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

[razorblade75]

hi to all, newbie here !! sorry for my probably terrible english, it's not my first language. anyway, i've tried to modify the thrust of the thermal rocket nozzle, without luck. no matter how high i put the maxThrust, the thrust stay the same. any help?

[Aedile]

The problem is that FAR has issues seeing them as closed and thinks they are open, so it thinks you are trying to launch a wall and produces insane drag.

Im no stranger to fairings, but I found it funny that if I placed a large receiver without a fairing ontop of a craft with 5TWR the craft would get to about 30ms and then crumble under the pressure lol.

I think far updates now when animation plays? at least the small receivers now seem to do change their drag when they open/close. (Which is pretty fun...)

But yes, the animations dont remember their state, which is rather annoying...

[ExavierMacbeth]

hi to all, newbie here !! sorry for my probably terrible english, it's not my first language. anyway, i've tried to modify the thrust of the thermal rocket nozzle, without luck. no matter how high i put the maxThrust, the thrust stay the same. any help?

Did you test it using a power relay network or just with an attached reactor? Your probably not seeing a difference if your using an attached reactor because the reactor isn't generating any additional Thermal Power for the thruster to actually use.

[db48x]

I have a new Idea for the Interstellar Pack. It would be an impulse drive that would function like a warp drive accelerating you at a constant speed of _______. It would run on electricity and be exactly like a warp drive but you can control it with throttle and you can steer.

What is the physical basis for such a drive?

[philotical]

What is the physical basis for such a drive?

star trek of course..

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Impulse_drive

[razorblade75]

Did you test it using a power relay network or just with an attached reactor? Your probably not seeing a difference if your using an attached reactor because the reactor isn't generating any additional Thermal Power for the thruster to actually use.

just an attached reactor

[phoenix_ca]

I'm pretty sure you are thinking of...every engine in the game that isn't the warp drive.

My thoughts exactly.

[Kerbonautical]

So... what's the maximum a thermal reciever (glowing red thing that goes on the engine) or small antenna can pick up? I've been reading Wiki's, watching Youtube guides and all sorts, but I just can't get more than say 24k MW. I now have 3 reactors and 4 relays out there, reactors are running very high efficiency and everything has a deployable array even though it shouldn't need it, but even if I stick a deployable array on my launching ship stuck to an infernal robotics hinge, pointed square at the relays I can't even get a Kilowatt. The 2.5m thermal receiver seems to only measure in KW as a minimum and I can't make that number move to a 1.

Is there any way that the relays may be limiting my power transfer? They have batteries, solar panels and a few radiators to keep it from overheating. The stations design is in the green thermally and pushes many GW's of power. My aspect angle is bang on to the satellite too, I just can't seem to get enough power to get any real use of the Thermal Turbojet in atmosphere mode, Nothing can generate the thrust to do anything without actively burning fuel.

[Hughesdylan]

star trek of course..

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Impulse_drive

OK so correct me where i'm wrong here but, isnt that exactly what's already in KSPI? Your describing exactly the plasma thruster. It uses fuel at first, true, but later it can push directly on the interstellar vacuum. See: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/wiki/Plasma-Engine

Relevant quote:

"The others are in between in the order they are listed above. When upgraded, the plasma engine is capable of pushing against the quantum vacuum itself to provide thrust. This mode only functions while not in an atmosphere and has the same performance as liquid fuel. However, while in this mode it requires only electricity and no fuel whatsoever."

So... what's the maximum a thermal reciever (glowing red thing that goes on the engine) or small antenna can pick up? I've been reading Wiki's, watching Youtube guides and all sorts, but I just can't get more than say 24k MW. I now have 3 reactors and 4 relays out there, reactors are running very high efficiency and everything has a deployable array even though it shouldn't need it, but even if I stick a deployable array on my launching ship stuck to an infernal robotics hinge, pointed square at the relays I can't even get a Kilowatt. The 2.5m thermal receiver seems to only measure in KW as a minimum and I can't make that number move to a 1.

Is there any way that the relays may be limiting my power transfer? They have batteries, solar panels and a few radiators to keep it from overheating. The stations design is in the green thermally and pushes many GW's of power. My aspect angle is bang on to the satellite too, I just can't seem to get enough power to get any real use of the Thermal Turbojet in atmosphere mode, Nothing can generate the thrust to do anything without actively burning fuel.

