Fractal_UK

No, it isn't independent of the mod dll but it doesn't create any kind of dependence because the base game cannot do anything with ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION config nodes so if you distribute some suitable MM configs, people with Interstellar will see the new resource definitions and those without will see nothing change, i.e. nothing will break. In the long run, I might be interested in stripping this resource system out of Interstellar so it's easier for other mods to hook into directly especially if these are the kind of problems other modders are running into. There is no specific requirement to respect the the existing planetary environment but it's a good idea to do so thematically. You shouldn't define the same resource twice but you can edit the existing definition with MM.

Hopefully this system should make this process a lot more scientific, now you'll have lots more information to plan what your heat dissipation needs actually are. The most important information is exactly when those indicators turn red, essentially informing you that you will never be able to keep the ship cool in space - afterall if extra equipment is causing your ship to overheat, you can always turn that off.

You can certainly use the Interstellar resource system to do this for people with both of these mods installed. You can use ModuleManager configs to make new resources or change the resources that are extractable from planetary atmospheres. Here is an example of such a config node: ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION { name = KerbinOxygen // unique ID guiName = Oxygen // display name of resource celestialBodyName = Kerbin // celestial body to apply constituent to resourceName = Oxidizer // resource that you can extract from the atmosphere in this proportion abundance = 0.20946 // abundance of resource in the atmosphere } You can modify existing nodes with MM or create entirely new nodes if you wish. This may or may not be a solution that is useful to you. Because these are simply config nodes, you can distribute them with your work without creating any kind of cross-plugin dependence.

I thought I would share a quick picture of how work on how the thermal mechanics helper is progressing since I've finally had some time to work on this today - it should certainly make your designs easier to asses in the VAB! The idea is to colour code information so that you can see if you simply have a) insufficient radiator capacity enough to cool a nuclear reactor at minimum 30% operation or c) enough to cool the reactor at 100%. Here I'm working with upgraded reactors/radiators in sandbox mode but you can see the impact of replacing the smaller radiators with the larger ones. The information on radiator resting temperatures should help you get an idea of efficiency from generators too.

They really aren't awful, you just have to build big to make good use of them. Its not like your investing in special techs to get them either,they're just unlocked on stock nodes so there's no real justification for them being significantly better than anything stock. The nice thing about the basic reactors is that your nuclear powered ships actually look a bit more like realistic designs because you need significant radiator areas to make something that works. Russ's ship on the previous page is a nice example. They might not be loads better than stock LV-Ns but they're perhaps a bit more interesting for that reason.

Yes, I already answered this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43839-0-23-KSP-Interstellar-%28Tweakables-New-ISRU-Preecoolers%29-Version-0-9-2-%28Beta%29?p=871819&viewfull=1#post871819

To be totally honest I haven't played with TAC before so you may wish to confirm this but it sounds like water electrolysis is capable of producing breathable oxygen with this installed, so you should similarly be able to use the sabatier process on the refinery to convert a tiny amount of LiquidFuel into Methane (which you don't neccessarily need to use) and Oxygen. This will indeed work on both Eve and Duna.

Yeah, Isp is always the same because they all have the same reactor temperature. TWR changes significantly with size though because the power/weight ratio is much much better for the big reactors. Only way to change the Isp of the thermal rockets with nuclear reactors is upgrades and choice of fuel (Uranium or Thorium).

Yes it is. The AGI core names are mainly derived from science fiction series, though there are one or two in-jokes that I put in for some friends.

Don't worry if you can't see it. Just activate the mode and you can switch away from the ship - unfocused generation of Tritium will still work fine and, along with high time warp speeds, those are most important.

You'll see zero unless you timewarp up to about 100x or so due to the 0.23 changes to part.requestResource(). I don't have the figures to hand right now but it does scale with reactor thermal power (but not charged power).

No, the changes to 0.23 were fairly extensive in certain areas that affect Interstellar (particularly the engines). Interstellar version 0.8.2.1 is compatible with KSP 0.22. Again, make sure you don't download the above link if you have 0.23, it won't work.

Power to start the fusion reactors can now be met with ElectricCharge, it needs a fair amount but a moderately sized battery or similar will handle it. As for generators, I haven't changed anything about the way they work other than tweaking numbers for a good four major versions. They don't have a maximum power and never have, they just scale down power be size if you use a differently sized generator and reactor. Direct attachment is enforced, try building a ship with a reactor and something between it and its generator and see how much power you get. Radiation is something I'm working on (slowly).

He may but I would suspect the idea is almost irrelevant for Kethane. Afterall, there isn't really any significant advantage to starting with full or partially full Kethane tanks in the VAB. On the other hand, access to Helium-3, Tritium and Antimatter are all game altering. For now though, I'm making a thermal mechanics helper in the VAB top priority in terms of new features. This will give you information on how much WasteHeat your ship will produce, resting radiator temperatures, etc and colour code your heat dissipation into three categories: Green: can dissipate enough heat to cool all reactors at 100%, Orange: can dissipate enough heat to cool all reactors at minimum power and Red: ship will always overheat in space. This will help you figure out the efficiency of generators too.

