Search the Community

Dear all, I'd like to create spaceplanes in RSS to achieve an orbit and stuff like that. What problems I found out by now using ksp-stock-sized related mods: ksp-fuels are way too dense --> spaceplanes don't produce lift enough at normal angles of attack (more angle - more lift - more dragg) ksp fuels are way too dense --> runway collapses jet engines and the rapier are adjusted for kerbin atmosphere and kerbin airspeeds Thoughts to come by these problems: using C7's Sabre Engine (2.5m) of the B9 pack and adjusting it to: use intake air / liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen in the correct ratio adjust it in size and weight to the planned sabre engine from Reaction Engines Limited adjust performance-values to work at mode switch conditons (~30km @ mach 5.x) Unfortunately I'm not a modder and don't know how to destroy adjust the configs correctly. Do you know: someone who created the piece of code I am looking for? a link to the modpack I am looking for? which values have to be adjusted? how to adust those values? do you know someone who is developing a jet-engine pack for RSS/real fuels? If you have other ideas to get a proper technical base for spaceplane engines, I'd like to read your suggestions. Thanks, Lukas

I'm asking this in the right place, correct? In my course of conquering colonizing the solar system, I have discovered that my O-10 "Puff" monopropellant engines no longer function. Checking the VAB, it appears that they have no right-click menu, only displaying "No more info". My mods, in order, are here: -AB_Launchers -B9PartSwitch -BetterBurnTime -CommunityResourcePack -EngineLight -FAR -Firespitter (.DLL only) -HGA (Proton-M) -InterstellarFuelSwitch -JSI (RasterPropMonitor) -KerbalEngineer -KJR -KVV -MakeItSmall (probably going to remove) -ModularFlightIntegrator (came with FAR) -NavBallsToYou -NavyFish Docking Alignment Indicator -NearFutureConstruction -NearFutureSolar -PlanetShine -RCSSounds -RealChute -RealPlume (configs included) -REPOSoftTech (DeepFreeze) -scatterer -SmokeScreen -SpaceXLegs -SpaceY-Lifters -Squad -ThrottleControlledAvionics -Trajectories -ModuleManager I have already attempted to remove the Puff manually and reinstall it, as I have KSP via Steam. However, it does not work, so one of these mods must have damaged the game code, as removing any of them doesn't change anything. It should also be noted that the O-10 once worked fine with all of these installed, so I'm not sure what changed. Log file is here (should be the correct file): https://goo.gl/MD1ura EDIT: Wrong link! Should be fixed.

Hi all, I've got a bit of an odd question regarding engine thrust. I'm designing an asteroid "puller" to bring in a Class E. I have my nuclear engines out on 4 radially-symmetrical nacelles, which were angled at about 45 degrees to try to clear the asteroid for unimpeded thrust. On my first attempt, the angle was not sufficient, and I had some of the engines (but not all) obstructed by the asteroid, leading to more asteroid-spinning and less asteroid-moving. So to address this, I tried to increase the angle of the engines (i.e., make them closer to perpendicular to the main axis of the ship). I tested out the new design on the launchpad, with gravity hacked and with just the core ship, not the orbital-launch rig. Results were not good- I was barely getting any thrust! In other words, it seems there's a thrust penalty for having your engines angled. I've looked on the forums for info on this and not seen much, but one person suggested the end-thrust is a function of the cosine of the engine angle. My question, I guess, is why. My (probably wrong) understanding was that, if you have two symmetrically balanced engines, as long as there was SOME angle in one direction, they would put full thrust forward regardless of the angle. Those engines' energy has got to go somewhere, and I presume it's not being lost to deformation or heating of the ship in between. If not, the only place the energy could go was forward. The analogy that comes to mind is: squeeze a wet bar of soap between your hands, it will shoot out straight up or in some direction. Not because you pushed it in that specific, but because it's got nowhere else to go when you apply a squeezing force. Can anyone explain what's causing the observed thrust loss? Is there just extra heat generation? Is the specific impulse of the engine affected somehow? Is it just something else? (By the way, if major engine angling is not the answer, I will probably fix my rig by either extending the "tail" so the ship is further in front of the asteroid, or putting the engines out on longer pylons). Thanks for any info you might have!

