[1.5 - 1.10] Kerbalism 3.11

[Atlessa]

3 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

Might be that CKAN detects a mod conflict and only shows you a version that it thinks is OK.

I don't think that's it.
This was taken from a fresh KSP install:

Seems to me that CKAN doesn't know anything newer than 1.1 exists for this config.  Should I report this to the CKAN crew or is this the right place to get it looked at?

 

Edit: forgot to mention, manually downloading and inserting the newest version from github fixed my initial issue. I would still like to see CKAN's index fixed though.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Atlessa

[Gotmachine]

@Atlessa Try toggling the compatible KSP versions (under the settings menu of CKAN).
Not sure why it happens but I've seen that issue before and that usually fixes it.

[Guest]

On 1/29/2020 at 5:10 PM, Sir Mortimer said:

It's a "feature" of Kerbalism. Actually it comes from a limitation, we cannot do heat simulations for unloaded vessels (think a drill mining ore in the background), so we don't do it at all. 

I have an idea that can, perhaps, help with that: implement your own heat system.  Let's face it, stock heat system sucks, anyway. It's fine for reentry heat and engines, and crap for just about everything that you'd want to simulate in the background.

Specifically, I suggest to make it a steady state system. If you played Children of a Dead Earth, it'd be somewhat similar. You have X radiator capacity, and you have Y thermal power being generated. When Y>X, components are shut down to prevent overheating. Radiator capacity would vary with radiator insolation (in a manner similar to how solar panels work), thermal power would vary based on power produced, such as equipment operating, solar panels being in the sun, Kerbals being inside, reactors running, craft being in or out of the shadow... Background simulation overhead should be manageable.

Radiators would have three modes of operation (set in VAB): Hot, cold and cryo, with a possible fourth "variable" mode, for stock heat system. I'll leave the exact temperatures to you, but the general idea is that hot is for reactors and drills, cold for crew and solar panels, and cryo for cryogenic tanks and some science. The idea is, the loop keeps temperature exactly nominal. Variable would be for things that, for some reason, vary heavily in temperature and thus are better served by stock heat system, such as heat-producing engines.

[Gotmachine]

@Dragon01 A thermal control system is one of the things I wish to implement since quite some time.
See https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/383

One of the reasons it hasn't been done yet is that there are some technical difficulties with doing what you describe : having radiator output being based on the external conditions (sunlight, temperature...).
This is very problematic to handle at extreme timewarp speeds, like the the issues we have with solar panels output evaluation, but even more complex.

So if that comes, the implementation will be quite simple :
- Radiators produce "coolant" by consuming a bit of EC independently of the external conditions.
- Some processes have a "coolant" input and won't run if that input isn't satisfied.

Having a more complex system isn't desirable IMO.
It would just add more complexity and micromanagement, we have enough of that as it is.

This simple system have the following advantages : 
- It achieve the main goal : make radiators relevant
- It is reliable technically
- It is easy to make it auto-configured for all parts from mods and stock without having to create and maintain specific configs
- It is easy and clear to plan for from a player POV : in the editor : check coolant/s needed -> add radiators in consequence
- It still could be extended to have radiator coolant output vary with external conditions if we someday implement the technical stuff needed for that to work.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Gotmachine

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:

Having a more complex system isn't desirable IMO.
It would just add more complexity and micromanagement, we have enough of that as it is.

Not true. It would add part count (because you might need multiple radiator types), but no micromanagement would be necessary beyond that. What you propose is too simple, the goal is not "make people add some radiators", but to add a meaningful gameplay mechanic. Autoconfiguration in my example is easy, too. You just need the radiator area and efficiency, both already present in the stock module. 

Radiators, in this context are exactly the same than solar panels. They would be subject to the same issues, but the same solutions and workarounds would apply. As for insolation, it'd be enough to check whether a ship is in shadow or in sunlight (already done) and use distance from the sun. Exposed area would be hard to calculate, but could probably be approximated somehow.

Also, "Kerbalism" is named that for a reason. One major consideration with radiators is that the hotter they run, the smaller they can be. What do you set the temperature to, in your idea? You'll either end up having to use gigantic radiators for reactors (if set cold) or with laughable requirements for crew modules and cryogenics (if set hot). Radiator area scales to the fourth power of temperature. There is no usable compromise.

[Atlessa]

I've stumbled across another bug:

The HDD Capacity Upgrade doesn't increase file capacity, but sample capacity. I assume it's a copypaste error, as that is a duplicate of an upgrade from another node.

... and I could REALLY use a capacity upgrade. =D

 

  

2 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

@Atlessa Try toggling the compatible KSP versions (under the settings menu of CKAN).
Not sure why it happens but I've seen that issue before and that usually fixes it.

