KSP Interstellar Extended Support Thread

[Khalkion]

4 hours ago, H4LPiN said:

So I thought id fixed my issue but it seems like the radiators look so much more insanely big than they need to be, 

im wondering again if its an install issue? 

just seems like a lot of heat waste . . 

I will test it when I get home, but looks like normal. However try to use black radiators, with full tech upgrades or in sandbox they are much more effective per mass than titanium ones.

Just tested your setup. Actually there is something weird. Antimatter reactor of that size should produce 720 GW, not 72. And so radiators should be in absolutely red zone.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Khalkion

[raxo2222]

Why solar wind collector only collects around 3x more solar wind when comparing 2.5m and 10m size, that is 50 m^2 and 800 m^2 ?

Largest one should collect 16x more solar wind than smallest one.

Also solar wind collectors should scale up at least to 100m

 

I got 1g of deutrium and 0.7 g of helium 3 from 100 kg of solar wind.

This means 10 ppm of Deuterum and 7 ppm of Helium 3 in solar wind.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2017 by raxo2222

[Khalkion]

Shall charge particle converters adapt to power generation of attached reactor like thermal ones? Because right now it seems they don't... Or are they capped now? 2.5 antimatter reactor produces about 683 GW of charged particles and charged particle direct converter takes only 30.8 GW. And I have no sucess in attaching or making to work more than one per reactor.

By the way, WarpPlugin/Parts/FuelTank/AntimatterTanks1/AntimatterTank125  (Electrostatic Antimatter Containment Device) still has cost = 1319283500.  It's pretty much 

Edited August 28, 2017 by Khalkion

[themaster401]

Hello. I know I'm about to make support for my issue a pain due to my heavily modded install, but I suspect it may be an issue or conflict with another mod nonetheless.

Upon coming into orbit around any body, the console and log are spammed with:

Spoiler

Module FNResourceScanner threw during OnFixedUpdate: UnityEngine.UnityException: Texture 'WarpPlugin/PlanetResourceData/minmus_uranium' is not readable, the texture memory can not be accessed from scripts. You can make the texture readable in the Texture Import Settings.
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.Texture2D:INTERNAL_CALL_GetPixel (UnityEngine.Texture2D,int,int,UnityEngine.Color&)
  at UnityEngine.Texture2D.GetPixel (Int32 x, Int32 y) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at OpenResourceSystem.ORSPlanetaryResourceInfo.getPixelAbundanceValue (Int32 pix_x, Int32 pix_y) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at OpenResourceSystem.ORSPlanetaryResourceInfo.getLatLongAbundanceValue (Double lat, Double lng) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at OpenResourceSystem.ORSPlanetaryResourceMapData.getResourceAvailability (Int32 body, System.String resourcename, Double lat, Double lng) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at OpenResourceSystem.ORSResourceScanner.OnFixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at Part.ModulesOnFixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

which heavily slows down the game. In this case, I was above Minmus. I have tried removing the seemingly faulty "minmus_uranium" entry in the resource definitions configuration and the texture, but still the log spam comes again with a different resource.

I can supply the KSP.log if necessary, though it is a hefty 83 MB due to the spam.

GameData

[BlackMoons]

7 hours ago, Khalkion said:

Shall charge particle converters adapt to power generation of attached reactor like thermal ones? Because right now it seems they don't... Or are they capped now? 2.5 antimatter reactor produces about 683 GW of charged particles and charged particle direct converter takes only 30.8 GW. And I have no sucess in attaching or making to work more than one per reactor.

By the way, WarpPlugin/Parts/FuelTank/AntimatterTanks1/AntimatterTank125  (Electrostatic Antimatter Containment Device) still has cost = 1319283500.  It's pretty much 

For whatever reason, dev has decided that antimatter reactors can only throttle up to 5% for use as energy generation. Likely to prevent them from being crazy OP and instead just 'kinda OP'

[ss8913]

since the latest IFS... my ThF4 containers seem to be orphaned from the tech tree.  my plane still has them but it says unable to launch due to parts "not available yet" - however the CTT (which is updated) is fully unlocked.. parts are in the game but it doesn't see them as researched, and this seems to be a bug(?)

edit: ok, that's weird, it DOES show up in the science lab.. just doesn't show up in the VAB/SPH.. says "owned" in the science lab though so I'm not sure why it's not showing up in the build windows..?

Edited August 29, 2017 by ss8913

[Khalkion]

4 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

For whatever reason, dev has decided that antimatter reactors can only throttle up to 5% for use as energy generation. Likely to prevent them from being crazy OP and instead just 'kinda OP'

Oh.. I see. So the main purpose for antimatter reactors now are propulsion on charged particles and other direct propulsion? Ok, I will try.

