Jump to content

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

Fractal_UK

By Fractal_UK
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

BigD145

BigD145

Posted
Posted
Is it possible to add a radiator effect to B9 wings? It's awfully annoying to try to find spots for radiators on thermal spaceplanes...

Use the humungoid panels and put them inside B9 wings. Ugly, but it works on bigger space planes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
raxo2222

raxo2222

Posted
Posted

I built 2000 GW powerplant LOL. I wish, that TweakScale fully supported Interstellar. If 3.75m antimatter reactor can output 400 GW of power, then how much 5m version of it output? Like 5 TW?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lei07

Lei07

Posted
Posted

Hi Fractal, firstly, love the mod. After seeing Scott Manley's initial few videos using this mod with his Interstellar Quest vids I downloaded it right away and haven't looked back since. Been playing with it months, on and off, and taking it slow I'm still in an "Apollo" era, but future toys are looking fun to play with.

Right, my question, as I have scanned a few pages in this thread and have not spotted anything on the matter, and apologies if this has already cropped up.

As many KSPI users may or may not be aware, there is a "jury rig" fix for KSP to make it run in 64bit, information here : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/82118-KSP-64bits-on-Windows-%28this-time-it-s-not-a-request%29 . The fix itself works wonders and I'm enjoying using the game in high res without texture reduction, but there is a snag. This fix doesn't seem to like the Interstellar mod.

It seems that if you do not have a well established saved game, consideribly far into the tech tree, the game will always crash on loaded the VAB. Now, this is not a "oi, fix it!" post, but I am legitimately interested if you think your mod will suffer once Squad officially makes KSP 64 bit. Is it a case of see what happens at the time, or are you thinking ahead and making steps to "future proof" your mod.

I'm not a modder myself, I wouldn't have the faintest idea how to do such a thing, and in general I find the mods that people like yourself do are just wildly fantastic and add so much depth to this game. I know that official KSP 64bit is some time off, but I'm sure it will happen (one day!).

It would be a shame to lose KSPI, as it has become a staple in many players tech trees.

Interested to hear your thoughts on the matter! Please keep the content coming, be it on 32 or 64 bit, or both! Tis such a great mod and always looking forward to what the next update brings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northstar1989

Northstar1989

Posted
Posted
Having read the links for both of those, it seems like they are still too theoretical.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Are you seriously trying to pull my chain? There's nothing any more theoretical about Solar Thermal Rocketry than there is about Microwave Beamed Power or Molten Salt Reactors (the still under-development in real-life reactors you use for your BASIC fission reactors in KSP Interstellar!) In fact, it's basically the same concept as a concentrating solar power plant- only the thermal energy is used to power a thermal rocket (already in KSP Interstellar, and already a real life technology that was demonstrated with nuclear thermal rockets) instead of to generate electricity.

The solar one is airship based and I aggree with them that airships and supersonic speeds won't mesh well. It also wouldn't really be in the scope of this mod.

There's nothing in the linked articles that even mentions airships, so what are you talking about? Plus, even if it were a propulsive system that was looked at for airships, there's nothing about the propulsive technique that in any way limits or restricts it to airships. That's about the equivalent of saying that because propellers were looked at for use on airships, they must be a technology specific to them...

As for the Air augmented rocket, the same applies. The added weight of the duct work would outweigh the benefits. You can try this yourself. Copy a stock engine. Add the appropriate weight to account for the duct work. Add intake air to the engines requirements (liquid fuel should be .9, oxidizer is 1.1. Start with intake air at 4 or so). Slap an intake on it and see how it goes. I'm not sure the isp should change though. However, the fuel consumption would go down by virtue of the fact that intake air may take up to half of the total ratio. This would (should?) double your fuel economy by itself.

You *do* realize that jet engines require a bunch of ducting as well, and we still use them. And, as the article states:

"leading to greater effective thrust for any given amount of fuel than either the rocket or a ramjet alone"

Air-augmented rockets are strictly superior in terms of TWR to Liquid Air Cycle Engines, as they require less additional mass, and yet those were used at one time as well, before the shift to rockets over early attempts at spaceplanes...

