Can you please explain me Antennas ?

[Mapoko]

All in all it seems to me that commutron 16 is the better one than Comms DS-M1, while it is not ?

To me it seems :

Both packet sizes are 2M

Both use 12ec/M

One has faster rate of 1.2M/s and other 0.7M/s

Or I am wrong about it ?

Sorry for not comparing the 88-88, but I recently started over on Hard and I am not there yet.

[AndrewBCrisp]

That was a little confusing to me as well. Energy usage per transmission would be the same for both antennae, however, the DTS-M1 transmits slower than the 16 - 2.8 seconds per packet (DTS) versus 1.7 seconds per packet (16).

However, that difference in transmission speed might have an advantage. For the same transmission size, the DTS-M1 can drain your batteries slower than the Communotron 16.

Take, for example, a temperature reading: each temperature transmission takes 8 Mits, or 4 packets. The Communotron 16 would take 6.7 seconds to transmit the data, while the DTS-M1 would take 11.4 seconds. But both transmissions would consume 48 electric charge. The drain rates per second become:

Communotron 16: 7.2 electric charge per second,

DTS-M1: 4.2 electric charge per second.

This gives you an idea how much power you need to have flowing into your batteries per second to keep them topped up. Since the DTS-M1 uses less power per second, you can use fewer solar panels, or pack fewer batteries, thus saving mass on your spacecraft or probe. Saved mass = extra delta-v.

That's how I see it, at any rate.

[icedown]

From my understanding, it would take the same electrical charge, since the packet size and ec per packet are the same. The only thing is the DTS is going to drain your batteries much quicker, so a c16 will be able to be used on a rocket with smaller batteries and power capabilities.

[Voidryder]

Jeb says they are the pointy things he uses to poke his fellow Kerbalnauts with when he's bored or for roasting marshmallows during his beach parties on Laythe.

[Mapoko]

So basically the 88-88 seems the worst ?

Sure, it will transmit the data from the lab faster. It is really slow with c16, but I had no faster one at the time, so I will send a module with 88-88 some day.

But aside that I do not see any reason to bring more expensive and heavier antennas than c16.

In vanilla that is. iirc in the mod where you need to have signal they have different ranges.

[AndrewBCrisp]

The 88-88 is best where speed is essential and/or power is not a concern - bases and space stations with labs can probably get the best use out of them. Also, they look the coolest.

The DTS-M1 would be better (technically) than the C16 because of its slower power consumption - useful on low-mass ships as you don't need as many solar panels / fuel cells / RTGs / batteries to keep your ship or probe fully functional: plus for larger transmissions (such as the science jr), you'd run less of a risk of draining your batteries BEFORE you complete the transmission. It's not a big advantage over the C16 (see my earlier post), but it is an edge.

[Reddeyfish]

the DTS also has much less drag than the 16 when it isn't open. (although compared to the drag of a normal rocket, it's negligible)

[problemecium]

There has been debate on this, and what I've heard is that the information on antennas is either displayed wrong or is leaving out something and thus being misleading.

Regarding what's been discussed here, if the issue is one of packet transmission rate, the obvious and very simple solution is to just time warp while transmitting. The antenna will have a minimum realtime delay between transmissions (about 1/2 second), while the batteries will recharge faster due to the time warp. The faster you warp, effectively the slower the antenna transmits, allowing you to obtain equilibrium and keep transmitting continuously even with only a few solar panels.

[Mister Spock]

So in stock, is there no range difference among the three antennas? You can take the newb antenna to Jool and it will still reach Kerbin?

[TMS]

Info displayed is wrong.

See for fix: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/97285-KSP-v1-0-2-Stock-Bug-Fix-Modules-%28Release-v1-0-2c-2-9-May-15%29-now-includes-Stock-Plus

[brianorca]

So in stock, is there no range difference among the three antennas? You can take the newb antenna to Jool and it will still reach Kerbin?

