Nertea

The issue you are describing is a direct result of there being a lot of variables. Panel Actuation Fixed (lowest mass) Deployable Only Deployable/retractable (Highest mass) Cell Type Regular Concentrating Blanket Each of those inconsistencies you mention is fully accountable to those things. For example, I know the KRX is 92 and the KRQ is 70, because one of them is retractable and one is not. What you probably have issue with is the descriptions more than anything else.

@AmpCat Try replacing your KerbalAtomicsNFE.cfg with this one and see if it solves some issues. https://www.dropbox.com/s/vhb25ge705ld4hg/KerbalAtomicsNFE.cfg?dl=0

That one (the pressurized one) does have a bug going on, but the other one doesnt.

It's not a problem that I intend to deal with, as far as I know this is a chronic fuel switcher problem.

I just said this is a bug, yeah... if you want to fix it, go to z-pinch-fission-375-1 and change the ratio under ElectricCharge to 17.92211538, and go to z-pinch-fusion-375-1 and change the ratio under ElectricCharge to 38.43925875.

@AmpCat I'll take a look but that is really weird. The core should be more or less independent from the internal temp, it's possible that there is an insulation number i need to tweak for very high core heat content values. Here's what I can gather is happening Reactor gets turned on, goes to 6000K core temp Reactor gets turned off, core temp slowly bleeds into internal bucket Reactor is technically a radiator so might be trying to consume the heat from the internal bucket but can't because there's no fuel flow weird excrements happens The good thing is that this is probably a pretty simple thing to solve, now that you've given me some very nice descriptions and (hopefully) clear repro steps. This isn't a thing. Is this a CKAN thing? :| You have to turn the reactor on right now. You can turn it on, set the throttle to 0% and that behaviour will work though.

Can you provide the craft file, please? I can't really help out if I can't replicate your test environment. In addition, I do need a list of other mods you have installed, particularly ones that might affect thermal behavior.

I think that there is a typo in the generation, shouldn't be using more than 100 Ec/s It's intended but maybe not correct at the moment. Those two engines should generate exorbitant amounts of heat, but the actual number remains to be fixed. New version of HC will add radiators that dump up to 8 MW per radiator so it'll be easier. With a beam core AM reactor, a good chunk of your ship will need to be radiators. And yeah I hadn't thought of that problem. Next version will have AM in the tanks in the VAB and it'll be cleaned out when you launch.

Tests with screenshots, repro steps, craft file, other mods stripped out make me happy. Other things make me sad.

Three things: That's the Emacipator on your rocket picture, not the Liberator, 4MW is not enough to keep it cooled even at 1% for sure. Which reactor are you actually using? Is this with the latest version of NFE? IE from a few hours ago? Can you repeat your testing with the latest version if that wasn't the case? If 2.1 doesn't resolve it, can you trim off the other-mod parts and upload the craft file?

Technology marches on! So I've just added this blurb into the OP. The balance pass I've mentioned before will happen with the first update to 1.3 of all of my packs. Near Future Technologies will be undergoing a major balancing and refinement pass with the KSP 1.3 update. I would appreciate any feedback about the balance of the current packs - leave a note here and we will look into it. If you have suggestions for any of my other mods, please post in their threads. Because I obviously can't test everything and it's easy to miss things, I'm hoping all of you users will be able to voice opinions that can point the elite balancing team (of two people) to balance issues and problems. Here's a not-exhaustive list of things we're looking at: Electric engine stats in a wide and far-reaching way Reactor cost, mass and heat outputs Solar panel cost, mass and energy outputs Structural part masses There is a 100% chance that this will affect your ships in some way, so this is another warning. After this I will move the mods to 1.0 +, with minimal chance of any major ship-affecting changes.

NF Electrical 0.8.7 New 3.75m MX-5 'Hermes' nuclear reactor, generates 5000 kW of electricity New model for 3.75m FLAT nuclear reactor Radial capacitors are now physicsless Capacitors now have a cfg-configurable DischargeRateMinimumScalar field that can be used to edit the minimum discharge rate of a capacitor (previously locked at 50%) Reactors now have a new AutoWarpShutdown toggle which allows the user to set a reactor so that it gets shut down at warp factors greater or equal to the specified number Capacitor UI rewrite: Significant visual improvements Fixed a bug that caused capacitor rate setting in the UI to be erronous. Reactor UI rewrite: Significant visual improvements Reactors can now be given a persistent custom icon and name Better data display and controls Advanced control mode allowing the setting of the AutoShutdown temperature and a new AutoShutdown warp factor Added more RTGs to DecayingRTGs patch courtesy of OrenWatson Added new USI 1.25m reactor to USI patch, courtesy of Wyzard256

Were you using the Pressurized one by any chance? it looks like the angular fix for that may not be working.

