KSP Interstellar Extended Support Thread

[FreeThinker]

On 15-7-2017 at 8:43 PM, BlackMoons said:

How does one scan for florite? I can drill for it, but there is no listing for it in scansat or the stock instrument:

 

PS: Shielded Diode Laser Beam Transmitter also becomes negative mass when scaled up. And Diode Infrared Beamed Power laser.

Yes I probably need to add it to the list for consistancy, but don't you think it is funny it allows you to tell very accurately the content of the soil deep underground by just flying over it? Just imagine if this kind of technology exists in the real world, aeroplanes would have mapped all resource of the world in a matter of a few days. The reality is after 10000 years of human activity we are still finding new deposits of resources in unexpected places. Instead of the acurate number it would make more sence it would tell you probablities of a resource with a high margin of uncertartainty, only after doing some measurement on the surface, the accuracy should increase.

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

22 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

Please add a reason to use larger nozzles.

Right now, the smallest thermal launch nozzle can support inf power, requires less min power to produce thrust, weighs less, costs less.

Right now the only reason to use bigger ones then 0.6m is it looks funny

 

3

The original idea was to allow a certain amount of customisation to allow you make the nozzle narrower making it perform better in an atmosphere. It was meant as a stop gap solution but I see now it leads to confusion and wrong conclusion like player as yourself. I will restore the original balance which would incur a performance degradation based on the mismatch of diameter surface between reactor and nozzle

22 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

It also appears the "Inline Thermal Receiver Mk1" (Black tube) is not limited by its 'maximum thermal power', although that is somewhat less of an issue due to beam size making bigger receivers worthwhile, it still is an issue  because heat not used for thrust turns into waste heat and will quickly overheat ships not designed to handle it when in high power networks.

Thermal receivers should likely have a max energy cap, and the reception control should be based on that max so we can turn down max thermal reception to match thermal dissipation of a craft, instead of how it currently sets reception based on a percent of max available power(?)

1

the 2.5M diameter model should have a maximum power cap of 8000 MJ, but perhaps it doesn't scale well or doesn't work correctly in NF mode. Are you running in NF mode or not?

22 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

It would be super amazing if nozzles and electric generators could auto throttle reception of attached thermal receivers to prevent massive waste heat production but I guess that is asking for too much. (Im thinking it would behave much like attaching a nozzle onto a nuclear power plant)

1

All receivers should already throttle back received power when wasteheat build up, is it not functional anymore?

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[BlackMoons]

29 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

The original idea was to allow a certain amount of customisation to allow you make the nozzle narrower making it perform better in an atmosphere. It was meant as a stop gap solution but I see now it leads to confusion and wrong conclusion like player as yourself. I will restore the original balance which would incur a performance degradation based on the mismatch of diameter surface between reactor and nozzle

the 2.5M diameter model should have a maximum power cap of 8000 MJ, but perhaps it doesn't scale well or doesn't work correctly in NF mode. Are you running in NF mode or not?

All receivers should already throttle back received power when wasteheat build up, is it not functional anymore?

Having to match it for performance reasons would be good, but there still needs to be a limit to prevent me beaming 50GW into a tiny little receiver and nozzle.

Not using NF mode.

They throttle back yes, but then it takes forever for your engine to cool them off and produce thrust again without a massive number of rads.

Right now my accent basically makes me turn off the receiver once AP is high enough, then back on to do the circ burn, because else I overheat badly and can't produce enough thrust to circ. This way I only need like 2 tiny rads, if that.

Mechjeb is then totally confused as to when to start the burn, since it sees an engine with a receiver off as 0 thrust. Also sees an overheated receiver as nearly 0 thrust since its not receiving any power anymore. (I manually engage the motor/receiver to set the burn start now)

It would be nice if they could report max thrust as if the receiver was on even when its off, or maybe if a receiver that is on does not build up massive waste heat (Engine throttle connected to reception? Sorta like how nuclear powerplant logic works?)

Edited July 17, 2017 by BlackMoons

[BlackMoons]

When I use a launch nozzle on a 3MW MFC Spherical Tomamak, it produces less thrust then a 1MW magnatized target reactor (But more ISP). Is this because the MFC runs at a much higher core temp its putting more energy into less fuel?

Hence your reactor core temp is a ISP vs Thrust tradeoff? if so that is AWESOME. I just wish I had core temp sliders now or ability to drastically change core temp on some reactors, maybe by fusion mode (only unlocked the basic 2 so far )

Edited July 17, 2017 by BlackMoons

[Pirate Turtle]

I have KSPI Extended installed and I can't extend my solar arrays. Is there something that I'm missing or is it a bug? (Screenshot below) 

 

Thanks! 

