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

[Fractal_UK]

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...

Of course, people are more than welcome to make use of nodes on the KSPI tech tree.

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.

As far as I'm aware, you really don't want any normal Hydrogen at all in a Fusion plasma because the other reactions, H+H, H+D, even D+D have really low cross sections compared to D+T interactions. In order to get net energy production, you need to maximise the probability of D+T interactions because they are the ones that can be produced sustainably. Most tokomak fusion experiments so far have used purely deuterium plasmas, I think because of the radioative nature of tritium and the increased neutron flux caused by having a genuinely high rate of fusion, your reactor core has to be able to handle that.

JET in Oxford, however, was designed to work with D+T plasmas albeit in something like 9:1 mixtures. Ideal operation conditions for a functional reactor would be with a 50:50 mix of Deuterium and Tritium plasma.

[Shadoworgon]

Quick question Fractal, dont know if this is a bug or just a mechanic that im messing up.

I have a ship in orbit with a 2.5m reactor then a bicouplar then two 1.25m thermal rockets.

Problem is when i throttle up it shuts them down saying theres no reactor attached. Can i not have that bicouplar there? or can i not mismatch those different size engine with reactor?

[Fractal_UK]

Quick question Fractal, dont know if this is a bug or just a mechanic that im messing up.

I have a ship in orbit with a 2.5m reactor then a bicouplar then two 1.25m thermal rockets.

Problem is when i throttle up it shuts them down saying theres no reactor attached. Can i not have that bicouplar there? or can i not mismatch those different size engine with reactor?

I'm afraid you cannot have a bicoupler, you need a direct attachment to the reactor, nothing in between. You can just use a 2.5m thermal rocket though, was there any particular reason you wanted to use the smaller ones?

[BananaDealer]

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:

*Snip*

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).

*Snip*

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.

*Snip*

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.

So basically a one-piece SCRAM/Thermal Jet hybrid?

[Shadoworgon]

I'm afraid you cannot have a bicoupler, you need a direct attachment to the reactor, nothing in between. You can just use a 2.5m thermal rocket though, was there any particular reason you wanted to use the smaller ones?

well for one it looked alittle cooler lol but other than that not really any reason, but im actually currently getting a ship with just the 2.5m engine in orbit lol hopefully it gets to Duna with the fuel it has lol

[Patupi]

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.

Are you thinking of inertial fusion 'reactors'? I know certain experiments have considered using hydrogen as a medium to allow compression (with some pellet formation as a buffer), but most current concepts (and the one that's been actually built) still use a plastic film which absorbs the laser light. It vapourises and part goes out, part goes in. The inner part crushes the D+T core and should lead to fusion. I don't think anyone has made ignition via this method yet, compared to Tokomak like devices. Those (as Fractal_UK said) are hard to do with pure deuterium or hydrogen based reactions. Basically D+T can be done with less strenuous conditions to allow electron tunneling via indeterminacy. Um. That probably could do with more explanation but my quantum physics isn't that good. Basically it's the energy needed to get atoms (or a smaller particle and an atom) to get over their mutual repulsion and finally fuse together. D+T needs lower pressure and temps than other reactions to get this condition.

[automcdonough]

So basically a one-piece SCRAM/Thermal Jet hybrid?

I guess? it started primarily as an idea for simple generator. The whole point of the offset is to keep it mechanically simple, down to only 1 rotating part. But when generator isn't loading it down then nothing stopping it from making lots of thrust like a normal thermal jet.. I just hope I got some gears turning in z's head.

[Patupi]

So basically take a thermal jet, add a reactor, but limit both to only operating with atmospheric gases as a medium to save weight? Nice concept and does have a place in the game I think. See what Fractal thinks. (EDIT: Maybe vary output of both jet AND reactor to atmospheric pressure?)

Edited November 5, 2013 by Patupi

[Tharios]

As far as I'm aware, you really don't want any normal Hydrogen at all in a Fusion plasma because the other reactions, H+H, H+D, even D+D have really low cross sections compared to D+T interactions. In order to get net energy production, you need to maximise the probability of D+T interactions because they are the ones that can be produced sustainably. Most tokomak fusion experiments so far have used purely deuterium plasmas, I think because of the radioative nature of tritium and the increased neutron flux caused by having a genuinely high rate of fusion, your reactor core has to be able to handle that.

JET in Oxford, however, was designed to work with D+T plasmas albeit in something like 9:1 mixtures. Ideal operation conditions for a functional reactor would be with a 50:50 mix of Deuterium and Tritium plasma.

See, I was wrong about that part.

[BananaDealer]

So basically take a thermal jet, add a reactor, but limit both to only operating with atmospheric gases as a medium to save weight? Nice concept and does have a place in the game I think. See what Fractal thinks. (EDIT: Maybe vary output of both jet AND reactor to atmospheric pressure?)

Hmmm... Interesting...

[Hremsfeld]

I guess? it started primarily as an idea for simple generator. The whole point of the offset is to keep it mechanically simple, down to only 1 rotating part. But when generator isn't loading it down then nothing stopping it from making lots of thrust like a normal thermal jet.. I just hope I got some gears turning in z's head.

Only one rotating part, I'm assuming this is the generator itself. Therefore, it'd need to be going fast in order to get the air flowing over/through the reactor in the first place, right? So it'd start off on conventional jets to get to speed, then (optionally) those cut and the air-cooled reactor kicks on/turns up...this is Project Pluto, then?

