[0.25]KSP Interstellar (Magnetic Nozzles, ISRU Revamp) Version 0.13

[ctbram]

What is the advantage of the bigger MW transceiver for Transmitting, Receiving, and Relaying. Is one better then the other for each of the three possible tasks?

[ctbram]

[q] How do I compute the amount of battery I need to start my fusion reactor? It is starting but I just jammed a random number of batteries and blutonium generators and I don't know which does what because you have created so many different units of energy and power and no convenient way to convert between them. The reactor needs 187MW but batteries are rated in E. I know for a fact 8 blutonium generators do not produce the required MW yet my reactor is able to start? HOW? MAGIC?

[ABZB]

[q] How do I compute the amount of battery I need to start my fusion reactor? It is starting but I just jammed a random number of batteries and blutonium generators and I don't know which does what because you have created so many different units of energy and power and no convenient way to convert between them. The reactor needs 187MW but batteries are rated in E. I know for a fact 8 blutonium generators do not produce the required MW yet my reactor is able to start? HOW? MAGIC?

I believe you need Megajoules to start the fusion reactor. I usually attach the smalllest fission reactor (until I unlock antimatter, of course) and either leave it on or stage it away.

[Makeone]

It reads MW as need so EC will do as 1 EC is considered 1 KW.

I can get 2.5m fusion reactor to start using big 2.5m battery from NFPP (aka. Near Future Propulsion Pack). Obviously i have direct conversion generator fitted on the reactor, so it kinda works like perpetual machine...as long as there is fuel.

[phoenix_ca]

http://imgur.com/a/g313g#4

Based on these graphs, somewhere between 7500 and 10000 km, (with an inclination of 0 degrees) yielding somewhat more than .006 mg per second

First of all, thanks. Didn't know those existed.

@DrNuke: I assume those are yours? Might I suggest adding a short explanation about what is better for each axis? Specifically with regard to scientific notation. The negative exponents are actually quite hard to see (at least for me; I missed them the first time), and a naive observer might look at that and think bigger numbers = better, when in the case of the AM flux, the opposite is true. Getting that backward might make someone think the best place to get AM is Pol, when it's actually the worst.

Just some thoughts after having looked at all those and thought "Pol is the best? No, that can't possibly be right. At all. No."

Or maybe even using a legend that is absolute relative to every graph, so that it's even more apparent there is a huge difference between say Jool and Pol, where Jool would be pretty much the only place you'd see that dark red. That would make them a lot easier to read with respect to each other.

Edited April 20, 2014 by phoenix_ca

[Aedile]

I know I am getting really ahead of myself here, but will ask anyway.

1. Is there a way to configure radiation hardness for different parts? How are the initial values generated?

2. Is there a way to adjust radiation around planets (for planetary mods etc), how does this work in general?

[phoenix_ca]

For number 2, if he's going for quasi-realism, it'll be something more than just a setting for each planet. Most of the radiation in space actually comes from the sun and cosmic rays. The magnetic fields of planets can trap these energetic particles in Van Allen belts. These would likely be related somehow to the already-implemented magnetic flux used for AM collection; that's just a guess though.

[Fractal_UK]

For number 2, if he's going for quasi-realism, it'll be something more than just a setting for each planet. Most of the radiation in space actually comes from the sun and cosmic rays. The magnetic fields of planets can trap these energetic particles in Van Allen belts. These would likely be related somehow to the already-implemented magnetic flux used for AM collection; that's just a guess though.

There are three factors that make up the existing dose:

1) A solar radiation term, which includes the particles produced by the sun and external cosmic rays, etc. This term is attenuated away by being inside a magnetic field and beneath an atmosphere.

2) Van Allen belt term, captured belts of protons and electrons that surround the planets with strong magnetic fields. This is based purely on your position over each planet and that planet's magnetic field at that point.

3) Ground-based radiation term that is determined based on the concentration of thorium in the area.

[phoenix_ca]

Sooooo. Pretty realistic model then. Cool beans.

[paelleon]

Hi all, I have a problem with this great mod. I'm trying to set up a relay network of 6 solar satellites orbiting at 3.5MKm from Kerbol and some relais in an inclined 5MKm orbit. I noticed that the relay does not receive any signal from the trasmitters, even if it has clear line of sight to all of them. See images. Does this mod works only in Kerbin orbit?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-PfU9_8mvaAUE85V2gyLTJoeEU/edit?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-PfU9_8mvaAbVlveHphbzFLaEU/edit?usp=sharing

I'm using KSp 0.23.5.

