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

[charno]

I have problems installing / using the interstellar mod on linux.

What I did:

- Download a fresh copy of KSP (Non-steam-version)

- Update KSP

- Download a fresh copy of Interstellar (0.9.2)

- Install Interstellar (by copying the Game)

- Start KSP (testet with KSP.x86 and KSP.x86_64)

What happens:

- The loading screen shows as usual, but the progress bar freezes at FNMethaneTank3-1. The intro words ("Adding K to every word") keep changing. This behaviour is reproductable.

- After a test start with .x86, I wasn't anymore able to use the .x86_64 version, but I did not investigate further. I'm not sure this has to do with Interstellar or if this is a KSP problem.

- The log doesn't show anything interesting, here are the last few lines:

>>> tail KSP.log

[LOG 20:25:02.063] Added sound_rocket_hard to FXGroup running

[LOG 20:25:02.063] Added sound_explosion_low to FXGroup flameout

[LOG 20:25:02.078] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'WarpPlugin/Parts/Engines/ThermalRocketNozzle/part3/bigThermalRocketNozzle'

[LOG 20:25:02.082] Added sound_rocket_hard to FXGroup running

[LOG 20:25:02.082] Added sound_explosion_low to FXGroup flameout

[LOG 20:25:02.097] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'WarpPlugin/Parts/Engines/ThermalTurbojet/part1/ThermalTurbojet'

[LOG 20:25:02.100] Added sound_jet_low to FXGroup running

[LOG 20:25:02.100] Added sound_jet_deep to FXGroup power

[LOG 20:25:02.100] Added sound_explosion_low to FXGroup flameout

[LOG 20:25:02.113] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'WarpPlugin/Parts/Engines/ThermalTurbojet/part2/ThermalTurbojet2'

Do you have an idea where the problem could be? What more information can I provide to help resolving this problem? Did I do anything wrong?

I'm not afraid to dig deeper or do some experiments, but time could be a limiting factor.

[Boamere]

I have problems installing / using the interstellar mod on linux.

What I did:

- Download a fresh copy of KSP (Non-steam-version)

- Update KSP

- Download a fresh copy of Interstellar (0.9.2)

- Install Interstellar (by copying the Game)

- Start KSP (testet with KSP.x86 and KSP.x86_64)

What happens:

- The loading screen shows as usual, but the progress bar freezes at FNMethaneTank3-1. The intro words ("Adding K to every word") keep changing. This behaviour is reproductable.

- After a test start with .x86, I wasn't anymore able to use the .x86_64 version, but I did not investigate further. I'm not sure this has to do with Interstellar or if this is a KSP problem.

- The log doesn't show anything interesting, here are the last few lines:

Do you have an idea where the problem could be? What more information can I provide to help resolving this problem? Did I do anything wrong?

I'm not afraid to dig deeper or do some experiments, but time could be a limiting factor.

I've had this happen on windows, try updating some mods, also wait a little and see if it changes.

One last thing after you've updated plugins etc. delete Fnmethane tank3-1 and see if the problem continues

I've never used linux, so I don't know much about it, but good luck anyway

(also see if you could add boulder.co texture compressor (it might help)

One other thing: have you got the 3 folders that are in KSPI in the gamedata folder? (warp plugin JSI and something else)

Edit: What is ksp x86? x86 bit? do you have a x64 version? Or is this a linux thing?

Edited January 29, 2014 by Boamere

[Lightwarrior]

merendel ,

Yes, i considered using lithium, but low thrust stopped me from doing so. Also will not those receivers ot top of lithium tanks collide with each other? And because lander can is a bit higher with such design the ladder will be needed on eve.

When i will finaly unlock upgraded reactors i will probably try it again, but anyway argon seems like best fuel for landers, where high dV is not required.

Another problem with lithium, BTW, is that if i want some supply of it on the "mothership" i will need to stack lots of hexcans, it will be inconvinient and not very good looking.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Lightwarrior

[Donziboy2]

Ok, the Kraken is a damn pig, it just ate my 160t Science/Transmitter Sat whole... Soon as I undocked and flew the tug away the damn thing vanished....

