Big-S Wing Strake: Why is it so powerful as fuel storage?

[Reusables]

Today, I found out that Big-S wing strake has 0.5t of liquid fuel storage. Since its dry mass is only 0.1t, the dry-wet ratio will be 6 which seems too powerful. In comparison, Big-S Delta Wing has dry-wet ratio of 4, and normal fuel tank has that of 8. Am I wrong somewhere here?

Wouldn't this make them too OP, making liquid fuselages redundant for spaceplanes? Also Big-S Delta Wing is only useful for aesthetics and reducing parts count, isn't it? Or are there some weak points of it?

[Streetwind]

30 minutes ago, Abastro said:

Wouldn't this make them too OP, making liquid fuselages redundant for spaceplanes?

The fuselages still have better mass ratios? You just said so yourself in your post Mk3 and Mk2 have around 8, Mk1 has 9, Mk0 has 10.

Edited February 3, 2017 by Streetwind

[Reusables]

1 minute ago, Streetwind said:

The fuselages still have better mass ratios? You just said so yourself in your post Mk3 and Mk2 have around 8, Mk1 has 9, Mk0 has 10.

Yeah, but spaceplane needs lift. I thought it would be enough for LF storage, and just realized now that the Big-S Wing Strake is much lighter than that.

Also didn't realize that Mk0 is much better for the mass; Thanks for let me know that.

[AeroGav]

2 hours ago, Abastro said:

Yeah, but spaceplane needs lift. I thought it would be enough for LF storage, and just realized now that the Big-S Wing Strake is much lighter than that.

Also didn't realize that Mk0 is much better for the mass; Thanks for let me know that.

But, from a capacity to drag ratio, the mk0 is twice as worse as the mk1,  but 2.5m are best of all (however there are no LF only mk2.5 parts)