Then you are not the target audience for this mod. If you want boxes with functions that never change shape or evolve, suggest you grab blender and make some grey cylinders. Maybe learn to lay out IVAs while you're at it because that seems to bug you inordinately too. I never provide any guarantee of stability, content, or state that things will not change. Particularly note that the version #s of all NFT packs are <1.0.

Interacting with KSP's heat systems is very complex. Logs won't help in this case, but definitely exact reliable reproduction steps are needed to even make a start Yes to some extent you can just leave the reactor throttle at 0% if you are willing to accept the inefficiency. The patch also lets the generators in the trimodal engines act like NFE reactors instead of being free energy.

Are you sure? This seems correct to me:

RD is more talking about bugs in the resource system that stop us from achieving our CRP goals.

Functionally, what is a fully automated reactor system? A basic engine module . At this point you just don't install the patch. My test didn't reveal anything here when I built a ship as you described. See here the Liberator running at 1%, 4 large thermal control systems (4 MW yes) and a Garnet running at full throttle. Complete steady state operation. Is your setup different?

I have quite a number of other projects on the go, but you can typically see the next 5-10 planned parts on the GitHub issues pages.

The exhaust provides 100% cooling. The difficulty people have is the part before a burn (when the reactor is hot but the fuel is not flowing) or directly after a burn. So a... reactor designed to operate ion engines is 100% the point of NFE in general. Perhaps I'm not understanding you right?

So any NFE-patched reactor is supposed to be more difficult to use. That's why it's an optional patch and not on by default. Interestingly, the larger the reactor, the harder the reactor will be to operate, because it heats up so fast and requires so much cooling. There's two real ways to operate the reactors, the simplistic, single-burn way, and the more complex way. The simpler way is to use the engine like it would be in a RL mission, in a planned, specific fashion. Heat up the reactor a little bit before you start your burn, and cut the power when the burn is done. That way you get maximum performance for the period of operation. Once done, put the reactor in zero or low power mode until you need to execute another planned burn. Use RCS or secondary engines to make fine course adjustments. The complex way (but really not that complex) to operate them is to have the reactor warmed up to near its nominal temperature before you make any maneuvers, then put it into a low idle at say 1% power. You will need enough radiators to support 1% of reactor power. This should keep the reactor core hot but generating a minimum of extra heat. When you want to make maneuvers, bring the throttle up - in engine mode the reactor will select whichever is higher, the main engine throttle setting or the reactor power setting, and adjust itself to match. So if you set the power level to 1%, then bring the throttle to 90%, the reactor will spool to 90%. When you cut power back to 0%, it'll return to that 1% mode. That will allow you to make smaller maneuvers and even use it for landing. You can see how in these situations the higher the reactor power, the 'harder' it is to use. The Emancipator has by far the highest heat generation at 1.125 GW, so you reasonably need ~11 MW of cooling to run it at 1%. That's 11 Large Thermal Control Systems! Honestly I will make a user guide eventually.

Here's a teaser of the new parts that will feature in the next update, which will probably be post-official 1.3. There are 4 new microchannel graphene radiators in this image, static square and triangular (which can be stacked up like hull plates) and two widths of deployable ones. These ones can't retract but have great dissipation per unit mass (about 1.5x that of the standard HeatControl high temperature radiators) and per unit area (about 1.3x as good).

3D Studio Max, Archaic Edition.

Urk. I'm probably not really going to be bothering to fix this anytime in the foreseeable future.

I... think that the Cutlass LH2 bit comes with CryoEngines? But yes good find, I will make that change. It's intended to be unrefuelable by default unless you're willing to put up with the enhanced difficulty of handling it. If you have the skills to add it to the engine though, fair's fair. For the second I usually say that anything atmospheric goes in Mark IV. probably not scoped for in here.