Thank god for hyperedit, to bad I lost the crew.

[Jivaii]

I'm working on getting all the KSPI fuels integrated and producing a couple of CFG files for distribution.

[Lightwarrior]

There is another problem with MFS - i just do not want to use it. I like when tanks look different an i can tell what fuel is used just looking at ship. Storing all fuels in the same tanks is just too boring and simple.

Other problem is bad compatibility after stock patches.

[NeoAcario]

So I was trying to build a Nuke Refueling truck... that'd I'd leave idle, breeding tritium, in the KSP compound.

oK.. so what's the deal? What's the trick to getting not-selected rovers to breed tritium? I can run 2/3 of the Nuke Fuel out of a 3.75m reactor and not 0.001 tritium will breed. Is this a bug? Am I doing something wrong?

Huh... same problem with a probe I just launched into deep space...

So I'm guessing it's safe to say non-focused Tritium breeding doesn't work? Guess I found my new vehicle to time accelerate on... my Nuclear Fuels truck.

Odd... My AMF(arm) didn't collect any antimatter during those 150ish days either. Did I break interstellar? Something to do with 100,000x time acceleration? I thought the rate didn't matter because the math was done when loading the vehicle. Checking the time it was last loaded vs what it was doing.

I need a few things explained to me, please.

~Steve

EDIT: Selected AMF and ran 150 days at 100,000x time accel. Works just fine... just as my fuel truck did. Seems KSPI still has a few kinks with non-selected functions working. Or are they no longer supposed to?

Edited January 30, 2014 by NeoAcario

[Jivaii]

There is another problem with MFS - i just do not want to use it. I like when tanks look different an i can tell what fuel is used just looking at ship. Storing all fuels in the same tanks is just too boring and simple.

Other problem is bad compatibility after stock patches.

My thing is that I want some larger tanks for KSPI hence MMFT. It also is useful when I want a craft to carry a specific fuel load

[Katamari]

Edit: Solved the problem: user error and just forgot to reload after docking. So now it is "Look at the pictures of my 48 ton equivalent of a 62.5cm Nuclear Reactor"

Sorry to add to the long list of people-who-have-bugs-or-don't-know-how-to-use-the-mod (not sure which I am...), but I came across something that certainly doesn't break it but does appear to be a bug (or user error). In the Tech-Tree I am using, I decided to try and build a space program with the original intent to power some of the ion-jets using solar power with massive solar satellites (I did not realize that one Gigantor XL array is 1/50th of 1/770th of one 3.5m unupgraded reactor and generator... I will probably be rethinking this...) and arrays.

Here is the bug: I got my first solar core into space (No Hyperedit, but also no Ferram, because this certainly wouldn't fly). It was generating the ~500kW as expected.

However, when I docked an outrigger to double the solar panels, it does not produce/transmit any additional kW. Note that the outrigger is attached to the Main Core via a standard docking port. I tested on the ground with it all as one part (not two original ships docked together) and it worked fine.

First pic: The satellite with only the core solar panels deployed and the amount of power.

Second pic: When I deploy the additional solar panels on the outrigger, they produce power/heat normally, but do not increase the kW transmitted.

I realize that solar arrays are weird in that they do not produce raw kW, but can transmit it using an array, so there is probably plenty of possible reasons for this bug, and since solar is so implausible (compared to nuclear), it is probably not worth fixing, but I was just wondering if anyone could see that this is a problem on my part.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Katamari
Solved the Problem

[RadHazard]

Sorry to add to the long list of people-who-have-bugs-or-don't-know-how-to-use-the-mod (not sure which I am...), but I came across something that certainly doesn't break it but does appear to be a bug (or user error). In the Tech-Tree I am using, I decided to try and build a space program with the original intent to power some of the ion-jets using solar power with massive solar satellites (I did not realize that one Gigantor XL array is 1/50th of 1/770th of one 3.5m unupgraded reactor and generator... I will probably be rethinking this...) and arrays.