There's a small mod to make the antennas different: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/56440-1-0-AntennaRange-1-8-Enforce-and-Encourage-Antenna-Diversity?highlight=antenna+range

[Mister Spock]

Yep, I noticed that mod. I'll try it my next game. (I've used Remote Tech in the past, but I don't feel like going through all that network-building again.)

So it appears that in stock, the stock antennae do not have any range limitations. That seems like a big oversight.

[martinborgen]

the 88 is great for transmitting a 490-ish batch of science from a lab.

[Pecan]

...So it appears that in stock, the stock antennae do not have any range limitations. That seems like a big oversight.

Range is not an issue in space. Power is an issue but Voyager's transmitter is just 20W and signalling from beyond (or on the edge of) the solar system. Arrange things that way though and you need BIG receiver-dishes. Certainly sending a louder, clearer message in the first place makes things better but it isn't a requirement.

[Sky_walker]

If they'd want they could create an interesting balance between antennas and tracking station upgrades and how upgrading one or the other affects how far you can go before you loose contact with the space center...

[Mister Spock]

Certainly sending a louder, clearer message in the first place makes things better but it isn't a requirement.

Thanks. I gather the AntennaRange mod does indeed focus on antenna power; beyond a certain range, power needs for each antenna ramp up dramatically, and as a practical matter, this means that each antenna has a different effective range. I haven't tried it yet, though, so I'm not sure if that's exactly how it works.

Also, range certainly does affect signal delay, yes? That's something modeled by RemoteTech. I enjoyed that feature a lot, even if it was frustrating sometimes. I don't think AntennaRange models delay.

[Pecan]

...Also, range certainly does affect signal delay, yes? That's something modeled by RemoteTech. I enjoyed that feature a lot, even if it was frustrating sometimes. I don't think AntennaRange models delay.

Yes radio/microwaves/lasers/visible-light are just different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum and travel at the speed of, well, light. Distance delays signals of any power exactly the same amount because it's just the time it takes for the signal to physically travel between the transmitter and receiver. In a similar* way, shouting may be easier to hear but it's still restricted to the local speed of sound. As far as I know RT is the only mod that implements this in KSP and realistically on every ship you'd want a pilot or computer/autopilot on-board (so not subject to delay) controlling any but the grossest manoeuvres. *Grin* to see what it's like trying to remote-control a probe that is light-seconds away (never mind out at distant planets) simply play your favourite online action-game with the worst lag and weakest wifi you can manage. Ping times under 1s are too cushy for this 8-p

[* Only 'similar' because sound propogates through some medium, usually the air. In space no-one can hear you scream (because there's no atmosphere for the sound to pass to them through) but they can watch you doing it (because light doesn't need one)]

[Kermunist]

Range is not an issue in space. Power is an issue but Voyager's transmitter is just 20W and signalling from beyond (or on the edge of) the solar system. [...]

To be fair though, Voyager uses a massive dish to make that 20W into a very narrow beam. As a result it is 46dB stronger than it would be if it came from a simple dipole antenna. So if voyager was equipped with a simple dipole (which is what KSP's basic antenna looks like) then it would need 750kW or thereabouts to yield the same signal strength at earth - obviously impractical. So I think it is realistic to give the simple anteanna a range limit. The other two antennae look more directional, so it's reasonable to have them work at longer ranges with more moderate power requirements.

[Renegrade]

Also, range certainly does affect signal delay, yes? That's something modeled by RemoteTech. I enjoyed that feature a lot, even if it was frustrating sometimes. I don't think AntennaRange models delay.

I always turned that off when I played RT2 - while it's true that signal delays are an issue (you definitely don't want a transmit/wait-for-acknowledge protocol like XMODEM used in deep space) in real life, most probes and such are self-navigating, not remote controlled (with a notable exception of the Soviet moon rovers). Thus, I've always assumed that when I've taken control of a probe, it's merely executing it's internal program, not receiving detailed, direct commands from ground control.