As the Wikipedia article points out, a large portion of modern missiles (weaponry) are in face air-augmented rockets. So I don't have to justify or defend the technology- the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. The ducting might be heavy, but the ISP is *doubled* for an SRB.

If you do your research, you will see the widely-cited figure of a roughly 15% performance increase from air-augmentation of SRB's. This is certainly less than a 100% increase, but it does mean that the technology works.

Regards,

Northstar

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northstar1989

Northstar1989

Posted
Posted
Hi Fractal, firstly, love the mod. After seeing Scott Manley's initial few videos using this mod with his Interstellar Quest vids I downloaded it right away and haven't looked back since. Been playing with it months, on and off, and taking it slow I'm still in an "Apollo" era, but future toys are looking fun to play with.

Right, my question, as I have scanned a few pages in this thread and have not spotted anything on the matter, and apologies if this has already cropped up.

As many KSPI users may or may not be aware, there is a "jury rig" fix for KSP to make it run in 64bit, information here : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/82118-KSP-64bits-on-Windows-%28this-time-it-s-not-a-request%29 . The fix itself works wonders and I'm enjoying using the game in high res without texture reduction, but there is a snag. This fix doesn't seem to like the Interstellar mod.

It seems that if you do not have a well established saved game, consideribly far into the tech tree, the game will always crash on loaded the VAB. Now, this is not a "oi, fix it!" post, but I am legitimately interested if you think your mod will suffer once Squad officially makes KSP 64 bit. Is it a case of see what happens at the time, or are you thinking ahead and making steps to "future proof" your mod.

I'm not a modder myself, I wouldn't have the faintest idea how to do such a thing, and in general I find the mods that people like yourself do are just wildly fantastic and add so much depth to this game. I know that official KSP 64bit is some time off, but I'm sure it will happen (one day!).

It would be a shame to lose KSPI, as it has become a staple in many players tech trees.

Interested to hear your thoughts on the matter! Please keep the content coming, be it on 32 or 64 bit, or both! Tis such a great mod and always looking forward to what the next update brings.

I hare to burst your bubble man, but 64-bit is probably never going to happen with KSP. Unity is simply too slow to adapt, too archaic, to ever fix the problems with their program that make it unreliable for 64-bit for a program like KSP...

If you look at the poll at the top of that thread, 1 in 4 people who attempted to install that 64-bit hack of KSP ended up with the game crashing/breaking. Something like that would be completely unacceptable for the official version of the game sanctioned by Squad, and unfortunately is nothing Squad can fix, as it's mainly a problem with Unity itself...

So unless Unity gets its act together at some point, and starts upgrading their program to work better with things like 64-bit and OpenGL (which is unlikely), don't expect any major improvements to the basic architecture of KSP anytime soon...

That being said, there ARE a lot of optimizations they could make with a dedicated and experienced performance-optimizer on the dev team (the kinds of things in Active Texture Management are just one example)- but Squad seems to have their heart set on keeping the dev team small and in-house, and probably isn't going to ever bring anyone on like that despite the potential benefits...

Regards,

Northstar

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rosenkranz

rosenkranz

Posted
Posted

North, you light up like a xmas tree. It makes me smile.

However a lot of the solar thermal article is seriously wanting for citations. The number of [citations needed] tags raises flags for me and the air ship reference was in the Solar-thermal for ground launch section.

I'll admit that the microwave tech is a bit far fetched as well. There are all kinds of problems I can imagine with either of these. Think about an ant under a magnifying glass in the sun. I recall simcity 4 and the possible disaster with the microwave power plants. Had to do with a satellite misalignment and the microwave beam misses the power plants receiver and bakes a section of the city. You shine 50GW on a ship and one wonders how it doesn't go 'poof'

As to the air rockets, I think my comments still stand. The 15% improvement you quote doesn't even come close to justifing the extra cost and complexity it adds to the rocket. Thus, in my opinion not worth the time to represent it in KSP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lei07

Lei07

Posted
Posted

Hi Northstar :) Aye, you made valid points, but as regards an official 64bit I don't think Squad would give up on it for some time yet. So far its been "we're working on it and getting reasonably close, then something breaks" deal, I think given the time they will amend matters.

