Ion+Atmo versus Hydrogen Thrusters. (Questions)

[ThotQuake]

I'm redesigning my fighter once again, and I've run into a reality check. Trying to incorporate Ion Thrusters and Atmospheric thrusters in to one build seems horribly inefficient.

But I'm pretty inexperienced, so I'm hoping this thread can become a repository for anyone's knowledge of these (vanilla) Thruster types. How do they work, what's the mathematical differences between them, what's the weight differences, what's the overall difference in efficiency for small (and large) grid builds. Anything helps, I'm looking to learn.

Thanks again community!

[Smightor]

https://spaceengineers.fandom.com/wiki/Thruster_Comparison

[Waldherz]

There is no right answer to this.
Every ship, playstyle and situation has its own optimal thruster configuration.

[Smightor]

Hydros are the best all around thrust to weight engine and work anywhere. Great for lifting cargo off planet, or landing colony ships. But they are limited to available fuel, and being a bit explodey with the fuel tank, they are not great for fighters.

Atmos are great for planet use as lifters or for fighting craft. Their fail is being useless in space, and being big and heavy.

Ions use less power, but lack thrust and are useless in atmosphere.

The main issue trying to use a combo of atmos and ion on one ship is the power-weight-lift triangle that comes with it. You have atmos, and batteries to power them. You add ions to get to space. But they weigh a lot, and use a lot of power. So you add more batteries, which weigh more, but now your atmos cant lift he ship. So you add more atmos, but now your ions dont have enough lift to make it to space because the atmos are heavy so you add more ions but now you dont have enough power so you add more batteries.......

An atmo/ion fighter while handy will not perform as good a a straight ion or atmos fighter would do to hauling around extra useless weight at all times.

Consider making 2 different dedicated fighters, or make your atmos/ion fighter very light. Or, make a separate drop ship to dock to that can haul your fighter on/off planet so you dont need to pack enough engine on it to lift into space.

[CrimsonKNight_05]

Originally posted by Thotquake:

I'm redesigning my fighter once again, and I've run into a reality check. Trying to incorporate Ion Thrusters and Atmospheric thrusters in to one build seems horribly inefficient.

But I'm pretty inexperienced, so I'm hoping this thread can become a repository for anyone's knowledge of these (vanilla) Thruster types. How do they work, what's the mathematical differences between them, what's the weight differences, what's the overall difference in efficiency for small (and large) grid builds. Anything helps, I'm looking to learn.

Thanks again community!

Ion thruster for SPACE, outside of the Planet gravity
Atmo thruster for Thick Atmospheric Planets
Hydrogen thruster for (ALL Space & Planets) as long as you can carry the fuel***

It is possible to create a "Trans-atmospheric" Small Grid Fighter Jet, Meaning a fighter craft that can travel tru space-earth and vice versa, And just Using ION and Atmo thrusters PRIMARY - ONLY, But it will be hard for you... its along trial and error, you need a calculator beside you...

BUT... as Fighter craft, Maneuverability and acceleration can't be second... SO you have to include the Hydrogen Thrusters to formula... and make it as SECONDARY/SUPPORT thrust.

I have already created that Trans-atmospheric Fighter Jet,

i could give the numbers, but i don't like spoiling you, i don't want piss on your sparks of curiosity by just telling the numbers...

TO START your concept,

What Fighter jet are you designing?
- Multirole? General Purpose Interceptor? There are so many ideas...
Whats the weight of the Fighter jet, VS the amount of thrusters it has to carry...
What are you willing to compromise to your creation and give it inherit advantage in combat?

If you want a good example of it, Look at the workshop,
"Cursor" by Aragath, is by far the simplest and good example fighter Jet that you can looked on...

[Dan2D3D]

Hi, I prefer to use Atmos on planet, Ion in space and Hydros as "Booster" used for the needed push to exit the planet Gravity, so I will add all thrusters on ships able to go everwhere and only the needed for ships that will stay on planet for example.

Good Tips
-> Finding the amount of thrusters it needed to support one full load large Cargo container will give you the experience you need.

-> It needs at least 2 large Upward Atmos thrusters to support one full load large Cargo container on planet.

-> It needs at least 16 small Upward Hydro thrusters to support one full load large Cargo container on planet.

_____________

The "Goal", imo, is to become Rich to build the best ship concepts of the game that is the "Nuclear ships" that uses Reactor + Uranium as power.

I recommend to go creative mode in asteroid only world to learn all about the Nuclear space ship first.

Example on "Nuclear Ion space ship"
You need :

1 - Cockpit.
2 - Gyroscope.
3 - Nuclear Reactor.
4 - ION Thrusters on all sides.

