[0.90] KSP Interstellar port maintance thread

[FreeThinker]

Alright you can download the new KSPI 0.90 Extended Configuration 0.4.4 from Kerbalstuff

Introduction

This Mod is in essence a continuation of Boris KSPI 0.90 with some additonal fixes, features and configuration settings.

Features

• Added ability of Atmospheric Scoop to function as Propulsive fluid accumulator which can be achieved by placing a vessel in a circular orbit at the edge of space (+/-10%) with access to KSPI plasma engines and enough power to counter the simulated drag
  
• Added many new configuration settings including MaxThermalNozzleIsp, RadiationMechanicsDisabled
  
• Added Liquid Nitrogen en (RealFuels) Nitrogen as a resource which can be used for Thermal/Magnetic/Electric Rockets
  
• Added Cryotank which stores Liquid Nitrogen at low temperature, requiring electric power to maintain
  
• Added Integrated Nitrogen Radiator which stores Nitrogen gas and can perform Active cooling with Liquid Nitrogen
  
• Nitrogen can be scooped from the atmosphere with Atmospheric Scoop
  
• Improved Science Lab research : Profession & Skill now matter (+/- 50%) , effect of stupidity reduced (+/- 10%)
  
• Improved Science Lab feedback, it will at real time show how much science is already collected
  

Installation

• First remove any existing KSP Interstellar folder (WarpPlugin in GameData)
  
• Second install KSPI 0.90
  
• Third extract KSPI 0.90 Extended Configuration into Your GameData folder.
  

Changelog 0.4.2

• Adjusted Nitrogen / Liquid Nitrogen ISP and Efficiency to realistic values
  
• Fixes issue where ThF4 in top Nuclear reactor would automatically transfers to second Nuclear reactor at startup
  
• removed Regolith config files from install
  
• moved OSR KSPI resource changes to atmosphericresourcedefinitions
  

Edited January 30, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Olympic1]

Alright you can download the new KSPI 0.90 Extended Configuration 0.4.2 from Kerbalstuff

-snip-

Thx, but can you include the newest version of regolith (Release: 0.1.3 or Pre-release 0.1.4)

[ABZB]

The 2.5m Nitrogen Cryostat (FNNitrogenCryostat2) has a mismatching rate in the Compressor - the nitrogen rate given is 6458.83293, the rate needed to balance the reverse reaction in the other module (and complete the symmetry to the samller part) is 6593.98 . As is, you end up with a net increase in nitrogen.

[Northstar1989]

Awesome FreeThinker! As always, I'm HIGHLY grateful for your amazing work to extend KSP-Interstellar!

Did you see/make the adjustments to Nitrogen Cryostat volume (the 2.5 meter Nitrogen Cryostat previously have only 4 times instead of 8 times the volume of the 1.25 meter cryostats, even though it was double the length) and electricity consumption?

Regards,

Northstar

[Drew Kerman]

so, sorry for not paying closer attention to what's going on here as I'm still very early in tech so haven't used KSPI for more than waste heat/radiators at this time. I'm wondering exactly what Freethinker's KSPI Extension is for. Is it similar to WaveFunctionP's fork where it is geared for a different play style than what FractalUK was going for? Or is it meant to continue on the work Boris did to get KSPI up to 0.90? I guess I'm mainly confused that it keeps getting posted here and not in its own thread, so am I right in interpreting that as Freethinker picking up where Boris left off? Or are there now essentially four different kinds of KSPI - boris/Fractal, freethinker, wavefunction, and whomever is doing the NF integration sorry forget the name.

[Northstar1989]

so, sorry for not paying closer attention to what's going on here as I'm still very early in tech so haven't used KSPI for more than waste heat/radiators at this time. I'm wondering exactly what Freethinker's KSPI Extension is for. Is it similar to WaveFunctionP's fork where it is geared for a different play style than what FractalUK was going for? Or is it meant to continue on the work Boris did to get KSPI up to 0.90? I guess I'm mainly confused that it keeps getting posted here and not in its own thread, so am I right in interpreting that as Freethinker picking up where Boris left off? Or are there now essentially four different kinds of KSPI - boris/Fractal, freethinker, wavefunction, and whomever is doing the NF integration sorry forget the name.

