Nertea

That seems more or less correct, but you have a weird OUTPUT_RESOURCE and INPUT_RESOURCE things with both consuming and generating electricCharge. Why is that?

Here's the best I can do! Resource converter properties: TemperatureModifier: kW added per second x50. So to add 10 kW per second, provide 500 in this field Core heat properties: CoreTempGoal: Sets a temperature goal, core won't be affected by core heat transferring radiators before this. CoreToPartRatio : If the part is this fraction of the core temp, reduce the cooling CoreTempGoalAdjustment: A scalar that adjusts the core temperature goal, eg if it is -200, and the CoreTempGoal is 800, it's 600. CoreEnergyMultiplier: How much to scale energy transfers between core and part HeatRadiantMultiplier: If the core is hotter, the fraction of heat to radiate out CoolingRadiantMultiplier: If the core is cooler, the fraction of heat to radiate out HeatTransferMultiplier: If the core is hotter than the part's internal, the fraction of heat that transfers to the part from the core CoolantTransferMultiplier: If the core is cooler than the part's internal, the fraction of heat that transfers to the core from the part radiatorCoolingFactor: The amount of kJ of energy to "actually" remove from the core per kJ removed by a Core Heat transferring radiator radiatorHeatingFactor: The amount of kJ of energy to "actually" add to a radiator pulling core heat from the core MaxCalculationWarp: Things won't be computed at a faster rate than this; ie at 10,000,000x time warp, the core heat analytics will still work like at 1000x CoreShutdownTemp: Shut down all generators on a part at this core temperature MaxCoolant: Maximum amount of kW of cooling capacity the core can consume (currently bugged)

You might want to post your whole cfg. There are more parameters than you have specified in the ModuleResourceConverter block that strongly affect production.

That is a bit beyond scope. Still, operating an engine is basically open cycle cooling . Haha, not really planned at the moment. Prefer space stuff. Yes they will work with NF Electrical that way, I am not ready to enable that patch yet though. I was hoping so, but then I got really busy. Questions: What do people use for their nuclear engine mods these days? I want to make sure the hydrogen patches cover the right engines, the last time I went and looked for all the current nuke mods was a while ago. I'm also buffing the mass of most of the NTRs in LH2 mode so that they will be more attractive. I intended to do this originally, but it didn't sneak into the release. Things like LV-N going to a mass of 2.5 instead of 3.

Yes, it's the blackbody glow, a good system for things without thermal animations, but poor for nice, handcrafted ones. I know of no way to disable it.

I was hoping to get to this sometime this week, but have failed to find the time. Been very busy. I will probably update it on the weekend because I need to do so to update bundled dependencies (CRP). Planned changes are ~ +10s Isp for most cryogenics, a revisit to TWR for many engines, a *slight* decrease in cryo cooling costs (~10%).

The only reason I use IFS is that its cost and mass calculating functions are slightly more robust that FS. It is not technically difficult to add the fuels, but I won't be doing it as it is a big chunk of busy work, and it would add a significant amount of clutter (what are all these resources??) to a mod that is prooobably not balanced with Interstellar in the first place. It's far better off as a MM patch for the tanks that :NEEDS[KSPI] For inspiration on how to modify and specify tanks using IFS and MM, check out CryoEngines' fuel switching patches. That's a beaut!

Not quite. The ones with built in radiators have power generation capabilities. The radiators will be calibrated to keep things running such that the reactor won't overheat when running at the max of generator level, but as this is usually <10% of thrust level, it wouldn't do so for full power

There's the correlation then. You, Jasmir and Wildlynx seem to all have that when using FAR. Lynx says is a stock bug that is amplified somehow (I believe this as I have def. seen randomly overheating parts with stock on vessel load). If so, I can try to work around it once I get more information. Will probably ask ferram if he has any clues.

Still unable to repro. Took a ship consisting of 1 garnet, 8 med thermal control systems, 2 drills, 1 isru, 1 jumbo-64 (emptied), a probe core and a couple of stack large batteries. Hyperedited it to a few places, filled the ore tank up with the drills, did a couple of toggles back to the space centre for some time warping, went back... converted some ore, turned the reactor on and off, some more toggles back and warping... could not create any anomalous heat. edit - just saw that post over in the release thread... you're not running FAR by any chance? Trying to figure out at least some correlations.

I'll look at that, but offhand, isn't 4 med stock radiators not enough for a garnet? 4x250kW < 1200 kW

You're going to need to provide some better information. I teleport a ship into orbit, turn on the reactor (or not), let it heat up, go back to tracking, warp a bit, go back to the ship, and nothing happens. Stick drills on it, nothing happens either. If I can't Also FYI I can't touch anything in analytic mode. This idiotic heat catchup fix is a workaround for a stupid, unturnoffable stock system that I didn't even expect to work in the first place.