Are you directly at ground level on kerbin? Because Microwave Receivers are really badly impacted by atmosphere, See:https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/wiki/Microwave-Power-Transceivers#receiving-power. Try from space?

I have a question on the H3 front, I would like to add H3 mining to either the Mun or Minmus. if i add an entry to the planetaryresourcedef.cfg file (or make a new one in my own mod folder with the same name?) and then make a perlin noise resource.png for minmus, would that add things in? or is the ISRU refinery hardcoded? If that's the case i'll just use the Kethane drill system, but i would much rather use KSPI's

Derp! For those who are like me and wanted to know, fractal already did an excellent job explaining this here:http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64595-Open-Resource-System-(ORS)-Mod-Resource-API-version-1-1-0

Also, can we get a set of less efficient, or perhaps dangerous CANDU reactors? Those use heavy water for their moderator, and thus have a very high flux of Tritium that could be (pretty sure) extracted. Like, less good on the reactor front, consumes heavy water to produce tritium. Citation:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU#Tritium_emissions

Another idea would be using Deuterium and Oxidizer to produce heavy water in the same way, or perhaps using Electrolysis of Water, and then reacting that water with Deuterium (so, consume water and deut, produces Oxidizer?) to form heavy water. Some of IRL heavy water is made in this way.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Hughesdylan
Update with second quote

[Kerbonautical]

Are you directly at ground level on kerbin? Because Microwave Receivers are really badly impacted by atmosphere, See:https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/wiki/Microwave-Power-Transceivers#receiving-power. Try from space?

I can't really test from space since it's the thermal turbojet engine in atmospheric mode that I'm trying to get running better. I tried adding a reactor near the KSC though with the antenna facing over the runway and launchpad, unfortunately that only gave me an extra 10k MW though, I can't seem to access anything beyond 100k MW of power from inside Kerbin using any type of antenna or array to receive even with the satellite at it's closest point. I think I may just have to admit defeat. I've added about 20 hours or more now to my KSP time in the past week and feel like I'm making no progress in KSPI. Each time I learn something new I think I may have nailed it, but then when I put it into practice I still can't seem to net any extra power. It's a great mod, but whatever is going on in it is a bit over my head. I figured heat dissipation and angles would be the main challenge but it seems there's so much more to it if your looking to get Gigawatts.

[Hughesdylan]

I can't really test from space since it's the thermal turbojet engine in atmospheric mode that I'm trying to get running better. I tried adding a reactor near the KSC though with the antenna facing over the runway and launchpad, unfortunately that only gave me an extra 10k MW though, I can't seem to access anything beyond 100k MW of power from inside Kerbin using any type of antenna or array to receive even with the satellite at it's closest point. I think I may just have to admit defeat. I've added about 20 hours or more now to my KSP time in the past week and feel like I'm making no progress in KSPI. Each time I learn something new I think I may have nailed it, but then when I put it into practice I still can't seem to net any extra power. It's a great mod, but whatever is going on in it is a bit over my head. I figured heat dissipation and angles would be the main challenge but it seems there's so much more to it if your looking to get Gigawatts.

I strongly suggest you keep trying I understand the frustration though, trust me. almost all the time when i feel frustrated though it turns out i was just doing something goofy i shouldn't have.

Whats your total network power? You do need quite a lot of power to make this work. What size of thermal receiver are you using? Small? Large?

[artforz]

I think far updates now when animation plays? at least the small receivers now seem to do change their drag when they open/close. (Which is pretty fun...)

But yes, the animations dont remember their state, which is rather annoying...

The parts do remember their state, which should be enough.

The problem is the anim init code in OnStart, as it currently is we *always* play the !state->state animation.

Swapping the normalizedTime around for the IsEnabled and !IsEnabled cases makes parts not do the weird animation dance when switching to a vessel.

[BigD145]

to the dev team of this plugin, if u have not already heard about it!

kerbal.curseforge

A place to stay far, far away from. Yes, I think we know.

[Kerbonautical]

I strongly suggest you keep trying I understand the frustration though, trust me. almost all the time when i feel frustrated though it turns out i was just doing something goofy i shouldn't have.

Whats your total network power? You do need quite a lot of power to make this work. What size of thermal receiver are you using? Small? Large?