It's meant to include some bugfixes, and features that Fractal_UK himself expressed an interest in adding to the mod (but didn't have time/ had other priorities). The extension config seeks to extend the functionality in a way that would be palatable to Fractal_UK himself, and to Boris, so that it can first be integrated into the 0.90 port, and then submitted as a pull request to Fractal_UK so he can implement it into the main KSP-Interstellar mod when he returns from his current hiatus.

It's true, we're taking a bit of a risk by going out and continuing Fractal_UK's work without his explicit imput that the way in which we implement the feature of Nitrogen (and eventually CO2) as harvestable, usable resources might not turn out to be to his liking- but since we're closely modeling the implementation on his existing work (even going so far as to use the same formulae he used to determine the other thermal rocket and plasma thruster propellants' efficiency/ISP, for instance), hopefully he will be grateful for our effort and work them into the main mod with little or no modification of the additions necessary...

Also, FreeThinker, I know I've been throwing a lot at you at once lately (tweaking Nitrogen Cryostat performance, fixing Nitrogen efficiency/ISP, and even requesting assistance with my Mass Driver mod), but how are you coming along in adding Carbon Dioxide as a harvestable/storable resource?

Like N2, CO2 should be usable as both a thermal rocket propellant (although with an ABYSMALLY low ISP- even lower than Nitrogen, but VERY high Thrust to compensate...) and an electric propellant. More importantly, it should be usable to perform the Sabatier Reaction outside of an atmosphere- allowing one to keep the ISRU refinery in orbit of the planet/moon (Duna in particular, obviously) and simply launch the CO2 into orbit to be reacted with LH2 stored there (possibly harvested from local water/ice, or shipped from Kerbin for mass-leveraging...)

CO2 is trivial to liquify (boiling point -57 degrees Celcius) and even to store as a solid (melting point -78 Celcius, that's what "Dry Ice" is!) Its boil-off is nearly insignificant in the -40 degree ambient temperatures of Low Earth Orbit, and it may actually require some *HEATING* to prevent in from freezing in interplanetary space (which can easily dip below -100 degrees Celcius). So I can think of no reason it should NOT be a harvestable/storable propellant, in fact in real life, it's the easiest resource to harvest and store of all the resources utilized in KSP-Interstellar so far!

By the way, CO2 should have the the following efficiency, ISP, and Thrust values compared to Nitrogen:

Thermal ISP: 79.78% of Nitrogen (actual ISP and Thrust values vary by Reactor Core Temperature)

Electric ISP: 2465.56 s (based on molecular mass, once again 79.78% of Nitrogen)

Plasma Thruster Efficiency: 82% (*EXTREMELY LOW* dielectric constant at low pressures and temperatures)

Regards,

Northstar

Edited January 30, 2015 by Northstar1989

[micheal rosen]

so, ive been doing more testing, and looking at the configs everything is there, the upgrade module is correctly typed into the config file for the part, but i dont know much about this stuff so that might just mean absolutely nothing. and it turns out nothing else is upgrading either.

[Northstar1989]

FreeThinker,

A little more background on why Carbon Dioxide should DEFINITELY be usable as a plasma thruster propellant, as well as a thermal propellant. Both possibilities are very well-studied in real life. Consider the following quote from the Wikipedia INTRODUCTION on plasma thrusters, for instance... (emphasis added to the phase "Carbon Dioxide")

"This fact, combined with the absence of hollow cathodes (which are very sensitive to all but the few noble gases) allows the intriguing possibility of being able to use this type of thruster on a huge range of propellants, from Argon, to *CARBON DIOXIDE*, Air mixtures to astronaut urine."

