Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Make steam engines need smokestacks
2018-04-12, 08:14 PM
Post: #21
RE: Make steam engines need smokestacks
(2018-04-12 10:00 AM)Eagle Wrote:  
(2018-04-12 08:58 AM)Unhinged mechanic Wrote:  
(2017-07-12 01:47 PM)Eagle Wrote:  +1 for the Smokestack suggestion. Although A closed loop option (nuclear powered?) is very interesting, especially for stealth- or spacecraft.

Efficiency should be slightly better then fuel engines with a good refinery, but slightly less space efficient.
What? No. Efficiency should still be poorer than fuel engines, what else would be the point to fitting a fuel engine anymore on a large ship? Like modern day navies, the choice should be between a normal dieselfuel setup, or a gasturbine engine (in our case steam) that will power the ship. The first has a lower powerdensity but is cheaper to run, the latter more powerdense but more expensive. FtD should be no different.

What would be the point of even having steam engines in the game if fuel engines take up less space AND are more efficient?

Your realisim argument is silly. Not only would steam engines being more efficient than internal combustion engines be BY FAR the least unrealistic thing in this game, but the reason that navies stopped using steam (and they haven't, not entirely), had little or nothing to do with fuel efficiency, and a great deal more to do with steam engines being difficult to maintain, heavy, and potentially extremely dangerous (the amount of energy contained in a steam boiler running at full power is enormous. If it wasn't full of water, the boiler would melt).

I think we got lost in translation here. The sentence "Efficiency should be slightly better then fuel engines with a good refinery, but slightly less space efficient." is quoted from the OP, and below that is my reply. I don't at all think that the efficiency of steam should be greater than ICEs, quite the opposite.

No, I understand perfectly. You are saying that steam engines should be less efficient with both fuel and space, and I'm saying that if that were the case they would have no point.

A great nation is not a nation that rules the world. A great nation is a nation that realizes they don't have to.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-04-13, 10:25 AM
Post: #22
RE: Make steam engines need smokestacks
That's not what I said -_-

Procrastination level is over 9000
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-04-13, 03:10 PM
Post: #23
RE: Make steam engines need smokestacks
Just going to intervene to make sure the argument doesn't escalate:

Eagle proposed that "The first [fuel engine] has a lower powerdensity but is cheaper to run, the latter [steam engine] more powerdense but more expensive. FtD should be no different."

I think that the realism argument makes some sense for determining which one takes which role.

(2017-04-20 06:54 PM)Hikari Wrote:  I made something that has an impact of a type 1a supernova. The projectile already breaks laws of physics by going way past the speed of light.

2000mm HE Dakka Enthusiast
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-04-13, 03:49 PM
Post: #24
RE: Make steam engines need smokestacks
Steam engines take hours to get started IRL, that's one of the major reasons behind the shift to IC engines... I don't think we can really duplicate that Tongue

Poke my boat! mostly pre-2.0 learning & catalogue thread - Update: Heavy & light tanks 07/04/18 for 2.1. 6 ships made 2.0 aware. If it's not AotE I can't do it regularily - sea -> post processing -> eyestrain.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2018-04-13, 07:22 PM
Post: #25
RE: Make steam engines need smokestacks
We could probably duplicate steam engines tendency to explode if we wanted to.

A great nation is not a nation that rules the world. A great nation is a nation that realizes they don't have to.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)