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

[Fractal_UK]

I'm using the interstellar tech tree, not seen any nodes that enable upgrades.

If you look at the first page and the tech tree, you'll see there are some items in brackets, that is when you will find those upgraded items will be automatically available from launch in the VAB.

What are the plans for tweakables in this mod under 0.23? I personally would like to see the option to pick fuels and upgrade state before building something.

My major big hope for tweakables is the option to switch between Uranium and Thorium reactors in the VAB and similar things. I've talked about wanting to make He-3 options for the upgraded fusion reactors in the past so that's another where it'd be nice to be able to switch between options.

There are also different types of generator that it might be nice to simulate - the existing kinds for generating power from heat but also direct conversion technologies for power generation methods that produce lots of charged particles.

But, we'll see what can be done when 0.23 comes out, whenever that is.

[NotCoach]

But, we'll see what can be done when 0.23 comes out, whenever that is.

Probably within the next week or two based on what they've posted in The Daily Kerbal.

[BelgarionNL]

sorry to be such a pain fractal! but I got another question, when I use the turbojet engine I get around 40 KN of force but then when I switch to liquid I get 2.5 KN and with LFO I get around 6!

where do I change those number to be a bit more usefull.

[forsaken1111]

sorry to be such a pain fractal! but I got another question, when I use the turbojet engine I get around 40 KN of force but then when I switch to liquid I get 2.5 KN and with LFO I get around 6!

where do I change those number to be a bit more usefull.

Those numbers are plenty useful...

[Fractal_UK]

sorry to be such a pain fractal! but I got another question, when I use the turbojet engine I get around 40 KN of force but then when I switch to liquid I get 2.5 KN and with LFO I get around 6!

where do I change those number to be a bit more usefull.

You can't really, the thermal turbojet is coded in such a way that you can't really trick it into giving you more energy than your reactor produces. Your only option is messing with the propellants file to change the isp ratio, which will give you more thrust but it will kill your fuel efficiency in the process.

The 1.25m nuclear reactor isn't really designed for building spaceplanes (though it might be just about possible if you really go for it), it's there for making long duration aircraft that can operate in any atmosphere. If you want a very competent orbit capable spaceplane, you'll probably want to wait for fusion tech or better.

[forsaken1111]

I built a twin-engine nuclear spaceplane which works alright. Its not the best or fastest but it will eventually get to orbit. I'm using FAR though and the wings are flipping HUGE so the low thrust and large lifting surface work out.

[Dante80]

Fractal I'm getting a weird bug in the last version. While trying to load the game, the bar freezes on spaces/sci/model and the game never completes loading. I am running the memory reduction mod btw, but it seemed to work perfectly until today. Any ideas? I keep getting on my console the following: [exception] nullreference exception: Object reference not set in an instance of an Object.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Dante80

[Fractal_UK]

Fractal I'm getting a weird bug in the last version. While trying to load the game, the bar freezes on spaces/sci/model and the game never completes loading. I am running the memory reduction mod btw, but it seemed to work perfectly until today. Any ideas? I keep getting on my console the following: [exception] nullreference exception: Object reference not set in an instance of an Object.

A few people have had problems at that point in the loading sequence, as far as I know it has always been a sign of running short on memory. You can also always try deleting the WarpPlugin folder and redownload/install and see if that helps you.

[Dante80]

Thanks for the tip, will try shuffling my gamedata around a little. C:

[AeroEngy]

You can't really, the thermal turbojet is coded in such a way that you can't really trick it into giving you more energy than your reactor produces. Your only option is messing with the propellants file to change the isp ratio, which will give you more thrust but it will kill your fuel efficiency in the process.

The 1.25m nuclear reactor isn't really designed for building spaceplanes (though it might be just about possible if you really go for it), it's there for making long duration aircraft that can operate in any atmosphere. If you want a very competent orbit capable spaceplane, you'll probably want to wait for fusion tech or better.

I had pretty much the same question. Basically I made a 2.5m turbo jet by copying the 1.25m part, changing rescale to 2. I increased the mass by 4x and what I think is the atmosphere intake required from 1 to 4 (sorry not at my PC now to check names). My question was how to appropriately scale the output power ... or will it do it that on its own once connected to a 2.5m reactor. Also is the any other properties I should scale regarding heat etc. To be consistent.

FYI I wanted the 2.5m turbojet for a big B9 plane I was working on.

[Taris]

I've just made a small fix to the fusion reactors. Apparently, they need some kickstarter power supply. So.... how about installing a very small power pack inside the fusion reactor(with the dark art of part.cfg edit)? Oh, well 200 MJ doesn't seem THAT small but it does the job. I think we can find minimized value for such kickstarter part.

A bit strange thing is.. even though I installed the pre-charged MJ, the reactor does not start right away. In fact, it starts from 20 MJ drained at the launch pad and I had to start the reactor manually.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Taris

[forsaken1111]

I've just made a small fix to the fusion reactors. Apparently, they need some kickstarter power supply. So.... how about installing a very small power pack inside the fusion reactor(with the dark art of part.cfg edit)? Oh, well 200 MJ doesn't seem THAT small but it does the job. I think we can find minimized value for such kickstarter part.

A bit strange thing is.. even though I installed the pre-charged MJ, the reactor does not start right away. In fact, it starts from 20 MJ drained at the launch pad and I had to start the reactor manually.

As other people have commented, its easy enough to include a small nuclear reactor/generator on the launch clamp and start the fusion reactor from that, then leave the small nuke behind.