NASA is even looking at utilizing a CO2-electric thruster for a Mars atmosphere-skimming satellite in the future, although the thruster is designed to optimize maximum thrust production using a Hall Thruster (due to the very anemic power budget- the plan calls for solar panels as the electricity source! Somebody should suggest to these people they use a nuclear reactor or deploy a solar collector in a higher orbit and beam power down to the satellite!) rather than for high ISP with a plasma thruster:

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/716067main_Hohman_2011_PhI_Atmospheric_Electric_Thruster.pdf

As for CO2-thermal thrusters, a European Space Agency team is currently working on a CO2-thermal "hopper" craft powered using an RTG as its heat source to do *precisely* that:

http://www.hngn.com/articles/13172/20130924/mars-hopper-leap-over-obstacles-using-liquified-co2.htm

- - - Updated - - -

so, ive been doing more testing, and looking at the configs everything is there, the upgrade module is correctly typed into the config file for the part, but i dont know much about this stuff so that might just mean absolutely nothing. and it turns out nothing else is upgrading either.

This is an issue, clearly. Boris, FreeThinker, anybody want to take a look at trying to fix this bug?

Regards,

Northstar

Edited January 30, 2015 by Northstar1989

[LMC]

Hate to interrupt a thread here but I've got a couple of minor(ish) bugs with KSPI 13.6. First is the small Deuterium/Tritium canister is simply missing. The other small canisters are there and the large Cryostat D/T's are also present, but the small container is simply AWOL. Also Tweakscale is doing funny things with the Vista Engine; it lists as 62.5 cm radius but is actually 3.75 meters, and scales up to 7.5 meters while still only showing 2.5 meters... any increase above that only changes the number and not the engine itself. Is the Vista engine supposed to be fully scalable or is it restricted between 3.75 and 7.5 meter diameters?

Anyhow I'm off to refine some D/T as it's incredibly expensive... this is the first time I've played KSPI in career mode so this 'cost' thing is new to me! :/ Thanks for this incredible mod BTW... they really need to include it in the regular game!

[Northstar1989]

Hate to interrupt a thread here but I've got a couple of minor(ish) bugs with KSPI 13.6. First is the small Deuterium/Tritium canister is simply missing. The other small canisters are there and the large Cryostat D/T's are also present, but the small container is simply AWOL.

Do you mean the radial Hexcan for D/T? Which part *exactly* is missing?

Speaking of Cryostats, though, FreeThinker, you're going to have to do a MAJOR revision on the Nitrogen cryostat costs:

A Nitrogen Cryostat should *NOT* be this expensive! (> 5 million Funds)

The Deuterium/Tritium Cryostats are extremely expensive, but *ONLY* with an initial full loadout of Deuterium and Tritium (both very expensive resources, *especially* the Tritium) is added to the cost. An *EMPTY* Deuterium/Tritium Cryostat costs LESS THAN 5,000 Funds! (4958 Funds to be precise)

However because Liquid Nitrogen is a fairly cheap resource by comparison to Tritium, an empty Nitrogen Croystat still costs well over 5,000,000 Funds! A (empty) Nitrogen Cryostat should *NOT* cost 1000x what a (empty) Deuterium/Tritium Cryostat costs!

Besides that, as I already explained here, the Nitrogen Cryostats need their power consumption adjusted...

Re-Cap:

- A 1.25 meter Nitrogen Cryostat should only require about 3.9185 kW of electrical power to run (I suggest rounding up to 4 kW), as its contents don't need to be kept nearly as cold as Deuterium/Tritium (-249.84 for D/T vs -195.79 degrees for N2, 78.37% the difference from 0 Celsius). There is already precedent for different cryostats requiring different amounts of electricity based on the temperature they need to keep their contents at: a Helium Cryostat requires 8 kW of power whereas a Deuterium/Tritium Cryostat only requires 5 kW!