Edited August 29, 2017 by Khalkion

[Ciro1983811]

5 hours ago, BlackMoons said:

For whatever reason, dev has decided that antimatter reactors can only throttle up to 5% for use as energy generation. Likely to prevent them from being crazy OP and instead just 'kinda OP'

 

• Form Project rho atomic rockets website.
  That's to understand why antimatter reactor is limited to 5% when producing electrical power or used to heat up propellants. Because the rreaction produce neutral pions, that decay to gamma ray in attoseconds, prompt gamma rays, and charged pions that In nanoseconds decay in neutral muons and neutrinos. So gamma rays equals wasteheat, and you produce a lot of them., if you don't redirect instantly out the charged particles whit a magnetic nozzle, or absorb wasteheat heating a propellant, you'll be in troubles trying not to fuse the reactor and the ship.
   
   
  

 On the subatomic particle level, the antimatter version of a proton is an antiproton. An antimatter electron is called a positron, and an antimatter neutron is an anti-neutron.

You might have the mistaken idea that when you mix antimatter and matter that you get energy. That turns out not to be the case.

First off, a particle will only annihilate with the corresponding anti-particle. This means if an electron hits an anti-proton, they will just bounce off each other (actually, protons and antineutrons sometime annihilate, and vice versa. But that does not happen very often).

---

Electron-positron annihilations do turn into energy, in the form of gamma rays. But note that electrons and positrons are approximately 1/1836 the mass of protons and other nucleons. So if you are mixing atoms of anti-hydrogen with atoms of hydrogen, the electrons and positrons will contribute about 1/1836th of the resulting energy. Electrons and positrons have a mass of 9.10938291×10^-31 kilograms, so an electron-positron annihilation produces about 1.6×10^-15 joules.

---

Since protons and anti-protons have 1836 times the mass, they also produce 1836 times the energy. So a proton-antiproton annihilation produces about 2.9376×10^-12 joules.

---

The trouble is with proton-antiproton annihilations. This produces (on average) 1.5 neutral pions and three charged pions with an average energy of 250 Mev. And energy that manifests itself in the fact that the particles are moving at very high velocities. Also about 0.005 (0.5%) of the annihilation energy becomes the so-called "prompt" gamma rays.

The neutral pions almost instantly (90 attoseconds) decay into "delayed" gamma rays with an average energy of 200 MeV. Which is good if you want gamma rays. If you don't they are an inconvenient blast of deadly radiation traveling in all directions. As is the case with antimatter propulsion.

The charged pions (traveling at 0.94c) will move about 21 meters from the reaction before decaying into muons and neutrinos. The fact they are charged means they can be directed by electromagnetic fields for propulsion or their energy harvested by electromagnetic fields to generate electricity. Failing that you can just have them heat up reaction mass to make rocket thrust.

The charged particles are annoying if you are trying to make an antimatter bomb. 21 meters from ground zero the charged particles will decay into muons and neutrinos that will do no damage whatsoever to the target. This means about 30% of the energy of the antimatter bomb is wasted.

---

To recap:

• Antimatter Weapon: gamma rays good, charged particles bad
• Antimatter Rocket Engine or Electrcal Power Generator: gamma rays bad, charged particles good

---

• 

Antimatter Reaction

Symbol	Particle
p+	Proton
p-	Antiproton
e-	Electron
e+	Positron
γ	Gamma Ray
π0	Neutral Pion
π+	Positive Pion
π-	Negative Pion
μ+	Positive Muon
μ-	Negative Muon
νμ	Muon Neutrino
νμ	Muon Antineutrino
νe	Electron Neutrino
νe	Electron Antineutrino

---

[H4LPiN]

I have a planet "thing" around Kerbol called Disk instead of moho and it looks like a white blob, clicking on it from orbital view I get the message "NullReferenceException: Object reference not attached to instance of object" 

Any Ideas or any more info needed from me?

Thanks, Loving this mod. 

Edited August 29, 2017 by H4LPiN
spelling

[BlackMoons]

17 hours ago, Khalkion said:

Oh.. I see. So the main purpose for antimatter reactors now are propulsion on charged particles and other direct propulsion? Ok, I will try.

Yea, that or just yaknow, the fact your still getting obscene amounts of power outta a light 2.5m format. And since the engine only throttles to 5%, your not using a ton of antimatter.

Even at 5% its still the highest power to weight ratio engine.

[ss8913]

did something change in the last patch with the QSR?  I had a ship parked in orbit with the QSR set to 80% and it immediately overheated when I switched to it after the last update... i can run it at 20% now safely, whereas 80% before...

also @FreeThinker any ideas on why the radial attachment ThF4 and.. really all the radial tanks except the antimatter penning trap... no longer show up in VAB/SPH but still exist on ships that had them from before?

Edited August 30, 2017 by ss8913

[Khalkion]

3 hours ago, ss8913 said:

did something change in the last patch with the QSR?  I had a ship parked in orbit with the QSR set to 80% and it immediately overheated when I switched to it after the last update... i can run it at 20% now safely, whereas 80% before...