The team seems to be in no rush to release the game as a "fully finished product", as KSP is already a couple of years old now (right?), and still in Alpha. It may take a massive kick in the pants of the Unity Engine to do so but I'd like to think it could happen at some point.

As regards the jury rig fix, other than an issue with a new game in KSPI I haven't stumbled on anything else (yet). I'm infact playing the game at the moment, busy retro fitting my fleet with the new Infernal Robotics parts. Other than a new game I have no issues at all with the Interstellar mod, nothing to rant and rave and demand a fix or anything. Were there that many issues then? It -could- be down to people impropperly performing the proceedure, as I'm sure any modder would state, no matter how clear they write a readme/install guide someone always does it completely wrong, or misses several steps. Perhaps down to their individual system, or balance of mods?

Im testing out several "high res" builds at this time, see how it performs at different ingame settings, and with and without forms of texture reduction.

Anyway, I was interested to get some thoughts and feedback about this issue, thanks for yours! As stated, I'm not a modder or anything but I am interested in how its all done. As I stated, I'm always looking forward to the next release!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
galactictaco

galactictaco

Posted
Posted

judging from my game data, im missing parts.cfgs for some files, including the arrays. i have .tgas, a .mu and a file called transmitter.cfg but other files have the equivalent files, plus a part.cfg. is this my problem and would redownloading the files work to fix it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sirbab

Sirbab

Posted
Posted
North, you light up like a xmas tree. It makes me smile.

However a lot of the solar thermal article is seriously wanting for citations. The number of [citations needed] tags raises flags for me and the air ship reference was in the Solar-thermal for ground launch section.

I'll admit that the microwave tech is a bit far fetched as well. There are all kinds of problems I can imagine with either of these. Think about an ant under a magnifying glass in the sun. I recall simcity 4 and the possible disaster with the microwave power plants. Had to do with a satellite misalignment and the microwave beam misses the power plants receiver and bakes a section of the city. You shine 50GW on a ship and one wonders how it doesn't go 'poof'

As to the air rockets, I think my comments still stand. The 15% improvement you quote doesn't even come close to justifing the extra cost and complexity it adds to the rocket. Thus, in my opinion not worth the time to represent it in KSP.

So the thing about Microwave transmission is, that it is focused to a much different frequency than what a conventional microwave oven is. What this does is; Only certain objects should even be affected by the microwaves in question. It would require such a gross failure to cause microwave transmission to start heating the area instead of merely transferring power. Also of note, is that the focal area is rather small in general, why would you beam power where you don't need to? At least, that is how i've come to understand it. given that it works on resonance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigD145

BigD145

Posted
Posted
judging from my game data, im missing parts.cfgs for some files, including the arrays. i have .tgas, a .mu and a file called transmitter.cfg but other files have the equivalent files, plus a part.cfg. is this my problem and would redownloading the files work to fix it?

Delete your entire parts folder and copy in the parts folder from the redownload. You might have other missing files, so you might want to just delete your WarpPlugin folder in gamedata and recopy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABZB

ABZB

Posted
Posted (edited)

Interesting discussion going on here today. In RL - I guess we'll wait and see. On the other hand - if someone wants to add more-or-less-that parts, regardless of the veracity of the claims:

ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[LF]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.4
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = LiquidFuel
			ratio = 1
		DrawGauge = True
	}
}
ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[Al]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.3
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = Aluminium
			ratio = 1
		DrawGauge = True
	}
}
ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[CH4]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.5
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = LqdMethane
			ratio = 1
		DrawGauge = True
	}
}

This will add jet-like functionality to those engines for the three propellants in KSPI that utilize Oxidizer. From what I read on the wiki article, they should function as standard rockets with the IntakeAir added:

ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[LF]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.4
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = LiquidFuel
			ratio = .9
		DrawGauge = True
	}
        PROPELLANT
        {
                name = Oxidizer
                         ratio = 1.1
        }
}
ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[Al]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.3
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = Aluminium
			ratio = 1
		DrawGauge = True
	}
        PROPELLANT
        {
                name = Oxidizer
                         ratio =4.05
        }
}
ATMOSPHERIC_NTR_PROPELLANT
{
	name = AirAugmented[CH4]
	guiName = IntakeAir
	ispMultiplier = 0.5
	isLFO = True
	isJet = True
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = IntakeAir
        	ratio = 20
	}
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = LqdMethane
			ratio = 1
		DrawGauge = True
	}
        PROPELLANT
        {
                name = Oxidizer
                         ratio = 2.72
        }
}

Of course, the out-of-atmosphere functionality comes with later tech tree upgrades. I did not make it work with the generic intakeatmosphere from KSPI - as that can be had out of the presence of oxygen.

I assumed that all 3 in each case have greater ISP than the just-intake sources. I arranged them as ISP[CH4]>ISP[LF]>ISP[Al] - the multipliers are .5,.4,.3 - if anyone has better numbers, feel free to post as such

Edited by ABZB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rosenkranz

rosenkranz

Posted
Posted
So the thing about Microwave transmission is, that it is focused to a much different frequency than what a conventional microwave oven is. What this does is; Only certain objects should even be affected by the microwaves in question. It would require such a gross failure to cause microwave transmission to start heating the area instead of merely transferring power. Also of note, is that the focal area is rather small in general, why would you beam power where you don't need to? At least, that is how i've come to understand it. given that it works on resonance.

Alright, that does make more sense. Thank you for that, i was having a bit of trouble getting my head around that concept. This would not be the case for solar though would it? It really would be the ant under the magnifying glass wouldn't it?

However, the focal area bit. If you're transmitting through an atmosphere or a great distance you're focal area is still likely to be bigger than the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MathigNihilcehk

MathigNihilcehk

Posted
Posted
They're not incompatible at all, there is no reason that Interstellar and Real Fuels should be mutually exclusive in any way. In fact it is one of the main mods I've strived to maintain the ability to be compatible with.

Indeed, it's quite possible to limit yourself to the early interstellar techs for e.g. NTRs, ISRU etc, then with the combination of heat mechanics and precoolers have solely a realism extension if that's what appeals to you.

I'm not sure why the DT Vista doesn't working with LH2 though, I will try to investigate.

Hey, I am interested in modifying Interstellar for personal uses. I want to make it compatible with Real Fuels. I'm looking at liquid H2, liquid oxygen, and hydrazine. I want to know how to make Interstellar use these in terms of Real Fuels instead of stock. I am also looking for creating new refinery operations to create some of the more exotic fuels of real fuels using the interstellar system.

First off, IS it compatible. In other words, if I plug in both Real Fuels and Interstellar will the fuels automatically convert, somehow? Does KSPI_MFS.cfg run after Interstellar and change all the Interstellar products into Real Fuel terms or something?

Second, how can I edit the refinery module such that it includes new fuel conversions? I found the Refinery module part.cfg, but I can't find anything relating to actual refining, only extraction.

Thanks a ton!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ABZB

ABZB

Posted
Posted
Hey, I am interested in modifying Interstellar for personal uses. I want to make it compatible with Real Fuels. I'm looking at liquid H2, liquid oxygen, and hydrazine. I want to know how to make Interstellar use these in terms of Real Fuels instead of stock. I am also looking for creating new refinery operations to create some of the more exotic fuels of real fuels using the interstellar system.

First off, IS it compatible. In other words, if I plug in both Real Fuels and Interstellar will the fuels automatically convert, somehow? Does KSPI_MFS.cfg run after Interstellar and change all the Interstellar products into Real Fuel terms or something?

Second, how can I edit the refinery module such that it includes new fuel conversions? I found the Refinery module part.cfg, but I can't find anything relating to actual refining, only extraction.

Thanks a ton!

The WarpPluginSettings.cfg in the GameData/WarpPlugin.