[Donziboy2]

As other people have commented, its easy enough to include a small nuclear reactor/generator on the launch clamp and start the fusion reactor from that, then leave the small nuke behind.

You can also use a transmitter/receiver, I try to include one on all my craft, just in case I loose reactor power.

[Taris]

As other people have commented, its easy enough to include a small nuclear reactor/generator on the launch clamp and start the fusion reactor from that, then leave the small nuke behind.

Problem is, that is NOT POSSIBLE with Turbo Jets!! Yeah, I'm talking about space planes. Also, adding such unnecessary parts move centre of mass confuses design.

Moreover, why do you need to tax PC with such unnecessary parts?

Edited December 5, 2013 by Taris

[Lightwarrior]

...

Is there a cutoff to the amount of reactors you can put on a gen does anyone know? I've tried the following - all reactors can provide their MW/th to the generator (tested), but it can only seem to make ~913 MW/e, for the 3.75m variant even. I reckon it should be about 1.5GW/e? I thought that thing could do up to 4.5GW/e with a nuke?

1 fusion

8 fusion

15 fusion

I can detach the fission reactor, and I lose about 75MW/th as expected, but my reported Maximum on the generator stays the same.

...

As i said generator gets "maximum power" value based on reactor it is attached to. And attaching additional reactors will not change this, you will only get more thermal power (which cannot be used by generator above those maximum power). So yes, it is usually better to use one generator per reactor, if you want to use all reactors simultaneously. But if you want, for example, backup power to restart fusion reactors in flight you can place single 0.625 fission reactor anywhere on tha ship, and you do not need to add generator to it, those attached to fusion reactors will work.

Another thing is... you can attach 1.25 generator to 1.25 AM reactor and it will get insane maximum power. And then you can use as much other reactors as you want until you exceed those maximum power. You dont even need AM. But IMO it is almost cheating...

Edited December 5, 2013 by Lightwarrior

[VorpalHerring]

Problem is, that is NOT POSSIBLE with Turbo Jets!!

clamp a pair of them to the wings and drop them after you start rolling?

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

Problem is, that is NOT POSSIBLE with Turbo Jets!!

Oh? And why not?

[forsaken1111]

Problem is, that is NOT POSSIBLE with Turbo Jets!! Yeah, I'm talking about space planes. Also, adding such unnecessary parts move centre of mass confuses design.

Moreover, why do you need to tax PC with such unnecessary parts?

Sure it's possible. Just put them on a decoupler. And if TWO EXTRA PARTS are going to tax your PC then you're already running way too close to the line. Those two extra parts will be left behind when you fly off, you know.

[Fractal_UK]

You only need one extra part to start a fusion reactor - a microwave power receiver. It's well worth building some kind of rover at KSC with a nuclear reactor/generator and microwave transmitter, then every fusion plane has a receiver, switch the receiver on, start the reactor, turn the receiver off, job done. Then, if you ever need to turn the reactor off all you need to do to restart the it later is turn the receiver back on, point it at a transmitter and wait for the trickle charge.

[VorpalHerring]

Sure it's possible. Just put them on a decoupler. And if TWO EXTRA PARTS are going to tax your PC then you're already running way too close to the line. Those two extra parts will be left behind when you fly off, you know.

Center of mass isn't really a problem as long as it doesn't move in behind the center of lift, and if it worries you that much just attach them in line with the center of mass.

[forsaken1111]

Center of mass isn't really a problem as long as it doesn't move in behind the center of lift, and if it worries you that much just attach them in line with the center of mass.

I... didn't mention the center of mass.

[VorpalHerring]

I... didn't mention the center of mass.

Sorry, I was addressing the comment Taris made about center of mass.

[pantheis]

I tried to build a fission powered airplane using the thermal turbojet and could never get it producing enough thrust to get enough speed on the runway to take off. I tried all three sizes of nuclear reactors, multiple reactors with multiple turbojets, large and small wing sizes, etc. I got this idea after seeing Scott Manley do it in his KSPI youtube series, but wasn't able to come even close to duplicating the plane with science.

Am I doing something wrong? Is it because he was using FAR and I'm not?

[forsaken1111]

I tried to build a fission powered airplane using the thermal turbojet and could never get it producing enough thrust to get enough speed on the runway to take off. I tried all three sizes of nuclear reactors, multiple reactors with multiple turbojets, large and small wing sizes, etc. I got this idea after seeing Scott Manley do it in his KSPI youtube series, but wasn't able to come even close to duplicating the plane with science.

Am I doing something wrong? Is it because he was using FAR and I'm not?

Eh? How much thrust were you getting? And how heavy is the plane?

[Fractal_UK]

I tried to build a fission powered airplane using the thermal turbojet and could never get it producing enough thrust to get enough speed on the runway to take off. I tried all three sizes of nuclear reactors, multiple reactors with multiple turbojets, large and small wing sizes, etc. I got this idea after seeing Scott Manley do it in his KSPI youtube series, but wasn't able to come even close to duplicating the plane with science.

Am I doing something wrong? Is it because he was using FAR and I'm not?

You can do it without FAR, though FAR will help. I do quite a bit of my testing without FAR installed and I've built a lot of fission planes - they key is to build small, you don't have a lot of thrust to play with so don't carry any extras, you want a cockpit, wings, reactor, radiator and engines (you can afford to carry a generator too but you'll have a faster plane without). You can carry a few science instruments but don't try to carry any more payload than this.