- A 2.5 meter Nitrogen Cryostat requires even less power for its volume, as it has 8 times the volume (I incorrectly thought you had set the volume to only be 4x instead of 8x before, based on a PM you sent me... Turns out the volume was increased 8-fold as it should be, and is correct...) but only 4 time the surface area. As a fuel tank in space this means two things: the heat load on the cooling equipment is less due to having fewer square meters of surface area per liter of volume, and the heat load is also reduced due to the tank having walls twice as thick (a fuel tank in space is a pressure-vessel, and has a linear relationship between volume and tank mass *despite* the Square-Cube Law- this is as a larger vessel has relatively greater stresses on its tank walls, which must thus be proportionally thicker...)

- When you combine these three factors (thicker walls, relatively less surface area, and a higher operating temperature), you find that a 2.5 meter Nitrogen cryostat has approximately 3 times the power requirements (by conservative estimates- the actual requirements are even less) of a 1.25 meter D/T Cryostat (which requires 5 kW). Thus, a 2.5 meter Nitrogen Cryostat should only require approximately 15 kW to operate (this is a *little* less than 4 times a 1.25 meter Nitrogen Cryostat, due to thicker tank walls and the fact that we rounded up from the 1.25 meter Nitrogen Cryostat's calculated power-consumption of 3.9185 kW...)

If you intend to maintain the *SAME* relationship between cost and volume as with a Deuterium/Tritium Cryostat (which costs exactly 4958 Funds when empty), then a 1.25 meter Nitrogen Cryostat should cost 4958 Funds (the Liquid Nitrogen is so cheap as to be negligible in cost- a full 1.25 meter cryostat's worth only costs around 1 Fund...) and a 2.5 meter Nitrogen Cryostat should cost 39,664 Funds.

Although, frankly, I think given the significantly higher operating temperature of a Nitrogen Cryostat, the fact that Liquid Nitrogen Cryostats are a common sight here on Earth (as a biologist, we used LN2 all the time in some of the labs I was in...) and the fact that it doesn't need to deal with Hydrogen-embrittlement (like a D/T Cryostat does), the Nitrogen Cryostat's cost should be *significantly* lower than that... (maybe 24,000 Funds and 3,000 Funds respectively, for some nice even numbers...)

Regards,

Northstar

Edited January 30, 2015 by Northstar1989

[FreeThinker]

By the way, CO2 should have the the following efficiency, ISP, and Thrust values compared to Nitrogen:

Thermal ISP: 79.78% of Nitrogen (actual ISP and Thrust values vary by Reactor Core Temperature)

Electric ISP: 2465.56 s (based on molecular mass, once again 79.78% of Nitrogen)

Plasma Thruster Efficiency: 82% (*EXTREMELY LOW* dielectric constant at low pressures and temperatures)

Regards,

Northstar

Now this is the kind of data I need, I will add it to my next upload

[Northstar1989]

Now this is the kind of data I need, I will add it to my next upload

Awesome!

By the way, on the RealFuels side of KSP-Interstellar/RealFuels integration, I noticed some more lines of code using the "&" symbol that aren't functioning correctly as a result (these lines of code were supposed to allow "LqdWater" to replaces "Water" and "Argon" to be storable in any tank that could hold XenonGas in RealFuels...)

//Add water tank using KSPI water. (TO-DO: integration with TACLS water without trampling KSPI or TACLS)
@TANK_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[@TANK[Kerosene]&!TANK[LqdWater]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin]:FOR[RealFuels]
{
	+TANK[Kerosene]
	{
		@name = LqdWater
	}
}

//Add Argon to all tanks that have XenonGas, as they function & store similarly.
@TANK_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[@TANK[XenonGas]&!TANK[Argon]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin]:FOR[RealFuels]
{
	+TANK[XenonGas]
	{
		@name = Argon
	}
}

I've brought this particular issue to attention on the RealFuels thread. It might be worth submitting a pull request to fix these lines of code, though. I can't find any other use of the "&" character in the KSPI_RF config file (aside from the lines about the Methane Tank you caught earlier), so once this is fixed I suppose all the KSP-I/RealFuels integration code should be working correctly.

