|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 12, 2017 19:14:46 GMT
all my ships have crew, they may be approaching the size of Nimitz class aircraft carriers at a third the mass but they have crew counts in the 80 range Are you using the stock crew modules? I have noticed today (after almost 50 hours of playtime) that the 50crew module I designed is cheaper than any of the stock modules. Gotta say, crew modules were not where I expected to be able to shave off massive amounts of money. I use UHMWPE crew modules, they are the lightest you can get |
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Mar 12, 2017 19:20:32 GMT
Are you using the stock crew modules? I have noticed today (after almost 50 hours of playtime) that the 50crew module I designed is cheaper than any of the stock modules. Gotta say, crew modules were not where I expected to be able to shave off massive amounts of money. I use UHMWPE crew modules, they are the lightest you can get Polyethylene comes close and is a lot cheaper. If you don't mind mods, there is always 3D-graphene. |
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Mar 12, 2017 19:29:57 GMT
I use UHMWPE crew modules, they are the lightest you can get Polyethylene comes close and is a lot cheaper. If you don't mind mods, there is always 3D-graphene. Boron baby. Can optionally be armored up a cm or two for a last-ditch layer of crew protection for fighting ships. |
|
|
|
Post by dwwolf on Mar 12, 2017 20:09:15 GMT
This is my first full day I've had to play this game since I bought it on Sunday of last week. I've been having a blast. I've made one custom ship and many custom modules. My first design goal is to exceed the stock modules, and I seem to have succeeded beyond all of my expectations. The only physics I actually knew coming in related to rocket nozzles (blame Scott Manley), but I didn't even mess with those for a while! So I think I'll go over my ship: The Lighthouse Agency Attack Frigate. Not much to say, really. It's got custom everything (except nuclear reactors). The Knifefight missiles are prefect for shredding drones and inbound ordinance (and in a pinch can be used against capital ships) The PD coilguns were inspired by the 3mm stock sniper coilguns. I wanted them, but didn't want to pay for them. I got their cost down to 1.02 Mc a pop (including ammo!). The lasers are lasers and the railguns are railguns. Nothing crazy. The nuclear engine is a Decane nuclear engine. Meh. The lasers and engine design specs were basically taken by reading the SSOS thread right on these forums.  All of this being said, however, the thing I am most proud of I just created a little over an hour ago. I wanted to make a new strategic nuclear weapon, better than the Devastator in every way. And I succeeded. Ladies, gentlemen, and everyone in between, may I present... the Apocalypse torpedo. For the same price and mass as a Devastator, you get more delta-V and four times the power.  May we have the nuke design? |
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Mar 12, 2017 22:23:29 GMT
Trying to make a planetary/lunar/asteroid defence gun. It's supposed to use locally available materials and large underground capacitors that draw from the colony's water supply. I picked 7 stages because they line up nicely but it could use up to maybe 20 before the rate of fire becomes uselessly slow. Unfortunately it's very unimpressive for the power input. I left it with horrible overheating since it should really be actively cooled, again by the colony's water, and/or sink heat into all the regolith it's embedded in.  Boron baby. Can optionally be armored up a cm or two for a last-ditch layer of crew protection for fighting ships. Boron and polyethylene also provide not-insignificant radiation protection. May we have the nuke design? I have a comparable design which I suspect from the payload mass fraction listed in that missile is much lighter. Design specification was a 1t device with whatever yield that led to, happened to be 7Mt. NuclearPayloadModule 7Mt U-233 BFN
UsesCustomName true
CoreComposition U-233
ReflectorComposition UHMWPE
SlowExplosive
CombustionReaction Silicon Thermite
DelayComposition Lithium
DelayCompositionMassFraction 0
FastExplosive Octogen
CoreMass_kg 727
Enrichment_Percent 0.97
HollowCoreRadius_m 0.251
InnerExplosiveWidth_m 0.001
FusionBoost Deuterium Tritium
FusionFuelDensity_kg__m3 718
Detonator
HardRange_km 0
ActivationRange_km 10
MinimumRange_km 10
OverrideTimer_s 0
DelayedTrigger false
TargetsShips true
TargetsShots false
|
|
|
|
Post by AdmiralObvious on Mar 13, 2017 0:25:22 GMT
I MAY have found a bug, possibly, in regards to combustion rockets powered with Nitrous Oxide.  Regardless of how much I increase or decrease the pump speeds, the temperature doesn't change, nor does the exhaust velocity, but the thrust to mass ratio still goes up regardless. Is this a bug, or is it somehow accurate? As a result currently, the only limitations for a rocket of this type is the actual structural integrity of the components (and assuming you use a material with a melting point +913K). Edit: Apparently Hydrazine does this too. Edit 2: Also, it seems that anything that doesn't need a mixture ratio does not have a temperature increase or decrease, nor exhaust velocity change. |
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Mar 13, 2017 0:36:00 GMT
Rocket WitchHeh. I also made a Asteroid Gun; it's about a 900 megacredits of Hafnia.  Accuracy is trash, but it's more for shelling other asteroid settlements/planetary colonies with thin atmospheres. To defend these sites, I use my slightly more practical design.  "Only" 163MC!
