KSP Interstellar Extended Continued Development Thread

[Hazelnut]

Actualy it should work but it needs to have a plasma thruster on the onboard. THe reason is that you need it keep in orbit, otherwise the drag would eventualy lower your orbit. The intention is that it will load all scooped resources the moment you switch back to the vessel. You should have made a little test at Kerbin first

The orbit is stable at 200,500 m not degrading in any short time frame. (maybe after years, but Jool atmo starts at 200km so i am just above in the traces) Why would a plasma thruster be needed? I don't see how it would help. Loading all scooped resources is not happening, what should trigger that?

I did test at Kerbin first. Didn't test the non-focussed time warp behavior though. Tested that the scoop was useful even above the atmo cutoff in the traces... because if this craft dips into the official atmosphere it has no way to get back out.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Hazelnut

[Weywot8]

Version 1.3.5 for Kerbal Space Program 1.0.4

Released on 2015-08-02

• Decrease neutron Embrittlement by factor of 100
  

Any way of repairing or is this a permanent damage thing so the whole ship slowly becomes useless?

Many updates since last visit to thread. Very impressed.

Real life preventing much progress - Only Day 30 in career mode!

For me, radiators and microwave transmitters most useful in nearer-term, sending out probes to Outer Planets Mod planets (Sarnus, Urlum, Neidon, Plock) at Day 30-60. These will need transmitted power by Year 1.5/2, (using Remote Tech so need to power transmitters). Haven't drained Mun and Minimus of science, probes enroute to Moho (80d to arrival), Eve-Gilly (180d to arrival), Duna-Ike (200d to arrival).

Using microwave power, possible to send fast ion based probes for cheaper vs LN-V, ignore optimal/lowest DeltaV launch window.

2500 science waiting distribution, mulling over what nodes to unlock...potentially MKS/OKS base building tech nodes before any of the engines/advanced reactors as travel windows quite far out. Can see potential of nuclear reactors to power continuous mining-refining-ISRU operation in the next stage of expansion.

P.S. Managed to get impactor/accelerometer to work this time round!

[FreeThinker]

Any way of repairing or is this a permanent damage thing so the whole ship slowly becomes useless?

No, it becomes radioactive waste. You could plan for the future by making your Reactor modular so it can be replaced. You can achieve this by using the analogous docking ports for this as it allows loss-less energy transfer between docking ports. But best advice I can give is to prevent the reactor get radioactive in the first place, by using Aneutronic fusion modes. The cleanest Fusion mode, would be pure Helium3. Of course this is also the hardest fuel to get.

Btw, have anyone used the Radiator folding automation which will automatically fold and unfold when it is safe to do so?

Edited August 3, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Nansuchao]

I tried the Animation today. Activated the radiators just out of the atmosphere and retracted them manually re-entering in the atmosphere with a spaceplanes. When are they supposed to automatically retract?

[SpacePirate32]

Why Gas Core reactor provides only 50% of power when attached to thermal rocket nozzle and 100% with generator? Its supposed to work this way or its my personal bug?

[FreeThinker]

Regarding Helium 3, I seems to have made several mistakes

First of the density of Liquid Helium3 is 59 g/L not 178 g / L which is the density of Liquid Helium4

Secondly for the cost of Helium3, I seem to have confused the cost of Liquid Helium3 with cost of helium3 gas at Standard Temperature and Pressure (273.15 K and 1 atmosphere) . Wikipedia list Helium3 at $2000/L however it didn't mention if it was for Liquid Helium 3 or at STP. From other sources I now understand what is mend is STP. This means the LqdHe3 resource must be at least 460x more expansive !! Now couple this with the rising market cost of the current Helium 3 at the $5000/L (STP) and I finally understand why so many hospital complain about the excessive cost of this very rare resource. A litter of Liquid Hydrogen would cost at least $2.3 Million / Liter (excluding liquefaction cost).

Now that's something you not going to waste. But look at the bright side. We finally we have a good reason to start a mining colony on the moon!

- - - Updated - - -

I tried the Animation today. Activated the radiators just out of the atmosphere and retracted them manually re-entering in the atmosphere with a spaceplanes. When are they supposed to automatically retract?

They are fully automated. Once active , you can forget about them. Note what automation will disable itself when you manually override it by deploying or folding it manually. You can actually put them in auto mode in the VAB, then once you go to the launch platform they will automaticly unfold. After you lauch, they will detect you are moving too fast and quickly fold (otherwise they would rip off)

Edited August 4, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Nansuchao]

Yes, that was my fear, I was in my career. Tomorrow I'll try them in sandbox mode.

[Cosmonauth]

I'm trying to build self refueling SSTO with Thermal Turbojet engine. Fuel for space operations is Liquid Nitrogen (easy to get in any atmo)

My problem is: Fuel tanks. I cant fill Mk-3 parts with nothing else but LOx. So i tried Real Fuels and it works really well. But for me it's a bit unrealistic, in case of Liquid Nitrogen, which has to be cooled like it does with Interstellar Tanks.

I know there is a patch for MM to add Interstellar Fuel Switch to stock tanks, or at least some of them, but I can't find it, so I asking for help here).

[FreeThinker]

Yes, that was my fear, I was in my career. Tomorrow I'll try them in sandbox mode.

What do you mean?

[Nansuchao]

I meant: Waooo!!!! Great!

I was scared that in case of malfunction I'll lose my mission. I made the sandbox test, activating the radiators directly in the VAB as you said and they works very well. Ground/Orbit/Ground without worries and it seems that the radiators are more though now than in the past. How they know the right moment to deploy and retract?

[FreeThinker]

I meant: Waooo!!!! Great!

I was scared that in case of malfunction I'll lose my mission. I made the sandbox test, activating the radiators directly in the VAB as you said and they works very well. Ground/Orbit/Ground without worries and it seems that the radiators are more though now than in the past. How they know the right moment to deploy and retract?

Well I wass getiing tired of lossing my own radiators in test flight, so I added a indicatoror which tell the amount of stress in maximum tolerance. It worked but I though, why not go one step further and make the reactors act whenever they are about to be ripped of or when it is safe to deploy. They seem to do very well, but perhaps I spoiled someone fun in guessing if it was safe to use deploy the radiator. THey can still do it manualy it they wanted to.

[Nansuchao]

That's actually a great idea. Often happens, in late game situations, to build ships with lot radiators. Testing them deploying and retracting them manually is a very boring process. Doing it re entering the atmosphere is dangerous too, so... Kudos to you!

[Cosmonauth]

This new radiators automation is gorgeous! This is magic! Also I really like top post of thread become much more informative, that really helps alot. Thank you FreeThinker, great job!

[raxo2222]

Why thermal generators suddenly have only 22% efficiency and charged particles have 36% efficiency in sanbox?

Looks like upgrades bugged up.

BTW it would be nice if there was procedural part that could hold any fuel resource.

Edited August 5, 2015 by raxo2222

[FreeThinker]

Why thermal generators suddenly have only 22% efficiency and charged particles have 36% efficiency in sanbox?

Looks like upgrades bugged up.

Whose numbers make no sense. Charged Particle generateir can only be 50% or 86.5% efficent. Are you sure it is a direct energy generator because it sound more like a thermal electric generator

[ss8913]

I may be running into what raxo2222 is saying also. With the latest update, my spaceplanes are broken again I use thermal turbojets and thermal rockets on just about everything - maybe I'm doing it wrong? But with the latest iteration, the 1.25m and 2.5m ones can only handle sustained throttle at like 20-25% which is insufficient power... I can barely get any kind of thrust out of them using hydrazine without them overheating or exploding. the 3.5m and 5.0m seem ok, but the smaller ones that power my spaceplanes.. seems like one or more of the heating issues has returned. I'm playing sandbox 1.0.4 with FAR and DRE, not using RealHeat, craft are mostly stock + KSPIE parts. Hydrazine fuel. It doesn't overheat much in atmospheric mode.

[Bishop149]

Why thermal generators suddenly have only 22% efficiency and charged particles have 36% efficiency in sanbox?

Looks like upgrades bugged up.

22% is about the efficiency I get out of a thermal generator pre-upgrade, my current career save is yet to unlock solid state generators which I believe should boost the efficiency to 50-60%. I assume the update bug may therefore be making sandbox thermal generators the pre-upgrade versions.

I've only recently actually really started to need large amounts of electrical power / get the hang of generating it. In one stunning screw up / learning experience I found that my crappy thermal generators + the heat throttling of a Pebble Bed mad for a MIGHTY 9% efficiency on Minmus. . . . . it was 22% on Kerbin, I assume the difference was due to the increase radiator efficiency in atmosphere.