[BlackMoons]

20 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

Yes I probably need to add it to the list for consistancy, but don't you think it is funny it allows you to tell very accurately the content of the soil deep underground by just flying over it? Just imagine if this kind of technology exists in the real world, aeroplanes would have mapped all resource of the world in a matter of a few days. The reality is after 10000 years of human activity we are still finding new deposits of resources in unexpected places. Instead of the acurate number it would make more sence it would tell you probablities of a resource with a high margin of uncertartainty, only after doing some measurement on the surface, the accuracy should increase.

 

Yea sure its not very realistic and is rather gamey, But basically I need to know 'Does this planet/biome have X?' somehow without having to send a 1 ton drill to every planet/biome to find out.

Though it is kinda tempting making little probes with the universal drill just as a 'sampling' device. be a little tricky to balance just 1 of them on a probe however. I seem to recall that things GUI did tell you the % planet wide?

Hmmm, Tiny landing probes with universal drill + seismic accelerometer for impact detection. Oh and surface scanner. That could be interesting. Only issue is id have to then write down the results or leave the probes in place.

How does impact detection work anyway in terms of number of probes vs science? Does spreading out the detectors help or is it just number of them that counts?

Edited July 18, 2017 by BlackMoons

[BlackMoons]

Errr, Even the universal drill has no entry for florite. And looks like since the global is not always filled, it does not tell you if its present somewhere on the planet but everywhere on the planet? hmmm. Need scansat readout I guess.

[BlackMoons]

Is it by design that the small holding tank (black ore tank) can't hold most types of ores? Do I have to tech up to the IFS cargo tank?

PS: the IFS Cargo Container (CC2501) can store every solid resource.. Except ore.

There is also two of them, with different mass, but the same name, yet store the same amount of material.

Edited July 18, 2017 by BlackMoons

[BlackMoons]

Apparently you have to add

SCANSAT_SENSOR
{
    name = Fluorite
    SCANtype = 536870912 //2^29
}

To SCANSat\Resources\SCANresource.cfg to make fluorite to show up. Maybe you can add it in your own cfg or talk to the scansat dev to add it to the main one?

https://pastebin.com/b3W5q8ta

Is a fixed SurfaceScanner.cfg to make it work with the surface scanner.

[ss8913]

@FreeThinker - on the latest 1.3.0-compatible build, I'm still having electrical issues... only in a certain case though, if I dock a ship to something, and then undock it, none of my generators produce any electricCharge.  If I F5/F9 it fixes it.

[BlackMoons]

TAC life support is currently shipping with an outdated Community Resource pack that is what caused all the 'blank reactor window' issues I was having awhile back, they don't have your fusion resources.

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

Errr, Even the universal drill has no entry for fluorite. And looks like since the global is not always filled, it does not tell you if its present somewhere on the planet but everywhere on the planet? hmmm. Need scansat readout I guess.

1

If it's not on the list, it's most likely not on the planet. Perhaps you are just unlucky

2 minutes ago, BlackMoons said:

TAC life support is currently shipping with an outdated Community Resource pack that is what caused all the 'blank reactor window' issues I was having awhile back, they don't have your fusion resources.

That indeed annoying, please inform them of this problem

[BlackMoons]

2 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

If it's not on the list, it's most likely not on the planet. Perhaps you are just unlucky

Scansat says kerbin is rich with the stuff:

[FreeThinker]

7 minutes ago, BlackMoons said:

Scansat says kerbin is rich with the stuff:

Thats just weird, How does this prove anything? Are you sure your not confusing it with something else

Edited July 18, 2017 by FreeThinker

[BlackMoons]

16 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Thats just weird, How does this prove anything? Are you sure your not confusing it with something else

Uh, Should I go mine some?

[FreeThinker]

4 minutes ago, BlackMoons said:

Uh, Should I go mine some?

No, could you show that the image only applies to Fluorite? What I need is a config screen or legenda. All I see now is a lot of information that is unrelated to the subject

Edited July 18, 2017 by FreeThinker

[BlackMoons]

That it has fluorite listed in the text at the bottom of the image, because I moused over a nice rich deposit as I already applied the patch I pasted here to scansat.

Edited July 18, 2017 by BlackMoons

[FreeThinker]

mmm, I suspect something has gone wrong while processing resources for the Universal Mining that is causing several resources not to show up at all. I have to fix it.

[BlackMoons]

23 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

mmm, I suspect something has gone wrong while processing resources for the Universal Mining that is causing several resources not to show up at all. I have to fix it.

Yea it looks like a cool drill IMO. I wish it responded to time compression though. Would be better to feed a couple drills MJ's for a little while then 16 drills for a week. I really like the feed out display though im not 100% sure how to read it.

