Re-nerf the LV-N

[tsinik55]

The latest patch has brought many problems, and one of them is the lack of normal interplanetary engine.

LV-N, alas, is no more suitable for this role. The weight gain and the inability to use the standard fuel (LF+OX) made it a "fifth wheel"

Therefore, a BIG request to Squad:

1. Return LV-N to its previous state - reduce its weight and allow the use of other types of fuels.

2. If this isn't possible, allow the player to choose the type of fuel in the fuel tanks.

I do know that it's possible to do with mods, but a lot of people prefer to play vanilla KSP, or KSP with minimal modifications (like me).

And, IMO, the ideal option: add the fuel switcher AND some new interplanetary engines (like the Atomic Age by PorkJet) in the official version of the game.

P.S. Again, IMHO: the KSP should be fun, not a hardcore space simulator - we already have the Orbiter for that.

Edited May 9, 2015 by tsinik55

[klgraham1013]

I think simulators are fun.

[Slam_Jones]

Asking Squad to change something is not likely to yield a lot of results...

Installing mods, however, will.

[tsinik55]

They are fun, but to a certain degree.

It's very disappointing that what was easy done in 0.25 and 0.90 is no longer possible. Like, heavy tugs for 1500t asteroids and long-range spaceships with decent DeltaV.

Edited May 9, 2015 by tsinik55

[Murph]

It's still suitable for its role, you just have to change your expectations and approach to it. You just need to use the mark 1, 2, or 3 LF-only tanks for it. Or, just use mods. Frankly, I find it baffling that people say things effectively equivalent to "I know there's a simple and easy solution for what I want, by installing a low risk mod, but I refuse to do that!" Parts mods are all very low risk, if they are just parts, without any new features. There's a large LF-only mark 3 tank, something like 5000 units or so, if memory serves, which is right up there with the Jumbo-64 2.5m tank.

The LV-N was changed to LF-only, because *that's how NERVA engines work*. It was a bug that it used LF+O, the bug was fixed.

Your suggestion is not well founded, and I actively oppose it. Squad, please do not change the LV-N back.

[windows_x_seven]

Use RealFuels mod for choosing fuels. I don't support your suggestion.

[Frozen_Heart]

LV-N is pretty dead. Its weight gain and the fact that by only using LF it only has half the fuel other engines have mean that its a poor choice to use.

I used to manage 6k dV from my LV-N warships. Now I can only manage 3K using LV-Ns. Other engines give closer to 4 or 5K

And they overheat so you can't even do long burns to make up for their low power.

If tanks could be made LF only then they would be more useful. Weirdly the LF only tank has 160 LF. The LF + O tank has 180 LF and all the oxidiser.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Frozen_Heart

[klgraham1013]

There are Mk3 LF only tanks with large capacities.

[regex]

LV-Ns work just fine as-is, about the only issue now is proper tankage. I've taken to using Mk3 parts and, as a side effect, I've gained massive heat sinks to help deal with the heat. Basically you should be able to perform a transfer and braking to anywhere in the Kerbol system if you have a big enough heat sink since no normal transfer will take more than @ 3km/s on either end (about the most brutal thing you'll encounter is Moho braking, so planning for a 3.5km/s burn will cover all your bases). If you're doing high-energy transfers more often then I can kind of understand the issue, but chemical rockets aren't at all ideal for those sorts of travel.

[Michaelo90]

LV-N is pretty dead. Its weight gain and the fact that by only using LF it only has half the fuel other engines have mean that its a poor choice to use.

I used to manage 6k dV from my LV-N warships. Now I can only manage 3K using LV-Ns. Other engines give closer to 4 or 5K

And they overheat so you can't even do long burns to make up for their low power.

If tanks could be made LF only then they would be more useful. Weirdly the LF only tank has 160 LF. The LF + O tank has 180 LF and all the oxidiser.

You can remove the oxidizer from any tank by rightclicking it and dragging the oxidizer slider.

[tsinik55]

I know, but it's worth a try

[Frozen_Heart]

You can remove the oxidizer from any tank by rightclicking it and dragging the oxidizer slider.

Yeah I know. Then the tanks are only half full so the dV is halved. The pure LF tank has less LF than the LF+O tank has liquid fuel. It should have double.

[Whirligig Girl]

The Liquid-Fuel-Only nature of it mimicks the fact that it would use Hydrogen only, a lower density than the kerosene the engines would otherwise seem to use. You'd thus need larger tanks anyway, so even though it looks like there's an empty space where the oxidizer is, it is really more like you have filled the entire thing with a lower-density fuel.

We've been wanting Oxidizer-Less Nukes for a long time, and it's been planned since 0.19 from what I can tell. If you want a higher-efficiency nuclear-powered interplanetary engine that uses Oxidizer, check out the Atomic Age mod, which includes a LANTERN engine, a Lox Augmented Nuclear ThErmal Rocket eNgine. This is not just a "There's a Mod for that" statement. Indeed, the Atomic Age mod is so beautiful and useful, that I think it should be included in stock.

[DoToH]

I think simulators are fun.

Using the words "simulator" and "fun" in the same sentence????. You heretic!!!

:sticktongue:

On topic:

There are Mk3 LF only tanks with large capacities.

Edited May 9, 2015 by DoToH

[cicatrix]

Even in earlier versions I tried to avoid designs, tricks and other shenanigans that wouldn't fly in real life. So I salute to any attempt the guys at SQUAD make to make the game more like with a real physics and science. If I wanted some space sim with banking starfighters I would have bought one - there are plenty. I never understand people who complain about parts behave like their real world counterparts in a physics game. For god's sake - change the cfg, add a modulemanager patch or install some addon which would give you an engine with infinite isp or consuming space vacuum as fuel. You can also hit alt-f12 or use hyperedit, but don't please ask SQUAD to make the game easier.

[Technical Ben]

There are Mk3 LF only tanks with large capacities.

This. I've not had time to make one yet* but the Mk3 tanks give similar to the same numbers as in 0.90 with mixed fuel tanks.

My craft will look different now**, but should perform similarly.

* Honestly no time... because I'm still planning on making it bigger and figuring out how to get it structurally sound. Yes... I'm making it too big again!

** They looked different before too!

[Sky_walker]

Definitely a bad suggestion. The old implementation of LV-N was bad on so many levels that a new one feels like a great refreshment.

Also: I did interplanetary flights withouth LV-Ns just fine. If you are locked down to LV-Ns, then perhaps it's a time to start thinking about optimizing your rockets?

[Whirligig Girl]

Definitely a bad suggestion. The old implementation of LV-N was bad on so many levels that a new one feels like a great refreshment.

Also: I did interplanetary flights withouth LV-Ns just fine. If you are locked down to LV-Ns, then perhaps it's a time to start thinking about optimizing your rockets?

Indeed I must agree. Chemical rockets are able to act as interplanetary engines, both in real life, on paper, and in Kerbal Space Program. The first ever interplanetary transfer done in KSP (By NovaSilisko in a 0.15 test version built to test Eve) was done with LV-T30s.

[Bill Phil]

Yeah I know. Then the tanks are only half full so the dV is halved. The pure LF tank has less LF than the LF+O tank has liquid fuel. It should have double.

That's not quite how it works...

LV-N has higher ISP. You get more Delta V. Delta V involves many factors.

[H2O.]

The nuclear engines are fine. They were way overpowered before, now they are just right.

On the other hand, if it was possible to have more choice regarding liquid-fuel-only tanks, I would appreciate it, but the engines are pretty well balanced.

[Randazzo]

There are solutions for what you want, but if you aren't willing to use mods you're stuck with what you've got. I sincerely doubt Squad will restore the old engines.

Anyway, there's a way to get more liquid fuel tanks in game with very minimal modding.

You will need Module Manager. Once you have that, see this thread (Don't forget to thank Regex - look for the star at the bottom left). To use the code, copy and paste it into a notepad file, then save the file as myprayersanswered.cfg (or something else, if you like.) and drop it in your GameData folder. Make sure to switch your "Save as type option" to All files.

Alternatively you could just alter the engines cfg file and make it consume oxidizer again.

[Sonny_Jim]

Shouldn't the title be "un-nerfed" rather than "re-nerfed", which would imply that they need nerfing more?

Personally I like the way the other engines are slightly more important rather than "Leaving Kerbin system? LV-N!" as it was before. I've never used the poodle so much as I have with v1.0.2.

My main gripe is that they introduced a heat system without giving us any parts who's purpose is to dissipate that heat (aka radiators) nor (at first) did they give us any way to monitor the heat produced.

Gimme some radiators and cylindrical tanks that are liquid fuel only and I'd be a happy camper again.

[Redshift OTF]

I've been doing a mission to Moho and I've found the LV-N's aren't as badly nerfed as I thought they might be. Overheating for the big burns wasn't a major issue as long as you attach the LV-Ns to something like quad-couplers and then directly to the fuel tanks. You can get away with 7/8ths throttle for almost unlimited time I believe, (well until your fuel runs out). That was using Mk3 liquid fuel tanks. It does limit your options a bit as placing LV-Ns on things like modular girder segments is a big no-no.

Draining oxidiser from normal tanks isn't great because the ratio of liquid fuel to the weight of the tank hits your efficiency by a significant amount imo.

[Randazzo]

Shouldn't the title be "un-nerfed" rather than "re-nerfed", which would imply that they need nerfing more?

Personally I like the way the other engines are slightly more important rather than "Leaving Kerbin system? LV-N!" as it was before. I've never used the poodle so much as I have with v1.0.2.

My main gripe is that they introduced a heat system without giving us any parts who's purpose is to dissipate that heat (aka radiators) nor (at first) did they give us any way to monitor the heat produced.

Gimme some radiators and cylindrical tanks that are liquid fuel only and I'd be a happy camper again.

See my signature for radiator parts. See above the post above yours for fuel tank parts.

Yes, mods.

[Cdr_Zeta]

Hello,

Problem solved...new tank added with less weight and no oX...

Zeta