Here is the bug: I got my first solar core into space (No Hyperedit, but also no Ferram, because this certainly wouldn't fly). It was generating the ~500kW as expected.

However, when I docked an outrigger to double the solar panels, it does not produce/transmit any additional kW. Note that the outrigger is attached to the Main Core via a standard docking port. I tested on the ground with it all as one part (not two original ships docked together) and it worked fine.

First pic: The satellite with only the core solar panels deployed and the amount of power.

-snip-

Second pic: When I deploy the additional solar panels on the outrigger, they produce power/heat normally, but do not increase the kW transmitted.

-snip-

I realize that solar arrays are weird in that they do not produce raw kW, but can transmit it using an array, so there is probably plenty of possible reasons for this bug, and since solar is so implausible (compared to nuclear), it is probably not worth fixing, but I was just wondering if anyone could see that this is a problem on my part.

Have you tried leaving to the space center and then going back to the vessel? In some cases, I think the vessel doesn't properly update when you dock something to it.

Also of note: If you didn't already know, you can place solar satellites closer to the sun benefit from the inverse square law. Halving the orbital radius in comparison to the sun gives you 4x the power production. Of course, setting that up requires lots of dV, so I would recommend starting out by using a fission power plant and an array of relays to start out.

[Lightwarrior]

Katamari,

Try to turn transmitter on/off. If it does not help try to disable transmitter, quicksave/quickload, and enable it again.

[Katamari]

And that's why I said it was probably my fault. I forgot to reload. Thank you all! I now have the equivalent power output of one unupgraded 62.5cm Nuclear Reactor! And it is only ~80 parts and 48 tons!

[Fractal_UK]

Have you tried leaving to the space center and then going back to the vessel? In some cases, I think the vessel doesn't properly update when you dock something to it.

That's right, the lists of parts to draw from are currently populated during vessel start so reloading to the tracking station will definitely fix this.

EDIT: Selected AMF and ran 150 days at 100,000x time accel. Works just fine... just as my fuel truck did. Seems KSPI still has a few kinks with non-selected functions working. Or are they no longer supposed to?

I think you may have been undone in this case by the length of time you time accelerated for. Due to KSP's "quirky" resource system, trying to use too much of a resource, that is requesting more of a resource than exists or trying to overfill the tank causes the method to do nothing rather than to do the maximum amount possible. Considering that there are a lot of antimatter collectors on your station, you could be running into that problem?

Tritium breeding has a specific bug related to persistent generation.

Both of these problems will be fixed with Interstellar v0.10.

[merendel]

merendel ,

Yes, i considered using lithium, but low thrust stopped me from doing so. Also will not those receivers ot top of lithium tanks collide with each other? And because lander can is a bit higher with such design the ladder will be needed on eve.

When i will finaly unlock upgraded reactors i will probably try it again, but anyway argon seems like best fuel for landers, where high dV is not required.

Another problem with lithium, BTW, is that if i want some supply of it on the "mothership" i will need to stack lots of hexcans, it will be inconvinient and not very good looking.

Those recievers clip their corners a bit when fully extended but they dont seem to actualy be coliding with eachother as far as the physics are concerned, no wobble at all. as to the height off the ground thats rather simple to fix as the initial version I just centered them on the lander can. By shifting them upwards to the top edge of the can(before it narrows and clips them inwards) and adjusting the position of the landing gear you get something like this.

Jeb can easily jump up and grab the the side of the door on kerbin. I moved the docking port to the lower edge of the craft as I didnt see a good way to dock to it on top in this configuration. And ya I forgot to put the side dishes back on in that shot after symmetry removed them while adjusting the litium tanks. Also I asumed you already had upgraded reactors when you talked about the useing the DT as your main drive. No way your going to make that work without quite a few reactors on your ship with unupgraded, probably even with argon. That said this configuration realy needs to be recieving 3gw at a minimum to be viable with 4-6 being prefered so your thrust is reasonably high on higher gravity worlds.

[Lightwarrior]

merendel ,

Yes, i will use it with upgraded reactors. For now i just transmit power from kerbin.

