Exploration Ship Builds

wetwire

wetwire
Thanks for the advice Lance 'Spacecat' D. im not apposed to putting in the other ships that do not support all the internals i listed on the home page as "required", It will just take time and each one would be different, hard to find a good set of standards when you don't have enough internal slots to keep them consistent.
You mentioned one less slot for the next patch, is this referring to the Discovery Scanner being removed? because all these ship designs on the web site use the extra slot normally taken by the scanner. Because beta.coriolis.io takes this into account by not having the Scanner as an optional internal module.
 

Rooster Podunk

Rooster Podunk
Lance 'Spacecat' D. said:
Very nice work, but if I may... I peeked at the type-6, a personal favorite of mine, and I saw a grade D powerplant with grade 5 overcharged. That made me wince in sympathetic pain. (The 'type' ships already run hot, an overcharged grade D ship would be like flying an oven)

I would gently, but emphatically suggest any design using a D-grade powerplant be updated to use an A-grade to reduce heat issues. Heat is one of the big enemies of explorers after all.
Click to expand...

+1. I looked at one with a 'D' and a 66 heat efficiency and could feel the heat coming from my monitor.
 

13A/24B

13A/24B
wetwire said:
Additional reply to 13A/24B's question about the Adder. I also like the ship but set goals for the builds to have key internal's to qualify. I may add the other ships as "unsafe" exploration ships. or something like that.
Click to expand...

I was being slightly 'tongue in cheek' when I posted as the Adder doesn't fit your minimum criteria. But it is a good explorer and not necessarily as a starter ship, mine took me to Pioneer :)

If you do add beginner/low cost ships here's my planned build for after 3.3 release.
 

CMDR Pugwash

CMDR Pugwash
This great OP, thank you. I don't engineer but this is still a big help. One thing though, the cockpit view is very important for exploration imho. Your pictures certainly help with that, but it would be great if there were some sort of metric along with the others.
 

disorganise

disorganise
Great site!
Would it be possible to also add a summary of the actual engineering - eg, lightweight/stripped/overcharged and so on. I'm trying to build a long legs Conda and trying to remember where I saw all the tips so having it in one spot would be good I think
 

wetwire

wetwire
disorganise said:
Great site!
Would it be possible to also add a summary of the actual engineering - eg, lightweight/stripped/overcharged and so on. I'm trying to build a long legs Conda and trying to remember where I saw all the tips so having it in one spot would be good I think
Click to expand...

The coriolis.io link for each ship should give the information , as each ship (as it stands currently) uses the same engineering modifications. But your suggestion is a great idea. i will look into adding a section that describes each engineer modification for the different modules.

Edit: Updated the Materials page to reflect as "Engineering" which includes the engineer modifications used, which engineers and materials.
This page can be reached by a link on the home page and the drop down menu in the top right of the page.

Also thinking over your comment, when you say "long legs" is this referencing the travel range? how long a ship can travel on a full tank without scooping? Because that stat is heavily influenced by fuel tank size, so adding more fuel tanks would change the travel range drastically at the down side of reduced jump range and impacts the fuel scoop time when the tanks are empty. The Andaconda build on the page with 64T of extra fuel would have an amazing travel range of 908.37LY, but reduce the jump range by about 8LY and empty tank refuel time from 25s to 1m:17s.
 
Last edited:

disorganise

disorganise
Awesome :) Hadn't noticed that in coriolis - apologies....feel like an ignorant fool now :/

For me, long legs meant long jump range - sorry. I see the confusion. My Asp could do 55ly on an oily rag iirc, so it's quite something to be pushing into the 70's
 

CoFfeX

C
wetwire said:
Also thinking over your comment, when you say "long legs" is this referencing the travel range? how long a ship can travel on a full tank without scooping? Because that stat is heavily influenced by fuel tank size, so adding more fuel tanks would change the travel range drastically at the down side of reduced jump range and impacts the fuel scoop time when the tanks are empty. The Andaconda build on the page with 64T of extra fuel would have an amazing travel range of 908.37LY, but reduce the jump range by about 8LY and empty tank refuel time from 25s to 1m:17s.
Click to expand...
The concept of long legs gets even more confusing than that, the travel range coriolis is giving you assumes maximum fuel usage for each jump.

For example, an Anaconda weighing 500t with a fully engineered FSD and no guardian booster can go approximately 70.77ly on 8t of fuel in a single jump. Or 254.4ly in 8 separate 31.80ly jumps, consuming 1t for the first jump, and slightly less for each subsequent jump, ending up just shy of 8t of fuel used in total.
 

iain666

iain666
CoFfeX said:
For example, an Anaconda weighing 500t with a fully engineered FSD and no guardian booster can go approximately 70.77ly on 8t of fuel in a single jump. Or 254.4ly in 8 separate 31.80ly jumps, consuming 1t for the first jump, and slightly less for each subsequent jump, ending up just shy of 8t of fuel used in total.
Click to expand...

Fuel's free. With a decent scoop refuelling adds no time so it's 7 jumps or 3 to cover 210ly, 5 minutes or 2. If you're in the bubble without a scoop and having to dock to buy fuel when you run out then doing 30ly/t rather than 9ly/t can be useful, in the black not so much. You might use economic plotting when surveying an area but it's not a significant metric.
 

wetwire

wetwire
Alright, i have added the remaining ships such as the Adder , here is looking at you 13A/24B :D j/k
Also thank you Lance 'Spacecat' D for the name, i used Minimalist, it seems a good description for the a type of explorer ship. Not having the AFMU that the other group has. your ruffing it out in the black, or in this case, a minimalist. now going without shields i would just classify as dangerously asking for trouble but some are willing to do that. I personally would not explore without some sort of fall back plan or preventive measure in the case of unforeseen danger.. I've had experience in losing my ship on the neutron highway halfway to Colonia and it is no fun to retrace that long trip.
Anyway the new category of ships can be found from a link on the home page or drop down menu in the top right.
Hope you enjoy the designs and find something useful in the information.
 

CMDR Zhao

CMDR Zhao
That's a nice little site you made! And it can be quite useful.

I think it would be great if each ship has a secondary build proposition, with optionnal or fun things (I can think of mining lasers or SLF for example).
 

Orvidius

Orvidius
manwithagun said:
So for now only fsd booster needed? No other 3.3 items for explorstion?
Click to expand...

Nothing will be truly "needed". You can remove the Advanced Discovery Scanner, since that will be built into the ship in 3.3, instead of being a module. The Detailed Surface Scanner will still be useful, but it will be a probe launcher, with the scanning itself being rolled into the ship's built-in discovery scanner.

The Guardian FSD Booster is highly recommended, but not strictly needed, since it just extends your jump range.

Other than that, research limpets can be useful, but only in certain situations, and aren't necessary at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom