Give us RS-68 or RS-25E...

[Jestersage]

Even in KSP1, Going from the 1-part Mammoth to the 5 parts analogue should not create too much physics stress. However, the Vectors are too expensive.

Please give us the low cost alternative for vector. Thanks.

[Kerbart]

22 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

Even in KSP1, Going from the 1-part Mammoth to the 5 parts analogue should not create too much physics stress. However, the Vectors are too expensive.

Please give us the low cost alternative for vector. Thanks.

Have you tried the Swivel?

[Jestersage]

3 hours ago, Kerbart said:

Have you tried the Swivel?

Surprise you didn't mentioned 2x Bobcat (which is closest to an ideal RS-68 analog) or even Skiff (have closest looks)

We need something that is OP,  small, and cheap. if they have to make it DLC, so be it.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Jestersage

[The Aziz]

7 hours ago, Jestersage said:

We need something that is OP,  small, and cheap. 

I like to think that from the three, you have to choose two. OP and small? Vector. Small and cheap? Swivel. OP and cheap? Well, depends on use, but there could be something.

Also devs said something about not using multi-nozzle engine parts, but letting us mix and match whatever propulsion sources we want.

[Jestersage]

1 hour ago, The Aziz said:

I like to think that from the three, you have to choose two. OP and small? Vector. Small and cheap? Swivel. OP and cheap? Well, depends on use, but there could be something.

Also devs said something about not using multi-nozzle engine parts, but letting us mix and match whatever propulsion sources we want.

And that is why I proposed an RS-68 or the RS-25E.

The Mammoth differ from 4x Vector + Engine Plate in the following for KSP1:

• Aerodynamics. Due to Mammoth lacking nodes, it will have less drag. However it can be a non issue in KSP2
• Mass. 4x Vector is 16t alone. 1x Mammoth is 15t
• Gimbal: Vector have insane gimbal
• cost: 4x vector alone is 72000, while a mammoth is only 39000

That being said, based on the dynamic mass-torque that is introduce in BG (where the less torque a motor produce, the lighter it becomes), perhaps what they can do is have cost increase in a non-linear way.

[SpaceFace545]

18 hours ago, The Aziz said:

I like to think that from the three, you have to choose two. OP and small? Vector. Small and cheap? Swivel. OP and cheap? Well, depends on use, but there could be something.

Also devs said something about not using multi-nozzle engine parts, but letting us mix and match whatever propulsion sources we want.

But, Mammoths look really nice

[Tweeker]

The problem with the Idea of RS-68s or RS-25E engines is that the vector is already ridiculously OP. That needs to be fixed before other engines are added at this same scale. 

It's thrust should be much close to 450 KN, about 30% of the Mainsail/Mammoth, and it should be 1.875M, not 1.25M 

An RS-68 should be about the same size, but be 700KN in thrust. 

 

[Jestersage]

14 hours ago, Tweeker said:

The problem with the Idea of RS-68s or RS-25E engines is that the vector is already ridiculously OP. That needs to be fixed before other engines are added at this same scale. 

It's thrust should be much close to 450 KN, about 30% of the Mainsail/Mammoth, and it should be 1.875M, not 1.25M 

An RS-68 should be about the same size, but be 700KN in thrust. 

 

Good enough. I was thinking more 2x Bobcat, aka 740kn/290 ISP SL and 800kn/310 ISP VAC. And reduce gimbal range, since it's design as a SL launcher.

[Capt. Hunt]

On 8/28/2019 at 10:42 PM, Jestersage said:

And that is why I proposed an RS-68 or the RS-25E.

The Mammoth differ from 4x Vector + Engine Plate in the following for KSP1:

• Aerodynamics. Due to Mammoth lacking nodes, it will have less drag. However it can be a non issue in KSP2
• Mass. 4x Vector is 16t alone. 1x Mammoth is 15t
• Gimbal: Vector have insane gimbal
• cost: 4x vector alone is 72000, while a mammoth is only 39000

That being said, based on the dynamic mass-torque that is introduce in BG (where the less torque a motor produce, the lighter it becomes), perhaps what they can do is have cost increase in a non-linear way.

IRL, the SLS versions of the RS-25 are lighter and cheaper versions of the ones used as SSMEs, so it makes sense that the mammoth is not exactly equal to 4 vectors+engine plate.

[Tweeker]

6 hours ago, Jestersage said:

Good enough. I was thinking more 2x Bobcat, aka 740kn/290 ISP SL and 800kn/310 ISP VAC. And reduce gimbal range, since it's design as a SL launcher.

 

6 hours ago, Capt. Hunt said:

IRL, the SLS versions of the RS-25 are lighter and cheaper versions of the ones used as SSMEs, so it makes sense that the mammoth is not exactly equal to 4 vectors+engine plate.

That would be alot more in-line with reality, the RS-25 is not a heavy lift engine,  as it is in KSP. 

It is a sustainer,  with lower thrust and ISP at SL and increasing thrust and ISP in VAC, 

on the Shuttle and SLS the RS-25s supply only about 15% -20% of the lift-off thrust, In KSP it is 60-70% 

[Guest]

On 8/29/2019 at 5:18 AM, The Aziz said:

OP and small? Vector. Small and cheap? Swivel. OP and cheap?

Spark.

[Concodroid]

15,000 twitches.