More Nuclear Reactors for Future Versions

[JMBuilder]

The Radioisotope generator is a great little tool, but in future versions of KSP, other types of reactors will be needed for larger amounts of power. These will also add some interesting challenges when resource management is implemented.

1. Uranium Reactor

Advantages: Significant source of power. Fairly light.

Disadvantages: Hazardous, high-mass waste. Still pretty heavy compared to other power sources.

2. Thorium Reactor

Advantages: Large source of power. Minimal waste.

Disadvantages: Large and heavy.

3. Fusion Reactor

Advantages: Incredible source of power. Consumes Hydrogen, which is abundant and easily collectible. Produces reusable materials, such as water, Oxygen, and Helium.

Disadvantages: Enormous and extremely heavy.

[animalcross]

More parts are planned.

[astropapi1]

More parts are planned.

He isn't just saying "GIMME MOAR PARTZ, BLERGH!". And IMO, we really need better power management.

[TwoHedWlf]

I've also had the thought of a kind of modular nuclear rocket, maybe the nuclear reactor for power could double for the rocket. Basically, you've got a nuclear reactor providing the heating for the fuel. The higher the reactor temperature the higher the ISP, the higher the total output the higher the maximum thrust. Then a nozzle for max thrust(Difference between the reactor and nozzle's max thrust is electrical supply?) gimbal and isp vs altitude.

[Canopus]

I would like the LV-N to produce electricity even when its not throttled up. Make it a bimodal NTR.

[Javster]

Basically, we have 3 ways of generating electricity: engines, solar panels and 1 radioisotope reactor.

[Kimberly]

What I would like is a nuclear reactor that is heavy and produces a lot of power, the kind of thing you'd use to power a large planetary base, but which requires a kerbal assigned to it to function. Combined with life support needs, this would make it harder to build up infrastructure.

[ngianoplus]

My guess is that when nuclear fuel is added for LV-N'a we could see a reactor that also uses the fuel solely for energy production. Perhaps, you could throttle down like with an engine to produce more/less power.

[GroxGlitch]

I'd love to see a fusion reactor, but I have to nitpick - a fusion reactor wouldn't output water or oxygen. If you're fusing hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium if I recall correctly, into helium, the byproduct is, I believe, one helium molecule and a free Neutron for every Deuterium and Tritium molecule fused.

What you're probably thinking of there is a fuel cell.

[OdinYggd]

I wonder how this thread got overlooked. It falls under the "More Parts" category of what not to suggest and will be closed.

Mods exist to add several types of reactor to the game, and at an unknown date when resources are added we might see some stock reactors added along with improvements to the nerva.

The full list of ideas that either are suggested all the time, confirmed to be coming soon, or will not be added can be found here:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/36863-What-not-to-suggest