![]() ![]() Good examples of this include the Space Shuttle’s RS-25 engines and the Ariane series of rockets’ Vulcain engines. This type of engine is often paired with extra boosters of some type to get a kick up into orbit. This is typically a more efficient engine that burns for a longer duration, but doesn’t really have the oomph needed to throw heavy payloads into orbit without a little help. Secondly, we have the sustainer type engine. Examples of this could be the Saturn V’s F-1 engines, or the Falcon 9’s Merlin engines. These engines are great for getting a ship out of the atmosphere and pushing really heavy payloads, but don’t have the efficiency to make them great deep space engines. Firstly we have the high-thrust, high power engine which we can call the booster engine. Rocketry fans will be familiar with three high-level types of liquid fuel engines. So, how to sort and help players determine how best to use them? I’ll present the concept of Engine Archetypes. If we’ve done our job right, they’ll continue to be useful engines in some niche even after you have access to objectively more power engines, so they’ll stick around for a while. ![]() More than half of those 35 engines are methalox, and they’re practically the first engines a player gets introduced to. So, looking in detail at the methalox engines we have inherited from KSP1, we can see that we’ve got an interesting challenge on our hands. Yes, this nomenclature change applies to jet engines as well for simplicity, so jet engines are now methane engines. When we talk about engines you might recall from KSP1 that sported the Liquid Fuel/Oxidizer moniker, we’re always talking about methalox engines. It’s a good choice – a number of commercial companies are currently moving engines using methane and oxygen propellants to operational readiness. ![]() For their space program, Kerbals have passed over the brutish kerosene, toxic hypergolics and seductive lure of liquid hydrogen to settle on this nice middle ground fuel. For KSP2, we’ve decided to take this resource and… name it. ![]() KSP1 gave us an abstracted resource to run our most common workhorse engines: the well-regarded Liquid Fuel. Let’s start with talking about… methane and methane accessories. I’m going to go into some detail on how we’re going to work towards addressing this, focusing in on the most common type of engines in KSP – the venerable liquid fuel engine category, which boasts such illustrious names as the Mainsail, Rhino and… Ant.īefore we get into this, a bit of terminology. Clearly, we need to find good ways to teach new and returning players how to select an engine and teach players at the very least which engines are better at which missions they want to accomplish. We’re adding more engines, more fuel types and more engine sizes. When we look at our plans for KSP2, we’re only making this problem worse. You're searching for specific impulse, thrust, mass, heat production, and how the engine performs in multiple situations (sea level, orbit, other planets). When you're looking for an engine, all of your important details are buried deep. This leads to a good deal of player confusion when starting out – what engine should I use? What engine is best for what I want to do? Why isn’t this rocket lifting off the pad even though I put 20 Terriers on it? There’s a lot of trial-and-error gameplay before you learn the hard-won lessons about specific impulse, thrust to weight ratio, and fuel density that can rocket you to success in KSP. KSP1 had 35 engines for you to choose from (more if the Making History DLC is installed), spread across Liquid Fuel/Oxidizer, Liquid Fuel, Monopropellant, Xenon and Solid fuel types. We’ve mentioned approachability as a core pillar of our KSP2 design, and I’m here today to talk about one of the less-obvious ways we are focusing on helping players reach the stars.Īn area we’ve noticed players struggling with in testing is making sense of the dizzying array of engines you’re presented with in the VAB. Engines: How to Avoid Shipping a Rocket Scientist ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |