Jump to content

PSA: Aerospike is the new best 1.25m engine!

Temeter

By Temeter
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Temeter

Temeter

Posted
Posted

Was quite suprised when I just looked at the spikes stats, especially since nobody seems to talk about it: Weight was reduced to 1 ton, so the Aerospike now gets a better T/W ratio then the reliant while having quite a bit more efficiency than a swivel. Also, you can freely place it.

Which I think is supremely awesome and everyone should know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Temeter

Temeter

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Old aerospike was heavier, afair 1.5t. It's thrust got buffend to 180kn around 1.0, too. Still a somewhat weak 1.25m engine, vector or mainsail will provide better performance for their weight.

Edited by Temeter
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted
Whatever happened to the Vector?

It's very heavy, very expensive, and very late in the tech tree. It really isn't all that great, but it does serve a good purpose. There are other topics on this (a lot of other topics) so I suggest we keep that discussion in one of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Streetwind

Streetwind

Posted
Posted

The aerospike had these stats since 1.0... The only thing the last patch changed is the model.

It's also not as good as you think it is when you actually try to use it instead of alternatives. It has its niche (spaceplanes) and isn't much noticable outside of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kagame

Kagame

Posted
Posted
Vector is better for atmospheric or high gravity bodies, Aerospike is superior for lighter ones or deep space.

Thinking about the real-world applications of these engines, this kinda doesn't make sense. (Please note: I'm not disputing the accuracy of your statement, just Squad's balance). Aerospike engines are made to work best at high speeds in atmosphere, and the RS-25, being an LH2 engine, does its best work in deep space. Huh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Temeter

Temeter

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It doesn't have gimbal. I wouldn't say it is better than the others. I wouldn't say it was worse either.

Well, it is definitly superior to the reliant, which doesn't have gimbal either. Also very low profile, especially with the new model. Interestingly, the engine collision model was fixed and it can't stand on it's tip anymore, tho.

I'd say getting an SAS system and aerospike will be superior to the swivel in most cases, due to it's vastly superior lifting capabilities: Swivel is 133kn per engine ton, spike is 180kn (not counting ISP).

I dislike PSA's on principal, can people stop doing that please.

Sorry, but it's really just a hook to tell people about something I noticed, it's not more official than any other silly thread.^^'

I thought the corner picture meant Gimball...

No, it ment the model looks still fine when you angle the engine. No vectoring, which is the only downside of the engine atm.

Whatever happened to the Vector?

4 ton heavy, so useless for 1.25m craft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panzer1b

panzer1b

Posted
Posted

Aerospike is really the best non nuclear 1.25 engine if you dont look at career mode (where you dont get it that early), and outside of very niche roles where other engines may be best.

I know this is subjective, but for me, there are not that many engines if you are looking at 1.25m engines.

For long range, its one and only one option, the nuke. For shorter ranges, usually you want something small and light with moderate thrust, aerospike wins. And well, for extremely lightweight craft the LV-909 is better then the aerospike, but i dont really build many such vessels, so for me its almost always a choice between aerospike and nuke. For pure space i usually elect to use nukes every time since even for shorter ranges you need less fuel and thus less mass at any given dV, while aerospike is usually for either atmospheric ops such as on duna, or when you need to land somewhere since nukes are not very good landing engines).

The aerospike is one of few engines that is competitive in atmosphere (its way better in Duna's surface for example), as engines such as the 909 and poodle, which both get similar ISP, are useless within atmo due to their horrid atmo ISPs. It isnt the best raw ISP from the LFO engines, but if you think about it, its one that doesnt have any hard limitations unlike the pure space rockets.

Another thing, is that well, its extremely lightweight and high TWR. Compared to the rapier (although not that anyone would use a rapier in space exclusively), its half teh mass and same thrust, with better ISP. It is also a very good replacement for the mark-55, since it has better thrust, better ISP, and its only 0.1t heavier. Its harder to mount, but by no means difficult to use especially since its so short.

Its so small, that it can fit almost anywhere a 909 can fit in. This makes it extremely easy to actually use on anything really, and shorter rockets are always nice (it has a back node now so that old weakness is irrelevant).

Ohh, and it has 20 impact vs the sub 10 of most LFO engines, making it more deadly in a collision (all my new capital ship torpedoes use aerospikes since its not only good TWR and all around stats, but its much better impactor then alternative engines). Ofc this last one is kinda situational, since i know not everyone plays KSP by making capital ships and shooting at them, but hey, more options are always nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Laie

Laie

Posted
Posted
Weight was reduced to 1 ton

That happened in 1.0.2, IIRC. The spike makes a decent sustainer engine, slightly worse than the skipper on the ground, better in space. For Mk2 purposes it still lacks oomph, IMO; I'd have preferred if thrust had been brought up to 250kN (or more) instead of reducing the weight.

The Vector finally gives us a more powerful small-diameter engine, but it's a bit too powerful for Mk2 (and way too powerful for 1.25m stacks -- clearly, it's purpose lies elsewhere).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Temeter

Temeter

Posted
  • Author
Posted
That happened in 1.0.2, IIRC. The spike makes a decent sustainer engine, slightly worse than the skipper on the ground, better in space. For Mk2 purposes it still lacks oomph, IMO; I'd have preferred if thrust had been brought up to 250kN (or more) instead of reducing the weight.

You're right, just checked the config, guess I totally missed the impact of the changes. It is still weaker than the reliant/swivel, that's true. On the other hand, a small capsule, FLT-800 and aerospike already counts as SSTO! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Iron Crown

Red Iron Crown

Posted
Posted
The aerospike is one of few engines that is competitive in atmosphere (its way better in Duna's surface for example), as engines such as the 909 and poodle, which both get similar ISP, are useless within atmo due to their horrid atmo ISPs. It isnt the best raw ISP from the LFO engines, but if you think about it, its one that doesnt have any hard limitations unlike the pure space rockets.

Duna's atmo is so thin that the atmospheric stats for engines are hardly relevant. Poodles, Terriers, and Nervs works just fine there, and better than engines with atmosphere-focused stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoSlash27

GoSlash27

Posted
Posted
The aerospike had these stats since 1.0... The only thing the last patch changed is the model.

It's also not as good as you think it is when you actually try to use it instead of alternatives. It has its niche (spaceplanes) and isn't much noticable outside of that.

^This. When you run a mathematical analysis for mass and cost efficiency, you quickly find that the aerospike is almost never the best option.

Best,

-Slashy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A35K

A35K

Posted
Posted (edited)
Vector is better for atmospheric or high gravity bodies, Aerospike is superior for lighter ones or deep space.

Isn't the entire point of the aerospike to work well in atmosphere?

Wait, it's actually the only engine with a point...(pun intended).

Edited by A35K
Link to comment
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...