What's the most common one you use on your designs / what'd you recommend for a NEWB? All RAPIER Pros - fully reusable, fuel always drains evenly, good (best?) payload fraction to LKO, high thrust weight ratio Cons - low ISP in space , not optimal for missions beyond low orbit 2 RAPIER 2 NERV Pros - fully reusable, can fly to space without oxidizer. Symmetrical layout. Decent delta V. Once fuel type for air breathing and rocket engines. Cons - one nerv can only lift 15 tons whereas a single rapier can do twice that, at a pinch, so you are carrying one more rapier than you really need - and those suckers are heavy. 2 tons each. Also the NERVs drain fuel front to back of the stack like a rocket , so won't take from wing tanks and try their hardest to mess up CG 1 RAPIER 2 NERV https://kerbalx.com/AeroGav/Astrojet-Citation Pros - fully reusable, can fly to space without oxidizer. Symmetrical layout. Good Delta V Cons - poor performance when subsonic, hard to bust through the sound barrier. Swapping RAPIER for Whiplash improves this at the expense of a little delta V though lower airbreathing max speed. 1 RAPIER 2 NERV 2 disposable panthers (coupled to rear of NERVs) Pros - solves the poor subsonic performance of the above layout, nice controllable climb not as banzai as a pure RAPIER/Whiplash design at high speed. Cons - not fully reusable, though Panthers are only a third of the price of a RAPIER and enable to sort of missions you'd need a pretty big rocket for. https://kerbalx.com/AeroGav/K211-Tundra-Goose NERV + disposable whiplash on decoupler behind NERV Pros - very high delta V, can go to Duna and back, since you're not dragging the dead weight of air breathing engines once they outlive usefulness. Cons - not fully re-suable, though still only 2000 kredits a pop https://kerbalx.com/AeroGav/whippynerv NERV + disposable RAPIER https://kerbalx.com/AeroGav/Astrojet-Citation-X The last word in performance. Re-using engines is for peasants.

Squad should add a new turbojet, something in between the turbo ramjet, and the wheesley. Not a panther engine though, just something that will work better at higher altitudes. The J75 was used on the U-2 spy plane to carry it to the edges of the atmosphere. We should have an engine that is smaller, and capable of doing this with really good fuel efficiency early on in the game, and to provide a way to air launch something from the edges of the atmosphere, or to do some early exploring of Kerbin.

I made a mod for a super-powerful engine, using seamlessly integrated North Pole UFO tech. (some anti-gravity stuff to propel the LfO out faster. --==Hyperengine==-- This is the first of its kind in the Hyperparts Co. series of mods. I can also add your mods, if they have OP parts, and Hyperparts Co. as the manufacturer. You will be given 90% credit (because I inspired you ).

what are some good chemical engine mods please send link.

Following my recent post on the pros and cons of Ion Engine and the overwhelming amount of response, I've noticed that a few of you fellow kerbonauts use ion engines mainly for your rovers. That's the background of this challenge. -- Mission -- Get to Minmus using a stock only lifter that has a rover powered by ion engines only (No delta V). Then you must land the rover/probe on the surface and drive around. While there be creative, maybe add some science parts for those of you in career mode? That is about it for the mission, if you attempt and/or complete this mission share your screenshots and your experiences on this thread! Thanks again, - Mr_Kerbal

I'm creating an engine switcher, and now I'm looking af switch the effects along with engine stats. Now I've run into en issue where the fx does not update properly from "OnLoad()" event. Basically what I do is Load settings from custom module Identify engine module to change Use ConfigNode to replace values regarding Fx in the engine Load the new values to the engine. I only have one update function, which is called by the OnLoad() event as well as by my switch button in the right click menu. However, when loading (or starting) a flight scene, the animation is just running with the animation from the original part. The issue seems to be triggered when the fx intended is different from the original one.... The behavior is not affected by deactivating the engine... (full code can be accessed here) I guess there is some trick to get the fx changes to take effect, but I just can't figure out what it is. Does anybody out there know what is needed?

