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

[Tharios]

I know this isn't specifically the place, but I was wondering if any of you had encountered catastrophic ASAS wobble, and if any of you knew of a means to counter it?

I've made craft that are so stable they're hard to make do anything but fly straight, but the instant I hit ASAS...they wobble to pieces as it overcompensates for, well, nothing.

Currently, along with KSPI, I've got FAR and B9. But it should be noted, I've always had this problem even with the stock game.

Suggestions? I ask here because I trust your opinions.

[Overlord]

I know this isn't specifically the place, but I was wondering if any of you had encountered catastrophic ASAS wobble, and if any of you knew of a means to counter it?

I've made craft that are so stable they're hard to make do anything but fly straight, but the instant I hit ASAS...they wobble to pieces as it overcompensates for, well, nothing.

Currently, along with KSPI, I've got FAR and B9. But it should be noted, I've always had this problem even with the stock game.

Suggestions? I ask here because I trust your opinions.

Hmm.... I know you probably checked but just in case, is your KSP up to date with 0.22, because the only time I remember having that problem was in the previous versions 0.21 and before.

[wasmic]

I know this isn't specifically the place, but I was wondering if any of you had encountered catastrophic ASAS wobble, and if any of you knew of a means to counter it?

I've made craft that are so stable they're hard to make do anything but fly straight, but the instant I hit ASAS...they wobble to pieces as it overcompensates for, well, nothing.

Currently, along with KSPI, I've got FAR and B9. But it should be noted, I've always had this problem even with the stock game.

Suggestions? I ask here because I trust your opinions.

Maybe try KJR - Kerbal Joint Reinforcement by ferram4. It can make your rockets perfectly rigid.

[Donziboy2]

For those of you having problems with Deuterium and Tritium you can use Tac Fuel Balancer to add them to tanks while they are on the pad attached to launch clamps. It also works with AM, but I have a 64 Collector sat in high orbit that takes care of that for me

I gave up on making the stuff myself, half the time it wasn't working, or my vehicles would just break for no reason....

[forsaken1111]

Maybe try KJR - Kerbal Joint Reinforcement by ferram4. It can make your rockets perfectly rigid.

KJR is good but its not OP. It makes things make more sense though. Joints between parts of the same diameter are much more stable and won't slide around, for example, and it does reduce wobble.

[Tharios]

Hmm.... I know you probably checked but just in case, is your KSP up to date with 0.22, because the only time I remember having that problem was in the previous versions 0.21 and before.

Yup, updated the day after release.

KJR is good but its not OP. It makes things make more sense though. Joints between parts of the same diameter are much more stable and won't slide around, for example, and it does reduce wobble.

The current wobble isn't because of insecure parts. They have hardly any flex while flying without ASAS. There's a lot of force exerted when I try to maneuver because I like my planes stable. As soon as I hit the ASAS though, all the flaps go bananas and flop the planes around til they finally shake apart.

[Xentoe]

Sorry for this silly question... but how does the updating work now in the actual version?

*missing the science ammountmeter and the updatemenubutton*

[Umlüx]

the updates are unlocked in the science tree and generated science is directly added to your career science counter

just read the first post, you can find everything there.

[xchoo]

I have a somewhat stupid question... How do you get microwave relays to work? I can't for the life of me get them to work at all. The setup: 1 solar satellite in orbit, 1 relay (i.e. one transmitter, one receiver on the same craft) on the VAB lauchpad, and 1 receiver on the SPH runway. I can get the relay to receiver power, and retransmit it, but when I switch to the receiver and point it at the relay, i don't get any connection (0KW, 0 satellites, 0 relays). =/

Can anyone confirm their relays work?

Fractal, I believe I have also found a slight issue with the current microwave transmitter code. While I was playing around with my microwave network, I found that if I disabled the transmitter, and then switched crafts within about 30s or so, the craft may still be recognized as a transmitting satellite. Same thing for when I enabled the transmitter. After poking around the code a bit, I think the issue is with the way "warpplugin.cfg" is updated. It seems to only be updated every 1000 updates (or so?). Might I suggest that the cfg file be updated as soon as you press the "enable" or "disable" button for the transmitter as well? That would make it more responsive. =)

[BananaDealer]

Fractal, I believe I have also found a slight issue with the current microwave transmitter code. While I was playing around with my microwave network, I found that if I disabled the transmitter, and then switched crafts within about 30s or so, the craft may still be recognized as a transmitting satellite. Same thing for when I enabled the transmitter. After poking around the code a bit, I think the issue is with the way "warpplugin.cfg" is updated. It seems to only be updated every 1000 updates (or so?). Might I suggest that the cfg file be updated as soon as you press the "enable" or "disable" button for the transmitter as well? That would make it more responsive. =)

That might make the plugin quite tanky on your resources...

[xchoo]

That might make the plugin quite tanky on your resources...

Not if the code is run *only* when the enable / disable button is executed though. It is already auto-updating every 1000 "onUpdates" already, having it update when either the enable/disable is executed shouldn't add that much extra processing to the system.

[BananaDealer]

Another slight bug when testing out the K-90X...