Thank you.

[WaveFunctionP]

What is the advantage of the bigger MW transceiver for Transmitting, Receiving, and Relaying. Is one better then the other for each of the three possible tasks?

The receiver is best used in when not at long interplanetary distances or if not a lot of power is needed at those distances. It is lighter and easier to fit onto a ship in multiple directions for good coverage angles. The array is best used for transmitting and relaying, since size does not matter when doing those things. The deployable array is best used to get larger amounts of power at longer distances.

[WaveFunctionP]

[q] How do I compute the amount of battery I need to start my fusion reactor? It is starting but I just jammed a random number of batteries and blutonium generators and I don't know which does what because you have created so many different units of energy and power and no convenient way to convert between them. The reactor needs 187MW but batteries are rated in E. I know for a fact 8 blutonium generators do not produce the required MW yet my reactor is able to start? HOW? MAGIC?

What matters is EC capacity for starting fusion reactors. You need enough to start the reaction for a couple of frames, then the output should sustain itself. I find that adding a single 2.5m stackable battery is enough, depending on how much capacity you have from other parts, two would be more than enough.

[WaveFunctionP]

Hi all, I have a problem with this great mod. I'm trying to set up a relay network of 6 solar satellites orbiting at 3.5MKm from Kerbol and some relais in an inclined 5MKm orbit. I noticed that the relay does not receive any signal from the trasmitters, even if it has clear line of sight to all of them. See images. Does this mod works only in Kerbin orbit?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-PfU9_8mvaAUE85V2gyLTJoeEU/edit?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-PfU9_8mvaAbVlveHphbzFLaEU/edit?usp=sharing

I'm using KSp 0.23.5.

Thank you.

You might try going back to the space center, sometimes vessels will not receive or relay until your reload the vessel. Particularly after staging.

[pantheis]

The x-axis is the altitude away from Kerbin in the directly away from the ground direction (NADIR) and the y-axis is if you have any inclination (i.e. anything other than an equatorial orbit). So for best collection, you want to be in an equatorial orbit. The best antimatter collection will be in the dark red section of the graph.

I really should redo those as a contour plot.

Doh! I get it now. Thanks! And Thanks to ABZB as well.

[Aeon-Phoenix]

Firstoff i'd like to say that i'm really enjoying this mod! I'm not yet fully through the techtree, but so far it offers some very interesting concepts to toy around with, without coming around as OP.

I did however noticed two things:

1.) The days you use to calculate science off science stations and the IR teleskope do not match the new kerbal days. I was at first surprised that i got such a low science yield. But then realized that this might be the issue. This issue might as well affect the calculation of the reactor consumption.

2.) The 2.5m Plasma engine has a lower TWR relative to the 1.25m Plasma engine. If i link 4 1.25m Plasma engines (4 tonnes total) together i get more TWR than using a single 2.5m Plasmaengine (6 tonnes). The larger engine might have a larger total power requirement, however should, technically still yield more or atleast the same thrust when supplied by the same power as 4 medium plasma engines would require (at least in my book).

Other than the things mentioned above, it is a really smooth ride so far. Keep it up!

[WaveFunctionP]

Firstoff i'd like to say that i'm really enjoying this mod! I'm not yet fully through the techtree, but so far it offers some very interesting concepts to toy around with, without coming around as OP.

I did however noticed two things:

1.) The days you use to calculate science off science stations and the IR teleskope do not match the new kerbal days. I was at first surprised that i got such a low science yield. But then realized that this might be the issue. This issue might as well affect the calculation of the reactor consumption.

2.) The 2.5m Plasma engine has a lower TWR relative to the 1.25m Plasma engine. If i link 4 1.25m Plasma engines (4 tonnes total) together i get more TWR than using a single 2.5m Plasmaengine (6 tonnes). The larger engine might have a larger total power requirement, however should, technically still yield more or atleast the same thrust when supplied by the same power as 4 medium plasma engines would require (at least in my book).

Other than the things mentioned above, it is a really smooth ride so far. Keep it up!

Days are calculated as 86400 seconds in KSPI, and it is used all over the place. They didn't change the seconds for kerbal days, so changing those calculations would mean a lot of if statements. I wouldn't bet that it would be a high priority bug.

This behavior you describe is similar to stock engine behavior. Sometimes you are trading part count for efficiency.