Nuclear Aircraft Engines To download, go to the Thermonuclear Turbines 1.1 release page. Development Album OLD Development Album A new hot way to get into orbit! This is a small mod in development that adds nuclear turbine aircraft engines based off of this concept, Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion, Project Pluto (Thanks to Nothalogh for sharing this link) and the similar Soviet program Tupolev Tu-95LAL, also with a little influence from the Choujikuu Yousai Macross anime series and sequels to give one of the engines space capability. I've been passing this idea around for a bit, and with the new changes to the LV-N Atomic Rocket, I can now make it. The concept behind the engine is that thermal energy is transferred through a heat exchanger into the "can" (combustion section of a turbine) instead of using combustion to rapidly heat up gasses to turn the turbine and provide thrust. Features: Six Engines: MASAMUNE, KUNAI, Short-M, NODACHI, MURASAMA, KATANA Custom Sounds Custom FX Attention: Much like the R.A.P.I.E.R. engine, the nuclear engines' CoM is adjusted forward to both help balance the craft and to simulate parts being gutted out to make room for the compressor, diffuser, and reactor "can." Current Issues A small bug with using conventional engines along with the nuclear engines will make them effectively nuclear. FIXED! A small bug with the "turbine spin" when switching modes of the MASAMUNE where the turbine spins down in nuclear rocket mode. FIXED! (New models and design change this.) Bug where the alternator does not supply electricity in nuclear rocket mode. This is caused by the muti-mode engine module. Just deploy solar panels in space. FIXED! (Although still good to have solar panels.) Current Status: M.A.S.A.M.U.N.E.: COMPLETE N.O.D.A.C.H.I.: COMPLETE K.U.N.A.I.: COMPLETE SHORT-M: COMPLETE M.U.R.A.M.A.S.A.: COMPLETE K.A.T.A.N.A.: MK2 cross-section, Being finished Currently Planned: Direct Air Cycle Engines (Phase I) MX-01 K. U. N. A. I. (Kerbin Utility Nuclear Aircraft Inductor) for those transport planes that never need to land. [does not go to space] MX-01X M. A. S. A. M. U. N. E. (Multiple Accelerator, Specialized Aicraft, Modified Utility Nuclear Engine) [goes to space] MXF-01 SHORT-M (Short M.A.S.A.M.U.N.E.) [lighter, less powerful, designed for small minimalist SSTOs] MX-02 N. O. D. A. C. H. I. (Nuclear Over Drive Aerospace Craft Heat Inductor) For your forever 2.5m flying needs [goes to space] MPX-01 M. U. R. A. M. A. S. A. (Multi Use Rotating Air Mechinism And Specialized Aircraft) Nuclear Propeller [you'll wish it went to space] MX-02 K.A.T.A.N.A. (Kerbin Aerospace Transport And Nuclear Acceleration) MK2 Style hybrid engine. [Also goes to space] Indirect Air Cycle Engines: (Phase II) planned but tentative Mk-II Reactor Mk-III Reactor 1.25m Reactor 2.5m Reactor ID-01 Turbine IDX-01X Hybrid Turbine IDP-02-ID Nuclear Propeller CHANGE LOG 1.0.0: Almost complete. No release yet. 0.1.42a: Accidentally broke the Masamune and Kunai engines, fixed now. 0.1.42: - Updated all plugins for 1.04 (licenses included) - Corrected animation for Short-M engine - Minor fixes 0.1.41: A little tuning to the configs and fixes the attachment node for Short-M Engine 0.1.4: Added 'Short M' engine (early) 0.1.3a: Hot Fix!!! 0.1.3: Fixed resource for air breathing, used Community Resource Pack's IntakeAtm intead of IntakeAir (thanks to suggestions by Svm420 and FreeThinker). Added MM patch for all intakes. A few minor config tweaks. 0.1.2: Changed emissive constant. 0.1.1: Description Fix in M.A.S.A.M.U.N.E Engine 0.1.0: Initial Alpha Pre-release Additional Credit: BahamtoD: BDAnimationModules.dll & Exhaust Effects B.Dynamics - Retracting/vectoring engines etc. (Pre 1.0.0) nli2work: for his awesome propeller meshes. Nazari1382: Hot Rockets (And the tutorial to make my own.) Snjo: for FireSpitter (*.dll Packaged with Thermal Nuclear) sarbian: for Module Manager (*.dll Packaged with Thermal Nuclear) RoverDude: for Community Resource Pack (Packaged with Thermal Nuclear) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

