More Russian Engines

[T1mo98]

There's a definite lack of Russian engines in KSP. Apart from the Kodiak and Cub there aren't really any. That's a shame because Russian engines are some the best looking and best performing of all. Here's a few I think would make great additions to KSP.

 

1. RD-170.

This is the most powerful rocket engine in the world, and it baffles me how there isn't an equivalent to it in KSP. 

For thrust we could be looking at around 2300-2400 kN. Size would be 2.5m.

 

2. RD-180

This would be a varient of the RD-170. 

For thrust, it would be between 1300-1350 kN, this would give it enough thrust to lift an Atlas 5 replica. Size would be 1.875m, this would mean it either is exclusive to MH-owners or would need the introduction of a stock adapter.

 

3. RD-191

The third and single nozzle varient of the RD-170.

It's thrust would be around 600-700 kN at a size of 1.25m.

 

4. RD-0120

This won't be a seperate engine but a varient of the Vector to give it some more visual variety.

 

5. NK-33

The engine that was supposed to launch cosmonauts to the moon. How this isn't in KSP yet astounds me.

The thrust would be around 600-650 kN at a 1.25m size.

(Yes, I know the picture is of the AJ26-58)

 

6. RD-58

This engine was made to be used on an upper stage of the N1 and evolved version were to be used on the Buran spacecraft.

This would be a low-thrust, high efficiency upper stage engine. Around 50-75 kN thrust at a possible 0.625m size.

 

7. S5.92

This engine is currently used in the Fregat upper stage.

It would function as a great, small upper stage engine. Thrust would be around 20-30 at a 0.625m size.

 

8. RD-0210

It's thrust would be around 200-250 kN at a 1.25m size.

 

[The Aziz]

Going only for the looks? Because:

1 hour ago, T1mo98 said:

 

2. RD-180

This would be a varient of the RD-170. 

For thrust, it would be between 1300-1350 kN, this would give it enough thrust to lift an Atlas 5 replica. Size would be 1.875m, this would mean it either is exclusive to MH-owners or would need the introduction of a stock adapter.

 

7. S5.92

This engine is currently used in the Fregat upper stage.

It would function as a great, small upper stage engine. Thrust would be around 20-30 at a 0.625m size.

 

8. RD-0210

It's thrust would be around 200-250 kN at a 1.25m size.

 

2. We have MH Mastodon for that.

7. Spark

8. Skiff/Reliant

 

KSP is already clogged with parts, and the engines we currently have are nicely balanced to serve different purposes. Not to mention they're being revamped, so some oldest engines have the chance to get a more Russian look (Hello Reliant/Mainsail!) Need less thrust but don't have the engine for that? Limit the thrust in VAB.

Besides, a lot of engines you presented here look too powerful for proposed size. 700kN for 1.25m? Just place a Vector.

Edited March 24, 2019 by The Aziz

[T1mo98]

9 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Going only for the looks? Because:

2. We have MH Mastodon for that.

7. Spark

8. Skiff/Reliant

 

KSP is already clogged with parts, and the engines we currently have are nicely balanced to serve different purposes. Not to mention they're being revamped, so some oldest engines have the chance to get a more Russian look (Hello Reliant/Mainsail!) Need less thrust but don't have the engine for that? Limit the thrust in VAB.

Besides, a lot of engines you presented here look too powerful for proposed size. 700kN for 1.25m? Just place a Vector.

Yes, going mostly for looks. Especially the smaller but powerful engines, since the Vector really is too big for a lot of designs where you need a powerful 1.25m engine.

The thrusts are based on how stock replicas of the rockets they are used in would function. As I said, the RD-180 needs about 1300 kN to propel a stock replica of the Atlas 5.

And besides, more parts is never a bad idea, epecially in a sandbox game like KSP.

Edited March 24, 2019 by T1mo98

[Gargamel]

2 hours ago, T1mo98 said:

And besides, more parts is never a bad idea, epecially in a sandbox game like KSP.

I would argue that for the base game, it would be a bad idea.   Some engines wold never get used, because there would be an overlapping engine that just does it better.  So while they might be pretty to look at, adding extra semi-useless parts to the stock game would only bog down a game that is already a pretty big hog of computer resources, alienating more players from being able to play. 

I think this suggestion resides firmly withing the area of "There's a mod for that". 

