Downsizing your power plant: Any downsides?

[Yanaran]

Those who are saying that having a power plant with a larger capacity than is needed reduces heat signature/temp (and has nothing to do with heat efficiency) are correct. I am using an A4 power plant in my Cobra and had about 10% extra power than I needed and my base temp was around 42. As I made money I upgraded all my power consuming modules and added other modules until I was at 101% power consumption, and my base temp now idles at 45-46. I not really sure why this is the case, but this is real empirical data and not theory. Note this is using the same power plant (i.e. the same heat efficiency).

That's because you added more heat due to larger power consumption. That's not what people have been saying. The only way to test is to use the same modules and switch back and forth between two power plants.

In other words your heat went up because you went from say, 9MW to 10MW power consumption - not because your power plant went from 90% to 100% usage.

 

[sohara]

That's not what people have been saying.

It's definitely what I have been saying - the more capacity your power grid has in reserves, the cooler the ship.
An 80% load will be cooler than a 100% load, when Efficiency ratings and load-out are equal. Your ship will stay cooler, and cool down faster.

This is my last post on the matter, I'm more than happy to enjoy the advantage even if others don't want it!

 

[clivewil]

interesting thread. i just spent 1.6 million on the plant for my Cobra, and i was wondering whether it was money well spent or wasted - my old plant had plenty of spare power; the new one has even more (but it didn't seem to make much difference in combat)

 

[Yanaran]

It's definitely what I have been saying - the more capacity your power grid has in reserves, the cooler the ship.
An 80% load will be cooler than a 100% load, when Efficiency ratings and load-out are equal. Your ship will stay cooler, and cool down faster.

This is my last post on the matter, I'm more than happy to enjoy the advantage even if others don't want it!

I was referring to the people who say there's no downside to downsizing the power supply. I realize you say different but what you're saying is also factually wrong, and my post was aimed against what you say. You confuse cause and effect, it's the total power consumed that determines heat not the % of available power consumed.

Changing from a smaller to a larger powerplant, that both have the same heat efficiency does not change ship heat at all providing you have the same ship configuration in both cases. Regardless of the % listed in the modules screen. Observe:

Completely stock Viper straight from the shipyard, no changes, default E3 power plant:

Spoiler

Sitting idle in space, 46% heat:

Spoiler

Docked and replaced power plant with E2 module, same heat efficiency:

Spoiler

Change in % of available power used, 96 instead of 77:

Spoiler

Sitting idle in space: 46% heat:

Spoiler

Again the only thing that changes heat, is the amount of power consumed in MW, it does not matter how much "spare" power your PP has.

 

[fergal]

Again the only thing that changes heat, is the amount of power consumed in MW, it does not matter how much "spare" power your PP has.

Put an A1 on it.

 

[Yanaran]

Put an A1 on it.

Why? Heat efficiency has already been adequately explained in the thread (Pretty self-explanatory from the name I think). Besides I don't think there are any class 1 plants, but if you want to test any other plants just pick up a Viper yourself and compare to my screenshots above. I already sold mine and went back to trading.

 

[fergal]

Why? Heat efficiency has already been adequately explained in the thread (Pretty self-explanatory from the name I think). Besides I don't think there are any class 1 plants, but if you want to test any other plants just pick up a Viper yourself and compare to my screenshots above. I already sold mine and went back to trading.

I've already done that, and yes there are size 1 parts.

 

[TheNameIsJambo]

Moreover, does a smaller power plant use less fuel - whilst outputting the same power levels?

 

[Guyperson]

I ran an A4 in an Asp for weight saving for a while. It idled at the same temperature and cooled down from high heat at the same rate as the A5.

 

[aowqyaaw]

I ran an A4 in an Asp for weight saving for a while. It idled at the same temperature and cooled down from high heat at the same rate as the A5.

Confusing.

So where does that leave us? Is Fergal wrong? Can I downsize my powerplant so i'm nearer my mw threshold without sacrificing cooling? Does the higher heat efficiency of higher rated pp's have an effect?

 

[Yanaran]

I've already done that, and yes there are size 1 parts.

So what was your point? I showed that using the same heat efficiency, only the total power draw of your modules determines heat, not the size of the plant - I was agreeing with your earlier posts. I don't think anyone has disagreed with higher heat efficiency giving lower heat as it's pretty obvious from the name of the stat, as well as obvious in-game.

 

[Fenster]

Summarizing what is on this thread:
E - high heat sig, low power output (bad efficiency)
D - semi high heat sig
.
.
A- low heat sig for power plant but higher power output (good efficiency)

Class 1 - low power capacity - no effect on heat
Class 2 - higher power cap
Class 3 ..higher power again- no effect on heat ...UNLESS... You install more modules to consume the extra power you now have at a higher class.
Class 4 ..etc

 

[Things]

Aren't smaller power plants easier to destroy? At least it would make sense if they are less robust than their bigger counterparts.