Large rads upgraded to graphene on my reactors with some medium rads to back it up. 2 generators per reactor in some instances and 1 in others. Each station is pushing a minimum of 40GW so with the 3 in orbit and one on the ground it should be upward of 160GW. On my relays I chucked on only small rads because a video I watched had mentioned that relaying doesn't generate waste heat, but I don't know if that's been changed or not. I've also tried both the small and large thermal receivers and none have been a great success. I managed to make it to orbit using a small receiver (and most of my liquid fuel once above 10km) but mostly in part due to the light weight of the plane. With the larger receiver I just can't get enough power to get off the runway.

Edit. Looking at one of my fusion station in orbit it says net power -28.9 gw :s

Edited May 13, 2014 by Kerbonautical

[Hughesdylan]

Large rads upgraded to graphene on my reactors with some medium rads to back it up. 2 generators per reactor in some instances and 1 in others. Each station is pushing a minimum of 40GW so with the 3 in orbit and one on the ground it should be upward of 160GW. On my relays I chucked on only small rads because a video I watched had mentioned that relaying doesn't generate waste heat, but I don't know if that's been changed or not. I've also tried both the small and large thermal receivers and none have been a great success. I managed to make it to orbit using a small receiver (and most of my liquid fuel once above 10km) but mostly in part due to the light weight of the plane. With the larger receiver I just can't get enough power to get off the runway.

Edit. Looking at one of my fusion station in orbit it says net power -28.9 gw :s

I'm honestly starting to suspect that this might be a bug. It appears to work correctly when you have a generator and reactor on board, but without that it doesn't seem to accept power correctly

i have a network with so much power i could FTL without the warpdrive basically, for instance, and i see almost no power at the pad. I never saw that before since i nearly always have some sort of reactor.

[Kerbonautical]

I'm honestly starting to suspect that this might be a bug. It appears to work correctly when you have a generator and reactor on board, but without that it doesn't seem to accept power correctly

i have a network with so much power i could FTL without the warpdrive basically, for instance, and i see almost no power at the pad. I never saw that before since i nearly always have some sort of reactor.

Huh, perhaps that's why then. I haven't actually created anything that would use a reactor in flight yet since I've been fully focused on making a thermal powered plane so that I have a fully reusable method of delivering reasonably heavy payloads. I'm going to have to try the same build with a reactor on board, but I don't see how I could actually build a plane that would fly with a huge reactor hanging off the back of it

[philotical]

OK so correct me where i'm wrong here but, isnt that exactly what's already in KSPI? Your describing exactly the plasma thruster. It uses fuel at first, true, but later it can push directly on the interstellar vacuum. See: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/wiki/Plasma-Engine

Relevant quote:

"The others are in between in the order they are listed above. When upgraded, the plasma engine is capable of pushing against the quantum vacuum itself to provide thrust. This mode only functions while not in an atmosphere and has the same performance as liquid fuel. However, while in this mode it requires only electricity and no fuel whatsoever."

Ok, I correct you, since you are wrong.

You must be the AntiTrecky to confuse the plasmathruster with an ImpulsEngine ala ST.

Star Trek is NOT Star Wars my friend!

But never mind...

[Einarr]

When I was playing around with power networks and receivers, I had a total of 5 3.75m fission reactors (the Molten Salt Reactors) and had to balance my power output to the network to get the best performance out of each power station. Think I had most of the transmitters tuned down to ~50%. Either way, I still had ~2 Gw of power from the network. Yet I was seeing on the ground more power from my Microwave Thermal Receivers than you are with more power in your network. I had only 4 relays up in GKO, each 90 degress apart from eachother. Gave excellent coverage anywhere on Kerbin orbit, and on Kerbin's surface as well.

I think the big difference will be in the receivers I had on my crafts versus what you have. I only had the MW Thermal Receivers. I did not rely on the network to also power my crafts (solar panels, RTGs, etc for that). I only used the power network for propulsion. I do not remember the exact numbers I was seeing on the surface, but they were often at least 500 MW and climbed sometimes to ~1GW as I was flying. I also used the thermal turbojets as I was working on an SSTO spaceplane. At the time, I did not have Fusion Power, so the thermal turbojets were not of the hybrid type, which means I had to switch out engines at a certain altitude (i.e. when the jets were no longer able to provide a TWR of 1).

Ok, I correct you, since you are wrong.

You must be the AntiTrecky to confuse the plasmathruster with an ImpulsEngine ala ST.

Star Trek is NOT Star Wars my friend!

But never mind...