Also, FreeThinker, would you have any interest in helping me wrap up the other issues (you commented on altering the rate of Ammonia consumption to match the change in resource density in RealFuels, but none of the other issues) with the KSP-I/Realfuels integration that I never got to before when working with Dreadicon? (specifically the issues you didn't comment on are: the KSP-Interstellar dedicated Ammonia tank needs to have its capacity increased when used to store RealFuels LqdAmmonia due to the lower resource density; the ISRU Refinery needs to produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant when the RealFuels module ModuleRCSFX is installed, which replaces "Monopropellant" with a variety of realistic monopropellants such as HTP and Hyrazine; and the ISRU Refinery's built-in tanks need to be insulated)

Feel free to reply to me by PM, because I know how difficult it can be bouncing around a million threads trying to catch everything that is going on...

Regards,

Northstar

[FreeThinker]

I simply added a Tank Definition for liquidnitrogen. (I use the module-managered integration of procedural parts into real/modular fuels):

I copy/pasted boil temp and loss rate from liquid oxygen, if anyone has better numbers, please let me know.

@TANK_DEFINITION[Cryogenic|BalloonCryo]:HAS[!TANK[LqdNitrogen]]
{
    TANK
    {
        name = LqdNitrogen
        mass = 0.000808
        utilization = 1
        fillable = True
        amount = 0.0
        maxAmount = 0.0
                temperature = -183
                loss_rate = 0.00000000002
                note = (has insulation)
    }
}

Yesterday I tried this MM code, but I didn't see any effect. Could someone you give me a working one I can include in the fix mod?

[Juggernaut]

G'day guys

I'm not sure if this has been discussed already, but I was wondering if there is already a quick(ish) patch or config I can add to make this compatible with regolith/Scansat etc. All i'm after is a means to detect and measure the amount of resources seeing as my Gamma-Ray Spectrometer doesn't map anything or (less preferably mind you) show the big half spheres from orbit.

[FreeThinker]

Alright, I updated the KSPI 0.90 Extended configuration to 0.4.4 which can now be downloaded from Kerbalstuff.

Change log:

• Added CarbonDioxide as a Thermal/Electrical Engine propellant
  
• rebalanced Efficiency Nitrogen/Liquid Nitrogen
  
• rebalanced build cost for Liquid Nitrogen Cryotanks tanks to realistic values
  
• rebalanced power requirments Liquid Nitrogen Cryotanks tanks to realistic values
  
• updated Regolith to 0.1.5
  

special tanks to Northstar1989 for supplying realistic values for Nitrogen/CarbonDioxide

Edited February 1, 2015 by FreeThinker

[ABZB]

Alright, I updated the KSPI 0.90 Extended configuration to 0.4.3 which can now be downloaded from Kerbalstuff.

Chang

• Added CarbonDioxide as a Thermal/Electrical Engine propellant
  
• rebalanced Efficiency Nitrogen/Liquid Nitrogen
  
• rebalanced build cost for Liquid Nitrogen Cryotanks tanks to realistic values
  
• rebalanced power requirments Liquid Nitrogen Cryotanks tanks to realistic values
  
• updated Regolith to 0.1.5
  

special tanks to Northstar1989 for supplying realistic values for Nitrogen/CarbonDioxide

In the electric propellant config for CO2 there is a typo - the isp is "0,21987368" instead of "0.21987368"

[FreeThinker]

In the electric propellant config for CO2 there is a typo - the isp is "0,21987368" instead of "0.21987368"

Thanx, I fixed it and made a new Patch

- - - Updated - - -

Also, FreeThinker, would you have any interest in helping me wrap up the other issues (you commented on altering the rate of Ammonia consumption to match the change in resource density in RealFuels, but none of the other issues) with the KSP-I/Realfuels integration that I never got to before when working with Dreadicon? (specifically the issues you didn't comment on are: the KSP-Interstellar dedicated Ammonia tank needs to have its capacity increased when used to store RealFuels LqdAmmonia due to the lower resource density; the ISRU Refinery needs to produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant when the RealFuels module ModuleRCSFX is installed, which replaces "Monopropellant" with a variety of realistic monopropellants such as HTP and Hyrazine; and the ISRU Refinery's built-in tanks need to be insulated)

When I made that comment I though it was about KSPI monopropellant production in KSPI Refinery. I studied it and it seems it already takes all relevant densities into account. So no need for change here except the ability to use certain resource from onboard resources, instead from the atmosphere. However, in order to do this well, I need the exact resources fraction by mass in the chemical processes.

I need data for the following numbers:

- Nitrogens Fraction By Mass in Haber Process (for production of Ammonia)

- CarbonDioxide Fraction By Mass in Sabatier process (for production of Methane)

Edited January 30, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Northstar1989]

Thanx, I fixed it and made a new Patch

- - - Updated - - -

Same installation instructions as before?

When I made that comment I though it was about KSPI monopropellant production in KSPI Refinery. I studied it and it seems it already takes all relevant densities into account. So no need for change here except the ability to use certain resource from onboard resources, instead from the atmosphere. However, in order to do this well, I need the exact resources fraction by mass in the chemical processes.

I need data for the following numbers:

- Nitrogens Fraction By Mass in Haber Process (for production of Ammonia)

- CarbonDioxide Fraction By Mass in Sabatier process (for production of Methane)

Easy numbers to calculate compared to some of the other calculations I had to make for Thermal/Electric ISP...

Nitrogen fraction is just atomic (NOT molecular mass of N2) mass of Nitrogen divided by molecular mass of Ammonia:

(14.0067)/(17.03052) = 0.822446995159 = 82.2447%

Carbon Dioxide fraction is a tiny bit harder. The Sabatier Reaction is CO2 + 4 H2 --> CH4 + 2 H2O, but KSP-I automatically couples it with Water Electrolysis (much to my disliking, since H2O is actually *MUCH* more storable in RealFuels than O2- as RealFuels assigns it no boil-off: though it *should* as temperatures climb high enough when you get as close to the sun as Moho...) This means the NET reaction (and the one you need the mass-fraction for) is CO2 + 2 H2 --> CH4 + O2, so...

(Molecular Mass CO2) / [(Molecular Mass CO2) + 2 * (Molecular Mass H2)] = (44.0095) / [44.0095 + 2 * (2.01588)] = 0.91607713869 = 91.6077%

Summary:

Haber Nitrogen mass-fraction: 82.2447%

Sabatier CO2 mass-fraction: 91.6077%

As you can see, the gasses that were not previously present as resources in KSP-I are the major mass constituents in each reaction. So it's not really practical to carry them from, say, Kerbin to Jool to act as seed mass for reactions with the H2 there, but it *IS* practical to harvest them from the edge of the atmosphere of Kerbin or Duna (using a Propulsive Fluid Accumulator- which can operate off N2 or CO2 for electric propulsion) and react them with Hydrogen launched from Kerbin's surface for some *MAJOR* mass-leveraging...

Oh, by the way, I think I said something silly earlier about Propulsive Fluid Accumulators not being possible on Duna. That was *BEFORE* I did my research and discovered that not only is CO2 a viable electric propellant, NASA is working on a spacecraft that would essentially act like a Propulsive Fluid Accumulator on Mars *NOW* (both collecting CO2 and using it for electric propulsion) in order to obtain imagery from a lower orbit (due to their insistence of relying on solar cells, however, they had to optimize for Thrust with a Hall Thruster, and thus end up with *VERY* low ISP/efficiency compared to what is possible with ISP-optimized plasma thrusters: no exact ISP value was given in the NASA study, but it appears to be less than 1200s, meaning they only just cut even with the rate of CO2 gathering vs. drag...)