My current best option is a Dusty Plasma with a direct conversion generator. . . . . adding (my current crappy) Thermal Generator on top adds little more than mass.

I have some questions about Neutron embrittlment . . . Is there anyway of telling how long your reactor has left to live at its current load level?

Edited August 5, 2015 by Bishop149

[FreeThinker]

Are you using Inertial Confinement Reactor? they lose 60% when used for electrical power production, this would mean direct energy conversion would only be 20% or 34.6% efficient

- - - Updated - - -

I may be running into what raxo2222 is saying also. With the latest update, my spaceplanes are broken again I use thermal turbojets and thermal rockets on just about everything - maybe I'm doing it wrong? But with the latest iteration, the 1.25m and 2.5m ones can only handle sustained throttle at like 20-25% which is insufficient power... I can barely get any kind of thrust out of them using hydrazine without them overheating or exploding. the 3.5m and 5.0m seem ok, but the smaller ones that power my spaceplanes.. seems like one or more of the heating issues has returned. I'm playing sandbox 1.0.4 with FAR and DRE, not using RealHeat, craft are mostly stock + KSPIE parts. Hydrazine fuel. It doesn't overheat much in atmospheric mode.

Exactly what is your setup? It the vessel fitted with radiators? How high it the wasteheat level when you experience overheating problems. Note the performance of the overheating prevention is directly correlated to the ratio of the wasteheat.

Edited August 5, 2015 by FreeThinker

[raxo2222]

Are you using Inertial Confinement Reactor? they lose 60% when used for electrical power production, this would mean direct energy conversion would only be 20% or 34.6% efficient

Yep. So looks like I need to change reactor for Vasmir spaceplane.

Also it seems like radially attached [air intake-precooler-charged particle generator-reactor-thermal engine] setup lags game - without this timer is green and with this it flashes in yellow. Its just 10 parts more.... (its mirrored symmetrically)

[FreeThinker]

I have some questions about Neutron embrittlment . . . Is there anyway of telling how long your reactor has left to live at its current load level?

Not sure how to calcualte it. I can tell you it works like this, for every second the following happens :

[embrittlment lifepoints left] = [current embrittlment lifepoints] - ([Reactor activity] * [FuelMode-Neutronicity] )/ [embrittlment-divider]

[Bishop149]

Not sure how to calcualte it. I can tell you it works like this, for every second the following happens :

[embrittlment lifepoints left] = [current embrittlment lifepoints] - ([Reactor activity] * [FuelMode-Neutronicity] )/ [embrittlment-divider]

Cool, might be a feature to consider for the future!

[raxo2222]

Who needs thermal atmospheric engines if you have atmospheric scoop?

Javascript is disabled. View full album

This space plane has 3 VASMIR engines, currently on nitrogen mode. Only nosecones have nitrogen - rest is hydrazine.

This airship has 46 parts but timer is yellow >.>

Probably because I'm using 2 reactors?

Normally I can fly 100 part planes and have green timer.

Edit: Probably it is because of DR/FAR too.

Edited August 5, 2015 by raxo2222

[Nansuchao]

The reactor/generator combo seems to helps in have some lag. Two of them is like calling a low frame rate. The Mach animation too doesn't help.

[raxo2222]

The reactor/generator combo seems to helps in have some lag. Two of them is like calling a low frame rate. The Mach animation too doesn't help.

Frame rate is okay, its physics running at 1/2 or 1/3 of normal speed.

Edit: Built 28 part SSTO.

It has 55k DV. Looks like VASMIR is best engine, as it can give a lot of DV and work in atmosphere.

Heres pictures:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited August 5, 2015 by raxo2222

[ss8913]

Are you using Inertial Confinement Reactor? they lose 60% when used for electrical power production, this would mean direct energy conversion would only be 20% or 34.6% efficient

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly what is your setup? It the vessel fitted with radiators? How high it the wasteheat level when you experience overheating problems. Note the performance of the overheating prevention is directly correlated to the ratio of the wasteheat.

I've got 4 foldable radiators scaled to 200% on most of these craft. Wasteheat does appear to be much higher than it used to be in previous versions of KSPIE (these designs I have been flying for months now.. have had problems on and off with overheating but so far you've put out a patch that fixed it every time I've posted about overheating TTJs - this one is definitely new with the new radiator system in the most recent or second-most-recent update). The amount of radiatoring going on was acceptable before but they seem to have gotten a lot less efficient?