KSP Interstellar Extended Support Thread

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, Aezon said:

I'm a big fan of your mod.  I have been having some frame rate issues in several different game installs and I think this mod may be the source.  I did a fresh install of 1.11.2 and installed only KSP-IE and required mods through ckan: Interstellar fuel switch core 3.25, KSP IE 1.26.26, Module Manager 4.1.4, and Tweakscale 2.4.4.5.  KSP will then hang on the loading screen.  The last section of the log is where it hangs:

 

[LOG 20:06:43.518] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'WarpPlugin/Parts/Radiators/ActiveCoolingSystem/ActiveCoolingSystem/activeCoolingSystemv3'
[ERR 20:06:43.522] [ShipTemplate]: No Resource definition found for RESOURCE

[ERR 20:06:43.522] [ShipTemplate]: No Resource definition found for RESOURCE

[ERR 20:06:43.522] [ShipTemplate]: No Resource definition found for RESOURCE

[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'IntakeAtm
[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'IntakeAtm
[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'IntakeLqd
[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'IntakeLqd
[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'WasteHeat
[WRN 20:06:43.530] Could not create PartResource of type 'WasteHeat
[EXC 20:06:43.626] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	ModuleResourceIntake.GetInfo () (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0)
	PartLoader.CompilePartInfo (AvailablePart newPartInfo, Part part) (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0)
	PartLoader+<CompileParts>d__56.MoveNext () (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0)
	UnityEngine.SetupCoroutine.InvokeMoveNext (System.Collections.IEnumerator enumerator, System.IntPtr returnValueAddress) (at <7d9ec060e791409ab3eb85c61e312ed6>:0)
	UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object)
	ModuleManager.UnityLogHandle.InterceptLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object)
	UnityEngine.Debug:CallOverridenDebugHandler(Exception, Object)

 

The entire log is here.

 

I do have some other game installs that will start up KSP, but my frame rate will plummet as soon as I exit Kerbin atmosphere, between 5 and <1.  It spams the logs with the exception above.  My beyond home save does this but has a more extensive mod list.  Log file is here.

 

At this point,  it's beyond my  ability to troubleshoot.  Does anyone have any advice?  Thank you in advance!

 

You need to install Community Resource Project, it is something that was once integrated in KSPIE but taken out

5 hours ago, pp3d said:

to me it looks like the same bug prevents Actinides to be "transferred" between a reactor to a container,  besides just between the reprocessor and the container. same bug may be preventing EnUr to be transferred to the reactor slot from a container. If all are connected, yeah, reprocessing the actinides will refill those EnUr slots everywhere it can. For a game play, one needs to be able to either remove actinides to be transfered to another facility or transfer EnUr from a facility to ship/station etc... otherwise all must colocated on the same vessel for this to work

Yes, it caused by a MM script not doing what is intended.

[shimmy00]

Hi.

First of all I'd like to say I have used this set of mods for a while now and really like the concepts and the parts as they are on paper - a lot of very cool stuff and lots of ways to make some really cool craft. Love all the advanced nuclear engines, reactors, etc. But I've lately been a bit discouraged what look like bugs I've found, even in the newest versions, and thought I'd come here to ask about this. I'm not sure if this particular bug has been noted here before - my apologies if it has, but I don't know of any way to search this very long thread beyond checking every single page, which is quite a tall order at 200 pages. My mod version is 1.26.19 and I'm running on KSP 1.11; and it doesn't seem the changes in the newest versions have fixed this one yet.

Namely, the problems I've encountered regard resource consumption, and wondering if anyone else has noticed this too or if there's a workaround or fix for it - particularly regarding the different forms of energy involved which, in addition to the stock "Electric Charge", include "Megajoules" and "Kilowatt Hour". Apparently, it seems that Megajoule energy is supposed to be such that 1 EC unit = 1 kJ, so 1 MJ = 1000 EC units, but it doesn't seem to go that way in the game and/or it doesn't seem things consistently follow that formula. I was trying to build a craft with a bunch of (7 large i.e. 5-meter) cryo tanks full of Fusion Pellets to try and cruise it to one of the star systems in the Galaxies Unbound pack, but cannot successfully even launch just the tank module separately (this craft is too big to launch in one launch, so it requires multiple launches and orbital assembly), because it rapidly runs out of power and the FusionPellets begin to similarly rapidly evaporate (11 pellets/s) into the void and with them, any hopes of an interstellar cruise.