You also might want to remove the 'test regolith drill'?

[Loren Pechtel]

10 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

 

Yea sure its not very realistic and is rather gamey, But basically I need to know 'Does this planet/biome have X?' somehow without having to send a 1 ton drill to every planet/biome to find out.

Though it is kinda tempting making little probes with the universal drill just as a 'sampling' device. be a little tricky to balance just 1 of them on a probe however. I seem to recall that things GUI did tell you the % planet wide?

Hmmm, Tiny landing probes with universal drill + seismic accelerometer for impact detection. Oh and surface scanner. That could be interesting. Only issue is id have to then write down the results or leave the probes in place.

How does impact detection work anyway in terms of number of probes vs science? Does spreading out the detectors help or is it just number of them that counts?

Hey, interesting idea.  I use Bon Voyage rovers for science gathering, sticking a drill on one wouldn't be that big a deal.  I built a rover for Kerbin that had drills & ISRU.  It had some rockets to be used to hop and collect the flying low science.  It was either enough fuel for  the whole mission from the start, or a minimal mining setup and recharge the tanks after every hop or two.

[BlackMoons]

Yea I mean a drill makes more sense then a 'surface scanner' anyway to be honest at refining the accuracy of scans and stuff.

It would be nice if we had more 'heavy' science instruments. atm the greenhouse is like the only one. (heavy as in, you might not want to stick every single one in existence on the same craft just due to mass reasons)

[FreeThinker]

12 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

It would be nice if we had more 'heavy' science instruments. atm the greenhouse is like the only one. (heavy as in, you might not want to stick every single one in existence on the same craft just due to mass reasons)

2

Well I have several ideas to make existing heavy parts to double function as a science experiment. For example, the dishes would be well suited to be used as telescopes. One idea I have is to integrate with TarsierTech. It would require some minor changes on the dish models to allow them to act as deep space telescopes. Due to their large aperture, they should be capable todo it quite well. The only limiting factor is the Unity floating point issues.

Another idea is to use them for prospecting. Aim a big laser turret at a location on an airless surface, blast it and analyse the light from the vaporised surface. How is that for heavy science instruments?

Another idea make micro satellites, fit them with a laser sail and blast them with a giga watt laser. Should be enough to do flyby for any nearby celestial bodies and to gather scientific data. Blast them for several days with a tera watt and you can even shoot them to nearby stars, off course it will take a while for them to get there ...

Edited July 19, 2017 by FreeThinker

[Saurenath]

Kspi extended fusion reactors are broken. The ixs magnetic containment fusion reactor rated for 23 GW only gives me 12 MW, even when connected to a charged particle generator and thermal generator, what gives? Ive put 600 hours in and i have one option each for charged particle and thermal generators and neither produce power when attached to the ixs. The ixs doesnt provide more than 12 mw and when on a ship states 100 mw is its max power, its rated for 23 gw. The thermal genrator attached isnt doing anything and the chatged particle generator says there is nothing to use. Where are the thermal and charged particle converters hiding, or how do i get the 23 GW i was quoted out of the reactor? As far as i can figure the kerbstein and fusion options are only for cheating as they dont actually produce power or convert byproducts into power. Seriously, what the hell am i doing wrong or are these parts non functional?

[BlackMoons]

Saurenath: First off, you have to connect thermal and charged generators directly to the nuclear powerplants nodes.

Second, you need MASSIVE amount of radiators in space (or a large number of convection rads on kerbin) to disipate enough heat.

1GW of heat through 65% efficent thermal powerplant = 650MW of power, 350MW of heat.

If your thermal generators overheat they become less and less efficent.

Check your thermal generators, if the cold bath gets much above 500k you need way more rads.

Second, generators output "Thermal power" and "Charged particles"

You need a charged particle generator to suck up Charged Particle power, and a thermal generator to suck up charged particle power. Charged particle generators can be up to 90% efficient, so you could get 900MW of power and 100MW of waste heat from a 1GW power plant.

 

Those huge deployable radiators seem pretty much the best IMO. Also can tweakscale them bigger.

Edited July 19, 2017 by BlackMoons

[BlackMoons]

On 2017-07-18 at 1:56 AM, ss8913 said:

@FreeThinker - on the latest 1.3.0-compatible build, I'm still having electrical issues... only in a certain case though, if I dock a ship to something, and then undock it, none of my generators produce any electricCharge.  If I F5/F9 it fixes it.

I can confirm im suffering from this as well. After undocking generators refused to produce power and reactor showed 0% activity (Molten salt reactor, so should say 6% or whatever at all times anything is being drawn)

Was docked to another ship that had its own reactor as well. F5/F9 fixes it.

Edited July 19, 2017 by BlackMoons