That has this:

WARP_PLUGIN_SETTINGS

{

name = WarpPluginSettings

HydrogenResourceName = LiquidFuel

OxygenResourceName = Oxidizer

AluminiumResourceName = Aluminium

MethaneResourceName = LqdMethane

ArgonResourceName = Argon

WaterResourceName = LqdWater

HydrogenPeroxideResourceName = H2Peroxide

AmmoniaResourceName = Ammonia

ThermalMechanicsDisabled = False

}

I think that this changes the target resources from the refinery (ISRU) module, so change OxygenResourceName = Oxidizer to OxygenResourceName = Oxygen, for example.

Then you would have to edit the 4 cfg files in the same directory that define the propellants for the reactor-based engines (only 3 really, 1 is just for that vacuum thruster)

In the parts/utilities folder, you would have to edit the refinery cfgs. in any extraction module whose (raw) resource has a different real-fuels name, you would edit the line:

resourceName = X as needed, as well as edit the resource nodes that hold small amounts of the raw mined and the products, as needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MathigNihilcehk

MathigNihilcehk

Posted
Posted
The WarpPluginSettings.cfg in the GameData/WarpPlugin.

That has this:

WARP_PLUGIN_SETTINGS

{

name = WarpPluginSettings

HydrogenResourceName = LiquidFuel

OxygenResourceName = Oxidizer

AluminiumResourceName = Aluminium

MethaneResourceName = LqdMethane

ArgonResourceName = Argon

WaterResourceName = LqdWater

HydrogenPeroxideResourceName = H2Peroxide

AmmoniaResourceName = Ammonia

ThermalMechanicsDisabled = False

}

I think that this changes the target resources from the refinery (ISRU) module, so change OxygenResourceName = Oxidizer to OxygenResourceName = Oxygen, for example.

Then you would have to edit the 4 cfg files in the same directory that define the propellants for the reactor-based engines (only 3 really, 1 is just for that vacuum thruster)

In the parts/utilities folder, you would have to edit the refinery cfgs. in any extraction module whose (raw) resource has a different real-fuels name, you would edit the line:

resourceName = X as needed, as well as edit the resource nodes that hold small amounts of the raw mined and the products, as needed.

Yeah OK. That leaves the new refining sets. I COULD use Kethane's conversion formula, if needed, then. Should be a simple replace the inputs and outputs. Thanks a bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndreyATGB

AndreyATGB

Posted
Posted

Reading through some of the discussions here, I think this mod will change the most in 0.24. Budgets will completely change the way we use microwaves since you'd need an insane amount of money to build a big power plant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NeoAcario

NeoAcario

Posted
Posted
Reading through some of the discussions here, I think this mod will change the most in 0.24. Budgets will completely change the way we use microwaves since you'd need an insane amount of money to build a big power plant.

I know I'm not looking forward to it... I might have to cave and make a solar farm with a system of sats. Thankfully I don't use a whole lot of beamed power. Only thing I currently use it for is my Asteroid Capture probe and to charge exotic matter for ships still on the launch pad. Ugh, those 1800 ton asteroids take so much power to put into a perfect equatorial orbit.

I'm actually quite curious how feasible it will be to get an AM farm back in orbit around Jool. Hell, my Warp Tugs can do anything. Only takes one and then it's basically EZMOAD. I might have to break down and design a bigger one for heavy lifts.

~Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rosenkranz

rosenkranz

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yay! Figured it out. Forum searching for the win :). Here's those power rovers I was talking about.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Andrey is right though. Each of these rovers would likely cost a mint. Using Kerbal Contruction Time would also put some limits on this.

To be honest though, budgeting is going to balance a lot of things.

Edited by rosenkranz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nli2work

nli2work

Posted
Posted
Yay! Figured it out. Forum searching for the win :). Here's those power rovers I was talking about.

http://imgur.com/a/qPWaf

Andrey is right though. Each of these rovers would likely cost a mint. Using Kerbal Contruction Time would also put some limits on this.

To be honest though, budgeting is going to balance a lot of things.

put that thing into orbit where you don't lose 60% of power through the atmosphere!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...