PURE Electric Engines

[Jatwaa]

PURE Electric Engines

You wanted electric engines without needing additional fuels, now you have them. This set of engines allows you to go FULL GREEN and only use Batteries and/or Solar power. 

OH ME OH MY! On Duna Helicopters now fly! Yes my friends, as of the last update to Pure, we are up to EC11! Added in are side mounted fans, Helicopter blades, EC RCS, and a high alt Trekker engine for REAL speedsters. 

Prosimian Productions has teamed up with us here and he created beautiful set of Star Trek based engines and they are fantastic! 

Take your builds to the next level with PURE Electric Engines!

The basic engines have thrust based on the stock engine. 

• EC1 "Pure"
  •  Max Thrust = 25
  • Size = 0.625
  • Comparable to Juno
• EC2 "PsyOclone"
  • Max Thrust = 80 (125)
  • Size = 1.25
  • Normal & Performance modes (afterburner) 
  • Comparable to Panther
• EC3 "Manleneto"
  • Max Thrust = 100 (170)
  • Size = 1.25
  • Atmospheric & ExtrAtospheric modes (orbital)
  • Comparable to Rapier
• EC4 "ElecTrek"
  • Max Thrust = 200 (400)
  • Size = 1.25
  • Comparable to Rapier (Star Trek Nacelles) 
• EC5 "ElecTrek Heavy"
  • Max Thrust = 300 (620)
  • Size = 2.5
  • Comparable to Rapier (Star Trek Nacelles)

 

 

4-18-2022

Added MOAR! Parts. This time for Rovers!

3 Wheels, 2 Chassis, EC Generator, Steel Beam, 2 Glass Panes, 1 adapter, 2 Lead weights! They are all tough as nails, so go all out and crash! Go from 0-40 m/s in 9 seconds and jump that crater! YOU are back in control of rovers and survivability! Embrace your inner Kerman Knievel!

https://spacedock.info/mod/1998/Pure Electric Engines

License: MIT 

Edited April 19, 2022 by Jatwaa
updated version

[hieywiey]

Nice violation of Newton's Third Law.

[Jatwaa]

4 minutes ago, hieywiey said:

Nice violation of Newton's Third Law.

Newton is so yesterday. This is a thought down the "what if the Em Drive... Worked?" 

[JaredTheDragon]

On 12/27/2018 at 3:30 PM, Jatwaa said:

Newton is so yesterday. This is a thought down the "what if the Em Drive... Worked?" 

I mean these are cool to have, glad you made them, but your analysis of physics is just beautiful in its chimerity.

But what VERSION of KSP did you compile this for? You need to indicate it in the title and the body of the post. Every other mod or add-on here does this and you could at least make some effort here.

But mostly, this isn't how an E/M ("Em" ) drive works, or any other drive. Electromagnetism isn't something from nothing, it's photons pushing ions and larger particles, by definition. While this mod is cool and I have absolutely no problems with you making it, you might take a moment to do a cursory study of electromagnetism and ask yourself, "What IS electricity? What IS magnetism?" Currently, your answers are wrong but very cute.

 

[Jatwaa]

6 hours ago, JaredTheDragon said:

I mean these are cool to have, glad you made them, but your analysis of physics is just beautiful in its chimerity.

But what VERSION of KSP did you compile this for? You need to indicate it in the title and the body of the post. Every other mod or add-on here does this and you could at least make some effort here.

But mostly, this isn't how an E/M ("Em" ) drive works, or any other drive. Electromagnetism isn't something from nothing, it's photons pushing ions and larger particles, by definition. While this mod is cool and I have absolutely no problems with you making it, you might take a moment to do a cursory study of electromagnetism and ask yourself, "What IS electricity? What IS magnetism?" Currently, your answers are wrong but very cute.

 

I didn't make the engines based on any actual real life counterparts. There aren't any. Also I noted "what if it worked" these are a far cry from being realistic. They are simply an experiment in modding that worked, some were asking for it, thus here they are. My understanding of electromagnetism and the science and rules behind propulsion are fine, but, again, these are not based on real life. Come on, I have Star Trek nacelles, hahahaha. This is a fun fictional work, take it as that and nothing more. 

[TheEeveeLovers]

Yay finally

[Techgamer68]

There are atoms in space so NEWtons law is not broken

[Snark]

2 hours ago, Techgamer68 said:

There are atoms in space so NEWtons law is not broken

Hi, and welcome to the forums! 

There are, indeed, atoms in space.  However, there are nowhere near enough of them to generate significant amounts of thrust the way these engines do-- and even if you could somehow use them, they're so scarce that you'd need planet-wreckingly large amounts of energy to do anything useful with them in terms of ship thrust.