After "solving" the antimatter problem, the two thermal jets don't appear to be thrusting at equal speeds...

Meaning one will always be ahead of the other with it's thrust output, causing the craft to veer off the runway on take-off...

[Donziboy2]

Another slight bug when testing out the K-90X...

After "solving" the antimatter problem, the two thermal jets don't appear to be thrusting at equal speeds...

Meaning one will always be ahead of the other with it's thrust output, causing the craft to veer off the runway on take-off...

Does it occur only at full throttle or is there a specific point they loose sync? I have had a similar problem with the Kiwi.

[BananaDealer]

Does it occur only at full throttle or is there a specific point they loose sync? I have had a similar problem with the Kiwi.

Not really... Out of the four tests I've made, one time the left was constantly ahead of the right, until full-throttle and maximum thrust. Second test was the opposite. Third test had them chasing each other, alternating which one would be "ahead" in thrust at different throttle levels. Starting with the left one being ahead until the ~25% thrust limit, then right one was ahead until the ~50% thrust limit was reached, then left again until 60-70%, then right until 100% thrust. Fourth test didn't exhibit the "bug" with both engines thrusting equally...

The drastic steering and veering problems don't seem to be the engine's fault however... I changed the landing gears and it's stable now... This's a low-rider, but stable...

[Jarin]

The current wobble isn't because of insecure parts. They have hardly any flex while flying without ASAS. There's a lot of force exerted when I try to maneuver because I like my planes stable. As soon as I hit the ASAS though, all the flaps go bananas and flop the planes around til they finally shake apart.

For rockets, I've found it to be important *where* I put the reaction wheels. For an aircraft though, I've only ever seen catastrophic ASAS shake when running physics warp. Maybe too many control surfaces?

[Makeone]

Fractal, i'd like once again to bring up the idea of a fusion reactor that runs of deuterium and tritium. Maybe current AM reactors could be named fusion reactors, but when upgraded, they would use AM as fuel? Hence, the stock fusion reactors would have more power than upgraded, same size nuclear reactors. Or would it be possible to change for my own usage, are they defined by the parts.cfg files or by your plugin code? If latter, then there's nothing much i can do?

I am bit bored of the AM collection, my orbital, 20-set collector should collect massive 12 units of AM per hour, but if it's not focused, it's doesn't seem to work. It's been in space for 30 days and only small amounts of AM. My single lab on ground has done 400+ units in less time, but it can be buggy, thanks to KSP's physics initialiazion horrors...

[Donziboy2]

Fractal, i'd like once again to bring up the idea of a fusion reactor that runs of deuterium and tritium. Maybe current AM reactors could be named fusion reactors, but when upgraded, they would use AM as fuel? Hence, the stock fusion reactors would have more power than upgraded, same size nuclear reactors. Or would it be possible to change for my own usage, are they defined by the parts.cfg files or by your plugin code? If latter, then there's nothing much i can do?

I am bit bored of the AM collection, my orbital, 20-set collector should collect massive 12 units of AM per hour, but if it's not focused, it's doesn't seem to work. It's been in space for 30 days and only small amounts of AM. My single lab on ground has done 400+ units in less time, but it can be buggy, thanks to KSP's physics initialiazion horrors...

From what I understand Fractal_UK does have plans for something in between nuclear and AM reactors.

Even if you focus on it your not going to get more than 4 units of AM per hour in Kerbin orbit. The most a single collector will get is 4.6e-5/s, which ends up at about 3.888AM per day per collector. I found that Kerbal Alarm Clock and sending ships to other planets works pretty well, I set the clock to stop warp a few minutes before burns and just run the AM collector sat while my ships are in transit. I had 5 missions going at the same time that way and still got about 90% of the AM I should have gotten. Hopefully Fractal_UK can fix it.

[Fractal_UK]

From what I understand Fractal_UK does have plans for something in between nuclear and AM reactors.

Indeed, fusion reactors are in the works, the whole point of getting all the Deuterium-Tritium resource system setup was to prepare for that.

Even if you focus on it your not going to get more than 4 units of AM per hour in Kerbin orbit. The most a single collector will get is 4.6e-5/s, which ends up at about 3.888AM per day per collector. I found that Kerbal Alarm Clock and sending ships to other planets works pretty well, I set the clock to stop warp a few minutes before burns and just run the AM collector sat while my ships are in transit. I had 5 missions going at the same time that way and still got about 90% of the AM I should have gotten. Hopefully Fractal_UK can fix it.

It looks like there was an error with the orbit averaging that takes place to determine collector efficiency over long periods. That would have revised quantities down below what they should have been, I believe this is fixed now.

[Tharios]

Fractal, i'd like once again to bring up the idea of a fusion reactor that runs of deuterium and tritium.

From what I understand Fractal_UK does have plans for something in between nuclear and AM reactors.

I would think a reactor would require less effort than the Vista engine, since it's self-contained rather than expulsive.

So, perhaps significantly reduced need for Deuterium and Tritium, and about the same liquid fuel consumption rate as a Vista on 1/2 throttle or so? Overall power output pretty much in between nukes and AM...though leaning a tad toward AM for the complexity of fueling the things.