The thing is, the numbers don't add up: the stage literally only has the cryo tanks, an Orbital Assembly Docking Port for remote control and some RCS stuff for manuevering it to the waiting remainder of the craft, but it drains even a stack of 10 big Megajoule capacitors (I'm thinking like 900 MJ in there) in minutes, yet none of the parts seem to report a power consumption on their little right-click menus that high, e.g. the cryo coolers are reporting only like 6 kW, and with 7 tanks that's 42 kW so my 900 MJ should last 900/42 = 21 ks or almost a full Kerbin day,  but it only lasts in-game minutes at most before it is gone - probably less than 1 ks in metric time units, so we're talking power usage at least some 21x beyond what it seems the components' reports in the windows can account for, unless those OADPs are HORRIBLY greedy when it comes to power usage, but then it'd seem that wouldn't make sense either (and alternatively, in other contexts they seem to be perpetual motion machines, because they never seem to run out of energy; though admittedly that was on an earlier version of the mod than the one I am using now. Given the description, I'd imagine they should sip EC at about the same rates as a Probodobodyne stock probe core [HECS/OKTO/etc.] and then when they run out, they should stop working, leaving the craft dead cold, so there the bug is bad in the other direction.). I've also had this problem with other crafts too where I wanted to stick a Megajoule capacitor to provide some start-up kicker energy for a reactor, but I'd launch it and find the thing dry as a bone by the time it reached orbit(!). In some cases, it seems even ordinary Z-4000 stock battery packs (measured with 4000 Electric Charge units each, so should be equivalent to 4 MJ) work better than the Megajoule stuff! Now I though that maybe that's because the MJ devices are "capacitors", not "batteries", so may have a fast self-discharge, but I tried it also with Lithium battery units with 750 Kilowatt Hour (so again - if these things were consistent/correct, should be an insane 2700 MJ in just one pack, hence just one should suffice to provide more than enough time to make the orbital rendezvous and dock the tanks with no boiloff), and the thing was sucked bone dry in hardly more time. Again, even spamming these units on top didn't help worth much - couldn't even complete one orbit around Kerbin without a stack of 10 of the best going dry.

Any ideas?

ADD: In the response below, @FreeThinker points out that the ultra capacitors should be expected to run dry fast because capacitors self-discharge fast. However, this doesn't explain the trouble with Lithium batteries which also seem to dry up very fast.

Edited March 26, 2021 by shimmy00

[FreeThinker]

First of there is a misconception the Super capacitators are like stock batteries that maintain their power indefinably. They don't because  they lose power over time. There purpose is to provide instant power delivery for devices that need a lot of power for short amount time, like Electric RCS or Electric Turbo  Pumps. Now if you want more long term energy, you should Super Lithium Batteries, They maintain there power for much longer  and can also store a lot more than super capacitators. But they act like low energy power generators, suitable only for low power applications like CryoStorage, communication and life-support.

Also, a question, do you use Kerbalsim? For Kerbalsim, the CryoStorage work when the vessel is offloaded. This is a recent addition. It means if you do not provide sufficient power, it will boiloff resources

Edited March 26, 2021 by FreeThinker

[shimmy00]

Thanks. I did mention this as a possibility toward the end, that I realized the capacitors would likely sensibly run dry soon because of just that (a fast self discharge rate). However I also pointed out that stacks of proper batteries also seem to run out too fast. In particular, the Lithium battery packs you mention deplete their Kilowatt Hour at a rate only modestly less than the stock Z-4000 deplete their ElectricCharge when used on the same craft, as though each unit of kWh were barely a few units of EC, yet for the conversions and names to be consistent, we should have 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ = 3600 EC, means a single 750 kWh Lithium super battery should provide 2 700 000 EC worth, and/or at the very least, should power a cryo cooler drawing 6 kW for 125 h, or (as I had) 7 of them (=42 kW) for 18 h (3 Kerbin days). In other words, it still seems there are inconsistent conversions amongst the energies labelled in Kilowatt Hours, Megajoules, and Electric Charge units.

[shimmy00]

I want to add: I think I figured the culprit. The little window you get when you click the battery was reporting a 5 MW(!) power drain. It turns out that having SAS on was draining at least 5 MW of power. With it off, the window reports 0.04 MW, or 40 kW, as I'd expect from the cryo coolers, and the Lithium batteries deplete at something that feels like the expected rate. However, is it sensible that SAS should consume that much, especially when as I pointed out it doesn't drain stock batteries at a rate that feels like that (It should drain a single Z-4000 in under 1 second, then, and drain a stack of 10 in under 10 seconds, but seems to drain them at more modest rates than that)? And it drains this even if you're not actively turning.

Edited March 26, 2021 by shimmy00

[FreeThinker]

1 minute ago, shimmy00 said:

I want to add: I think I figured the culprit. The little window you get when you click the battery was reporting a 5 MW(!) power drain. It turns out that having SAS on was draining at least 5 MW of power. With it off, the window reports 0.04 MW, or 40 kW, as I'd expect from the cryo coolers, and the Lithium batteries deplete at something that feels like the expected rate. However, is it sensible that SAS should consume that much, especially when as I pointed out it doesn't drain stock batteries at a rate that feels like that (It should drain a single Z-4000 in under 1 second, then, and drain a stack of 10 in under 10 seconds)?

wait the SAS was draining that much? exactly what SAS part are you using. KSPIE has its own SAS unit which more accuraly similates reaction wheels, but their power cost depend on their saturation.

[shimmy00]

I have an Orbital Assembly Docking Port - two, actually, which may be kind of redundant but was out of habit (I need a big 5 m port on the back to fit the final stage which is the Daedalus interstellar fusion engine) - and I presume those are what are providing the SAS. The parts are just the OADPs, the 7 cryo tanks, and chemical RCS thrusters (6 Heavy 5-way RCS Blocks) and a mono tank (and structural elements of course.).

ADD: More experimentation reveals that SAS alone doesn't eat that much. But when RCS is turned on along with it, then we get 5 MW.  But that doesn't make a lot of sense, RCS derives its power from chemical propellants, not massive quantities of electric power (I have no electric RCS thrusters.).

Edited March 26, 2021 by shimmy00

[FreeThinker]

Perhaps you got any active Artificial Intelicence parts When active they require quite a lot of power.

[shimmy00]

So it's the docking ports, then? Then why would it be only when the RCS is engaged? (I also note that active RCS seems to heat up radiators quite a bit, too, for some reason.)

There also seem to be issues involving time warp as well: power spiking during warp, or "persistent" power usage when dropping out that wasn't there when first going in.

[FreeThinker]

2 hours ago, shimmy00 said:

So it's the docking ports, then? Then why would it be only when the RCS is engaged? (I also note that active RCS seems to heat up radiators quite a bit, too, for some reason.)

There also seem to be issues involving time warp as well: power spiking during warp, or "persistent" power usage when dropping out that wasn't there when first going in.

No, the docking port don't have any AI and don't cost any power while their reaction wheels aren't used

[ss8913]

so couple more power-related questions...

1. still not sure why the antimatter warp core doesn't use any antimatter?

2. Was it intentional that the plasma beam core antimatter reactor can't power a charged particle generator anymore?  I used to use that combo a lot, but if there's a reason why it shouldn't work, then I'm ok with it;  if however it's a bug, then I'm reporting it

[FreeThinker]

17 minutes ago, ss8913 said:

2. Was it intentional that the plasma beam core antimatter reactor can't power a charged particle generator anymore?  I used to use that combo a lot, but if there's a reason why it shouldn't work, then I'm ok with it;  if however it's a bug, then I'm reporting it

This functionality have been moved to the Plasma Antimatter Power Generator . The Beam Core is going to be an exclusive Antimmatter Propusion Engine

Edited March 27, 2021 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

51 minutes ago, ss8913 said:

so couple more power-related questions...

1. still not sure why the antimatter warp core doesn't use any antimatter?

The Warp Core Has become a Antimatter Cytalyzed Fusion Reactor, whivh have several modes including a Pure ptoton/anti ptoton mode

[shimmy00]

4 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

No, the docking port don't have any AI and don't cost any power while their reaction wheels aren't used

OK, so why then is it draining a lot of power when RCS is active and thrusting, even though it's chemical-driven RCS, not electric RCS? Again, this still smells like a bug to me.

Also, I finally managed to assemble the craft by killing RCS every time the tank stage was lined up for an orbital maneuver, but now I note some other behavior that looks like bugs: during time warp, the fusion reactor (the "Spherical Tokamak" one, at least) ran down its internal store of Deuterium, but then instead of cutting out, seemed to stop depleting it with just a small positive fraction left and keep going, in effect providing "free" perpetual power. Fiddling with the time warp setting would cause it to drain a little more, then it'd go flat and I'd get more perpetual power. It also did not seem to dig into the larger holding tank of Deuterium that I had on the craft as well, like I would have expected it to.

Edited March 27, 2021 by shimmy00

[yjchun]

 

Module description says Thermal Nozzles need to be attached directly to reactor but it seems attachment location is not relevant. Is this intended? When I put many engines to the vessel they share pebble bed reactor's max thrust equally.

 

[FreeThinker]

14 hours ago, yjchun said:

 

Module description says Thermal Nozzles need to be attached directly to reactor but it seems attachment location is not relevant. Is this intended? When I put many engines to the vessel they share pebble bed reactor's max thrust equally.

 

For nozzles it is intended, but you will lose some power and there is limit to the distance

[yjchun]

Hi FreeThinker.

21 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

For nozzles it is intended, but you will lose some power and there is limit to the distance

But as you can see, upper engine's thrust is exactly same as bottom engine even though it's 5 parts away, or a few meters away. Too convenient to use then.