|
|
|
|
Post by vegemeister on Mar 13, 2017 11:50:31 GMT
AdmiralObvious The heat comes from a chemical reaction in the propellant, and the heat goes into the propellant. Pumping more propellant into the engine increases the heat, but it also increases the amount of propellant to absorb it in exactly the same ratio, so the temperature doesn't change. That's true of all chemical rockets. Temperature only becomes an engineering problem when the flame temperature of the propellant is higher than the service temperature of whatever material you've made the engine thrust chamber out of, and you have to use regenerative cooling. In that case, heat has to be conducted through the walls into the unburned propellant in the cooling tubes. Increasing the flow of propellant adds more heat, but you actually have to thicken the chamber wall, reducing its thermal conductivity. This has to be counteracted by increasing the size of the chamber, either by increasing the throat radius or the contraction ratio. With boron or diamond chambers, this only seems to be a big consideration with the fluorine reactions, because of their stupendously high flame temperatures. I'm not sure about the realism of the exhaust velocity not changing. I don't think exhaust velocity depends substantially on chamber pressure for engines that operate in vacuum. Real engines have difficulty throttling to small fractions of full thrust (20% is considered quite deep), but I don't know how much of that is injector design.
|
|
|
|
Post by Inglonias on Mar 13, 2017 13:13:10 GMT
May we have the nuke design? The nuke design is inferior to the one in the SSOS thread in all respects (mass, cost, and yield). I'm now using that one instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 13, 2017 13:25:27 GMT
May we have the nuke design? The nuke design is inferior to the one in the SSOS thread in all respects (mass, cost, and yield). I'm now using that one instead. there is a 10.2Mt design for less mass then the SSOS nuke floating around somewhere |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 13, 2017 15:54:09 GMT
The nuke design is inferior to the one in the SSOS thread in all respects (mass, cost, and yield). I'm now using that one instead. there is a 10.2Mt design for less mass then the SSOS nuke floating around somewhere It has much lower mass but is much more expensive. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 13, 2017 18:27:30 GMT
not that much lower
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 13, 2017 22:28:33 GMT
I have made my smallest NTR powered thing ever, a small missile weighing in at 22T and 1.2Mc   RP-1 is very dense and I have better exhaust velocity then most of my H-F thrusters (save for one 600M in diameter), it was a struggle to get the mass flow rate low enough to pack 30s+ of burn time in a reasonable amount of propellant, more Dv then my smaller missile and more armour and firepower as well, only more cost and mass (and size) for downsides |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 14, 2017 0:09:47 GMT
I have made my smallest NTR powered thing ever, a small missile weighing in at 22T and 1.2Mc RP-1 is very dense and I have better exhaust velocity then most of my H-F thrusters (save for one 600M in diameter), it was a struggle to get the mass flow rate low enough to pack 30s+ of burn time in a reasonable amount of propellant, more Dv then my smaller missile and more armour and firepower as well, only more cost and mass (and size) for downsides That was so heavy. All of my current missiles are lighter than that and uses NTR. If I had to rank it, it'd be in the class 'large'. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 14, 2017 0:55:56 GMT
|
|