I placed docking port on top of the craft becase i wanted to be able to dock few fuel tanks/life support supply tanks and probably few big transceivers, and still be able to use lander's engines.

I will probably test all variants and see which one will work better. May be i will just use monopropellant because it has best tanks available both for resupply and for lander itself.

[merendel]

ya if I absolutely had to have the docking port on the top I'd probably take those recievers and stick them on the corners of all 4 hex cans at a 45 degree angle so theres a large gap down the center and either add mono prop tanks or just a girder segment to raise the docking port. 4 on that configuration should give you prety good coverage from any direction but strait down. Actualy I'd probably use the slightly bigger lander legs so I have a bit more ground clearance on landing and then just retract the legs so the lander is resting on the cans so the kerbals can get out without a drop.

[NeoAcario]

I think you may have been undone in this case by the length of time you time accelerated for. Due to KSP's "quirky" resource system, trying to use too much of a resource, that is requesting more of a resource than exists or trying to overfill the tank causes the method to do nothing rather than to do the maximum amount possible. Considering that there are a lot of antimatter collectors on your station, you could be running into that problem?

Tritium breeding has a specific bug related to persistent generation.

Both of these problems will be fixed with Interstellar v0.10.

Oh these issues are both about to be resolved with the next update? Nice.

But no, overfill isn't the issue. My AMF(arm) has 4 of the 3.75m tanks. 270k cap each, 1.08m total units. 150 days only generates about 60k AM. This shouldn't have been the problem. It mostly works during my trips back and forth to Mun and Minmus with time accel. Not sure exactly what the problem could be.

When is the next update due anyways?

~Steve

EDIT:

Happened again, seemingly for no reason. During about 20 hours of game time... doing missions between three ships. I go back and check on my AMF(arm).... and nothing. Still sitting at 22, should have made another 300am in that time.

Am I supposed to go back to the base first (doesn't work)? Does changing ships from the map cause issues? What am I missing?

What does me having 4 empty tanks have to do with the problem exactly? Oh.. too may collectors. Well, let's drop half the collectors and see what happens.

EDIT AGAIN:

Well, dropped the collectors from 100 to 50.. ran it for 10 days... still doesn't work non-selected. So what's the limit?

Edited January 30, 2014 by NeoAcario

[Donziboy2]

Oh these issues are both about to be resolved with the next update? Nice.

But no, overfill isn't the issue. My AMF(arm) has 4 of the 3.75m tanks. 270k cap each, 1.08m total units. 150 days only generates about 60k AM. This shouldn't have been the problem. It mostly works during my trips back and forth to Mun and Minmus with time accel. Not sure exactly what the problem could be.

When is the next update due anyways?

~Steve

EDIT:

Happened again, seemingly for no reason. During about 20 hours of game time... doing missions between three ships. I go back and check on my AMF(arm).... and nothing. Still sitting at 22, should have made another 300am in that time.

Am I supposed to go back to the base first (doesn't work)? Does changing ships from the map cause issues? What am I missing?

What does me having 4 empty tanks have to do with the problem exactly? Oh.. too may collectors. Well, let's drop half the collectors and see what happens.

EDIT AGAIN:

Well, dropped the collectors from 100 to 50.. ran it for 10 days... still doesn't work non-selected. So what's the limit?

They changed the way resources work with 0.23 and broke alot of the mechanics Fractal_UK had in place. Alot of the parts used extremely small numbers for collection and creating, when those vessels with those parts are not the active vessel the numbers are ignored completely. And when you are focused on them they only work at specific time warps because the collection amount is above the minimum.

[NeoAcario]

They changed the way resources work with 0.23 and broke alot of the mechanics Fractal_UK had in place. Alot of the parts used extremely small numbers for collection and creating, when those vessels with those parts are not the active vessel the numbers are ignored completely. And when you are focused on them they only work at specific time warps because the collection amount is above the minimum.

That explains why Tritium Breeding only seems to work at high time warp. AM collection seems to work on focus with any/no time warp... so that's good.

