KSP Interstellar Extended Continued Development Thread

[FreeThinker]

6 hours ago, theunbeliever said:

Absolutely.  I'm going to give you a link to a zip file with several screenshots (can't figure out how to upload them here and imgur won't let me upload because file sizes are too big).  The first proves that I have enough radiators, the second is the reactor info window, showing that it's generating power, the third is the thermal generator, fourth and fifth are the engine itself, one after just activating and the other after activating and timewarping a couple hours.  As you can see, the engine has everything it needs, it just refuses to consume fuel for some odd reason.

https://mega.nz/#!npY2haAR!1xHQS7pdRyHrTDW1xNG_lj68z7yJH1Lb5bG2lBpROno

For one thing, you  are using a big thruster with a relitvely weak reactor. For the Molten Salt Reactor, use the smallest Plassma thruster you can find (scaling it down) second, get into space and try if it works there. The static presure at the surface is simply too high. Third, if you want to have higher thrust, you should use heavier propellant, like XenonGas or LqdCo2 if you are on a budget

Edited May 20, 2016 by FreeThinker

[theunbeliever]

Kicking the thing up into orbit with Hyperedit solved the entire problem.  Brilliant!  Maybe add an error message like "Static Pressure Too High!" when this happens?

 

Is there any way I can contribute to the development of this mod?  I've been looking for a way to brush up on my programming skills and this seems like a decent outlet.  I might not be able to add new material without a lot of help but I can at least do some spellchecking and whatnot.

[Nansuchao]

Seen that KSP 1.1.2 broke the gimbal of a couple of engines on yaw control, I found a kind of temporary workaround awaiting for future fixing. If you use the Inline Radiator, the one with the built-in Reaction Wheels, you can disable completely the gimbal and have much less troubles going into orbit or maneuvering a ship.

 

The problem is also accentuated from the way KSP manage Reaction Wheels and engine's gimbal. It usually over correct, causing often the loose of control. The other one less useful workaround is to spin-stabilize the ship, but that is not even ever possible, realistic or useful.

Edited May 20, 2016 by Nansuchao

[FreeThinker]

45 minutes ago, Nansuchao said:

Seen that KSP 1.1.2 broke the gimbal of a couple of engines on yaw control, I found a kind of temporary workaround awaiting for future fixing. If you use the Inline Radiator, the one with the built-in Reaction Wheels, you can disable completely the gimbal and have much less troubles going into orbit or maneuvering a ship.

 

The problem is also accentuated from the way KSP manage Reaction Wheels and engine's gimbal. It usually over correct, causing often the loose of control. The other one less useful workaround is to spin-stabilize the ship, but that is not even ever possible, realistic or useful.

Actualy it's a model thing. For the Thermal Launch models it was just a matter of replacing it with the updated version, the Lightbulp gimbal can be "fixed" by disabling it's animation. Hopefully porkjet will create a proper update one day

Edited May 20, 2016 by FreeThinker

[hirschhornsalz]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

the Lightbulp gimbal can be "fixed" by disabling it's animation.

How would I do that? I you don't tell me, Jeb might never return... ;-)

[Nansuchao]

32 minutes ago, hirschhornsalz said:

How would I do that? I you don't tell me, Jeb might never return... ;-)

I proposed a couple of effective trick few post above yours. Disable the gimbal and use only the Reaction Wheel or spin stabilize during burns.

[hirschhornsalz]

2 hours ago, Nansuchao said:

I proposed a couple of effective trick few post above yours. Disable the gimbal and use only the Reaction Wheel or spin stabilize during burns.

I read it. But for an mission underway adding more reaction wheels isn't an option and trying to spin while burning messes things up even more badly, for me at least. But it has some entertainig value, I've got to admit.

[FreeThinker]

13 minutes ago, hirschhornsalz said:

I read it. But for an mission underway adding more reaction wheels isn't an option and trying to spin while burning messes things up even more badly, for me at least. But it has some entertainig value, I've got to admit.

Alright, the solution is realy simple, simply lookup the ModuleGimbal in Lightbulb.cfg and replace Reactor by thrustPoint. At least this ensures the gimbal works again

[raxo2222]

Why table on first page says that AIM generates 95% CP, while it actually is 80% CP?

And why total fuel annihilation is marked with yellow color?

On unrelated note: Can quantum vacuum mode ISP be calculated from reactor fuel use?

Edited May 20, 2016 by raxo2222

[FreeThinker]

4 hours ago, raxo2222 said:

And why total fuel annihilation is marked with yellow color?

It means nothing is left after the the antimatter get annihilated, all other reactor modes do produce something else

4 hours ago, raxo2222 said:

Why table on first page says that AIM generates 95% CP, while it actually is 80% CP?

mmm, the table is wrong. is should at most be 80%, similar to Fusion D-He3 fusion

[spirokai]

Guys, do you know what .dll or mod is responsible for calculating resources when switching to previously inactive vessel after long timewarp? I had two probes enroute to Jool with MKS nuclear reactors, both had 12 UF4 at the begining. I switched to them after timewarping 62 days and their UF4 is at 0. I opened the save and the value is correct in the save .... 11.something ....which means the calculation when switching to the vesssel must be wrong and I want to figure out how to fix it.

