2018-02-22, 09:11 AM

I did some calculations, and it turns out that the optimal electric engine drive factor for an RTG+electric engine setup, if you want the maximal volume efficiency, is 0.79, yielding 19.37 PPV. The optimal drive factor for cost efficiency is 0.36, yielding 0.1541 power per material setup cost (this yields 16.15 PPV). In the attachment, you can find a graph representing those results.

This means that if you are striving for just volume efficiency, every fuel engine with worse than 20 PPV (as with an RTG, you also do not have to dedicate any space to fuel tanks) should be replaced with an RTG setup - and RTGs also have the advantage over very efficient fuel engines of fitting into very tight, awkward spaces.

This means that if you are striving for just volume efficiency, every fuel engine with worse than 20 PPV (as with an RTG, you also do not have to dedicate any space to fuel tanks) should be replaced with an RTG setup - and RTGs also have the advantage over very efficient fuel engines of fitting into very tight, awkward spaces.

**Attached Files**

**Thumbnail(s)**

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a big gun - Maxim #24