Fractal_UK

Yes, they still work, though there won't be a huge amount of point to them without at least some of the other parts from the pack. I've modded the stock solar panels to generate some heat but most of the radiators are pretty large and pretty potent so they won't pose much of a risk of overheating anything. The nuclear reactors do put out quite a bit of heat though and the standard versions are all influenced by real nuclear reactors that are either works in progress or have really been tested, albeit never flown. If you want a realistic game, I'd say just delete the antimatter parts, the warp drive and the DT Vista. Then you could tone down the radiator areas and temperatures in the cfg a file to make for a bit more of a challenge. It's just strange because changing the resource values shouldn't actually change much internally. I did today fix a bug in the resource manager but I don't know if this bug could have caused the problem you mentioned, I think it's possible though. I'll perform some "stress tests" at high time warp speeds for long periods and see if everything continues to work as it should. Try putting a junior docking port or something on the plane, then you can connect it to a science lab or a computer core. A lot of people also like to use KAS for this.

One unit = one milligram

That's a cool concept but I'm not sure how much I'm going to be able to help you here. The stock resource system fails at ongoing supply/demand without large "storage buffers" this is why resource generation is so often adversely affected by high timewarp speeds, you see it sooner than usual with intake resources because they tend to have very tiny storage capacities. For a lot of stuff in this mod, I get around this by using my resource manager code but I don't think that's going to be a viable solution for intake resources. I can improve the functioning of this under timewarp but you probably won't see your resource rates improve at quite the same rate as you are timewarping. This is a KSP limitation that I don't think I can do much about at present.

Nope, just unzip the file directly into the kerbal space program directory and it will automatically install itself in the right place.

You should be able to find it by going on to steam, right clicking on Kerbal Space Program in the Library, click properties. Select the local files tab at the top, then click "Browse Local Files". Unzip the mod file here.

Just unzip the zip file into your main KSP directory, all the directory structure that you need is inside the zip file to make things easy.

Eventually but that might well not come in v0.7. Either way, power requirements for the antimatter collector will certainly be less than 1MW so that its feasible with solar satellites as well.

Not directly but the idea is that it could imagine indirectly. In terms of electricity production, the plan is for the state of the radiators to raise the thermodynamic cold bath temperature of the generator - that means as radiator temperature goes up, efficiency of electrical production goes down. You could imagine a scenario where if you were totally failing to dissipate heat, you end up trapped in a cycle of having to use more thermal power (and thus create more heat) to generate each unit of electricity to keep the antimatter tanks powered or turn off your reactor to stop producing heat and allow your heat levels to fall at the expense of having an unpowered antimatter storage tank! The long storage capacity of the backup power supply of the antimatter tanks makes this situation not terribly dangerous unless you have literally no radiators but at least it gives you another design consideration to account for.

Thanks! It's always nice to have positive feedback and it's always nice to see new people appearing on the thread to give their comments. I think by this you may have pointed out an error that I've made. Namely, in the latest version, I added a bonus to science for landed science labs, I did this mainly to encourage people to land on other bodies, rather than just sticking labs in low orbits. However, at present, this bonus applies to Kerbin, when the reverse should probably be true. I can imagine that a microgravity research environment would be more interesting than doing research on the surface of Kerbin. Science labs sitting on the launch pad wasn't really something that I had in mind but that said, if people want to build universities on Kerbin with research labs and power plants then I don't want to totally discourage that. Afterall, those universities will make the technological breakthroughs eventually but you may be able to accelerate that process by doing research on other planets. So, I don't want to take out science generation for Kerbin completely but likewise the last update means that Kerbin's science rates probably need tweaking.

Yep, that's not a big job, I should be able to add that in. I've fixed this bug but not quite got it working exactly how I want it to yet. In other news, I've been working on making things more scary. Part of this is the next step towards those all important consequences for not dissipating heat but another part is to simulate something of the danger of antimatter. Thus, we have amongst the most basic of demonstration ships imagineable: an antimatter tank and some solar panels! The antimatter tank, when unpowered, discharges its emergency power supply at a rate of 1 per second. Likewise, when fully powered it will charge at the same rate. The power supply needed to contain the antimatter will depend on the size of the tank and can be supplied either by ElectricCharge or by Megajoules. Should you fail to power your antimatter tank for long enough, eventually you will receive a final warning: When you see this message it's time to stop fooling around and find some power, sharpish! Should you still fail to find some power to keep the antimatter contained, when the storage tank finally runs out of charge, the antimatter tank will violently explode. The blast radius is dependant upon the amount of antimatter in the tank but could easily threaten nearby vessels in addition to the one that caused the explosion!

Did you also try turning on and off the resource flow before you filled up the resource bars with hyperedit? The thermal power bar really has nothing to do with the functioning of the thermal rockets, it's all handled through the resource manager which is capable of detecting supply and demand even when the thermal power bar is totally empty. I have noticed as well that there have been a number of bug reports from people using mods like Hyperedit and TAC Fuel Balancer, basically those mods that fiddle with resource totals quite aggressively. Had you made any other changes to your ship using hyperedit earlier in the flight?

I'm not sure that I understand, what was it that you did that actually resolved the problem? What were the generator and the reactor actually reading at the time? Do you have any screenshots during the failure or a copy of your KSP.log file from the time when it failed?

It shouldn't even work at all because you can't do non-physical timewarp inside the atmosphere. The only reason it probably does is if I haven't replaced the stock atmospheric altitude function, I'll check that.