Thanks for all the help!

EDIT: It just burns it way faster than it should when not focused. It burned first 8 units of UF4 in 42 days of flight.

EDIT: This does not seem to be happening in Thorium mode.

Edited May 21, 2016 by spirokai

[raxo2222]

Can AIM have switchable fusion fuels at certain upgrades?

This way we could pick reaction, that for example produces only CP (is this even physically possible?

 

In table D-He3 generates 94.5% of its power as CP. So after all AIM should produce more CP.

D-He3 Fusion

Fusion

MCF / MIF / T

Advanced Fusion

no

100%

1.04

0.85

100%

2.5x

LqdDeteurium + LqdHe3

Helium4 + LqdHydrogen

94.5%

15.9%

5%

Edited May 21, 2016 by raxo2222

[Mine_Turtle]

On 5/19/2016 at 3:33 PM, FreeThinker said:

Well the radiator job is find the hotest part and keep it cool. If the radiator is allowed to have a higher maximum temperature, overheating issues elsewhere, including simple mk2 decoupples should get less op a problem

Except it does not help. I have removed all the mods and installed the latest KSPI version manually. It did solve the problem with low radiator max temp(caused by DeadlyReentry), however overheating problem from turbojet still exists.

Here are two craft files:

1. Test craft with nuclear turbojet engine. Heat from engine transfers over to cockpit and destroys it. According to thermal helper I have enough radiators to cool the engine.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzaLdTtFg_piTV9obzZ3aExzWFk

2. Test craft with nuclear reactor(molten salt)+thermal nozzle. Reactor is scaled in size to match power output of nuclear turbojet engine. There are no problems with this craft after it reaches high speed for the nozzle to provide stable thrust.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzaLdTtFg_piRC1KYk1sUU55M1U

Essentially both crafts are similar: nuclear molten salt reactor+thermal nozzle, so they are expected to operate similarly. However, the first one overheats(internal temp flux from engine reaches 38MW!!) while second one does not.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Mine_Turtle

[Mine_Turtle]

Here is the information on how to fix issue with deadly reentry:

@PART[Some.KSPI.Part]
{
	%leaveTemp = true
}

Edited May 21, 2016 by Mine_Turtle
wronge post

[Rushligh]

On 5/18/2016 at 4:32 PM, Mine_Turtle said:

Could anyone give me some hints on how to manage nuclear ramjet, please? I am trying to design a ssto craft around this engine to allow me cheap means of going into orbit, however this part is extremely hot and all of my attempts fail because the part attached directly to the reactor(inline radiator) explodes from internal overheating. I have more than enough radiators to keep waste heat inline, however internal heating prevents me from reaching mach 4 at 25km.

Currently, I have only first heat management tech unlocked. Will unlocking heat techs further the tree help in any way?

One thing I noticed is that reactor temp(2.7k) is equal to part temp, so 2.7k transfers to nearest attached part heating and melting it. Should not reactor core temperature be handled separately from part temp?

attach your engines to a mk1 pre-cooler. if you have tweak-scale installed, you can make it a mk2. the inline radiator isn't really useful unless you have higher tech leves anyway. i use it as a gyroscope most of the time. also, makre sure your craft doest exceede 1800 m/s below 50000 m altitude.

if you want a cheap re-usable SSTO i suggest getting the kerbaloons mod. use them to get high up enough for good liquid fuel lets, then use the nuclear light-bulb engine for orbit positioning with liquid fuel. kerbaloons can also be used to slow decent apon reentry.

[raxo2222]

What do you think about this SSTO?

It needs mothersip for grand tour, but I think it should be capable to go anywhere in solar system and go back.

Each engine uses separate reactor - thermal turbojet/ramjet uses 1.5m antimatter reactors, while plasma engine uses 3.75m AIM reactor.

This SSTO weights 376 tons, so mothership should weight like 3500 tons, if you don't want to slow it down too much.

Mothership could weigh like SSTO, but then TWR would be cut in half.

SSTO features B9 docking port for refueling.

 

Edited May 21, 2016 by raxo2222

[Nansuchao]

13 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

What do you think about this SSTO?

It needs mothersip for grand tour, but I think it should be capable to go anywhere in solar system and go back.

Each engine uses separate reactor - thermal turbojet/ramjet uses 1.5m antimatter reactors, while plasma engine uses 3.75m AIM reactor.

This SSTO weights 376 tons, so mothership should weight like 3500 tons, if you don't want to slow it down too much.

Mothership could weigh like SSTO, but then TWR would be cut in half.

SSTO features B9 docking port for refueling.

 

How this beast behave during reentry?

Beautiful SSTO btw!

