|
Post by goduranus on Mar 13, 2017 14:30:52 GMT
There's no much difference in RTG configurations, basically there is only one material available(two but their power density/cost is about the same) and the maximum temperature is capped by fuel melting temperature. The only variable worth tweaking is how big of radiators you can afford, with bigger radiators allowing greater temperature deltas for more power.
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Mar 13, 2017 16:51:41 GMT
There are no Strontium ceramics with higher melting thresholds? Rocket Witch might be cheaper than Iridium too, Strontium is normally considered reactor waste...
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 14, 2017 0:52:36 GMT
There are no Strontium ceramics with higher melting thresholds? Rocket Witch might be cheaper than Iridium too, Strontium is normally considered reactor waste... What is material [Rocket Witch]?
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Mar 14, 2017 1:29:19 GMT
There are no Strontium ceramics with higher melting thresholds? Rocket Witch might be cheaper than Iridium too, Strontium is normally considered reactor waste... What is material [Rocket Witch]? 1 part raw quark gluon string, 95 parts CHON (Carbon Hydrogen Oxygen Nitrogen), various other trace Bosons, 1 part Witch-ium. Anyways, you probably figured that I was saying "Radioisotopic Strontium ceramics might be cheaper than Iridium isotopes."
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Mar 14, 2017 5:02:28 GMT
If we are going to revive this I'll have to completely rework my ship, yet again. After the patch those guns that I used are useless and I might as well avoid the payload, now that I know its an exploit.
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Mar 14, 2017 11:11:18 GMT
To do this properly, RTG material probably either needs to be cheaper (for the ones that can be extracted from nuclear waste) or to cheaper allow low-enrichment fuel like for thermoelectric engines.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Mar 14, 2017 14:23:54 GMT
There are no Strontium ceramics with higher melting thresholds? Rocket Witch might be cheaper than Iridium too, Strontium is normally considered reactor waste... So is neptunium, but zero solar abundance inflates its price. As does radioactivity I think (hence radon's price), so iridium-192 would be cheaper by virtue of transporting it plain and processing in-situ (its transmutation parent literally is plain iridium according to the config for it), while Sr-90 has to be taken from U-235/U-233/Pu-239 reactors and people paying you to take their waste away isn't modelled. Vanilla strontium-90 is more expensive than iridium-192 by about twice. Unless you had a different isotope in mind (which would have to vastly cheaper, unlikely given the way everything is priced primarily based on elemental constituents), adding other elements to the strontium to form a cermet with a higher melting point would probably only slightly increase the price and give you less power when I don't think any LAC is going to be strapped for surface area to attach radiators at these meagre power levels anyway. To do this properly, RTG material probably either needs to be cheaper (for the ones that can be extracted from nuclear waste) or to cheaper allow low-enrichment fuel like for thermoelectric engines. Why? You totally can keep the cost of the ship within 40MC with any fuel, and this is a design challenge. I do want to do a finished entry for this, especially after the patch, probably involving nuke cannons. Very power-unintensive way to cause mass destruction.
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Mar 14, 2017 18:35:53 GMT
To do this properly, RTG material probably either needs to be cheaper (for the ones that can be extracted from nuclear waste) or to cheaper allow low-enrichment fuel like for thermoelectric engines. Why? You totally can keep the cost of the ship within 40MC with any fuel, and this is a design challenge. I do want to do a finished entry for this, especially after the patch, probably involving nuke cannons. Very power-unintensive way to cause mass destruction. Because having the RTG fuel doubling the price of the craft makes little sense for a budget ship. Better over-engineer a cheap, safe thermoelectric reactor with ample safeties of margin at that point. If 40 Mc is too much after that, then cut it to 20 or 25 Mc.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Mar 14, 2017 19:26:14 GMT
Because having the RTG fuel doubling the price of the craft makes little sense for a budget ship. Better over-engineer a cheap, safe thermoelectric reactor with ample safeties of margin at that point. If 40 Mc is too much after that, then cut it to 20 or 25 Mc. Easy said that "the goal is to build something interesting outside of your comfort zone", not to be in any way believable. Everyone uses thermos, and when turbos are added everyone will use those instead. Molecularly perfect fission reactors are always going to be better in CDE unless a massive manufacturing cost hike occurs. Nobody designs RTGs unless they find the current state of reactors distasteful enough or want to make fist-sized microdrones, so the challenge was made to get people to design RTGs, conventional guns, etc. and deal with massive power limits rather than replicate the endless lasershow dominating the meta.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Mar 15, 2017 2:27:32 GMT
Presenting... the Long Assault Cutter. Steel tanks; 610kW power; 60x 250t nukes that go totally unfired because the intercept wasn't lined up perfectly. 6 points for level 1. I'll need to modify the nuke gun with a turret for level 2. I could probably improve the railguns a lot too; I made inextensive modificiations to the stock 200kW. Modules (warning over 9000 images):
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 15, 2017 2:54:07 GMT
I'll need to modify the nuke gun with a turret for level 2. I could probably improve the railguns a lot too; I made inextensive modificiations to the stock 200kW. Wait how did you get your guns to separately target both the ship and the drones with different weapons?
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Mar 15, 2017 3:16:02 GMT
Wait how did you get your guns to separately target both the ship and the drones with different weapons? I dunno; it's just what the AI decided to do, I guess because the drones are what triggered the enabling of ignore range and so became the designated target for the weapons newly firing, or were picked because the were closer once those weapons were activated, whereas the railguns were already laid onto the carrier.
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 15, 2017 17:33:53 GMT
Wait how did you get your guns to separately target both the ship and the drones with different weapons? I dunno; it's just what the AI decided to do, I guess because the drones are what triggered the enabling of ignore range and so became the designated target for the weapons newly firing, or were picked because the were closer once those weapons were activated, whereas the railguns were already laid onto the carrier. That is like 90% of my issues with guns at the moment is simply not being able to properly target what i need to.
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Mar 15, 2017 17:52:54 GMT
Rocket Witch and Argon, have you considered mounting duplicates of the same weapon with differences in targeting? A Mod A turret set to fire on ships only, and a Mod B turret set to fire on Ships and missiles, ect?
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Mar 15, 2017 23:43:56 GMT
Rocket Witch and Argon, have you considered mounting duplicates of the same weapon with differences in targeting? A Mod A turret set to fire on ships only, and a Mod B turret set to fire on Ships and missiles, ect? Yeah i have tried that, it can still be a little wonky. We really need a little more specific options for the targeting inputs like shoot at ships(yes) Laser(no) railgun(no) coilgun(yes) or some such
|
|