Edit: VVVVV True about the radiation, but then you forget the other nuclear-based Project [space], Project Orion. While it should make the launch center glow in the dark for awhile after each launch, you can have kerbals hang out all day right afterwards and be fine; the D/T engine's the only implementation of radiation so far that I know of.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Hremsfeld

[BananaDealer]

Only one rotating part, I'm assuming this is the generator itself. Therefore, it'd need to be going fast in order to get the air flowing over/through the reactor in the first place, right? So it'd start off on conventional jets to get to speed, then (optionally) those cut and the air-cooled reactor kicks on/turns up...this is Project Pluto, then?

The "one rotating part" would be the hypersonic ram that compresses that air before it enters the combustion chamber...

Something we're all probably forgetting... Making the air pass through a nuclear reactor would make it rather highly radioactive...

[Eadrom]

While I haven't gotten to moho I can confirm that my labs DO create science while not focused. I have two labs on the Mun and they are creating science as expected.

I have 9 manned labs (Kerbalx3, Mun, Minmus, Eve, Gilly, Duna, and Ike) and they are working perfectly fine as well. The only issues I'm having are with these two unmanned stations using the upgraded computer cores.

[boomerdog2000]

The "one rotating part" would be the hypersonic ram that compresses that air before it enters the combustion chamber...

Something we're all probably forgetting... Making the air pass through a nuclear reactor would make it rather highly radioactive...

Oh, so now I suppose you're going to say I shouldn't test the Vista on the launchpad, because the neutron radiation isn't safe.

[BananaDealer]

Oh, so now I suppose you're going to say I shouldn't test the Vista on the launchpad, because the neutron radiation isn't safe.

No, I'm saying you should give all the attending staff at least some sort of protection... Sunglasses, umbrellas... Hard-hats... That sort of stuff...

[Tharios]

No, I'm saying you should give all the attending staff at least some sort of protection... Sunglasses, umbrellas... Hard-hats... That sort of stuff...

Don't trample on the hard-won and blood-born liberties of free Kerbals everywhere! To give up liberty for safety is to deserve neither and lose both!

Oh man...I can never say that line with a straight face...oh, the laughs.

[CalculusWarrior]

No, I'm saying you should give all the attending staff at least some sort of protection... Sunglasses, umbrellas... Hard-hats... That sort of stuff...

Radiation shielding? Who needs it? All those gamma rays give you a nice healthy green glow (for a kerbal, that is)

[PlayMp1]

Real fast question - is it possible to turn off nuclear reactors? I'm planning an unmanned mission going to Jool (no warp drive yet), and if the reactor is running the whole time, by the time I arrive at Jool, most or all of the nuclear fuel will be gone. I don't want to have to bring along a science lab just to reprocess uranium hexafluoride, making the mission no longer unmanned.

[Umlüx]

just deactivate the fuel in the reactor (klick on the little green 'play' arrow).

[Patupi]

Um, won't the reactor scram? Then you'd need a Kerbal to re-initialise it. Not so hot on an unmanned vessel

[Pigbear]

Um, won't the reactor scram? Then you'd need a Kerbal to re-initialise it. Not so hot on an unmanned vessel

The reactor will not turn off unless it lacks fuel and will turn back on as soon as it recieves fuel.

[Patupi]

That's what I mean. If you shut the fuel for the reactor down to save fuel for the trip, won't it scram?

[Donziboy2]

Ok. So I may have run into a little problem... It's been reported before but I feel like I need to report it again...

I'm testing out the K-90 SunStreak, a double-thermal jet + a Sabre (B9) fighter. As soon as I turn the Thermal jets on, one gets ridiculous thrust, like upwards of 500KN and the other one keeps to 0. Both are active and using atmosphere for propellant. There's a 1.25m antimatter reactor and an electric generator of the same size for each "engine block". Each block also has an antimatter collector, but that doesn't work on Kerbin's surface so yeah. There are also 3 Antimatter storage tanks in front of each engine block.

When I try to shut the engine with 0 thrust and activate it, it starts getting the ridiculous thrust, while the one that was working before drops straight to 0...

Here's pictures.

Left working, right being DERP.

Right working after shutting off and back on (manually, not using the action groups). Left not working. (Thrust will climb back up to 530 on the right but keep to 0 on the left)

Edit:

Doing a fresh test run. This happens.

I turn only the left one and it doesn't work (thrust keeps to 0). I then activate the right one and it's nominal (thrust climbs to 530, left one's still 0). I "toggle" the left one manually and its' thrust climbs to 530 while the right drops to 0... And so on...

I just want to point out that the AM reactors need massive amounts of intake air/atmo.... I have 3 Ram's on a single AM craft and the Reactor never gets to 10% usage, and I was getting mach effects....

It does look cooler with 2 engines but the limiting factor is intake air/atmo.

Edit.... missed a 0...

Edited November 5, 2013 by Donziboy2

[Tharios]

Radiation shielding? Who needs it? All those gamma rays give you a nice healthy green glow (for a kerbal, that is)

Revelation...Kerbals are miniaturized Hulks!

[BananaDealer]

I just want to point out that the AM reactors need massive amounts of intake air/atmo.... I have 3 Ram's on a single AM craft and the Reactor never gets to 10% usage, and I was getting mach effects....

It does look cooler with 2 engines but the limiting factor is intake air/atmo.

Edit.... missed a 0...

Yeah... That thing is pretty much 80% intakes...

Also... Since we're on the topic of intakes...

Fractal, is every part designated as an "intake" supposed to produce IntakeAtm?

Cause pretty much all my designs use B9 intakes and sometimes the IntakeAtm shows up and sometimes it doesn't on the same craft designs when unpacking from SPH...