[Hremsfeld]

2.) The 2.5m Plasma engine has a lower TWR relative to the 1.25m Plasma engine. If i link 4 1.25m Plasma engines (4 tonnes total) together i get more TWR than using a single 2.5m Plasmaengine (6 tonnes). The larger engine might have a larger total power requirement, however should, technically still yield more or atleast the same thrust when supplied by the same power as 4 medium plasma engines would require (at least in my book).

The plasma engines use power, yes, but they don't have a lower limit like the Vista does. If you supply them with 1MW, you'll get a pittiance of thrust, but just the same you'll get thrust. Critically, that thrust is the same for all sizes of plasma engine. However, they do have an upper limit for power. The larger the engine, the more power it can use, and thus the more thrust it outputs. If you have multiple engines, it splits that power between them - four 1.25m engines can use a combined total of 100,000MW before reaching max output, but a single 2.5m engine can use 200,000MW.

By way of comparison, a single ton of 0.625m thrusters will, at most, output 0.75 times the thrust of an equivalent mass of 1.25m engines (i.e. a single engine). This ratio holds true for six 1.25m engines compared to a single 2.5m engine. So, there's a point where it's slightly more efficient to have multiple smaller thrusters compared to a single larger thruster, but it depends on how much power you can actually supply. With regards to the 1.25m and 2.5m engines, you should stick with the 1.25m engines and add a new one for every 25GW of power you have available, until you get above 150GW. However, if you're not beaming that power in, the extra mass will have a fairly-negligible effect on your total dV when compared to the mass of the rest of your ship and the adapters to mount the extra engines, so you might as well go with a 2.5m engine if it fits your ship's aesthetics.

[Einarr]

Any tips for building a spaceplane utilizing the thermal turbojets for atmospheric flight, followed by a thermal rocket once the jets are no longer effective? My tech level is pre-fusion and pre-antimatter. I have all the stock techs unlocked, though. My current approach is to use beamed microwave thermal power, rather than having reactors on the ship itself. Hoping to get an idea of how much power I need to make it feasible.

[AndreyATGB]

Any tips for building a spaceplane utilizing the thermal turbojets for atmospheric flight, followed by a thermal rocket once the jets are no longer effective? My tech level is pre-fusion and pre-antimatter. I have all the stock techs unlocked, though. My current approach is to use beamed microwave thermal power, rather than having reactors on the ship itself. Hoping to get an idea of how much power I need to make it feasible.

This is how I did it. It flies pretty quick and doesn't require refuelling for a very long time. That is an upgraded fission reactor though, not sure if you have those.

EDIT: Seems you're asking for an SSTO really, then sorry I didn't build one with KSPI stuff.

Edited April 20, 2014 by AndreyATGB

[Einarr]

Yeah, I'm going for a reusable SSTO. Also, upgraded fission reactors come with the first Fusion tech...which I do not have yet.

[Yuval ofer]

---------------------------------------------

As seen in the screenshots- i clearly have reactors and generators on the same craft. for some reason it sais this messege when i try to *Activate Generator*: "Generator Shutdown: No reactor avalable!". im completly lost, ive tried quicksaving and loading- didnt help.

HELP!

Edited April 20, 2014 by Yuval ofer

[Rabada]

http://i.imgur.com/EoC40mX.png

http://i.imgur.com/8O5EDJ6.png

---------------------------------------------

As seen in the screenshots- i clearly have reactors and generators on the same craft. for some reason it sais this messege when i try to *Activate Generator*: "Generator Shutdown: No reactor avalable!". im completly lost, ive tried quicksaving and loading- didnt help.

HELP!

Reactors need to be directly attached to the generators, so you should alternate reactor/generatpr/reactor/generator and so on

[Yuval ofer]

really?? i cant dock them together??

well, thats a lot of time wasted... :\

[Rabada]

really?? i cant dock them together??

A electrical generator must directly contact the reactor in order for it to receive thermal power from the reactor to convert thermal power into megajoules. You can have docking ports or whatever else opposite the electrical generator. Sorry my first reply was poorly worded. I launch one reactor up at a time and dock them together.

Edit: FYI this also applies to thermal nozzles, you must have your thermal nozzle attached either directly to a reactor or a thermal receiver for them to work.

Edited April 20, 2014 by Rabada

[Yuval ofer]

let me make sure i understand- i need to lunch them in pairs of Generator+Reactor and dock these pairs together?