krillin678

I haven't even downloaded yet and I can see these parts taking over my need for b9. Plus way fewer parts is always a bonus. Good job.

Would it be possible to generate a key combo that re-centers the craft in the sph/vab, at least on the x/y axis. I move my craft around a lot to get different views of it and it would be wonderful if I could put it exact center again.

It is like wave said. Scott Manley's version is this one. https://github.com/WaveFunctionP/KSPInterstellar/releases/tag/v0.11exp It has been patched for 0.24.2. Please understand that there are still bugs with this version and I don't know if wave or anyone else will fix in the immediate future.

I am currently having the same problem but I have some more details about it. Mods I run, tweakscale b9 r5.0 quantum struts tal cargo solutions and other organize and look and feel mods Also running 32 bit and also had previous version of interstellar installed but I am pretty sure I have removed that. Problem Solved Mis downloaded the source code version. Uninstalled that and installed the regular version which fixed this issue. Be advised.

You need the experimental version of kspi. It is found in wavefunctionp's signature.https://github.com/WaveFunctionP/KSPInterstellar/releases here.

Wavefunctionp, I know this is a couple of pages back, but my opinion on precoolers is that they are kind of worthless. I typically throttle back when things get a little hot or change propellants. Also I am finding much less use for non radial(the back ones) intakes. Might use two or less in a design.(non intake stacker) I know you didn't ask for an opinion on upgrades or resources but I am in favor for removal of he3 and I am also in favor of more reactor models to show steps of progression. As it stands now it is kind of confusing with upgrades that are not really shown. Back to resources, I am also in favor of waste to new fuel for next reactor but dunno if that makes real world sense, just so long as we get a resource reduction I am fine with it. I find the amount of different resources to be a little daunting for new players.

shifty803: I can agree that to offset cost we could send up empty reactors and fill them from mining network to save money... that makes a lot of sense. The problem I have is we don't have a reliable way to tell accurately how much time a reactor has left in its lifetime. The thing that made me think of this is if we have price adjustments based on fuel I could just estimate the amount of fuel I would need for the entire mission profile(say a half years worth) and only take that up and save money. Like the way you are thinking though, and I would be for the idea. Dunno if wavep wants to take the time though(lots of balance and tweaking).

shifty803: I can understand that... can't wait for it to get rejiggerd and edited to make complete sense. Haven't had much time to look at the generators and I haven't got that far in the game yet(looking at duna right now). I also understand your point about the lv-n but I personally think it was a little bit of a cop out, even says so in the code(something about burning lfo), which is why this mod make so much sense to me and I won't be using lv-n's anytime soon as long as I have this mod. At least there are reactors and generators and... well you know the stuff in the mod that make it awesome.

Galactictaco: Most of the thermal rockets do not have very good thrust to weight ratio when burning typical fuels. That being said, the denser fuel provided by the mod(Methane Oxidizer) works very well for increasing the thrust to weight ratio. The unfortunate part is the size of said fuel tanks... they are big. Other tips: adjust your engine before launch to burn the correct fuel: tweakable (if you are burning liquid or less you won't get much power) your angle for your thermal receiver is pointing correctly(should be long edge toward beamed power) if you are using fission(kiwi, aegletes...) your rocket may need some srb's for help as even burning methane and oxidizer still won't get you off the ground.

Hello all, Playing through the game as one does and I noticed a price discrepancy. The 2.5m aegletes reactor is more expensive than the 3.75m one. I think a random extra zero is to blame(or missing if you want to go the other way). Current costs as I know them: 1.25m fission kiwi - 100k 2.5m fission aegletes - 2.5 mil 3.75m fission aegletes 2 - 500k 2.5m fusion - 2.5 mil 3.75m fusion - 10 mil So, either way the 3.75m fission, or 2.5m fission need price adjustments. Still all praise to wave for going all out. Edit: I know I can adjust prices in the config files, but I don't want anyone else to be confused, plus which way should I go? More inline or more expensive?

WaveFunctionP, Just got home and tried out the latest build and I can confirm that reactors and generators work on 32bit... dunno if that gives you a clue into the mess of things but I felt that would be some good info to share if you didn't know it already. word Edit: found that there is no waste heat being produced though... found that odd. Gonna check the cfgs and see if that is turned off... think I read that you could do that somewhere. Edit edit: can confirm that my warppluginsettings.cfg have the line thermalmechanicsdisabled = false... so this is a bug but not a major one cause no I don't have to worry about waste heat. Edit again...: found that waste heat is being produced but not at a significant scale. Almost immediately goes away.

Thanks Threadsinger for responding, and I love legos which is part of the appeal for me while playing ksp I guess in my opinion, I would have made both reactors and generators one part. Just an opinion. WaveFunctionP, thanks for all of your hard work man. I love to see this mod kept alive.

I have a philosophy question... On the wiki it says reactors must be directly connected to generators. Got it. And that is the way it worked in 0.23.5. My question is why do we need separate parts for both reactors and generators? I find it hard to come up with a reason why you would only want one or the other as the parts won't work if the are used separately. I cannot use a generator with solar panels as the two generate/use different resources(as I understand it). Infact the only reason I can think of not having a generator is if I go thermal rocket... but if I were to do that I would use beamed power instead. Finnally, as I understand it, if you mix sizes for generators and reactors there is also a penalty. If one does go this route I could see an addon part for direct conversion as that only pertains to fusion reactors. TL:DR Why are generators and reactors separate parts? Doesn't make sense.

I know this might seem a little off topic but is there going to be any changes to the resource He-3. I find it to be extremely difficult to find/mine this resource, to the point where I don't even consider using the antimatter initiated reactor as it is just to much work. Also I know fractalUK is doing IRL things but I would love to have accurate info on the wiki, or a wiki, or a forum. Look I need hints people. Right now there are upgrades to parts that happen in the tree and those are not reflected accurately on the wiki. ex. Plasma engine upgrade unlocks now with the node for alcie drives, where the wiki says it is supposed to unlock with antimatter reactor node.

Hey there all, Just wanted to say that I love the mod, probably one of the best I have seen put together yet(over b9 imo). I understand the need for realism, difficulty, and the lack of those two. I haven't payed much attention in rocket school and I do, once in a while, pay attention to future technologies. The major point I want to make is why couldn't there be a couple of versions that we could choose to make it easy/difficult/real as we want. Infact I am kind of surprised that squad didn't do the same with contracts. Sort of a missed point I feel. Whelp, that is all I have got.

Challenge: land at KSC using the save below. Here are some rules: 1. Once touched down you can't lift off again 2. You may quicksave once at any point on the orbit. 3. Multiple attempts allowed, just use the quick save you made. 4. Here is a scoring system: 1 pts. landing on the bright grass around ksc 20 pts. for landing on the launch pad 15 pts for landing on the runway 100 pts for landing on the hangar 200 pts for landing on the vab. Have fun. Here is the save: http://bakercomputing.squarespace.com/storage/KSC%20Landing%20Challenge.zip