| From: | Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Multiple and Combined Power Plants (Long) |
| Date: | Sat, 18 Jul 1998 11:44:50 EDT |
I am going to be changing some things to reflect what is going to be written
here.
Please read the whole thing before responding to the various things. Please.
What is the difference between Multiple and Combined Power Plants? Multiple
Power Plants means more than one of the -SAME- type power plant. Combined
Power Plant means a power plant which is the combination of more than one
power plant from the -SAME- power plant category (in terms of electric /
methane / gasoline / diesel / propellor / turbine).
-=-=-=-=-
When you give a vehicle Multiple Power Plants, the only three things which
change are the Load, Fuel Economy and Signature of the vehicle, everything
else remains unchanged. The Signature of the vehicle drops by 1 (a reflection
of greater heat generation and other things). The Load rating of the vehicle
increases by 50% of the original Load rating Maximum, per pp beyond the first.
The cost of the Multiple Power Plants is the sum of the individual costs of
the all of the power plants multiplied by 1.25. Fuel Economy changes because
the same fuel tank is now powering two or more engines, so, if the fuel
starting size is not changed, the fuel economy drops to (Base Fuel Economy)
divided by the number of power plants on the vehicle.
An example of a Multiple Power Plant is a Airliner with -TWO- Airliner Jet
Turbine Power Plants.
The new Load Rating Maximum would be 112,500 kilograms, which would still have
to be bought up from 10,000 kg, which is the Starting Load rating. For three
pp, the Max Load rating would have been 150,000 kg.
The Fuel Economy does not change, but the range with the same amount of fuel
(5,000 liters) is now between 1,000 and 1,500 kilometers, instead of 2k to 3k
with one power plant.
The Signature (sticking with the R2 for now) of an Airliner Jet Turbine pp is
normally a 2, and would drop to a 1 (which is still a 2 anyway).
The cost of the Twin Airliner Power Plant is going to be 2,500 design points.
-=-=-=-
When I mention the term Combined Power Plants, this is where things begin to
get rather interesting. This occurs when you combine more than one type of
power plant to make something unique. Like an airliner pp capable of
travelling as fast as a Jet Fighter, and so on.
First, the base power plant for the Combined Power Plant (which determines
which the base stats), is the one that is intended for the Body of the vehicle
that it is being designed for (which means no Airliner pp in Tbirds and
anything not having a Body of 9).
For the Speed and Load ratings, take the highest values. If there are more
than one pp that is the same, then the Load ratings will be calculated as if
they had been as a Multiple Power Plant (see above).
For the Accel ratings, use the lowest values.
For the Fuel Economy, take the Base Fuel Economy and divide it by the total
number of pp involved in this morass.
For the signature, take the Base Signature (still using R2) and subtract one
for each pp after the first.
For starting fuel, use the size given for the base pp.
The design cost for this Combined Power Plant is equal to the (sum of the
design points for each pp) multiplied by the number of pp involved.
Okay, now for an example.
Using the same Airliner Chassis, someone wants it to be as fast as a Jet
Fighter, but also wants it to be able to carry more, so they add in another
Airliner Power Plant. And the pp will be from the Jet Turbine Category.
The Airliner pp is the base pp.
The Speed Rating are now (150) 2,000 / 5,000.
The Accel Ratings are 35 / 60.
The Load Ratings are now 10,000 kg / 112,500 kg.
The Signature is still a 2 (2 - 1 = 1, which is a 2, gotta love math
sometimes).
The Fuel Economy is now 0.13 / 0.2 km/liter.
The Starting Fuel Size is 5,000 liters.
The Design Cost is :
(2,000+2,000+2,500)x3 (number of pp combined) = 6,500x3 = 19,500 design points
-=-=-=-
In the end, let me know what you think either way.
Thanks,
-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you could ever have.