~Steve

PS

Has there been any hint at when the next update might come to be?

[W.O.P.R.]

Would it be a big ask for some more options with heat dissipation? The coolers used in vacuum are too large for the micro communication satellites I build (with remote tech), and I can't make a decent looking one myself. I've also modified the scale of the model in the config, but that didn't end up so swell either. Perhaps a modified antenna, like a telescopic heat exchanging rod. I really love the heat mechanic, (though there should be something to be said about being too cold as well) and this mod as a whole. Not a deal breaker if that part is a no-go, but it could add to the fun.

Cheers

[merendel]

Has there been any hint at when the next update might come to be?

Fractal hasnt given us a date yet although he has said that he is no longer adding new features to the next version because he is focusing on preparing it for release. Interpret that how you will. I'm hopeing that means in the next week or so but your guess is as good as mine.

Would it be a big ask for some more options with heat dissipation? The coolers used in vacuum are too large for the micro communication satellites I build (with remote tech), and I can't make a decent looking one myself. I've also modified the scale of the model in the config, but that didn't end up so swell either. Perhaps a modified antenna, like a telescopic heat exchanging rod. I really love the heat mechanic, (though there should be something to be said about being too cold as well) and this mod as a whole. Not a deal breaker if that part is a no-go, but it could add to the fun.

Cheers

Unless you are needing a ton of power on those things you shouldnt even need the deployable ones. The small radial ones, while best in atmosphere, should be enough to keep a couple of solar pannles from overheating as long as your not sunskiming or something like that. if you needed to attach a bunch of gigantors it might be different but if you have room for gigantors the deployable radiators wouldnt look out of place.

[ctbram]

More Radiator Sizing HELLL!!!!!!!!!

I want to use a .625 reactor and generator stock (no upgrade). I want to use them in space. The reactor only has to drive the generator. Nothing else produces heat. I need about 1.6kW of power. I am trying my ass off to compute the size of the cooler needed I am I coming up with like 3.7m^2 for the area of the radiator needed. The radial and inlines lose a factor of 20 in space so I'd need like 60 small inlines and the smallest folder out is 5x the size of the reactor and generator!

I have to be doing the math wrong. Can someone, anyone, for the love of god and for the sake of my sanity please EXPLAIN HOW TO SIZE THESE F'ING THINGS?

Here is an example satellite.

You can see it simply has a reactor core, a 0.625 generator and an omni and scanner that draws 1.53kW of power. I stuck three of the small radials on there by simply guessing. After warping I see the waste heat shooting up and up. Also what are the units for waste heat being shown in the resource bars and info on items? On this particular sat it says the max is 1,200,113 what? The reactor info is 113/113 of what? Meanwhile the generator is the only thing producing energy and it has no waste heat bars at all. Trying to figure this out is like taking a fork and sticking it in my eye!

So the reactor is capped at 113/113 mystery units and is not melting down. Just one radiator says it's radiating 23Kw and there are three of them. The resource bar says 13140/1200113 mystery units. Are the units Watts? So the ship is at 13kW of 1.2MW but the reactor core is at 113 Watts??? Nothing makes any sense!!!! then the reactor also says it's producing 450kW of thermal energy. Great yet another Power number that I cannot correlate with any of the other numbers.

I need to go take a shower because this is really pissing me off. I keep spending hours putting things in orbit and fiddling with phasing only to have them shut down because I cannot figure out the right amount of radiators to put on them. I mean JESUS what do I have to do put 16 maxi huge gigantor radiators on a 0.625 reactor to be sure I have sufficient cooling!!!!

Edited January 30, 2014 by ctbram

[TheTom]

Well, inlines do not work in space. Simple like that. Second...

> I need about 1.6kW

A nuclear reactor to power a torchlight? SERIOUSLY?

This is a VERY low power requirement. Nuclear reactors have a minimum power output IIRC of 30% of max and that will just blow your requirements out. Why are yoi trying to solve something that low in power requirement with a reactor? Reactors generate amount of energy, and your requirmement is a joke.

[AeroEngy]

More Radiator Sizing HELLL!!!!!!!!!

I want to use a .625 reactor and generator stock (no upgrade). I want to use them in space. The reactor only has to drive the generator. Nothing else produces heat. I need about 1.6kW of power. I am trying my ass off to compute the size of the cooler needed I am I coming up with like 3.7m^2 for the area of the radiator needed. The radial and inlines lose a factor of 20 in space so I'd need like 60 small inlines and the smallest folder out is 5x the size of the reactor and generator!

I have to be doing the math wrong. Can someone, anyone, for the love of god and for the sake of my sanity please EXPLAIN HOW TO SIZE THESE F'ING THINGS?

Here is an example satellite.

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x185/ctbram/ksp%20stuff/th_2014-01-30_00008_zps1b66d42a.jpg

You can see it simply has a reactor core, a 0.625 generator and an omni and scanner that draws 1.53kW of power. I stuck three of the small radials on there by simply guessing. After warping I see the waste heat shooting up and up. Also what are the units for waste heat being shown in the resource bars and info on items? On this particular sat it says the max is 1,200,113 what? The reactor info is 113/113 of what? Meanwhile the generator is the only thing producing energy and it has no waste heat bars at all. Trying to figure this out is like taking a fork and sticking it in my eye!

So the reactor is capped at 113/113 mystery units and is not melting down. Just one radiator says it's radiating 23Kw and there are three of them. The resource bar says 13140/1200113 mystery units. Are the units Watts? So the ship is at 13kW of 1.2MW but the reactor core is at 113 Watts??? Nothing makes any sense!!!! then the reactor also says it's producing 450kW of thermal energy. Great yet another Power number that I cannot correlate with any of the other numbers.

I need to go take a shower because this is really pissing me off. I keep spending hours putting things in orbit and fiddling with phasing only to have them shut down because I cannot figure out the right amount of radiators to put on them. I mean JESUS what do I have to do put 16 maxi huge gigantor radiators on a 0.625 reactor to be sure I have sufficient cooling!!!!

The waste heat can be a frustrating if you don't understand whats going on ... and I don't pretend to fully understand it either. After you warp your craft for awhile does the waste heat bar stabilize ... or does it fill up and shut down your reactor? The reason I ask is because like in real life radiators dissipate more heat the hotter they get (the more full the bar). This is non-linear and a bit difficult to wrap your head around. It is impossible to have a waste heat of zero so don't try. So long as waste heat eventually stabilizes somewhere on the lower quarter or so of the bar you should be OK. Since your craft doesn't need that much power you could probably get away with much higher wasteheat (75%-ish) since efficiency (more about that later) shouldn't be an issue. Also, I believe I read many pages ago that Fractal is working on some kind of Thermal sizing / management thing for designing this stuff in the VAB which should help.

Now about the reactor efficiency according to the Wiki the non-upgraded 62.5cm reactor produces 1.5 MW of thermal power. The non-upgrade generator has a best case efficiency of 31% (leaving you with 465kW of power). However, this number is further reduced by the ratio of hot to cold bath temps for the generator. The hot bath is the reactor's temperature and the cold bath is the radiator's temp. The efficiency equation is this (1-Tc/Th) ... so say your reactor temp divided by the radiator temp is 0.5 then you will lose 50% of that 465kW and only output 232.5kW from the generator. Similarly if the ratio is really high like 0.9 (lots of waste heat) then you would only have 46.5kW output from the generator. The mystery part of this to me is how the waste heat bar relates to temperature ... so I generally don't think about it. I just try to keep it less than ~25% full (unless doing some short term high power draw stuff).

Edited January 30, 2014 by AeroEngy

[Fractal_UK]

Using a 1.5MW nuclear reactor to power a 1.5KW sensor seems like overkill when you could do that with two small solar panels.

In any case, trying to cool even a 62.5cm nuclear reactor with radial radiators is ineffective, for reference, it looks like this:

Alternatively, you can just do this (notice the massively higher efficiency in this second case due to the lower radiator resting temperatures):

Edited January 30, 2014 by Fractal_UK