[T1mo98]

1 hour ago, Gargamel said:

I would argue that for the base game, it would be a bad idea.   Some engines wold never get used, because there would be an overlapping engine that just does it better.  So while they might be pretty to look at, adding extra semi-useless parts to the stock game would only bog down a game that is already a pretty big hog of computer resources, alienating more players from being able to play. 

I think this suggestion resides firmly withing the area of "There's a mod for that". 

I know there's a mod for that, I just don't like using part mods.

[Tweeker]

  I'm not hating on your creativity, however I will offer some suggestions and a small criticism.

You see to be on the high side on the thrust of most of the engine, and low on the diameter,

I would suggest the following stats, based purely on balancing their thrust and size to the IRL engines:

RD 170,  Thrust 1650,       2.5M

RD 180, Thrust 900,     1.875M

RD 191, Thrust 450,     1.25M

Although, I would ultimately suggest just Including the RD-191 and making the other version via clustering,

 

RD 120, Thrust 200,    1.25M, almost exactly the same as the LV-T30 & 45

NK-33, Thrust 360,    1.875M  or 1.25M ----- tough call on the diameter on this one.

RD-58, Thrust 17,     .625M     ------Yes really,  it is a very small engine.

s5.92  Thrust 4.4,    Tiny,      -------Whatever size the Ant is.

RD-210 Thrust 130,  1.25M

 

That is just how the thrust and diameter work out,  applying a constant conversion factor to them, so the have the same relative proportion to each other, and  other real-life engine.

 

 

 

[T1mo98]

On 3/25/2019 at 8:13 PM, Tweeker said:

  I'm not hating on your creativity, however I will offer some suggestions and a small criticism.

You see to be on the high side on the thrust of most of the engine, and low on the diameter,

I would suggest the following stats, based purely on balancing their thrust and size to the IRL engines:

RD 170,  Thrust 1650,       2.5M

RD 180, Thrust 900,     1.875M

RD 191, Thrust 450,     1.25M

Although, I would ultimately suggest just Including the RD-191 and making the other version via clustering,

 

RD 120, Thrust 200,    1.25M, almost exactly the same as the LV-T30 & 45

NK-33, Thrust 360,    1.875M  or 1.25M ----- tough call on the diameter on this one.

RD-58, Thrust 17,     .625M     ------Yes really,  it is a very small engine.

s5.92  Thrust 4.4,    Tiny,      -------Whatever size the Ant is.

RD-210 Thrust 130,  1.25M

 

That is just how the thrust and diameter work out,  applying a constant conversion factor to them, so the have the same relative proportion to each other, and  other real-life engine.

 

 

 

Thanks for the suggestions!

Really pretty much all my thurst numbers were just made up on the spot by doing some quick mock-ups in the game to see how well they would perform in my replicas, which all pretty much require more thrust than a lot of the current engines give at a particular size, except for the Vector which I constantly have to use.

For example, I figured out the Thrust for the RD-180 by seeing how much thrust I would need to lift my stock replica of an Atlas 5. Although I understand that 1300 would be too high, it's very difficult to properly place this in a way where it is both balanced and true to it's real life counterpart. Especially when compared to the Vector, where in KSP it would have around the same thurst while in real life it has twice that of the SSME (although that's more the Vector being overpowered)
Part of the reason why I said variants instead of clustering was that I like the look of the support structures, similar to the Kodiak engine, which you don't get by clustering and are a b***h to make yourself because struts are so annoying.

Also the one thing I'm missing very much in KSP right now is a small but powerful engine, something in the 1.25m range with around 600-650kN thrust but without the gigantic nozzle of the Vector.

I do have to question the 200kN of thrust on the RD-0120 (I think you may be confusing it with the RD-120). The RD-0120 is the Russian equivalent to the SSME, so it should be on par or slightly lower than the Vector.

The NK-33 should be 1.25m imo, 1.875 seems too big for a single nozzle engine with 360kN thrust, although that's more my feeling that the Bobcat is underpowered, since that can barely lift a fully fueled Gemini replica.

I'd also still put the RD-58 thrust a bit higher, at maybe 30-35kN.

On further consideration I'd remove the RD-0120, RD-0210 and the s5.92.

[Tweeker]

If you are looking at the RD-0120 as opposed to the RD-120, then the thust would be higher, 

340 SL   440 VAC

All these number are based off the real-world numbers,    LBS thrust /1000 or KN *.225,