasma and fusion reactors are designed to allow, of course it only helps if you collect them and use them for electrical power. Unless they're actually collected, they simply impact the walls of the reactor/generator vessel and heat it up.

I added a slider to the transmitters when I was doing some work on the update the other day so you could control what percentage of maximum power you wanted to transmit.

Exactly, technically an MSR/Gas Core reactor still produces 80%+ power as charged particles but in the former case the charged particles are contained within the molten salt, in the second case they are contained in a quartz chamber so they can't escape the reactor core to be collected by a direct conversion generator, they just become heat. If you have no direct conversion generator or the direct conversion generator is at 0% power, all the power produced becomes heat. The update will be released when its ready but unfortunately I'm extremely busy at the moment.

Actually, the position of impactor doesn't ever appear in the calculation, it is assumed that regardless of the location that the impactor lands you will be able to get good readings of the seismic data. The initial vector is the position of the first accelerometer so the problem is simply one of spreading out the sensors as much as possible up to the single impact science cap.

That is a very bizarre piece of logic. In general, in research, scientific gains are very much commensurate with the amount of effort you put into making your experiment or your theoretical model realistic. You might be able to draw some worthwhile conclusions with a poor experimental setupid or a simple model but nowhere near as many as if you actually put the effort into making a good one. This system does need a bit of tweaking of values for sure, particularly for the more distant planets but it's not really so far out of line with what you can already get and takes quite a lot more work. I sympathise with that, in KSP the two things that I think would make a really nice "difficulty slider" are 1) physical scale relative to reality and 2) tech costs.

You are correct, yes. There is a defined science cap for each body but you will receive much more science per impact, thus hitting the cap significantly faster, by having more accelerometer sensors placed on the surface of the body you are impacting into. There is a maximum bonus of 3.5x the per impact science value for having well laid out sensors.

Yeah, that's probably a touch high so some of the outer planets may need to be revised downward a bit. That said, you did hit the cap of maximum science possible for a single Eeloo impact there, which implies you got your accelerometer placement down pretty well. Edit: I don't want to cut out too much of the science though because that mission isn't all that easy. You need do need several Eeloo landers, plus the impactors so it's a fair bit more difficult than a stock mission there. No, the base amount is 0.1 science/day, so by landing on Moho, you get 4 science/day, not 40. In theory, you can get 6/day by using 2 zero stupidity Kerbals in the lab. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Which power supply/demand? If you want to try and create such a thing, go right ahead, it's certainly beyond my modelling abilities.

Northstar, I've responded to some of these already but let me summarise: 1) Inclusion of the haber process is a planned feature and will appear soon, likewise Methane pyrolysis is planned at some point in order to permit closed loop reactions useful alongside life support mods. 2) There are a lot of similar options for slightly different inputs for different processes but the refinery is already a bit ridiculous in terms of the number of options and a better solution needs to be found before lots more options can be added. It is possible that until then I'll fix the reaction rate by including RWGS alongside the sabatier reaction. 3) There is absolutely nothing wrong with the input rates for ammonia and hydrogen peroxide in the hydrazine production process, once you convert from litres to mass units, you will see that they are correct. If you haven't updated to 0.10.3, you may be seeing the wrong rate as there was previously a problem related to the handling of time warp rates. The only actual problem is the lack of water production, which will be fixed in the next version.

No, if I did this by default I'd have to provide a WasteWater resource definition, which is fine for anyone without TAC but those with it would have two definitions of the same resource and that is not safe. Most of the resources in Interstellar that can overlap with other mods are defined in the WarpPluginSettings.cfg file, if you edit the name in there along with the all the RESOURCE{} nodes but not the RESOURCE_DEFINITION{} node, you can make any of the resources compatible with other mods. If you want integration with TAC, look up KESA resource integration on the forum, it has all the module manager definitions to integrate Interstellar and TAC.

For those of you looking for good spots on the Mun, with both Water and Uranium, I suggest looking beyond the large polar crater. You may find other, smaller, craters around the poles to be more promising. Remember you can scan for the Uranium from orbit.

Can you post a KSP.log file please? I added some debug information in there for the impactors which should be able to tell me why it isn't working. No, you're not doing anything wrong, there is a bug with the enumeration of power from Direct Conversion generators, which is causing this problem. I have fixed it but the fix isn't released yet. Until it is, you should be able to build a working microwave transmitter with fusion power by switching the generators over to the KTEC thermoelectric in the VAB.

In reality there should probably be some small energy loss at each stage, due to the efficiency of the reception and transmission system. That energy loss to that particular mechanism is fairly small and generally outweighed by the amount of energy lost to empty space so it isn't something I'm especially concerned about "fixing" at the moment. It's right at the bottom of my list and, in all likelyhood, it will stay there.

Sounds like you aren't using the latest version if you're seeing a big difference in tritium consumption and breeding rates. In any case, the rates are tight by neccesity, DT fusion is D+T -> He + n. Thus, for every Tritium consumed by the reaction you have 1 neutron, 1 neutron is required to breed a tritium via the reaction 6Li + n -> He + T. That means every neutron produced in the fusion reaction needs to be used to produce a Tritium, it's unlikely that will be the case but fortunately, there is also the reaction 7Li + n -> He + T + n, which happens far less often than the first reaction (the neutron cross section of Lithium-7 is less than 0.005% of Lithium-6) and is endothermic rather than exothermic but it does help improve the neutron economy a bit.

Looks like this is a bug with the enumeration of maximum power with direct conversion generators - the microwave transmitter is thinking that they are thermal generators so the power it is trying to consume is totally disconnected from what it should be. If I correct this problem and use my trick for fusion reactors (like I did with thermal rockets) of drawing a little less power than the maximum so that the plasma heating doesn't get affected, we get a nice stable situation. (rubbish rocket but it demonstrates the fix at least!)

Sounds like one detector then? I tweaked the numbers a bit because in the previous version there was a problem with the handling of multiple detectors so I wanted to get the balance right after that got fixed. Anyway, I'll let a few more reports build up first but assuming everything is working nicely, I'll look at integrating the data from the science lab and the telescope in the same way.

Excellent, that looks spot on, it's a lot more than you'd get with one detector but less than the theoretical maximum from perfect placement. Does that report contain all the 1354 science? That's how I set it up in the end.

Just curious but has anyone been doing the impactor experiments since 0.10.3 released? If so, is everything working fine with it? There were a couple of reports of people getting less science than expected since I integrated the impactors with the stock science system but I've been totally unable to reproduce that problem in my own testing. It'd be nice to get some reports of success/failure. The detectors must be kept at ~2K, that's very difficult if your spacecraft has any kind of power system aboard. Even if your spacecraft was in a total void with no stars nearby, no electrical power onboard whatsoever, CMB temperature is ~2.7K which is too hot.

I've added a little mention of it in the part description now, hopefully it will be enough.