I'm wondering if it's possible to add two particle emitter effects to a single engine. I think it's possible, because I think at least the turboramjet effect with hot rockets worked that way. However this happened to me when I tried (see image below). What I did was I added to particle emitter objects in Unity to the empty object that is exported as a .mu file. This generates one .mu and two texture files. But KSP doesn't like it? Is there another way? The effect coming out of the exhaust is how it's actually supposed to look, but I don't know where the diagonal flame came from. Also, the engine can't be turned off or on, and the effect is always running...

I seem to be haveing some problems getting a VTOL running. Not because of balance issues, but one of the two engines always fails! I've rebuilt the plane several times, and each time, one of the VTOL engines on either wings just flames out for appearantly no reason. I'm not really familiar with the game's air flow logic, but it seems like it shouldn't be happening. The engine on the left flames out during spool-up, but the one one the right runs fine Plane side profile Plane top profile

I have a multi-mode engine where the animation works in one mode, but stops working in the second mode. How do I make the animation work in both modes?

Nerva HT Engine v1.0 Late-game 2.5m Nuclear Engine. I was originally asked to model an engine for this mod, but unfortunately the mod was halted and I never got to finish it. I went back to my original draft and started over to release the engine model on my own and use it to learn how to mod KSP from Unity. Download: Spacedock Dropbox Real Plume config by @VenomousRequiem. Module Manager required for RealPlume configs. Please check out my Development Thread for my new ProbesPlus mod! License: CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 Please let me know if you release anything based on my work. I'd love to check it out!

I'm working on a mod for engines. One basic function is supposed to be switching the propellant on an engine, like fuelswitch does for fueltanks. It is supposed to function as an alternative to the engine switch like on rapiers. I aim at integrating against tech level, and maybe inflight upgrading by EVA or something. Now, my current issue is, I cannot get the propellant switch to work. I can change the name of the propellant, but that does not change the propellant. A copy of the full C# module in it's current state can be obtained here. I think I need to change the ".id" of the propellant to get the game to recognise the change. If this is what I need to do, then I do not know how to obtain the resource ID's other than through the error logs in KSP. I've tried "PartResourceLibrary.GetDefinition(string)" but I get an error I simply cannot figure out how to fix. --> "An object reference is required for the non-static field, method, or property 'PartResourceLibrary.GetDefinition(string)'." I reality I would really like to be able to delete the old propellants and replace them by new ones. Can anyone help?

For some reason can't get engine light mod working with real fuels? I've tried messing about with the mm configs but no joy. Please help!!!

Hello all, I'm still a novice here, so if what im asking for already exists, please point me the right way I'm looking for a set of large in-shell propeller engines, like those on a Sci-f- helicopter or the Marvel Helicarriers. something that would optimally be usable with twaekscale, and surface mountable (so that it could bat attached to the wing). I've been experimenting with using the high bypass fan from the MKIV pack as a graphic for a 2 part engine. the engine its self is an intake with reversible thrust (it can act as suction and intake, or propulsion). Ideally you would toggle the modes in the SPH, or have 2 separate parts functioning in tandem. the suction engine function would have reverse thrust of low power and high intake, the propulsion side would have high output but no intake. also, true to realism, neither would have any gimbal.also might opt for a resource that isn't intake air as not to allow use of alternate air intakes, powered by electricity preferably. im kinda bad at the codeing, so if someone could provide some scrips for this (of just a part; i don't wanna be stealing someone else's graphics) that would be awesome. (the idea is something like this http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y90/hybriddiesel/maglevrotor.jpg )

It's kind of a pain to have to set thrust to zero so you can manually adjust each individual engines thrust limiter. I was thinking it might be nice to have an option that would allow you to incrementally increase or decrease each engines thrust limiter via an action group.