However, all of that is entirely beside the point.  As the OP here made quite clear, there is not even any attempt to be realistic-- this is a mod just "for fun" and doesn't concern itself with actual science, which of course is perfectly fine.

If folks want to discuss the scientific case for various proposed propulsion mechanisms, by all means go open a thread in Science & Spaceflight.  However, that sort of discussion is off-topic  here, since this thread is about this mod.  So let's not get caught up in scientific arguments about a mod that is, by its own declaration, not "scientific".  Thanks!

[Techgamer68]

OK thanks

PS: more energy is good to make the atoms faster and that meens speed)

Edited December 29, 2018 by Techgamer68
i just wanted to add "PS"

[JH4C]

Can I ask the reasoning behind having a full declaration of all the pre-existing resource types included in this mod? If the EC rules need changing to make these work effectively then an MM patch that works just on the EC definition would be a much simpler and safer answer.

[Jatwaa]

4 hours ago, Snark said:

Hi, and welcome to the forums! 

There are, indeed, atoms in space.  However, there are nowhere near enough of them to generate significant amounts of thrust the way these engines do-- and even if you could somehow use them, they're so scarce that you'd need planet-wreckingly large amounts of energy to do anything useful with them in terms of ship thrust.

However, all of that is entirely beside the point.  As the OP here made quite clear, there is not even any attempt to be realistic-- this is a mod just "for fun" and doesn't concern itself with actual science, which of course is perfectly fine.

If folks want to discuss the scientific case for various proposed propulsion mechanisms, by all means go open a thread in Science & Spaceflight.  However, that sort of discussion is off-topic  here, since this thread is about this mod.  So let's not get caught up in scientific arguments about a mod that is, by its own declaration, not "scientific".  Thanks!

Indeed, the science behind these are DEEP into the Science Fiction realm. Those that put actual science against it will find that the science would disprove such technology rather than prove. This is just to have an all electric engine, nothing much more or less. The dV stats on these are off the charts. The original reason for this was for electric propellers (very low powered)....But I ran into an issue with a non-Firespitter blur disc (since I don't have the time to figure out the motion blur effect I found.)

Thus, this is all fictional. If I ever figure out the propellers, those would be more based on realism.

38 minutes ago, JH4C said:

Can I ask the reasoning behind having a full declaration of all the pre-existing resource types included in this mod? If the EC rules need changing to make these work effectively then an MM patch that works just on the EC definition would be a much simpler and safer answer.

Easy, rather than using MM to patch multiple things, I used one file that matches EC almost exactly, in so much that it doesn't affect much else in the game. One file, no MM patch delays and same effect overall.  

[JH4C]

11 hours ago, Jatwaa said:

Easy, rather than using MM to patch multiple things, I used one file that matches EC almost exactly, in so much that it doesn't affect much else in the game. One file, no MM patch delays and same effect overall.  

Yeah, but you're potentially undoing changes made by other mods for their own requirements by including the entire definition file. Adding one item to the MM list of patches when you already have 10k+ other patches queued causes no appreciable delay  

[Jatwaa]

1 hour ago, JH4C said:

Yeah, but you're potentially undoing changes made by other mods for their own requirements by including the entire definition file. Adding one item to the MM list of patches when you already have 10k+ other patches queued causes no appreciable delay  

If there are mods affected by it, let me know. The change shouldn't affect anything, but if it does, I will attempt it in MM. 

[Kerbinidiel]

thanks for this mod!

but in VAB and in fly i see a strange thing on the engine models... like if i put one part inside another and the surface is flickering

[Daedala]

If the only thing you need to do is redefine ElectricCharge, it would be safer if your ResourcesElectricCharge.cfg contained ONLY the RESOURCE_DEFINITION for ElectricCharge. It seems kinda weird, and potentially unsafe, for it to be redefining resources the mod doesn't even use, even if it's just resetting them to stock values. Indeed, calling it "ResourcesElectricCharge.cfg" when it redefines Ore and Ablator and other things seems like deceptive naming (which I know isn't your intent, but still...) No need to rely on MM if you don't want, just pare down this file to just the one RESOURCE_DEFINITION you care about.

Also seems weird that this is hidden in a folder called "Textures"... :\

Edited January 1, 2019 by Daedala

[Jatwaa]

11 hours ago, Daedala said:

If the only thing you need to do is redefine ElectricCharge, it would be safer if your ResourcesElectricCharge.cfg contained ONLY the RESOURCE_DEFINITION for ElectricCharge. It seems kinda weird, and potentially unsafe, for it to be redefining resources the mod doesn't even use, even if it's just resetting them to stock values. Indeed, calling it "ResourcesElectricCharge.cfg" when it redefines Ore and Ablator and other things seems like deceptive naming (which I know isn't your intent, but still...) No need to rely on MM if you don't want, just pare down this file to just the one RESOURCE_DEFINITION you care about.