Would be bad if your ship explodes after a few shots to the power plant.

 

[fergal]

Confusing.

So where does that leave us? Is Fergal wrong? Can I downsize my powerplant so i'm nearer my mw threshold without sacrificing cooling? Does the higher heat efficiency of higher rated pp's have an effect?

First of all, the difference in the heat efficiency isn't that big. You might not actually notice it. I was trying to stealthily kill elite anacondas without me having any shields. I tried many, many combinations of parts.

Where I do notice the difference in ship heat is during fuel scooping. When you try it with your stock E plant (just after you buy a new ship) you will overheat much quicker than later on when you have a higher "lettered" powerplant.

If you have a C4 powerplant, and "downgrade" it to an A3 you will reduce your ships heat. You will also generate less power, save weight so have better speed and fsd range, and it will cost more, so need more money and have a larger insurance bill.

To be honest I wouldn't worry about the heating effects, I'd run with the absolute minimum power you need looking for the lightest powerplant that will do this. D parts are the lightest, If you have a cobra and a D4 can power everything I would go for that.

MW and Mass, only two things I would worry about.

Aren't smaller power plants easier to destroy? At least it would make sense if they are less robust than their bigger counterparts.

Would be bad if your ship explodes after a few shots to the power plant.

Thats a really good question. No idea
It seems to take longer to destroy a powerplant on a dropship vs an anaconda, so each ship might have their own "health" for their parts, just like they have their own shield strength, just a guess though.

 

[Ghostickles]

I rocked an A2 ona type 6, boost suffers a bit, but otherwise it worked well. More jump range was my goal.

 

[Thogapotomus]

There is something that a lot of people are confusing when it comes to heat signatures. Your heat signature is how much heat your ship is radiating into space, period.

Power Usage

Ship A: You have a power plant that has 10MW capacity and you are using 10MW. You are venting 10MW worth of heat into space.

Ship B: You have a power plant that has 30MW capacity and you are using 10MW. You are venting 10MW worth of heat into space.

Both ships will have the same thermal signature as they are both venting the same amount of heat.

Heat Efficiency

The A-E heat efficiency will determine how quickly it can vent the heat away from the ship, thus affecting your internal heat percentage but not your radiated heat.

Ship C: You have a power plant with an A heat rating and a 10MW capacity. You are using 10MW of power. You are venting 10MW worth of heat into space. Your ship sits at 40% heat efficiency.

Ship D: You have a power plant with an E heat rating and a 10MW capacity. You are using 10MW of power. You are venting 10MW worth of heat into space. Your ship sits at 80% heat efficiency.

Both ships use the same power and vent the same heat into space. Ship C is able to vent the heat faster and more efficiently allowing the ship to run cooler while still producing the same amount of heat.

Silent Running: This closes the radiators and vents no heat into space, hence the buildup of heat in the ship.

So in the end, if you want to have a smaller thermal signature, turn off modules or enable silent running. Having a power plant with excess power does nothing, nor does it's heat efficiency. It's all about how much heat you are using.

Hope this helps.

 

[Wolfman]

I'm running an A3 on my explorer Asp. It idles at 32%. It is the bees knees for fuel scooping. It lets you get closer to the star for a much quicker fill up.

 

[Morbad]

Heat efficiency rating is the key.

If you can power everything you need with an A2, an A4 won't make you run cooler.

But ... if youve got enough power then theres no point in things being disabled ? so what exactly is the advantage of not having enough power for everything ?.

The advantage is a lower heat sig when you deploy weapons.

Less total power used at same heat efficiency = lesser heat sig.

Aren't smaller power plants easier to destroy? At least it would make sense if they are less robust than their bigger counterparts.

Would be bad if your ship explodes after a few shots to the power plant.

Yes, modules with lower integrity do seem to be easier to destroy.

However, most small ships will lose all of their hull value before modules are at risk, unless you are very unlucky, or your opponent is deliberately not trying to kill you as fast as they can.

The only ship I can see using a B module on for integrity reasons (B are generally the toughest and heaviest), would be the PP on an Anaconda, which is extremely vulnerable from above, below, and behind.

 

[MrReynolds]

Read the thread on and off so may have missed this obvious answer but.......
Does an A have more initial power to give? 8 seconds on full beam lasers instead of 7?
That would be a worthy investment.

Edit: or are capacitors the only variable for this instance?

 

[Quineloe]

I ran an A2 power plant instead of the D4 on the Type 7 and the Type 7 regularly went above 100% when charging the FSD even when nowhere near a sun. With the A2 it stopped at around 96%.