Cswartz9 Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 So I\'ve been having tons of problems with KSP lately (I haven\'t even been able to play the game, despite multiple re-installs) and that\'s driven me to check out pretty much every part of my computer to find the problem. I ended up looking through the parts list in the KSP folder, and found three different parts labeled \'LiquidEngine 1,\' \'LiquidEngine 2,\' and \'LiquidEngine 3.\' So far I\'ve found them completely the same in every aspect, and I was wondering what the purpose of them is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt'n Skunky Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Yes, there are 3 LFEs in the default parts: A non-gimballed main engine, a gimballed main engine, and a small lander engine.Cheers!Capt\'n SkunkyKSP Community Manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 They\'re not the same. liquidengine1 is a high-thrust, non-vectoring engine. 2 is a moderate thrust, vectoring engine. 3 is an efficient, low thrust, vectoring engine.Edit: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cswartz9 Posted April 20, 2012 Author Share Posted April 20, 2012 Okay, thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Orion Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 They\'re not the same. liquidengine1 is a high-thrust, non-vectoring engine. 2 is a moderate thrust, vectoring engine. 3 is an efficient, low thrust, vectoring engine.Edit: I found the engines pretty interesting at first... the big one and the gimballing one have identical efficiency, (you divide the thrust by the fuel consumption) which ends up at 25. The little engine also has a value of 25, however it weighs 4 times less than the others...The little engine is a bit weirdly balanced. I think it\'s weight should be upped just a little bit, but the drag put down (due to the small size) and the actual fuel consumption reduced a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Or, the big engines should have their weight taken down a bit. An engine that weighs twice as much as a command pod is a bit crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sal_vager Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Well, the command pod is made by a paper company, that might be why you cant stick things like RCS thrusters on it, it tends to catch fire when you try to weld it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Orion Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Or, the big engines should have their weight taken down a bit. An engine that weighs twice as much as a command pod is a bit crazy.I personally think that the little lander should weigh a bit more, and the big ones should weigh a little less but still more than the landing engine. The fuel should also be a little bit heavier when empty (but the same when full) and decouplers should weigh a LOT less. I think that\'d encourage staging without seeming oddly balanced between parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts