ION Fix

[LexDavis]

The current uses or the Ion parts are practically none. I think it would be cool if the developers removed the ion engines and xenon tanks and replaced it with an actual nuclear engine that ran on a nuclear generator that ran on electricity and nuclear fuel. Its ISP could be slightly higher than the LV-9 but lower than the current ion engine...:cool:

[*Aqua*]

Do we really need another LV-N?

The ion engine is already bosted in terms of thrust and nerved in terms of ISP. In it's current form it is the engine for tiny and small probes.

[Sirrobert]

Since when does a nuclear REACTOR run ON electricity?

The entire thing of a reactor is that it produces energy

[Tex]

The Ion engines serve a useful purpose for small and lightweight spacecraft. The frankly ridiculously low thrust comes with a ridiculously high ISP, and so you could argue that, provided with enough electricity (and, indeed, enough engines) that the Ions are superior to many other engines.

In addition, we use Ion engines in real life to power probes, so it kinda feels right at home to use 'em! I actually stuck ten of them onto a car to make it go in one of my videos.

[Nemrav]

while I must agree I would like higher phys warp when using ion engines, "fixing them" would involve nerfing them, they are already way... over powered.

what i'd like for engines though would be say a rockomax sized jet engine and jet fuel tank for planes..

[*Aqua*]

It should has a thrust of 2.5 Newton and an ISP of 20.000 s. That's what RL ion engines can do.

Squad boosted the thrust so nobody has to wait for months for completing maneuvers.

[m4v]

It should has a thrust of 2.5 Newton and an ISP of 20.000 s. That's what RL ion engines can do.

Squad boosted the thrust so nobody has to wait for months for completing maneuvers.

[redacted]

edit: sorry, my mistake, I read too fast.

[sal_vager]

Place a piece of paper on your hand, the weight you feel is equal to the thrust of most real life Ion engines :/

But the miles per gallon is fantastic!

And some people want solar sails, they'd be even weaker

[jwenting]

Some people want every engine to be turned into a monster with the fuel efficiency of a nerva, and mass of an LV909, and the TWR of a Mainsail...

The mix we have is pretty well thought out, I suggest you learn which engine is best used for what purpose.

[guest91111]

I actually made a video of an Ion powered plane, Ion engines are really not useless

[LexDavis]

I meant something that is NOT an ion engine. And and something that would need large amounts of electricity to be able to use its fuel. not necessarily nuclear. The ISP doesn't have to be that high, maybe 900 or 1000 and the thrust doesn't have to be ridiculously high. Like 30-40. I'm just saying that the current ion engines have no use except for tiny probes that can't collect much science anyways.

Edited March 9, 2014 by LexDavis

[austincurr]

I meant something that is NOT an ion engine. And and something that would need large amounts of electricity to be able to use its fuel. not necessarily nuclear. The ISP doesn't have to be that high, maybe 900 or 1000 and the thrust doesn't have to be ridiculously high. Like 30-40. I'm just saying that the current ion engines have no use except for tiny probes that can't collect much science anyways.

Two people have given examples of things they've used ion engines for. Btw, what you are asking for is just a weaker, more efficient nerva except that it requires electricity.

[coolitic]

No, atomic engines are much better than ion. The only drawback is size and weight.

Still, ions cannot reliably do most maneuvers without wasting tons of time.

[Gauss H2K]

Ions wouldn't be so obnoxious if you could leave them to burn while switching to a different vehicle, and come back to them after the burn. As it is, for ultra lightweight craft they're pretty good, the problem being that there isn't a whole lot an ultra light can do.

Also I believe the Interstellar Mod has plasma thrusters, and other engines that are similar to ion engines, but scaled up for 1.25m parts.

[AlexinTokyo]

Ions wouldn't be so obnoxious if you could leave them to burn while switching to a different vehicle, and come back to them after the burn.

This. So very much this.

I have a tiny ion-engine-powered probe with a small science package that's headed to Kebol, either as a sun skimmer or a sun diver, depending what I feel like. I'd really love to be able to set up a long burn and then either time warp or switch away, because sitting there and watching it do basically nothing for a two-hour burn is not really fun.

Current solution: YouTube videos while the game is on in the background.

[Gauss H2K]

Current solution: YouTube videos while the game is on in the background.

You're lucky, in an effort to reduce crashes, I end every program on my computer except KSP, and play with only FAR installed. In my case, nukes are so much better for anything larger than a pea. It's not too hard to build an ion plane/probe/rover, the difficulty is then finding a practical use for the new creation. I mean why use an ion plane, if not just for the challenge? It's not practical for exploring kerbin, nor for SSTOs so the only real point to building an ion plane is to say that I've built an ion plane.

[*Aqua*]

I meant something that is NOT an ion engine. And and something that would need large amounts of electricity to be able to use its fuel. not necessarily nuclear. The ISP doesn't have to be that high, maybe 900 or 1000 and the thrust doesn't have to be ridiculously high. Like 30-40.

