Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Also, just use the 400 Liquid fuel only tank, you shouldn't need that many of them.
Nerv's are very efficient in space, but have low TWR. Only needing Lf is indeed an upgrade not only from an effiency stand point, but a logistics one.
The Ion engine for instance, is the most efficient engine of all; but needs neither Lf or Ox.
Keep in mind the Nerv is heavy though, it's best used on long distance trips.
A mk1-3 command pod with a jumbo 64 fuel tank with a Poodle gives you 5368 m/s delta V while using the same tank drained of oxidizer and a Nerv gives you 7130 m/s delta V. The break even point for this particular payload appears to be one X200-8 - if you pack more fuel tanks then the Nerv is better, otherwise the Poodle wins. [Get KER or MJ to see the numbers for your rocket]
In a perfect world you would fill the entire tank with liquid fuel to reduce dry mass per ton of fuel carried but this is not a perfect world.
I don't know - different engines use fuel at different rates, and I don't understand how you can work out which part of the difference can be attributed to the type of fuel used.
Edit:
I have not checked this but I think it would work...
Should make a copy of all the new Rockomax tanks that are liquid fuel only.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=863737439