Tried that, didn't work. CKAN still tells me 1.1 is the latest version, just like in the screenshot I posted before.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Atlessa

[Gotmachine]

31 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

exactly the same than solar panels [...] the same solutions and workarounds would apply

And that's exactly the problem. Our current solutions and workarounds aren't good enough, solar panels handling is very far from reliable at high timewarp speeds.
The real solution is quite complex to implement, may come at some point but not on the table currently.

I'm basing what I'm saying on an previous implementation that wasn't merged into Kerbalism because it proved that :
- Having a reliable environment dependent thermal evaluation isn't possible without the above mentioned solution.
- The gameplay consequences of that unreliability are much more visible and problematic than for solar panels
- It is very hard to plan for the radiator capacity needed since the needs and outputs will vary widely depending on where your vessel is

There was a lot of discussion, work and playtesting that was done at the time, and the conclusion was that this realistic implementation (which wasn't far from what you propose) wasn't desirable.
See https://github.com/ShotgunNinja/Kerbalism/pull/105 and https://github.com/ShotgunNinja/Kerbalism/issues/83#issuecomment-293413231

And yup that previous implementation actually had a tweakable coolant temperature for better efficiency at the cost of higher EC cost (compressors).
This is something that could still be part of a different implementation.
As well as scaling output with the sun distance, and radiator orientation.
All other environmental conditions (sunlight/shadow, albedo flux and body flux) are too unreliable to be used.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Gotmachine

[Sir Mortimer]

3 hours ago, Atlessa said:

I would still like to see CKAN's index fixed though.

The funny thing is: I do see the latest versions, as do other users I asked to take a look. Do you have any funny KSP version restrictions going on? Are you using KSP 1.8?

[Bersagliere81]

I have a suggestion for science transmission. I feel like the science window (with message and option to save or transmit it) gave a greater sense of achivement. Now it's just about a counter going to zero.

Why not having the classic science window with both options to save or transmit, and then starting the new kerbalism mechanic?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

And that's exactly the problem. Our current solutions and workarounds aren't good enough, solar panels handling is very far from reliable at high timewarp speeds.
The real solution is quite complex to implement, may come at some point but not on the table currently.

In that case, how about implementing a partial solution? That is, ignoring solar heating entirely, and focusing on getting internal heating right. In fact, solar heat is an important, but not primary concern in most designs, except with solar panels, for which you can tie heating to power directly. At Earth, insolation is about 1.3kW/m^2, and in practice, a lot of that would get reflected (ever wondered why thermal blankets tend to be white or gold?). For internal heat, Apollo got 2.4kW from gyros alone (not reaction wheels, these gyros were just for determining orientation). Especially in cases like nuclear reactors, drills and the like, solar heat is a secondary concern. Even radiators tend to have a very reflective surface, so insolation effects are reduced. 

For missions closer to the Sun, or anything involving the cryo loop, this would be more of a problem, but perhaps ignoring this is forgivable until a better solution can be found. Of course, it's not a perfect solution, and it does leave out a lot of things which definitely should be simulated at some point, but a good partial solution would be capable of being expanded later on.

[Sir Mortimer]

15 minutes ago, Bersagliere81 said:

Why not having the classic science window with both options to save or transmit, and then starting the new kerbalism mechanic?

That window would pop open every single time you happen to enter a new situation, or a new biome while an experiment is turned on. Sure you want that?

 

[mcwaffles2003]

There any literature on how running a lab works in 3.0+ ?

Just found out that all my previously collected samples (early ones like mun and minmus) are making no science when they're researched in a lab

[Gotmachine]

2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

That is, ignoring solar heating entirely, and focusing on getting internal heating right.

Quoting myself :

5 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

So if that comes, the implementation will be quite simple :
- Radiators produce "coolant" by consuming a bit of EC, at a fixed rate, independently of the external conditions.
- Some processes have a "coolant" input and won't run if that input isn't satisfied.

And later :

4 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

And yup that previous implementation actually had a tweakable coolant temperature for better efficiency at the cost of higher EC cost (compressors).
This is something that could still be part of a different implementation.
As well as scaling output with the sun distance, and radiator orientation.

There are indeed several candidates for processes already present in Kerbalism that could be changed to require a coolant input : exothermic chemical converters, nuclear reactors, drills, some experiments...
Eventually liquid hydrogen tanks from mods.
As I said, it's something I consider quite high priority, but there are other even more pressing matters, like rewriting the habitat / pressure system.