We have several RD-107/108 engines in various mod packs right now but they all suffer from lack of detail or integrated fairings. I was wondering if anyone was up to the challenge of producing a set of BobCat-esque (think Soviet Engine Pack) models for the RD-107 and RD-108 for use with Realism Overhaul? Perhaps to integrate into FASA or another "replica" mod? Something like this (RD-107): And this (RD-108) The main nozzles don't gimbal but the little side engines (S1.53800) do gimbal. Obviously some detail can and should be omitted for performance, but models like this would be great additions to the Realism Overhaul game as the "naked" R-7 engine selection could use some love. Thanks for your consideration.

Hi! I have been much idle time, but I'm back and I'm back with a new idea: more nuclear propulsion. Justification of more nuclear propulsion: In Kerbal no evidence of the existence of a cold war, nuclear testing and non nuclear proliferation treaty; and also the only life there are those green people living in the rocket base, so no problem with nuclear contamination. (forever alone) The atomic propulsion that I suggest: - Nuclear thermic engine (update): Now make use of only hydrogen (more down) instead fuel and oxidizer. - Radioisotope engine: A little engine similar to ionic engine, little more heavy, that make use of hydrogen (instead xenon) and not requires electricity. - Atomic bulb: A big powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and little of uranium (more down), and produces electricity. - Nuclear liquid uranium engine: A medium powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and uranium. - Nuclear gas uranium engine: A big very powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and lots of uranium. - Uranium bubble: A medium very powerful engine that make use of only uranium (need a new animation to represent ioniced uranium bubble), and lots of electricity. - Nuclear pulse engine: A very big and very powerful engine that make use of 0,8 to 25 kilotons range nuclear detonations to propelling (need a new animation to represent engine move and nuclear explosions), make use of nuclear nukes (there is of different types, mass and power). - Advanced nuclear pulse engine: A extremely big and powerful engine that make use of 25 kilotons to megaton range nuclear detonations. - Polywell nuclear thermic engine: A little-medium engine that make use of a controlled fusion reactor to heat up hydrogen (make use of only hydrogen), and produces much electricity. - Antimatter injection thermic engine: A little-medium engine that make use of very low amounts of antimatter to heat up hydrogen (make use of hydrogen and antimatter), and produces much electricity. Fuels and materials to propulsion: - Liquid hydrogen: in containers of similar size to "fuel-oxidant" containers (any size). - Uranium: in little and shorts containers. - Antimatter: in little and shorts heavy containers, with reinforced texture, these containers consumes a lots of electricity to contain the antimatter, if there is no electricity, it will explode. - Nukes (very expensive, care): of various types, in very width and shorts containers: - 0,8 kt (60 units) - 2 kt (30 units) - 5 kt (20 units) - 10kt (10 units) - 25 kt (5 units) - 50 kt (3 units) - 100 kt (1 unit) of various types, in very width and large containers: - 25 kt (30 units) - 50 kt (20 units) - 100 kt (10 units) - 250 kt (5 units) - 500 kt (3 units) - Megaton (1 unit) Utilities: - Big radioisotope battery. - Nuclear isomer battery: like classic radioisotope battery, but with more intensity, less duration and rechargeable. - Nuclear power reactor (produces a lots of energy, consumes uranium). - Polywell power reactor (produces more energy than fission nuclear, consumes hydrogen and requires big quantity of energy to start). Technology tree: After nuclear node (thermal nuclear engine): - Add: little and medium hydrogen containers/tanks After nuclear node (thermal nuclear engine): - Advanced nuclear node: nuclear power reactor, big radioisotope battery, radioisotope engine, little uranium container/tank, big hydrogen containers/tanks. After advanced nuclear node: - More advanced nuclear node: atomic bulb, gas nuclear thermal engine, liquid nuclear thermal engine, medium uranium container/tank. - Basic nuclear fusion: polywell power reactor, isomer battery. After more advanced nuclear node: - Kiloton: nuclear pulse engine, little nukes containers, uranium bubble. After basic nuclear fusion node: - Advanced nuclear fusion: polywell engine. - Antimatter: antimatter containers, antimatter injection engine. After kiloton node: - Megaton: advanced nuclear pulse engine, big nukes containers.

A mod that adds many turbofan engines based on real-life counterparts (i.e. Trent family, CFM56/CFM-LEAP, GE90) would be nice, as this allows construction of many passenger/cargo planes based off of real-life commercial and cargo jets. The Goliath turbofan in 1.0.5 is only suited for medium-heavy planes like the Stearwing A300. Having a mod like this would allow customization of planes that can carry a certain amount of cargo.