The heat and emissive animations use a number of parameters that were introduced in 1.05 so you might be out of luck there.

Yeah these are probably planned. More RCS blocks at least. However, due to an abundance of RL stuff, my time for KSP is quite limited at the moment (my low post rate probably clues into this). Anyways I'm also working on NTR support for NFE. The concept is as such: core temp controls ISP. You have to heat up the core before you start your burn. When the engine is on, the flow rate of your engine controls heat dissipated. You could add radiators to keep the core hot while not burning, or time the start of your burn so your reactor gets to Max heat when you are ready to burn. The reactors will use a lot more uranium too, so keeping then on at full power all the time will be problematic. However, keeping them on at low power for the trimodal engines should easily be possible.

I don't intend to change the mechanics of how energy consumption and generation work. Any changes I would make would be purely related to functionality and not complex electrical management logic.

Good find, I'll add it to the issues page.

Heh, this was actually made before any of the current NTR models, hence the roughness in some areas. Open cycle power levels start to get into the region of needing really crazy heat dissipation, which means a huge nozzle or a magnetic one. Was hoping to combine both with this cascading approach, but maybe I will save this for the NSWR, as that can look pretty sci-fi-ey.

This has always been a problem, and I don't have much of an idea of how to fix it. With high time warp, it's a toss up whether the Ec production or consumption occurs first... let's say a solar panel adds 0.06 Ec/physics step, at 10000x that's only 600 Ec/tick. A medium reactor that adds 400 Ec/s adds 133,000 Ec per tick. In some situations that power is too large to get added to the ship's reserve so doesn't get added at all. This is actually why the reactors have built in Ec storage. The sequence goes something like this (or used to, dunno if recent KSP versions have adjusted this): Reactor adds 400 Ec, room for only 300, none is added Tank consumes 50 Ec Reactor adds 400 Ec, room for 350, none is added Tank consumes 50 Ec Reactor adds 400 Ec, room for 400, power is added etc So power will appear to get stuck at a level which the storage can handle the output. In the solar panel case, many small additions are more effective than one large one. Someone can feel free to correct me about this, I'd like to fix it but I haven't been able to yet.

There is information in the first post about assigning parts to tech nodes.

Does it actually do that? I thought it just allowed you to turn on and off crossfeed for an object, not specifically enable crossfeed for radial tanks. I don't intend to do teeny ones at this moment. My goal isn't really to replicate Atomic Age, I just want to make engines that I think are cool. I suspect any air breathing engines would go in Mk4, which does have a nuclear ramjet planned. This is my WIP open cycle gas core rocket. I'm pretty happy with most of it, but the extensible magnetic nozzle isn't the nicest looking thing I've ever made. I ran out of space! I'm going to have to reconfigure them all Yes I'll probably have to patch that when I have time.

Yes, no temperature dependence at all. Just supply EC and you're good... thermal system is a pain to work with sometimes. With something as mission critical as fuel evaporation, I wanted a clear and deterministic system. I'll think about that. Now that we have boiloff to moderate the power of the hydrolox engines, some of them could use a bit of a bump up. RE: CKAN: I say this about a million times every update. If you download anything I make from CKAN and you have problems, that's not my problem. I try my best to maintain clean, efficient zips containing all the dependencies that are needed in the three download locations, and that's enough work. I do not wish to work on splitting out things every time I update stuff and fragmenting stuff even more.

It's experimental and disabled by default. Enable at own risk. Deletes engine light modules if they're present. These engines contain their own engine lighting They need more fuel volume, yes. In a case where you could use something as dense as LF in an NTR, you would get much lower Isp, maybe 500s or so. Yeesss, I think the NASA one is butt-ugly :P.

Glad you all enjoy it. It was a lot of fun making these models (sometimes), the challenge of laying out the plumbing was quite interesting. It's closed cycle (they don't all have to look like that NASA study). As you point out, the stats are not nearly good enough for an open cycle. I do want to do an open cycle one at some point, but I haven't decided on the exact shape or form factor. NSWR is in the works and would probably arrive with the OC GCNTR, I'll probably make it the mod's only 3.75m engine when I do. I haven't settled on a style/visualization yet, but it looks like most of the detail will be in the cooling systems for the nozzle Generally, this mod should mesh perfectly with CryoEngines (if that's what you mean by LH2 chemicals) in balance and function.

Its included in the download, not heavily tested though.

Next release will include a few classic "extras" patches, for example to disable boiloff and to convert these engines to LF in a similar fashion to CryoEngines' extras. In the meantime you could remove the boiloff modules in the configs via MM patch or direct editing.