Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Chemical Rockets (Of the liquid variety)

Discussion in 'Suggestions and Feedback' started by Sumyunguy, Feb 25, 2015.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    If we are going to have planets, and if the gravity of those planets will affect ships, we are going to need something more powerful than the current electrical based thrusters we have. Chemical rockets.

    Chemical rockets would help ships exit gravity well of a planet and/or achieve orbit. Chemical rockets would consume some type of fuel, whether it be kerosene or hydrogen, and have a much higher thrust output than current thrusters. These can be used on any ship, and will allow proper maneuvering/landing in gravity. Ships can still use only electrical thrusters, but will have to stay in planetary orbit or risk falling and blowing to bits once they smack the ground.

    Players could build shuttles/payload delivery vehicles to ferry supplies to and from the planet to whatever they built in orbit, and would be cheaper than fitting a large ship with rockets.

    For fuel types, hydrogen would be gathered from ice through electrolysis (refining ice for hydrogen, and processing it in an oxygen generator for, well, oxygen), while oil for kerosene might biofuel processed from plant life or some other way(if planets give way to alien life, then we might find oil to process in the planets crust). Kerosene would be cheaper to produce, while hydrogen can be easily gathered from asteroids with a space fairing vessel. This allows players to not be stranded on a planet without a way to leave it.

    Links:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propellant (chemical fuels article)
    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/sb4001382 (pinene fuel article)

    Some pictures for examples. Both Saturn V engines.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2015
  2. IronHenry Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    28
    Seems like something way down the road but would be cool. I like options.

    I assume you mean liquid fuel rockets? I don't know of any solid fuel rockets you can turn off once lit. :)
     
  3. blizzerd Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    478
    most of them meant for space launch systems can technically be turned off or throttled, he whole "ksp you cant turn this off or throttle" thing is because when the nazi's invented them they didnt know how to throttle it and it worked for gameplay balances.
     
  4. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    Yes, I meant liquid rockets in that they use chemical reactions instead of current ionized particle thruster type(I think that's what the current thrusters are, at least). Though hybrid solid fuel rockets are cool, also.
     
  5. inventor200 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    446
    Use a rail gun assisted launch system, and you won't need to use so much fuel. Although the railgun runway needs to be several miles long.. :woot:DDD so......have fun? :woot:
     
  6. Keaton Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    67
    That Railgun Assisted launch system would not work.
     
  7. Keaton Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    67
    if you want to see my idea for chemical rockets, go to this forum post:

    http://forums.keenswh.com/post/chemical-fuel-systems-7313091?pid=1286338292#post1286338292
     
  8. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    Yeah. Such acceleration all at once would rip things apart. Deadly yet ,I assume, entertaining.
     
  9. wilcomega Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    24
    Good suggestion, i like it!
     
  10. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    Added new possible fuel descriptions to OP. Both fuels would have pros/cons. Feedback is welcome, as is constructive criticism.:)
     
  11. inventor200 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    446
    O.o which is why you make the runway longer...? I mean, these things are supposed to be, like 150-300 miles long. Anything shorter would over-accelerate and kill, yes.
     
  12. Lycanphoenix Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    49
    I love the idea of having Chemical Rockets, and I would also love to see Fusion Rockets, which would run entirely on hydrogen and, while being more expensive to build and maintain, would be a lot more efficient than their chemical counterparts.

    And of course, we could also have Turbine Engines (more efficient than standard rockets in atmospheres, but bulkier and more expensive to build without having any added benefit in space compared to standard rockets). There could be different varieties of Turbine Engine, as well; Chemical Turbines, Fusion Turbines, Ion Turbines (since standard SE thrusters are Ion Thrusters), and so on.

    - - - -

    On an unrelated note, having construction rules regarding aerodynamics would be important in an atmosphere.
     
  13. inventor200 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    446
    I'm sorry for all my off-topic replies, but LycanPhoenix: your profile pic, as my roommate would say, gives me life. :woot: keep being awesome, fellow Clanner.
     
  14. goduranus Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    512
    Play Kerbal Space Program instead?
     
  15. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    You act like rockets are mearly limited to K.S.P. Space Engineers is space-based voxel game, and liquid rockets have been fueling our endeavors to space since the 1950s. Rockets are a huge part of aerospace and will be around for a long time.

    To say normal rocket engines don't belong in "Space" Engineers is like saying chocolate chips don't belong in a chocolate chip cookie (Strange analogy, I'm aware). That just makes the cookie less delicious/exciting.

    Now, if you have an criticism instead of play game X instead, please post it. Proper feedback is welcome.:thumb:

    ---

    Yes, jets to be used in an atmosphere would be awesome. And having some type of aerodynamic system would be interesting, favoring sleek ship designs for atmospheric use with higher speed, with some type of lift. Anything not aerodynamic should keep its current acceleration to not punish large, brick-like ships too much, maybe.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 2, 2015
  16. Lycanphoenix Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    49
    You would also need to build ships symmetrically if you wanted to use them in an atmosphere, not just aerodynamically.
     
  17. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    Ice has just been added in the recent update, along with oxygen and a way to store it. All we need now is a way to extract hydrogen from the ice also to fuel rockets. Updating the OP for change.
     
  18. Morbophobie Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    145
    This would add a nice resource consuming drawback to planets. Since people fear that you wouldn't go off the planets if they were added. I like it.
     
  19. Brandt333 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    9
    With the introduction of oxygen, hydrogen should be produced as a byproduct. It would be a viable fuel source and could be used for as said planetary escapes or as I posted on a different thread cheap expendable rocket based weaponry.
     
  20. Sumyunguy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    86
    Yes. Having missiles require propellant would be great. A break from the magnesium powered missiles we use now, with other additions for rocket powered weapons like torpedoes or what have you.


    Added a new poll to OP for people to pick their preferred fuel mixtures along with an option to abstain from voting but still be counted to determine the percentage of people who want liquid chemical rockets.
     
  21. Andeerz Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    172
    Yes, please! This suggestion is great. I think it would be awesome, also, if different fuels had different specific impulses! This, combined with having mass of stored stuff (like fuel!) actually count could open the door for some actual engineering in the game! Different fuels would be ideal for different uses in this way, and add some i additional gameplay and design considerations.
     
  22. Belaniell Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    30
    +1 for liquid fuel not only for specialized thrusters for every thruster. Even in 2077 there will be no thrusters
    consume only nuclear power. Ion Thrusters and Plasma Thrusters also consume
    xenon or other noble gases. Why not different fuels from from different sources with diffrent power output ?
    like oxygen and hydrogen good storage / energy rate (in space) and liquid methane and liquid oxygen with higher power output but also you need more of it.
     
  23. Andeerz Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    172
    +1

    Fuel for every thruster, for sure... there should be no such thing as a reactionless thruster. Solid fuels should also be possible.
     
  24. [POR]Shoterxx Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    103
    That's highly impractical. In order to have fuel, you'd need to use conveyor-like tubes to feed the thrusters, and while it's not a bad idea to add them as a new variety (like boosters), replacing the current ones would mean significant changes to the game's core (ship weight and size, aditional resources, leaks, etc). Additionaly, the game, as stated before by the devs, is not supposed to be a realistic space simulator, but more of a realistic aproach to a sci-fi engineering game.

    Also, there is a reactionless thrust method already present in the game that cannot be removed, that being the gravity generator. And I don't see it going away any time soon.

    My idea of a hybrid spaceship is similar of that of a shuttle. On that note, liquid fuel rockets would be kind of a gimmick, optional feature, while basic aerodynamics would be of greater importance, with working flap blocks and drag.

    That being said, liquid based BOOSTERS would be interesting, even though not a pritority, and the fuel composition should be easy to obtain, so hydrogen and oxygen sound best.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 27, 2015
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.