[forsaken1111]

I would think a reactor would require less effort than the Vista engine, since it's self-contained rather than expulsive.

So, perhaps significantly reduced need for Deuterium and Tritium, and about the same liquid fuel consumption rate as a Vista on 1/2 throttle or so? Overall power output pretty much in between nukes and AM...though leaning a tad toward AM for the complexity of fueling the things.

I doubt a reactor will consume liquid fuel at all. The liquid fuel is used as propellant in the Vista engine. Reactors do not need propellant.

[123nick]

can you make it so this mod uses ONLY the stock tech nodes, so its more compatible with moded techtrees?

[Fractal_UK]

can you make it so this mod uses ONLY the stock tech nodes, so its more compatible with moded techtrees?

No, there is simply not enough scope on the stock tech tree, the tech nodes are far too cheap and are inappropriate for the advanced technologies. If I did this, you'd have almost everything from the mod arriving on the same or almost the same tech node and there would be no logical progression at all. The mod will revert to using stock tech nodes if you try to play with a different tech tree but not all features will be supported if you do this.

Unfortunately, the way the tech tree is at the moment, there are always going to be trade-offs but given the extended tech tree is a major feature of the mod and thematically very important, no I won't be removing that.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Fractal_UK

[BananaDealer]

No, there is simply not enough scope on the stock tech tree, the tech nodes are far too cheap and are inappropriate for the advanced technologies. If I did this, you'd have almost everything from the mod arriving on the same or almost the same tech node and there would be no logical progression at all. The mod will revert to using stock tech nodes if you try to play with a different tech tree but not all features will be supported if you do this.

Unfortunately, the way the tech tree is at the moment, there are always going to be trade-offs but given the extended tech tree is a major feature of the mod and thematically very important, no I won't be removing that.

Plus, a lot of other mods model themselves after the KSPI tech tree...

When Cabana Corp.'s Data Storage Drives get finished (or at least are in a working state), I plan on incorporating them into the KSPI tree. Mostly since it's the one I use...

That is, if that's OK with you, Fractal...

[Tharios]

I doubt a reactor will consume liquid fuel at all. The liquid fuel is used as propellant in the Vista engine. Reactors do not need propellant.

Afaik, most current efforts center around a principle pretty much identical to the Vista. Laser a small mass of deuterium/tritium, and use it to ignite regular hydrogen into a sustained plasma state by compressing it with magnetic fields. Burning straight deuterium/tritium for power is wholly impractical. It's just not a big enough bang for as little as can be reasonably used.

I don't currently know of any reactor efforts which are D/T only. I could be wrong.

Really though, even an AM reactor would just be little bits of AM that are used to ignite magnetically compressed hydrogen to get it to a usable plasma state without having to use a bunch of power for massive lasers too. Otherwise, an AM reactor wouldn't produce much (currently) usable energy at all. It'd generate a lot of thermal potential, but not all that much more than most nuclear reactors, and that would be only a tiny fraction of its power...the rest would be wasted.

If we really want to get the most out of any such reactors, we'll have to develop materials that, in concert, are capable of interacting with the radiation from the reaction the same way solar panels convert visible wavelength photons into electricity. In the meantime, our only options are to use as much of the energy to generate as much heat as possible to use over the broadest system to get the most mechanical/electrical potential out of it. Or, to pass the plasma through networks of coils to generate electrical fields as it passes.

Fortunately, there are already materials under research that will be capable of directly converting thermal energy into electrical energy.

That...may have come across as patronizing or condescending. It was not intended as such...please don't take it that way.

[automcdonough]

So I have a little concept for you guys. Some inspiration, food for thought. Not that you seemed bored and in need of new part ideas but here it is anyway.

To start, put the thermal jet engine in your brain. Runs off nuke as the heat source for the typical "combustion" stage. right?

now:

This is a combined jet engine and generator. The performance is basically that of a jet, but if the generator loads it down then thrust will drop. On the other hand, it can generate a fair amount of juice this way. It only functions if there's atmosphere, but does not require any fuel other than the reactor. As a generator, it should be lightweight and efficient compared to the one's we're used to in this mod (But it only works in atmosphere).

This is a side-mount concept featuring two of those offset jet generator things into an integrated reactor. Basically a one-stop shop to make something move in the atmosphere. It's by itself here so no scale, but I imagine a small one would have a probe with small wings cruising nicely or make a rockin KAS jetpack. Or just a really convenient generator. Normal size would be similar thrust to a single turbojet and capable of jamming out a few MJ if needed. Maybe half actually.. Very modest, but also very lightweight. Ideal for a scout type plane setup where you aren't looking to charge an FTL jump or anything.

similar concept, this is a larger inline style shown with Mk 1 cockpit and sandwiched between 2 fuel tanks. Not that it needs fuel but this layout kinda makes a hole for something to go there. The scale I drew is also kinda big, that thing would haul ass. Probly oversized.

This could perhaps be a large sidemount meant to stick onto existing reactor part. Again, mostly redundant to the existing thermal jet but contains generator. as a non-integrated setup it seems maybe too redundant? Nice to have side-mount option at least.