If I remember correctly, there was some problem with QSR perfomance and lithium, QSR had lower perfomance than it should and it was fixed.

[raxo2222]

3 hours ago, ss8913 said:

did something change in the last patch with the QSR?  I had a ship parked in orbit with the QSR set to 80% and it immediately overheated when I switched to it after the last update... i can run it at 20% now safely, whereas 80% before...

also @FreeThinker any ideas on why the radial attachment ThF4 and.. really all the radial tanks except the antimatter penning trap... no longer show up in VAB/SPH but still exist on ships that had them from before?

QSR never throlles down now.

[FreeThinker]

4 hours ago, raxo2222 said:

QSR never throlles down now.

manual throtling doesn't work anymore?

[raxo2222]

15 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

manual throtling doesn't work anymore?

Automatic one - that is reactor always run at 100% of energy production of given throttle causing to produce waste heat.

So if I set QSR to produce energy at 20% or 100% of total output, it will produce as much energy as it can (20% or 100% of total capacity) disregarding power needs.

Edited August 30, 2017 by raxo2222

[Ciro1983811]

19 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

Automatic one - that is reactor always run at 100% of energy production of given throttle causing to produce waste heat.

So if I set QSR to produce energy at 20% or 100% of total output, it will produce as much energy as it can (20% or 100% of total capacity) disregarding power needs.

Normal behaviour I think. You sustain the black hole, or you loose containment. And so you can reduce the fuel fed to the black hole (manual throttle) but for each unit of fuel fed, the black hole will emit a certain amount of hawking radiation, aka wasteheat. Only fusion And antimatter reactors (and certain fission reactors where you have moderators on solid cores, or where you can reduce the gaseous/dusty fissionable materials injected) can be throttled automatically following the power needs.

[Khalkion]

39 minutes ago, Ciro1983811 said:

Normal behaviour I think. You sustain the black hole, or you loose containment. And so you can reduce the fuel fed to the black hole (manual throttle) but for each unit of fuel fed, the black hole will emit a certain amount of hawking radiation, aka wasteheat. Only fusion And antimatter reactors (and certain fission reactors where you have moderators on solid cores, or where you can reduce the gaseous/dusty fissionable materials injected) can be throttled automatically following the power needs.

I'm not sure about this. If you have a way to throttle manually - you can automate the process. If you have no way of throttling - then nothing to automate.

That's why QSR has manual throttling with minimum limit (still pretty high compared to other reactors) to sustain the blackhole as well as automatic. 

 

@FreeThinker Looks like inline thermal reciever mk1 (small one) has wrong stack nodes (same nodes as x2 reciever). Drag cubes are the same too, but I'm not sure that they should be different.

Edited August 30, 2017 by Khalkion

[The-Doctor]

@FreeThinker let's say I want to have beam power with nothing else, what do I not delete for it to work?

[raxo2222]

1 minute ago, The-Doctor said:

@FreeThinker let's say I want to have beam power with nothing else, what do I not delete for it to work?

Standalone reactors, generators, radiators, all microwave network parts and  storage for fission/fusion/antimatter fuel.

[The-Doctor]

Just now, raxo2222 said:

Standalone reactors, generators, radiators, all microwave network parts and  storage for fission/fusion/antimatter fuel.

I only want the beamed power stuff, I'm gonna be playing with near future, not that I don't wanan play KSPIE, it's too complex for me right now

5 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

Standalone reactors, generators, radiators, all microwave network parts and  storage for fission/fusion/antimatter fuel.

does the microwave power have to be aimed at the target?

[The-Doctor]

I feel like building a base unlike any anyone has seen yet and using the base to provide beamed power, which would be long lasting due to it constantly mining the materials it needs to run the reactors, the base will be unique in what parts I'm gonna use to assemble it

 

[raxo2222]

12 minutes ago, The-Doctor said:

I only want the beamed power stuff, I'm gonna be playing with near future, not that I don't wanan play KSPIE, it's too complex for me right now

does the microwave power have to be aimed at the target?

Well idk if near future reactors works with beamed power parts.

 

Your receiving ship must have its receivers pointed at beamed power source.

[The-Doctor]

@FreeThinker does Near Futures reactors work with beamed power?

[The-Doctor]

@FreeThinker I just wanna be able to beam power and receive beamed power, what are the bare minimum parts and configs and mod dependencies I should have to do that? I'd really like beamed power cause then it would give any base I build, actual, proper purpose, not just fuel mining and life support exporting

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

@FreeThinker I just wanna be able to beam power and receive beamed power, what are the bare minimum parts and configs and mod dependencies I should have to do that? I'd really like beamed power cause then it would give any base I build, actual, proper purpose, not just fuel mining and life support exporting

The answer really depends on what you want to achieve, and at what tech level. Some parts are great for short range, other medium and other long range.  Some part a great on the surface, other for satellites and other for mission vessels, or rovers

Edited August 31, 2017 by FreeThinker