3dprintingnut

Why do mk2 fuel tanks hold the same amount of fuel as mk1?

Recommended Posts

Because the extra bits at the side are wing segments, not tanks. It's why the Mk 2 parts generate lift. :) If you look in the middle of an unattached mk 2 tank, you'll see a mk-1 sized circle where presumably the tank is located.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, moogoob said:

Because the extra bits at the side are wing segments, not tanks. It's why the Mk 2 parts generate lift. :) If you look in the middle of an unattached mk 2 tank, you'll see a mk-1 sized circle where presumably the tank is located.

So why not just fill up the extra space with fuel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, the Mk1 and Mk2 have almost the same weight. So for a little extra weight, you get wings and increased heat tolerance. I think it's a bargain, in terms of what you get for the same mass.

However, it would be nice if there is a tank in between the Mk1 and Mk3 tanks. Off the top of my head, the Mk1 holds 400 units, and the smallest Mk3 holds 2500. That's quite a big gap. 

Realistically, you could at best fit two Mk0 tanks in the empty space of the Mk2, thereby increasing the fuel from 400 to 500. Hardly a solution for the gap I mentioned above. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @3dprintingnut , this thread might interest you. 

 

44 minutes ago, Magzimum said:

Realistically, you could at best fit two Mk0 tanks in the empty space of the Mk2, thereby increasing the fuel from 400 to 500. Hardly a solution for the gap I mentioned above. 

 

Four actually :) . Two on each side. And if you surface mount them on the ends, instead of the outside, you can rotate them inboard for zero drag penalty. 

 

NINJA: it can be a pain to refuel them, though. Also helpful for unused space in a cargo bay. 

Edited by DrunkenKerbalnaut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/11/2016 at 6:38 PM, DrunkenKerbalnaut said:

 

 

Four actually :) . Two on each side. And if you surface mount them on the ends, instead of the outside, you can rotate them inboard for zero drag penalty. 

 

NINJA: it can be a pain to refuel them, though. Also helpful for unused space in a cargo bay. 

20161202151136_1_zpsq0vcqjja.jpg

So basically, never use a mk2 liquid fuel fuselage, fit a mk2 cargo bay instead with a mk1 and four mk0 tanks inside for 50% more fuel capacity.   Plus you've always got the option to remove the tank if you don't need the delta v.

That said,  i very rarely put fuel in the main body anyway.  The main fuselage is just big enough for essential mission cargo  and  kerbals only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.