[Rushligh]

On 5/20/2016 at 11:44 PM, Nansuchao said:

Seen that KSP 1.1.2 broke the gimbal of a couple of engines on yaw control, I found a kind of temporary workaround awaiting for future fixing. If you use the Inline Radiator, the one with the built-in Reaction Wheels, you can disable completely the gimbal and have much less troubles going into orbit or maneuvering a ship.

 

The problem is also accentuated from the way KSP manage Reaction Wheels and engine's gimbal. It usually over correct, causing often the loose of control. The other one less useful workaround is to spin-stabilize the ship, but that is not even ever possible, realistic or useful.

I suggest you get the stock bug fix modules. they greatly help with this. however, if you do, DELETE THE LIFT ONE. it messes with everything.

2 minutes ago, Nansuchao said:

How this beast behave during reentry?

Beautiful SSTO btw!

looks good.
personally i would use the light-bulb reactor/engine for orbital thrust: i find it's high heat tolerance and good thrust/vectoring make it very useful in orbital positioning for ssto's.
in combination with some good reaction wheels you wouldn't even need rcs (except maayybbee for docking.)

only other thing is you might wanna tilt those wing radiators forward slightly so their tip is just inside the wing; greatly reduce air resistance.

[raxo2222]

12 minutes ago, Nansuchao said:

How this beast behave during reentry?

Beautiful SSTO btw!

It comes in hot. Since 60% of its mass is fuel, it should be much better, when almost empty.

We really should have reentry plasma deflection tech

11 minutes ago, Rushligh said:

I suggest you get the stock bug fix modules. they greatly help with this. however, if you do, DELETE THE LIFT ONE. it messes with everything.

looks good.
personally i would use the light-bulb reactor/engine for orbital thrust: i find it's high heat tolerance and good thrust/vectoring make it very useful in orbital positioning for ssto's.
in combination with some good reaction wheels you wouldn't even need rcs (except maayybbee for docking.)

only other thing is you might wanna tilt those wing radiators forward slightly so their tip is just inside the wing; greatly reduce air resistance.

I'm rich (I play on sandbox, fission is so.... last century), also I like this 56000 m/s of DV, that VASMIR engine give me on 10% thrust.

I use big inline radiator as SAS. and docking port with RCS is for docking and refueling.

 

[Rushligh]

always sandbox yo. i can't afford to come in to hot because i use OPT parts. i strive for aesthetics as much as function.
this passenger shuttle holds over 80 and used light bulb engines with LF for orbital positioning. uses thermal turbojet with OMEGA for take off and atmospheric flight, and uses OPT mk2 j-61 jets as scram jets for the last 10,000 ft where thermal jets just get to hot.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Rushligh

[Nansuchao]

Just now, Rushligh said:

always sandbox yo. i can't afford to come in to hot because i use OPT parts. i strive for aesthetics as much as function.
this passenger shuttle holds over 80 and used light bulb engines with LF for orbital positioning. uses thermal turbojet with OMEGA for take off and atmospheric flight, and uses OPT mk2 j-61 jets as scram jets for the last 10,000 ft where thermal jets just get to hot.

http://imgur.com/c9yCsTh

Beautiful, but I'm not sure it will fly so well in FAR.

[Rushligh]

Just now, Nansuchao said:

Beautiful, but I'm not sure it will fly so well in FAR.

shhh what FAR? i don't know about any FAR  <.<    >.>
 

i made this in windows 64bit in 1.0.5.
FAR didn't work even with ***REDACTED*** .

[raxo2222]

Apparently ladders and precooler exploded from heat. I kept pith of 30 degrees with autopilot.

I have RSS, so I was descending earth. AP - 270 km. (best place for mothership - it can refuel QSR and produce hydrazine - hydrogen is most abundant here), PE - 30 km. 0 inclination - equator orbit.

Speed was around 7500 m/s when reached 100 km altitude.

Edit: I kinda survived reentry, but antimatter explosions, and hydrazine/radiation contamination in middle of pacific ocean won't be forgotten.

My ship just kinda melted in few points in between 20 - 60 km.

Edited May 21, 2016 by raxo2222

[Rushligh]

Just now, raxo2222 said:

Apparently ladders and precooler exploded from heat. I kept pith of 30 degrees with autopilot.

what speed are you descending at? if its anymore than 2500 m/s you might wanna consider retro-thrust before/during reentry.

[Mine_Turtle]

2 hours ago, Rushligh said:

attach your engines to a mk1 pre-cooler. if you have tweak-scale installed, you can make it a mk2. the inline radiator isn't really useful unless you have higher tech leves anyway. i use it as a gyroscope most of the time. also, makre sure your craft doest exceede 1800 m/s below 50000 m altitude.

if you want a cheap re-usable SSTO i suggest getting the kerbaloons mod. use them to get high up enough for good liquid fuel lets, then use the nuclear light-bulb engine for orbit positioning with liquid fuel. kerbaloons can also be used to slow decent apon reentry.

The problem is this engine generates too much internal heat(not wasteheat), more than thermal nozzle+any reactor setup. So the next adjacent part gets overheated. I use inline radiator as an insulator to separate rest of the craft from the engine as it has a high internal temp limit(higher than precooler).