Most (or all?) engines in KSP are only usable in special circumstances. For example the Mainsail is good for early stages of a heavy rocket. The Skipper is the same but for higher stages. The Poodle is good for orbital maneuvers of such a rocket. This all works because different atmosphere thicknesses at different heights requires adapting.

In space there is no atmosphere so the difference between more thrust/less ISP and less thrust more/ISP becomes the main deciding factor of what engine to use. If there's an engine which has a higher ISP and small drawback like the need for a nuclear reactor I would always choose the later engine over the LV-N. In fact your proposed engine is so good there is no reason to not use it. It only needs a high amount of electricity and a little bit of fuel. Maybe I can swap some fuel tanks for some solar panels. It makes the craft lighter while providing the energy need. The thrust is about half of that of a LV-N but I don't care. I just put two of your engines on my rocket. It's still more efficient. It's the ultimate engine for interplanetary flights.

Your proposed engine would break the balance of all available engines.

[Red Iron Crown]

It is not impossible for an engine to have high Isp and high TWR in real life (the NERVA is a good example). In KSP, they are played off each other for gameplay balance reasons.

I think the OP is looking for something between the LV-N and the ion engine on the TWR and Isp scales. Not an unreasonable or balance breaking request, IMHO, though LV-Ns work well enough for me on the kinds of craft I build.

[CaptRobau]

I think the Ion engine could be made be more useful for everyone by simply reducing the amount of electricity it requires. You can't run it at full power on anything less than a Gigantor solar array. That thing weighs as much as the engine, xenon and probe it's attached too. Since you can't run it at full power without a ridiculously large design, most people don't even get it's pitiful 0.5 Kn of trust. No wonder people think it's useless. Real-life ion engines can run full power on the equivalent of two OX-4L solar panels. Let the KSP one do so as well and you'll see more people use ion engines for their light probe designs.

[Anton P. Nym]

Real-life ion engines can run full power on the equivalent of two OX-4L solar panels.

Real life ion engines develop less than a thousandth the thrust of the PB-ion, too. That's not the problem; the problem is that KSP is a game and the weeks-long burns real ion engines use are boring to play... and the game engine doesn't allow levels of physics acceleration high enough to speed things up to enjoyable levels. I don't know how to fix that.

-- Steve

[Random Tank]

It is not impossible for an engine to have high Isp and high TWR in real life (the NERVA is a good example).

The NERVA-2 produces 250kN of thrust in real life, and has an ISP of ~850

I'd like it so NERVA's actually use nuclear fuel, and also there was a nuclear generator in the game (for generating electricity by using a fuel). TBH, any fuel consuming generator (that doesn't produce thrust!) would be lovely. Multiple sizes of NERVA could be cool too; the only reason why we (real life) haven't made anything more impressive than the NERVA-2 is because the Project was scrapped when the planned Mars flight in the 80's was cancelled , if it hadn't been we would/could have bigger, badder nuke engines!

[CaptRobau]

Real life ion engines develop less than a thousandth the thrust of the PB-ion, too. That's not the problem; the problem is that KSP is a game and the weeks-long burns real ion engines use are boring to play... and the game engine doesn't allow levels of physics acceleration high enough to speed things up to enjoyable levels. I don't know how to fix that.

-- Steve

True. To use ion engines in the same capacity as they are sometimes used in real-life, ion engines would need to fire even under some sort of timewarp. That is something that might be hard to fix though. A solution that would make ion engines at all useful would be a reduction in electrical power consumption. It's easy to do and would result in a reduction in spacecraft mass (very important when you work with low thrust levels) and it increases available thrust as a whole. This is just enough to open some more mission types for ion-powered spacecraft, such as maneuvering through a planetary system like Jool's (collecting science from all the moons' orbits in one mission) or landing on very low-gravity moons like Gilly and Bop. It's not the holy grail of using just ion engines for everything but the launch from Kerbin, but it's a start.

[Red Iron Crown]

The NERVA-2 produces 250kN of thrust in real life, and has an ISP of ~850

The planned NERVA 2 was even more impressivethan that, with 867kN of thrust and a specific impulse of 850 vacuum/380 sea level (link). Our LV-N is nerfed in TWR and atmospheric Isp.

[Random Tank]

Oops, it's 250k pounds of thrust isn't it, derp

With that much thrust, and nearly the atm ISP of the Aerospike, that would be a very useful mid ascent stage engine for rockets! Would be good for SSTOs too if they could carry it! Makes me want a bigger NERVA even more...

[HoneyFox]

Just in case any of you haven't discovered this plugin I made for ion thrusters to enable them to generate thrust during time-warp...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/70881-0-23-Orbit-Manipulator-Series-%28WIP%29-%28Updated-March-12-2014%29

So yes, I suggest reducing the PB-ION thrust. Perhaps from 0.5kN to 0.005kN or so, it might be still OP than RL for 10 times, but anyway...