Also seems weird that this is hidden in a folder called "Textures"... :\

I do need to isolate it down to just EC, but there are no other changes that I applied to the resources. The only change was EC. I'll move the file, tbh, it was supposed to be in a Resources folder, just slipped my mind. I need checklists badly when doing these things. I'll task myself in cleaning it up and posting an update. 

[Magos Mechanicus]

Dude thank you for creating this.  This is a answer from heaven for me.  And my goodness you also made a good looking model for it.  I found out about it because of Kottabos Games doing a video on it on youtube.  And i was so lucky i even figured out how to get the 1.5.1. Version because there hasnt been enough updated mods yet for 1.6.0.  But thank you so much.  I would have been happy with a base model being remade but man i really appreciate the time and work you put into it.  As soon as i get paid im going to send you a little something for your work.  I literally created a account on this site to thank you.  So...

Thank you again,

Magos Mechanicus Kabrex

KottabosGames

•

[TheDeinonychus]

Firstly, these things are great. I can finally make space planes that work without strapping a crazy amount of extra rockets to them.

Second, it seems whatever system KSP uses to determine burn time for maneuver nodes has no idea how to handle these engines. The speed bar always shows up as full red as if there isn't enough fuel (despite having more than enough electric charge), and the burn time is always something tiny, like 5-10 seconds, regardless of how long the actual needed burn is.

Have you by chance looked into any way to fix this? I suspect it's because the engines aren't using any actual propellant that's causing KSP to not calculate them correctly. Maybe have the engines generate their own propellant at a rate higher than their consumption, so KSP understands them better?

[Nuke]

thats one hell of an acronym.

[Jatwaa]

On 1/2/2019 at 9:59 PM, Magos Mechanicus said:

Dude thank you for creating this.  This is a answer from heaven for me.  And my goodness you also made a good looking model for it.  I found out about it because of Kottabos Games doing a video on it on youtube.  And i was so lucky i even figured out how to get the 1.5.1. Version because there hasnt been enough updated mods yet for 1.6.0.  But thank you so much.  I would have been happy with a base model being remade but man i really appreciate the time and work you put into it.  As soon as i get paid im going to send you a little something for your work.  I literally created a account on this site to thank you.  So...

Thank you again,

Magos Mechanicus Kabrex

KottabosGames

•

Thank you Kottabos, I am glad I can offer back to the community in which I feel at home. Makes me thrilled that people enjoy the mod 

8 hours ago, TheDeinonychus said:

Firstly, these things are great. I can finally make space planes that work without strapping a crazy amount of extra rockets to them.

Second, it seems whatever system KSP uses to determine burn time for maneuver nodes has no idea how to handle these engines. The speed bar always shows up as full red as if there isn't enough fuel (despite having more than enough electric charge), and the burn time is always something tiny, like 5-10 seconds, regardless of how long the actual needed burn is.

Have you by chance looked into any way to fix this? I suspect it's because the engines aren't using any actual propellant that's causing KSP to not calculate them correctly. Maybe have the engines generate their own propellant at a rate higher than their consumption, so KSP understands them better?

I have seen the same, but the issue is how it's being calculated. For now, I just ignore the feature as even KER has the same issue. Electric charge isn't really consider it seems. I don't want to modify EC too much. 

[Kerbinidiel]

lovely mod! i relly love the sci fi style...

one request: is possible, in one future update, have the EC4 and EC5 in single radial engine?

[Jatwaa]

21 minutes ago, Kerbinidiel said:

lovely mod! i relly love the sci fi style...

one request: is possible, in one future update, have the EC4 and EC5 in single radial engine?

It is indeed! I am working on such along with a probe sized. 625 as well. Stay tuned! 

[Kuktar]

Great work! love the designs. Obviously the people complaining about newtons laws are correct but reading over the entire thread definitely indicates these are from the future. Funny thing is in a couple hundred years this could be possible. Go back to the roman days and ask them about plutonium fission bombs :P they will say its never going to be possible, but here we are. 

[eldemarco]

I have a request. Is there any way that you could add a node attachment to the bottom of EC1, EC2, and EC3? I don't just use them for Spaceplanes. Example: My Mun lander uses an EMDrive for landing and takeoff, but I can't add my launch stages below the EMDrive. The Only way that I can build it is putting the lander upside down, and use fairings for aerodynamics.

[Jatwaa]

19 hours ago, eldemarco said:

I have a request. Is there any way that you could add a node attachment to the bottom of EC1, EC2, and EC3? I don't just use them for Spaceplanes. Example: My Mun lander uses an EMDrive for landing and takeoff, but I can't add my launch stages below the EMDrive. The Only way that I can build it is putting the lander upside down, and use fairings for aerodynamics.

Yeah I don't see why not, this can be done pretty easily.