As the title says: we have listed values for vacuum and ASL thrust, but how is the Isp/thrust interpolated from there (or extrapolated for higher atmospheric pressures)?

I'm sure this has been asked umphteen times before, but my part is, after being exported from Unity and getting a hastily written .cfg file, not appearing in the VAB part list at all. I've given up on trying to animate the gimbal for now to reduce the chance of hierarchy errors and stripped everything down to its bare necessities, to no avail. Here's a screenshot from Unity And the config, partially copied from a stock engine. Can a kind soul help me spot the error? Possible anomaly: when imported into Unity, the model was solid pink and I needed to manually assign a material to it. PART { name = UPPvexin module = Part author = Ravenchant mesh = Model.mu rescaleFactor = 1 node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0 node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.375, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 0 TechRequired = propulsionSystems entryCost = 2800 cost = 200 category = Propulsion subcategory = 0 title = Vexin/Valois manufacturer = OKB Gryphon description = Test attachRules = 1,0,1,0,0 mass = 0.252 heatConductivity = 0.06 skinInternalConductionMult = 4.0 emissiveConstant = 0.8 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.2 angularDrag = 2 crashTolerance = 7 breakingForce = 200 breakingTorque = 200 maxTemp = 2000 // = 3600 bulkheadProfiles = size1 MODULE { name = ModuleEnginesFX thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform exhaustDamage = True ignitionThreshold = 0.1 minThrust = 18 maxThrust = 18 heatProduction = 150 fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.125 EngineType = LiquidFuel PROPELLANT { name = LiquidFuel ratio = 0.9 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = Oxidizer ratio = 1.1 } atmosphereCurve { key = 0 236 key = 1 201 key = 12 0.001 } } MODULE { name = ModuleGimbal gimbalTransformName = thrustTransform gimbalRange = 2 gimbalResponseSpeed = 8 useGimbalResponseSpeed = true } }

First post here; joined to discuss rocket designs, SSTO, and reusability. Air-augmented rockets (also known as ejector jets or ducted rockets) are a sort of cross between turbofan jet engines, ramjets, and pure rockets. Ramjets depend on a ram-compressed flow of atmospheric air for combustion, making them useless for launch and for orbital insertion. An air-augmented rocket uses a stream of atmospheric air only as added reaction mass, greatly increasing specific impulse in a fashion similar to a turbofan bypass. They can afford to use fuels with greater energy density, because so much of the reaction mass is external. Best of all, because their core is more or less an ordinary rocket, they have no problem functioning from a standstill or in a vacuum. (For reference, there was a prior forum post on air-augmented rockets here, though it didn't go into many details.) The most efficient turbofan engines are built with extremely high bypass ratios, exceeding 10 kg of bypass air for every 1 kg of airflow through the central turbojet. Of course, the primary difference between a turbofan and an air-augmented rocket is that the power is delivered to the air mechanically in the former case, but thermally in the latter case. Air-augmented rockets have not historically been very successful. In most cases, adding a shroud around the outside of an existing rocket was a large weight cost in exchange for only a modest increase in thrust specific fuel consumption, and because they weren't optimized for using the air as reaction mass, most of the added thrust was the result of secondary combustion between the fuel-rich rocket exhaust and the atmospheric air, making them essentially very inefficient ramjets. If, however, an air-augmented rocket engine were designed in an inside-out configuration with a central bypass rather than an external bypass, you'd end up with a much simpler, more compact, potentially much more efficient design: Such a design could allow a really, really high bypass ratio, causing thrust specific fuel consumption to drop ridiculously low. The combination of really high thrust and really high specific impulse is pretty nice. I wonder whether this could be made large enough that the thrust augmentation more than overcomes additional drag. Thoughts?