Why do you want to get rid of it? It's only used up when you turn on the Alcubierre drive.

It is slow but its another of those things that you should be able to leave running even when your ship isn't selected, so you can have longterm production going on in the background. Which other mods do you have installed?

Have you tried strutting to the antimatter reactor and leaving the nozzle unstrutted? The nozzle is a very light part, especially compared to the other parts you have there, that might be inducing vibrations that are tearing it off. The attachment between the rocket nozzle and the antimatter reactor should be pretty strong in this version so strutting to the nozzle itself is probably not neccessary.

What are you building? Since I updated the attachment strengths I had no problems flying a sizeable 3.75m antimatter rocket into orbit with zero struts.

Did you have problems with centre of thrust? I built a stock Fireflash a while back but it was horrible for nosing down due to the top engines.

No, not exactly, while you have the ship with the transmitter active it will continually update the amount of power that it is sending out. Once you switch away from the transmitter ship, the value it had on the last update cycle is stored, the receiver ships will then receive this maximum value. If the power transmitter is powered by solar power it will check line of sight from the sun to the transmitter. It will then check for line of sight between the transmitter and the receiver. If it can satisfy these conditions, it wil then scale the received power down for distance, atmosphere and receiver dish facing angle.

When you turn the transmitter on, you need to actually be getting power, so you don't want to do that when the transmitter satellite is in shadow. Also, if it's a geostationary satellite giving you power, you'll again only receive power during the day time because at night, Duna will be blocking light from reaching the satellite.

It did, second line of the changelog.

Version 0.6.2 Released Added a whole raft of bug fixes as well as Duna ISRU option, nuclear reactor balanace tweaks and nuclear rocket nozzle weight reductons. Changelog Version 0.6.2 -Added Duna ISRU, water electrolysis with extra energy cost for baking water out of the soil -Added persistence to Computer Core science production and reactor Lithium consumption/Tritium production -Added warning message for undetectable propellant files -Changed nuclear reactor base power outputs to 1.5MW, 40MW, 500MW and 3GW -Revised down nuclear reactor masses to 0.225, 1.5, 8 and 28 -Changed vista engine to require 2.5GW of power (instead of 1.5GW), upped vista thrust to 1100kN -Kerbol now has scientific value -Reconfigured attachment node strengths of 3.75m for better structural integrity -Reduced mass of thermal rocket nozzles, 3.75m now mass = 3, 2.5m now mass = 1.5 and 1.25m now mass 0.4. Throttle will scale down with ratio of attachment areas if you use the wrong size nozzle on the wrong size reactor. -Removed all constructors and placed initialised code in OnStart methods (this should help avoid various unity related problems) -Fixed Solar Panel collector area code -Fixed science lab antimatter persistence -Fixed multiple generator to one reactor plasma engine bug -Fixed Science lab malfunctioning after vessel switch -Amount of DUF6 that is reprocessable will drop after each reprocessing cycle Downloads links in the first page have been updated.

Well, a thermal rocket is probably better than a plasma thruster for conserving antimatter, it might also be possible to make warp assisted maneouvres more cheaply provided that the drive only needs one or two charging cycles. Maybe when they add that resources to the game but I don't really want to try and preempt a stock resource, I think that might be inviting incapability problems.

Basically this is a discussion about things we can do to add more and goals and objectives in the medium to long term. I want to try and give players some alternative goals so that once you reach the mod's "endgame" so to speak, once you have built the infrastructure that you need in order to perform all your missions there needs to be another measure of success to keep things entertaining, i.e. trying to use your new found wealth of energy resources in the most efficient way possible. Let's say you decide to put antimatter to a very good use by building an Eve SSTO. We know this can't be done with stock parts or the nuclear reactors but we know it can be done with antimatter because we've seen it in this thread. So, what might be interesting to know now is what is the minimum quantity of antimatter that someone can do this with? What about all the interplanetary transfers? I don't really want to be uploading this stuff or keeping track of it centrally in any way, I'd just like to provide you with some information for your own amusement. Another really interesting thing might be further down the load as career mode is developed, can we introduce some kind of value to the resources? We have to assume part cost will eventually mean something and you will have to buy the parts. Perhaps, you might be able to receive additional funding for your space program by bringing back rare and useful resources to Kerbin?

What I feel I really need to do now is give you all some incentive to run energy efficient space programs, you have lots of exciting technologies to use now. At some point, you will be able to develop enough of a science and antimatter economy that you will be able to build a spacecraft with pretty much whatever fuels and propellants you want aboard. What would be really nice is to give you something for using the right tools for the right job. Let me explain: In space travel we tend to think about increased specific impulse being universally a good thing - specific impulse lets us go further on less propellant and that means we have more delta-v but actually specific impulse has a downside too, namely energy consumption. Kinetic energy is proportional to exhaust velocity^2, so let's say we went to Duna with an engine with a 3.75m antimatter engine, which has exhaust velocity = 176,413.23m/s or we went to Duna with a solid core nuclear thermal rocket, with exhaust velocity = 8,976.15m/s. The first approach uses (176,413.23/8,976.15)^2 = 386.26x more energy. Obviously we save a lot of propellant by using the antimatter reactor but are we really better off saving Hydrogen, the most abundant element element in the universe, at the expense of precious Antimatter that takes enormous quantities of power or time to produce? I'm open to suggestions about how to factor this in. I don't think I'll make any mechanical changes but I wonder if some kind of "space program data sheet" could be produced, so you could see how efficient your space program is and compare that with other players.