You, sir or madame, are hereby expelled from the Trek Fan Club. Turn in your paraphernalia and titles on the way out the door.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Einarr

[philotical]

You, sir or madame, are hereby expelled from the Trek Fan Club. Turn in your paraphernalia and title on the way out the door.

Star Trek is NOT Star Wars - you've never seen a particle effect behind a shuttle - did you?

Is today the HerpDerp-Day and no one told me?

[Einarr]

There weren't any particle effects for engine trails in Star Wars either...at least, not until Lucas remastered ruined it...

And you're getting bent out of shape due to some artistic differences? Seriously, take a chill pill.

Honetly though, the Plasma Thruster is not a likely candidate to be closest to the ST Impulse engine. The thrust is way too low.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Einarr

[philotical]

[Form posted on reload an outdated post again.. - so I fill the space with something else useless]

Edit:

"Honestly though, he is right but still tell him to take a pill.."

What ever you say - the second time today..

Oh btw: Have a look at the non existing star wars thruster effects:

(Hint, it's the red hot looking thingys on the back of the Rebel Fighters)

Edited May 13, 2014 by philotical

[Einarr]

Double posting doesn't make your point any more valid...

In any case, if you wish to continue this discussion argument, please take it to PMs so we can stop cluttering and derailing this thread.

[phoenix_ca]

Also, can we get a set of less efficient, or perhaps dangerous CANDU reactors? Those use heavy water for their moderator, and thus have a very high flux of Tritium that could be (pretty sure) extracted. Like, less good on the reactor front, consumes heavy water to produce tritium. Citation:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU#Tritium_emissions

Not to go all Canadian on you but...that's just wrong. CANDU reactors aren't dangerous, in fact they're much, much safer than a light-water reactor. That very same section on tritium emissions you cited goes into detail about how low the regular emissions from such power plants are, and how standards for tritium amounts in water are substantially more restrictive in Canada compared to international standards. On top of that, you have the operational safety (which I stress again is laid-out in detail in the very link you posted in the sections above it).

Calling a CANDU reactor dangerous is just...absurd in the extreme. Properly managed, there's far less risk of things going wrong compared to LWRs or pressurised reactors. It's like saying a hamster is a dangerous pet that could maul you to death.

As for KSPI, there's the slight issue of a CANDU being put into space also being pretty absurd.

Edited May 13, 2014 by phoenix_ca

[Deredere]

Impulse engines in Star Trek, including the ones on shuttles, are fusion-powered electro-rockets.

i.e the exact same thing as a plasma engine.

You could assume the exhaust doesn't emit in the visible spectrum if it bothers you.

[Hughesdylan]

Impulse engines in Star Trek, including the ones on shuttles, are fusion-powered electro-rockets.

i.e the exact same thing as a plasma engine.

You could assume the exhaust doesn't emit in the visible spectrum if it bothers you.

Yes! thank you! Anyone who knows trek knows that these use plasma to generate thrust. Granted, they dont shoot it out the back, but still. The method of operation is remarkably similar. Plasmas in KSPI can generate quite a huge amount of thrust also, if you can supply the energy. We even have the same type of reactor system, matter/antimatter. They are exactly the same kind of thing that the plasma engine is here, Fusion power, generating plasma, accelerating that plasma via coils to very high speed, generating thrust. Correct me here if i'm wrong about this.

Not to go all Canadian on you but...that's just wrong. CANDU reactors aren't dangerous, in fact they're much, much safer than a light-water reactor. That very same section on tritium emissions you cited goes into detail about how low the regular emissions from such power plants are, and how standards for tritium amounts in water are substantially more restrictive in Canada compared to international standards. On top of that, you have the operational safety (which I stress again is laid-out in detail in the very link you posted in the sections above it).

Calling a CANDU reactor dangerous is just...absurd in the extreme. Properly managed, there's far less risk of things going wrong compared to LWRs or pressurised reactors. It's like saying a hamster is a dangerous pet that could maul you to death.

As for KSPI, there's the slight issue of a CANDU being put into space also being pretty absurd.

Whoh whoh whoh! Sorry man, i should have been more specific. I meant make them dangerous as a game play consideration. I didn't intend to imply that the actual power plants are somehow inherently less good than other systems. I was mainly thinking about using them in my off planet Kolony using the MKS mod. Building it off planet would reduce the ...silliness of launching one. It would also make a really neat "refueling and processing" base kind of concept.