5 - Enter the cockpit, try the ship and add more of #2, #3 and #4 if needed to have a better maneuverability = it goes with the total mass of the ship so you will need more on bigger ships.

6 - Full all its containers + connectors + O2/H2 Gens to know if it can fly Full Load, so you may have to add more thrusters and gyroscopes once Full, engineer testing needed.

If you do the above = The rest will become easier.

[Ronin Planetary Industries]

Ion thrusters DO work in planetary atmospheres. But they function relatively poorly. They are down to about 1/5th of the power at sea-level (0 meters)... but pop up to around 1/3rd at 1000 meters. Unique to the game, the amount of power used is based on output, not the amount of throttle. So if your thrusters are only 20% as efficient you only use 20% of the power you would in free space...

[Bullslayer]

it really depends on build, i feel its kinda silly to try and meta think it cause theres so many design possibilities all three work well and yet so many they dont. If its a small grid fighter then id say all three are fine, large atmo lift thrusters are good for getting you up to 100ms quick if ur leaving orbit and your hydros will do less work getting you those first 6km (average) before the atmos cut out, then once ur space the ions work better thus taking over the atmos spot and further reducing the work on your hydros.

that all said i usually make my first space builds in a world hydro only then calc the fuel and thrust needed cause ice is usually pretty easy to find even in space.

[hippybaker]

Originally posted by Smightor:

https://spaceengineers.fandom.com/wiki/Thruster_Comparison

Is this up to date and accurate?

[Smightor]

As far as i know it is. But then again, I didn't make it and I don't track updates on it. its just a resource i found when i had the same questions. At the time, like 2 years ago, the math seemed to hold up to my load lift testing.

[Alshain]

I never use all 3 on one ship. It's either Ion or Atmo or Hydrogen or Atmo + Hydrogen. I build function driven ships and in most cases the ship is either a function performed in Space, on a Moon, or on a Planet so they have only one engine type. I don't build "Jack of all trades" ships, mostly because if I ever did I'd run out of new things to build and the game is over.

The only function that requires multiple engine types is transition between atmosphere and space and that never has Ion. (Though you could argue that 0 gravity to moon gravity is another transition since you need a ship with more lift than one designed solely for space.) I have scout ships and cargo transports in that category but for cargo once I get to a facility in space or back on the planet, I switch ships. Their purpose is ONLY to make that transition.

[Smightor]

I have a small grid cargo ship 'Dragonfly' that I have as a general use ship that is all three. It has atmos for planet, Ion for space, and hydro boost for lifting to space only. 2 medium cargo containers, 2 hydrogen tanks, O2 gen/tank, 2 solar panels, a parachute, 1 gyro, 1 small reactor and 5 batteries. But to make it work, the ship has almost no body. It is just exposed equipment with a frame to attach engines to. Great for economical retrieval of plat and uranium from asteroids, or hauling small amount of cargo around. But it explodes pretty quick if fired upon.

[Delaradra]

In the past I've used merge blocks and had Atmo & Ion Modules that I would swap out. The base ship had limited Hydrogen thrusters & tanks used for boost, finish the trip to space when atmos failed, and mobility while swapping out modules. I kept the modules at small space dock at the edge of gravity so a small hydrogen thrust would be enough to let gravity pull me in. It also had a couple of parachutes if needed.

[frag2k4]

For the most parts I use Atmo on planets where able especially for mining ships so I can keep them smaller and avoid the piping up issues. Hydrogen are king in general as multipurpose thrusters and generally needed for getting off planets. Ion are okay, but are weak, power hungry and heavy, main upsides is they are generally smaller and have more attachment points.

However if you want a better option, go for a 2 stroke piston clang drive and only have a few thrusters for breaking. Will work on both planets and space and at any weight level.

[Neen]

If you want to combine atmos and ion, I like to prioritize having VERY weak ion thrust in all but one direction (turn the ship to brake). Rationale is that space doesn't demand much continuous thrust (you can just point yourself in the direction you want to go, hit top speed, then turn off your dampeners and cruise), atmosphere does, and it's better to have less useless weight in atmosphere where your thrusters will be constantly burning.

However, since space doesn't require continuous thrust, you could also just put hydrogen on the ship and have a more powerful thruster that can also be used in the atmosphere for high load/high acceleration needs. Ion thrusters are expensive and not very powerful on their own.

In general with thrusters, try to stay aware of what directions you actually need to be strong for a ship. Reducing side-to-side or up/down thrusters can be a good move, as you can compensate for it by rolling the craft with Q and E. In atmosphere, you can get by surprisingly well with just some strong downward thrust, a gyro, and a parachute for emergencies.

[Dan2D3D]

I think the best is to try all the possibilities and use the one you like the most.

= You will become a very good experienced engineer after testing and trying all.