So Propulsive Fluid Accumulators should *DEFINITELY* be possible using CO2-fed plasma thrusters (ISP of 2465.56 s) powered by nuclear reactors or beamed-power (MUCH better ratio of power to drag than solar cells) on Duna (20x thicker atmosphere than Mars, meaning useful CO2 densities for scooping can be found at much higher altitudes than on Mars), especially since PFA's operate at higher altitudes than the satellite being studied by NASA (which is meant to fly as low as possible so as to obtain closer imaging of the Martian surface) where orbital velocities should be lower (this is why solar-powered PFA's were shown to only be profitable in Earth orbit only at higher altitudes than nuclear-powered variants: because orbital velocity is lower in higher orbits, and atmosphere is thinner- meaning you can operate with larger scoop inlets without saturating the scoop, and have a better ratio of inlet flow to drag...) Thus, using PFA's to feed Sabatier Reactors in Duna orbit should certainly be profitable...

Regards,

Northstar

Edited January 30, 2015 by Northstar1989

[FreeThinker]

Same installation instructions as before?

Overriding into GameData should be enough.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, by the way, I think I said something silly earlier about Propulsive Fluid Accumulators not being possible on Duna. That was *BEFORE* I did my research and discovered that not only is CO2 a viable electric propellant, NASA is working on a spacecraft that would essentially act like a Propulsive Fluid Accumulator on Mars *NOW* (both collecting CO2 and using it for electric propulsion) in order to obtain imagery from a lower orbit (due to their insistence of relying on solar cells, however, they had to optimize for Thrust with a Hall Thruster, and thus end up with *VERY* low ISP/efficiency compared to what is possible with ISP-optimized plasma thrusters: no exact ISP value was given in the NASA study, but it appears to be less than 1200s, meaning they only just cut even with the rate of CO2 gathering vs. drag...)

This reminds my of one glaring unrealistic aspect of the ISRU Refinery Sabatier process, which is air density and pressure above a minimum (0.01), have no effect what so ever on the speed or power cost of the sabatier process. We might fix this unbalance by requiring the use of air scoop to first gather the resource before you can convert it into methane.

[Jahkeb]

FreeThinker, I don't know what changed, but the moment I installed your Extended Configuration 0.4.4 all of my problems went away. You're the man.

[Snoman314]

I'm having a problem I can't see referred to anywhere else. I've just unlocked the experimental Electrics tech node, but I still can't build graphene radiators, or the upgraded generators. It's as if I never unlocked that node.

[Temeriki]

They get upgraded automatically from their base version. I think ships in orbit have to be upgraded manually, ie click the part then select upgrade.

[Snoman314]

No I'm talking about ships built brand new. In the VAB the option to switch the generator between KTEC and Direct Conversion is not available, and when I build a new vessel, the radiators are of the old type.

I'll check and see if the option to upgrade existing vessels is there.

- - - Updated - - -

OK, so I was able to upgrade the 0.625m generator on my space station, but not the radiators.

I went back to the SPH to see if the problem was still there, and it is, except the 0.625m generator is showing as the upgraded version in the SPH. (Previously I had only tried the 3.75m version). So that's weird.

I checked the config files for the two generators, and I can't see any differences.

[Snoman314]

I've done some further testing. In a new Sandbox campaign, everything works as it should. In a new Career campaign that I edited to have 100000 science, I unlocked KSPI nodes one by one, and then eventually the entire tech tree. At every step, the only generator that was ever upgraded was the 0.625m version, as above. I didn't check the radiators, but I'm guessing they're not upgrading either.

So it seems to be something wrong with KSPI recognising the upgraded tech node?

[micheal rosen]

I've done some further testing. In a new Sandbox campaign, everything works as it should. In a new Career campaign that I edited to have 100000 science, I unlocked KSPI nodes one by one, and then eventually the entire tech tree. At every step, the only generator that was ever upgraded was the 0.625m version, as above. I didn't check the radiators, but I'm guessing they're not upgrading either.

So it seems to be something wrong with KSPI recognising the upgraded tech node?

yeah i had the same exact problems, we discussed this earlier in the thread (page 31)