If the planets have been renamed it won't work. I wanted to make it so that if someone did something different to the planets, such as what Nova is doing with Alternis Kerbol and what NathanKell is doing with RSS, they wouldn't be stuck with inappropriate planet crustal/atmospheric/oceanic resources definitions. There are three .cfg files in the PlanetResourceData folder that can easily be modified to make it work. It isn't but I am sort of interested in the idea of people being able to stockpile resources that they have collected so that they become available in the VAB, it would preserve the in game difficulty of collecting up the advanced resources but remove the annoyingness of having to transfer resources to ships on the launchpad. I have some vague ideas how to do it but nothing more than that yet.

Interesting, I don't think I've set ChargedPower to have equalised power draw in the same way that I have with ThermalPower. It doesn't matter of course, it works just the same but I'll change it in future so it looks nicer.

They don't have a maximum. The output is just proportionately smaller if you use the wrong size. True. Weird, that didn't happen when I tested it. I will check it out. I don't have any problem with people doing science on Kerbin but I should probably remove the landed multiplier and make stations in Kerbin orbit better than those on the ground. It says thrust: variable in the VAB. I can't be any more specific than that because the tooltip doesn't update depending on conditions in game. You can use mechjeb if you want to get a value or look them up on the wiki. Yeah, changing all of these requires converting the DT vista over to the resource manager, its the last holdout of the stock system, I haven't had time to make that change and test it yet - mainly because it appeared to still be working correctly but I guess it needs to move up the list now.

Do you have fuel left for the reactor AND spare capacity for actinides? If not, that's why you can't restart.

Have you installed more mods? Normally crashes are caused by KSP hitting the memory limit. It could also be an issue with your installation of the mod, make sure an extra GameData folder hasn't crept in or something.

Version 0.9.2 Released (Merry Christmas) With now beautifully performing thermal turbojet atmospheric code, there is no doubt that tonight Santa will be ditching his reindeer and swapping them for a nuclear reactor and thermal turbojet Version 0.9.2 -Added 62.5cm thermal rocket and plasma thruster. -Added 2.5m thermal turbojet. -Reverted to 0.9 atmospheric code and fixed application, engine atmospheric performance should now be optimal -Added tweakable option for reactors to start disabled in the VAB -Unupgraded generator efficiency raised to a theoretical maximum of 31% Download links in the first page have been updated.

Yes, they do.

Sorry, I missed this post earlier. It isn't possible (by default) to get Antimatter direct from the VAB but you can land antimatter tanks at the space centre and fuel up your crafts with that.

They aren't completely rubbish, thermal rockets especially the larger ones are simply better than the stock nuclear engines and even the small ones offer more delta-v albeit without much thrust to write home about. The plasma engine is harder to use without any upgrades but there is no guarantee about the order in which people will unlock the tech tree. I'm not going to legislate for player patience, I've seen people use rockets with far lower TWRs than I'd care for in order to maximise delta-v so the option is there if the player wants it. It's worth noting as well that there is literally no way to use anything other than linear scaling (in other words, I can't make the nuclear powered ones better without making the more advanced tech ones better by the same factor) due to the way the plasma thrust works (adding up power from all sources of electricity) so it's totally impossible, due to the scales involved, to make the bottom end any more useful without causing the top end to shake your ship to pieces through excessive thrust. This is definitely not something I'm going to change.

Let me show you what happens if I do this: Stock ion engine 0.5kN thrust with specific impulse 4200s, total power = 0.5*500*9.81*4200 = 10.3MW. But it only uses 14.5KW worth of electrical power, so in order to make them comparable, I must multiply plasma engine thrust by 710. Now a basic 1.25m nuclear reactor and 1.25m generator produces 71kN at 11,200s of specific impulse. An upgraded 3.75m nuclear reactor and 3.75m generator produces 24,637kN at 11,200s. An upgraded 3.75m antimatter and 3.75m generator produces 10,159,177kN at 11,200s. This is totally stupid, the low powered reactor/generators used with plasma engines would obselete every other engine in the game and the high powered reactor/generators would be totally impossible to fly as they'd just break the ship in half the moment you throttled up above about 5%. Honestly, this has come up before and I really don't see what the problem is. Plasma engines don't really work in KSP with small reactors and generators but it just doesn't matter - there are plenty of other engines you can use. Not every combination of parts has to make a good rocket, small unupgraded reactors and generatores are useful for lots of things, plasma thrusters are useful for lots of things too but they aren't the best when use together - so just use a different engine, like a thermal rocket or jet. Besides, maybe KSP will have better physical timewarp options in future.

You need fuel lines to transfer oxidiser and liquid fuel as you would between stacks on a rocket. The fuel line needs to go from the tank to the refinery (the opposite way to what you might expect). Was it an inline or radial radiator? Only the deployable radiators that look a bit like solar panels actually deploy.