Kerbal Space Program Megathread V1

[Pat22]

I'm not getting what the problem is. Won't the Ion engine do the trick?

[Ivan2006]

I doubt a single barely-powered ion engine is enough to get it make a proper orbit.

[Tau]

I once used 3 half-powered ion engines to get a 24t manned spacecraft from a keostationary orbit into a near-perfect orbit around Kerbol, situated between Duna and Dres, for the purpose of setting up a temporary RemoteTech comms relay network. It took a combined total of 8 hours of my computer sitting idle on the desk during the burns, but I did it.

If I can do that, you can use an ion engine and RCS to send a teeny tiny probe to Eeloo.

[Keon]

euurrghh I hate ions.

[ACH0225]

I love them, but I hate them. I was able to maneuver the probe into a capture orbit, but the big question is if I can keep it.

[Ivan2006]

I suggest using RCS as thrusters if the ion engine itself isn´t powerful enough.

[Iv121]

The RCS is more powerful than those ion thrusters BTW :P

[Pat22]

Yes, but you'll empty your Monopropellant a lot faster than your Xenon supplies.
Pat22 industries presents the Interplanetary Ion Ring! Designed to carry small craft and equipment to other planets and back. It possesses 30 Ion engines for a maximum thurst output of 15, reducing what would normally be hours of ion burns to mere minutes.
Its modular nature allows you to attach various sizes of Xenon supplies as well as any kind of craft. Easy to modify to fit different components as well.

View of the rear, where a spaceplane is currently docked.



View of the front, where the XenoRCS container is currently docked.

Some orbital assembly required. Size of the craft and engines not having any vectoring capabilities also render A-SAS almost useless once in space. Stabilizing has to be done manually.

[Pat22]

I was watching how slow Ion engines are compared to nuclear and it got me thinking. Are Ion engines really more fuel efficient than nuclear engines?
So I did a test.
A nuclear engine will produce 60N of thurst, and in doing so will consume 2.25 tons of fuel in 75.63 seconds.
120 Ion engines will also produce 60N of thrust, but will consume 2.25 tons of Xenon in 100.45 seconds.

So, in short, yes, Ion engines are about 33% more fuel efficient than Nuclear engines.

[MrTargareyan]

I was watching how slow Ion engines are compared to nuclear and it got me thinking. Are Ion engines really more fuel efficient than nuclear engines?
So I did a test.
A nuclear engine will produce 60N of thurst, and in doing so will consume 2.25 tons of fuel in 75.63 seconds.
120 Ion engines will also produce 60N of thrust, but will consume 2.25 tons of Xenon in 100.45 seconds.

So, in short, yes, Ion engines are about 33% more fuel efficient than Nuclear engines.

What about the weight of all those ion engines compared to 1 nuclear? but I can barely get to kerbin orbit

[Pat22]

I was watching how slow Ion engines are compared to nuclear and it got me thinking. Are Ion engines really more fuel efficient than nuclear engines?
So I did a test.
A nuclear engine will produce 60N of thurst, and in doing so will consume 2.25 tons of fuel in 75.63 seconds.
120 Ion engines will also produce 60N of thrust, but will consume 2.25 tons of Xenon in 100.45 seconds.

So, in short, yes, Ion engines are about 33% more fuel efficient than Nuclear engines.

What about the weight of all those ion engines compared to 1 nuclear? but I can barely get to kerbin orbit

One nuclear weighs 2.25.
One Ion weighs 0.25, so 120 Ions weighs 30. But you wouldn't use 120 Ions. If you're using Ions, you've accepted the fact that they're slower and thus would only use a fraction of that. I'm currently using 30 Ions which weighs in at 7.5.

[fr0stbyte124]

To be fair, you should take into account the additional mass 120 ion engines will have on the acceleration of the ship.

If I am still any good at basic physics, from rest the final velocity is:

Vfinal = (Force * Time)/Mass

*edit*
Damn ninjas always sneaking up when I am doing maths.

[Tau]

I'm going to guess (famous last words) that at one tank of xenon per engine, and 120 engines, you will not go to space today.

On an unrelated note:

Spoiler:

>0.02 intakeair
>125km
What the flying fuck?

[Pat22]

To be fair, you should take into account the additional mass 120 ion engines will have on the acceleration of the ship.

If I am still any good at basic physics, from rest the final velocity is:

Vfinal = (Force * Time)/Mass

*edit*
Damn ninjas always sneaking up when I am doing maths.

Couldn't have figured that out by myself. Took me a full ten minutes to figure out how to math all the data to get the result I did anyways.

Right so final result is, for the same 2.25tons of fuel:
1 Nuclear engine adds up to 2016.8
120 Ion engines add up to 200.9, so 10 ten times less velocity.
But with only 30 Ion engines, it adds up to 7812.5, almost 400% better than a single nuclear engine.

[Pat22]

I'm going to guess (famous last words) that at one tank of xenon per engine, and 120 engines, you will not go to space today.

On an unrelated note:

Spoiler:

>0.02 intakeair
>125km
What the flying I bite my thumb at?

Don't ask me, I have no idea where that air is coming from. Not only am I in space, the intakes are all closed.