[Beetlecat]

7 hours ago, Bersagliere81 said:

I have a suggestion for science transmission. I feel like the science window (with message and option to save or transmit it) gave a greater sense of achivement. Now it's just about a counter going to zero.

Why not having the classic science window with both options to save or transmit, and then starting the new kerbalism mechanic?

 

6 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

That window would pop open every single time you happen to enter a new situation, or a new biome while an experiment is turned on. Sure you want that?

 

Also -- the "flavor" message *does* appear on-screen, briefly upon full transmission to the KSC --  I've taken to using One Window so that I see all the random messages in one place, and can page back through them.

[Drew Kerman]

10 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

This is very problematic to handle at extreme timewarp speeds

define extreme. I think maxing out timewarp at like 1000 would be a suitable trade-off for heat production, along with anything else that gets messed up due to high warp. Forget having your cake and eating it too. Features over convenience, I say!!

[DasSkelett]

13 hours ago, Atlessa said:

I don't think that's it.
This was taken from a fresh KSP install:

Seems to me that CKAN doesn't know anything newer than 1.1 exists for this config.  Should I report this to the CKAN crew or is this the right place to get it looked at?

Edit: forgot to mention, manually downloading and inserting the newest version from github fixed my initial issue. I would still like to see CKAN's index fixed though.

Can you try to refresh the modlist (click the big "Refresh" button), and check again? Maybe your registry just hasn't been updated in quite a while.

[warhammercasey]

So how do you protect kerbals from radiation? Every kerbal I've sent to space has died within a couple minutes even if they havent even left LKO and the shielding on the pod is maxed out.

[Sir Mortimer]

5 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

define extreme. I think maxing out timewarp at like 1000 would be a suitable trade-off for heat production, along with anything else that gets messed up due to high warp. Forget having your cake and eating it too. Features over convenience, I say!!

Half baked features that have not been thought through to the end have a nasty tendency to randomly kill kerbals without obvious reason - especially while time warping. Nobody wants that, especially not the kerbals.

[Drew Kerman]

5 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

Half baked features that have not been thought through to the end have a nasty tendency to randomly kill kerbals without obvious reason - especially while time warping. Nobody wants that, especially not the kerbals.

not sure what you're referring to by "half baked features", I'm not trying to advocate for anything in particular but I'm just saying if extreme time warp is an issue for things put a cap on it so it stops messing with otherwise interesting and deep gameplay. I'm not sure at what point "high warp" messes with things tho which is why I asked

[Bersagliere81]

12 hours ago, Beetlecat said:

 

Also -- the "flavor" message *does* appear on-screen, briefly upon full transmission to the KSC --  I've taken to using One Window so that I see all the random messages in one place, and can page back through them.

I have one window but I can't make it appear on that. How do you do that?

Btw yeah I am aware of that message, but still it doesn't feel like what I fight for 

[mcwaffles2003]

6 hours ago, warhammercasey said:

So how do you protect kerbals from radiation? Every kerbal I've sent to space has died within a couple minutes even if they havent even left LKO and the shielding on the pod is maxed out.

Are you sure they died from radiation and not lack of oxygen?

[Beetlecat]

2 hours ago, Bersagliere81 said:

I have one window but I can't make it appear on that. How do you do that?

Btw yeah I am aware of that message, but still it doesn't feel like what I fight for 

Oh, shoot. I haven't realized it doesn't get captured by one window. I also pine to see these messages.

[warhammercasey]

3 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Are you sure they died from radiation and not lack of oxygen?

TACLS says I have about 52 days worth of all life support (oxygen, water, food, wastewater, waste, and co2). Kerbalism does say something different though, everything will last over a year according to kerbalism but either of these numbers is long enough. Plus whenever a kerbal would die I would get the message "#KERBALISM_radiation_fatal"

[mcwaffles2003]

12 minutes ago, warhammercasey said:

TACLS says I have about 52 days worth of all life support (oxygen, water, food, wastewater, waste, and co2). Kerbalism does say something different though, everything will last over a year according to kerbalism but either of these numbers is long enough. Plus whenever a kerbal would die I would get the message "#KERBALISM_radiation_fatal"

TACLS and kerbalism are not compatible, please see:

https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/Home-~-Mod-Support

 

Out of curiosity, why did you want 2 different life support mods anyway?

[warhammercasey]

Just now, mcwaffles2003 said:

TACLS and kerbalism are not compatible, please see:

https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/Home-~-Mod-Support

 

Out of curiosity, why did you want 2 different life support mods anyway?

Oh ok thanks. I'd assumed they would work well together since when I played RO it automatically installed both TACLS and kerbalism and they worked together well since it seemed like their life support values were the same but kerbalism does more and TACLS has stuff like parts designed to hold life support.