If you are new to KSP or to Rocket Science in general, you might not know what all the different engines that the game offers do, or how they work, or why you would use one instead of the other. At it's most basic level, the engines in the game take some sort of fuel, and accelerate it out the back of the rocket/plane and, because of Newton's Third Law, this propels the craft forward. How the engine does this depends on the type of engine, and in KSP, at this time, there are five different types of engines. These are: Chemical Rockets, Jet Engines, Solid Rocket Boosters, Ion Thrusters, and Nuclear Thermal Rockets. (There is only one Ion Thruster and only one Nuclear Thermal Rocket) Quick Note: All engines have different characteristics, thrust, ISP a sea level, and ISP in vacuum. Thrust is how much force the engine exerts, and ISP measures how efficient the engine is, so an engine with an ISP of 400 will use half as much fuel to produce the same thrust as an engine with an ISP of 200. Chemical Rockets: Thrust: 2-4000, ISP ASL: 80-295, ISP Vacuum: 290-350 (Not including "Puff" Monopropellant Engine) Chemical Rockets (or Liquid Fuel Engines) require Liquid Fuel and Oxidizer, and is one of the most common engines that you will use in the game. The basic concept is that the fuel is burned inside a combustion chamber and then the heated exhaust expands through the nozzle and is shot out the back. These engines are somewhat efficient, and have pretty high thrust. There is a very large variety of these engines so each one is fit for a particular job. For instance there are some of them that are more efficient in the atmosphere than others and some might be very efficient in space. You're sure to find one that fits your needs. Jet Engines: Thrust (Mach 0): 20-360, ISP ASL: 3200-12600 Jet Engines only require Liquid Fuel, but they also need Intakes. These engines work by taking air from the atmosphere, compressing it, mixing it with the fuel and then burning it in the combustion chamber. They exhaust then shoots out the back, propelling the craft forward. They also only work in atmospheres with oxygen, (Kerbin and Laythe) and if they are deprived of air, (if you go too high) the engines will flame out and stop producing thrust. Like the Chemical Rockets there a different types of Jet Engines in the game. There are high efficiency, low thrust engines, and there are low efficiency, high thrust ones too. Solid Rocket Boosters: Thrust: 18-750, ISP ASL: 118-195, ISP Vacuum: 154-220 Solid Rocket Boosters (or SRBs for short) only need one fuel called Solid Fuel, which they carry themselves. These engines differ from other ones because, unlike the Jet Engines and the Chemical Rockets, all of their fuel is stored inside the combustion chamber. This means that when you start these engines (with an ignition charge at the top of the booster) they will continue to run until all their fuel is used up, so you can't shut them off. Solid Rocket Boosters are low efficiency, high thrust engines, and are best used during ascent. Ion Thrusters: Thrust: 2, ISP ASL: 100, ISP Vacuum: 4200 Ion Thrusters need a resource called Xenon Gas (pronounced Zee-non) and also require Electric Charge. These engines are very complicated, but basically they use electricity to ionize (charge by adding or removing an electron) particles and then shoot them out of the back at insanely high velocities. These engine are incredibly efficient in space (12 times more than the most efficient Chemical Rocket) but they produce practically no thrust. Because of their low thrust, they are best used on small crafts like probes. Nuclear Thermal Rockets: Thrust: 60, ISP ASL: 185, ISP Vacuum: 800 Nuclear Thermal Rockets only need Liquid Fuel. The concept of these engines is my favorite. They work by heating up the fuel with a small Nuclear Reactor and then shooting the fuel out the back. The Nuclear Reactor allows the fuel to get hotter than it does in a Chemical Rocket, which means that the fuel is more energetic, which then leads to it going faster out the nozzle of the engine, which means that the engine is more efficient. This engine is about two times more efficient than the most efficient Chemical Rocket, but the Nuclear Reactor can cause the engine to overheat, (so radiators are almost always required) and it doesn't produce much thrust. R.A.P.I.E.R Engine: Jet Engine: Thrust (Mach 0): 105, ISP ASL: 3200 Chemical Rocket: Thrust: 180, ISP ASL: 275, ISP Vacuum: 305 There is an engine in the game called the R.A.P.I.E.R, and that engine has two modes, Airbreathing (Jet Engine) and Closed Cycle. (Chemical Rocket) It is mainly used for a type of spaceplane called an SSTO. (Single Stage to Orbit) P.S: I got all the images from the KSP Wiki. P.P.S: If I missed anything or did something wrong, please tell me. Also, if you want more of this sort of stuff, say so.