|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 28, 2016 0:09:12 GMT
Ok so I know this is not hugely relevant but when you start to try and use stupidly huge ships the max fuel you can put into an NTR becomes a major issue as you very rapidly have to ditch exhaust velocity for thrust in order to have any acceleration of note with the ship.
Basically super huge ships require NTRs with more nuclear fuel than can currently be added to function fully.
To be fully clear I want more than 500kg of nuclear fuel in my NTRs as the current cap makes it very difficult to make silly huge ships.
|
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Oct 28, 2016 0:16:23 GMT
Can't you just use more efficient engine like 20 of them together or is that still not enough?
How heavy is that ship by the way?
|
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 28, 2016 0:20:54 GMT
Can't you just use more efficient engine like 20 of them together or is that still not enough? How heavy is that ship by the way? Oh it just weighs in at 2,800,000,000 kg and has 20 Decane 3.58km/s 551MN NTRs. It is really a silly ship that cost an insane amount and has no use but I really like messing around with it with the assumption that cost and mass and delta v are no issue and as it stands I have the max amount of decane thrusters and I really do not want to ditch more of the very little exhaust velocity I have left. So not really needed for any other type of ship but it is needed with this level of ludacris. As it stands it has .4gs of acceleration 31.8 second turn around time and 28.2 second roll about time but I want more  |
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Oct 28, 2016 0:42:35 GMT
Can't you just use more efficient engine like 20 of them together or is that still not enough? How heavy is that ship by the way? Oh it just weighs in at 2,800,000,000 kg and has 20 Decane 3.58km/s 551MN NTRs. It is really a silly ship that cost an insane amount and has no use but I really like messing around with it with the assumption that cost and mass and delta v are no issue and as it stands I have the max amount of decane thrusters and I really do not want to ditch more of the very little exhaust velocity I have left. So not really needed for any other type of ship but it is needed with this level of ludacris. As it stands it has .4gs of acceleration 31.8 second turn around time and 28.2 second roll about time but I want more Make it a broadside ir a saucer layout and add ALL the thrusters. |
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 28, 2016 0:52:58 GMT
Oh it just weighs in at 2,800,000,000 kg and has 20 Decane 3.58km/s 551MN NTRs. It is really a silly ship that cost an insane amount and has no use but I really like messing around with it with the assumption that cost and mass and delta v are no issue and as it stands I have the max amount of decane thrusters and I really do not want to ditch more of the very little exhaust velocity I have left. So not really needed for any other type of ship but it is needed with this level of ludacris. As it stands it has .4gs of acceleration 31.8 second turn around time and 28.2 second roll about time but I want more Make it a broadside ir a saucer layout and add ALL the thrusters. That would be such an immense pain with the darn thing. It doesn't help that I can't move internals below a certain point which is irksome. |
|
|
|
Post by bertle on Oct 29, 2016 1:19:58 GMT
Oh it just weighs in at 2,800,000,000 kg and has 20 Decane 3.58km/s 551MN NTRs. It is really a silly ship that cost an insane amount and has no use but I really like messing around with it with the assumption that cost and mass and delta v are no issue and as it stands I have the max amount of decane thrusters and I really do not want to ditch more of the very little exhaust velocity I have left. So not really needed for any other type of ship but it is needed with this level of ludacris. As it stands it has .4gs of acceleration 31.8 second turn around time and 28.2 second roll about time but I want more Make it a broadside ir a saucer layout and add ALL the thrusters. 551MN? Wow. Would you mind posting the details of that? |
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 29, 2016 1:37:00 GMT
Make it a broadside ir a saucer layout and add ALL the thrusters. 551MN? Wow. Would you mind posting the details of that? Sure thing!  The reaction wheels are Osmium spinning at 3.3 krpm You can ditch the basalt fiber armor to save a crap load of money among other things as this beast is mainly there to provide thrust to my stupid huge super dreadnought. |
|
|
|
Post by cuddlefish on Oct 29, 2016 2:17:04 GMT
154 tons per second... good grief.
|
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 29, 2016 2:25:46 GMT
154 tons per second... good grief. Yeah it is not in any way shape or form intended for anything other than the hugest of things. I designed it solely to propel a 2,000,000 ton space craft at .4 g and that's what it does. Not much else. If I could pack in more fuel I would so I can get more exhaust velocity because as it stands some chemical rockets have better exhaust velocity than this XD |
|
|
|
Post by wafflestoo on Oct 29, 2016 15:24:30 GMT
I think Q had an article about this very thing; mass scaling faster than surface area which had a fundamental limiting factor on TWR. Now we get to see it in action  |
|
|
|
Post by ross128 on Oct 29, 2016 15:49:01 GMT
Yeah, based on what those reaction wheels are doing to your TWR, I don't think bigger NTRs being made possible would help you very much. There'd be a little bit of ground to be gained, but you're already starting to get to the point where most of the thrust your engine generates is spent pushing the engine and the fuel necessary to give it more than a couple seconds of operation. Basically, you're getting spit-roasted by the rocket equation and the square-cube law. |
|
|
|
Post by magusunion on Oct 29, 2016 16:46:22 GMT
154 tons per second... good grief. Yeah it is not in any way shape or form intended for anything other than the hugest of things. I designed it solely to propel a 2,000,000 ton space craft at .4 g and that's what it does. Not much else. If I could pack in more fuel I would so I can get more exhaust velocity because as it stands some chemical rockets have better exhaust velocity than this XD You considered switching to Methane, or a different propellant? I know that will make your internals more volatile, but you can always modify the armor on the tanks and design "blast" shields in case the tanks get struck. That's what I'm using on a sightly bigger design on yours, but the exit velocity is literally garbage with stock engines. I'm just glad my design has the delta-v to move around in its orbits. |
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 29, 2016 17:36:51 GMT
Yeah it is not in any way shape or form intended for anything other than the hugest of things. I designed it solely to propel a 2,000,000 ton space craft at .4 g and that's what it does. Not much else. If I could pack in more fuel I would so I can get more exhaust velocity because as it stands some chemical rockets have better exhaust velocity than this XD You considered switching to Methane, or a different propellant? I know that will make your internals more volatile, but you can always modify the armor on the tanks and design "blast" shields in case the tanks get struck. That's what I'm using on a sightly bigger design on yours, but the exit velocity is literally garbage with stock engines. I'm just glad my design has the delta-v to move around in its orbits. Methane is actually quite a bit worse delta v wise. The density of decane is so much better than methane that I can fit almost 3 times as much into the same volume of space craft and that saves a huge amount of mass from both the size of the tanks and the amount of armor. |
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Oct 30, 2016 2:15:32 GMT
Yea, your problem is that you have maxed out the ingame sliders for power from a nuclear thermal rocket. You are now in the shitty trade space between throwing more mass out the engine on the same power, or not.
It sounds like the request for the dev is:
"Can we please have more than 500kg of fissiles in the nuclear thermal rockets?"
|
|
|
|
Post by captinjoehenry on Oct 30, 2016 2:18:54 GMT
Yea, your problem is that you have maxed out the ingame sliders for power from a nuclear thermal rocket. You are now in the shitty trade space between throwing more mass out the engine on the same power, or not. It sounds like the request for the dev is: "Can we please have more than 500kg of fissiles in the nuclear thermal rockets?" Yeah that is exactly what I asked for in the first post and the point of the thread. I want bigger NTRs then are currently possible. |
|