 

 

 

[FreeThinker]

28 minutes ago, yjchun said:

Hi FreeThinker.

But as you can see, upper engine's thrust is exactly same as bottom engine even though it's 5 parts away, or a few meters away. Too convenient to use then.

Well it tries to balance power consumption when more than 1 engine is connected. Try again with only 1 engine and check the difference

[ss8913]

@FreeThinker thank you for your previous replies... I still have one other issue that I've been fighting with for years, and that's the random explosions at warp speed that seem to be slightly worse in more recent versions?  it's like, I enter warp, and one of three things happens:

1. Nothing, it works fine
2. Parts will glitch into each other and eventually destablize the craft.  If I can drop out of warp, parts are at odd angles to each other, clipped into each other, or separated by as much as several meters, yet still "connected".  F5/F9 fixes this satisfactorily, however.
3. The ship will just randomly drop out of warp and explode, save for the primary command module which, along with some other parts, go spinning off into space at very very high speeds.

Logs show nothing.  I have part G force limits turned off, although I've tried it both ways and it doesn't change anything with respect to either case #2 nor #3.  I have tried increasing warp speed gradually, or not gradually, I have tried RCS on, RCS off, anything I can think of... only thing to do to make a FTL trip is to go for a short distance, drop out of warp, save with F5, continue, ship explodes, F9, try again, until it works.. it's not exactly the most satisfying thing to have the ship constantly wanting to explode, and I have no idea what to do about it.

I've tried it on large vessels, small vessels, all 3 different warp rings... same behavior.  I notice #2 happens slightly less often when it's a single ship as opposed to 2 ships docked together. 

I'm using a lot of mods; the ones that I feel might make a difference here are KJR and WorldStabilizer.. nothing else I have really should affect this, or I wouldn't think so at least?

[FreeThinker]

Hard to tell, we do know that KSP was never designed to fly at high speed. I imagine any code that modifies  that modifies the links between parts could cause parts to start clipping when combined with high floating point errors. I recently tried to make FTL drive more safe by requiring your not starting falster than speed of light and when manual stopping, it will first slow down to speed of light before dropping oy t of warp completely. But if you have power failure, you would still drop out of warp instantly which tend to rip the ship apart

 

Edited March 30, 2021 by FreeThinker

[ss8913]

18 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

Hard to tell, we do know that KSP was nevrr designed to fly at high speed. I imagine any code that modifies  that modifies the links between parts could cause parts to start clipping when combined with high floating point errors. I recently tried to make FTL drive more safe by requiring your not starting falster than speed of light and when manual stopping, it will first slow down to speed of light before dropping oy t of warp completely. But if you have power failure, you would still drop out of warp instantly which tend to rip the ship apart

 

yeah, there was no power failure involved.  And yet, I went to play again last night, and went from Kerbin to Palleo ("Vulture System" pack, pretty nice) and had zero issues going or coming.  The night before, I had to reload the game about 50 times.  Wish it would log something so I could figure out what's different between A and B ><

[shimmy00]

2 hours ago, ss8913 said:

yeah, there was no power failure involved.  And yet, I went to play again last night, and went from Kerbin to Palleo ("Vulture System" pack, pretty nice) and had zero issues going or coming.  The night before, I had to reload the game about 50 times.  Wish it would log something so I could figure out what's different between A and B ><

I'm curious: does the problem appear to depend on speed? I.e. if you go slower, does it become less severe? Or does it happen simply by virtue of using the warp drive at all? As if it's floating point round off error in the game's movement code, it would seem logical to imagine the problem should decrease with reduced speed.

[DiegoKeys]

Hello,

why antimatter reactors became so inefficient in the latest release? I had a ship with a wapr drive who could reach 6400c, now just 50c... What happened to the mechanics of antimatter reactors?

Thanks

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, DiegoKeys said:

Hello,

why antimatter reactors became so inefficient in the latest release? I had a ship with a wapr drive who could reach 6400c, now just 50c... What happened to the mechanics of antimatter reactors?

Thanks

Nothing, either your power is too low or your mass it too high for the amount of warp drive power in your vessel.

[pp3d]

What's the story with. the kerbstein engines? How long will the older versions (using UDD) will be supported (so games don't crash). I see Kerbstein and Kerbstein1 in the folder but only one (the newest one) shows up in the VAB.  If I want the older style to show up in the VAB what do I do? (remove kerbstein1 folder?). Anyway to have both variants show up? (sorry too many questions)

edit: feedback it was appealing having a single resource on the ship from where one can manufacture UDD (LqD). Now for fusion pellets you got to manufacture them elsewhere - with the need for an added supply of He3 - and refuel separately.  

Edited March 30, 2021 by pp3d