Allow Fuel Tanks to be switched On or OFF in the Modules Panel

[Andargor]

Installing Fuel Tank modules increases your total fuel capacity. In theory, this allows you more flexibility to choose your jump range by having more or less fuel in your tanks. An almost empty tank allows you to jump further but requires more fuel scooping, a full tank allows you to make more, but shorter jumps. This allows the commander to adjust his/her strategy depending on the situation: long voyages requiring max jump distance, or sparse star areas, or the surveying of very densely packed stars without concern for refueling.

However, the Route Planner currently considers the total fuel capacity when calculating routes of more than 1 jump. This means that even if you have an almost empty tank, the route planner will give you sub-optimal routes. You have to manually select the next jump to benefit from an almost empty tank.

The proposal is as follows:

- Fuel Tank modules appear in the Modules panel
- They can be turned off like the other modules
- The fuel capacity is reduced by the Fuel Tank capacity turned OFF, and excess fuel is discarded
- The fuel capacity is increased by the Fuel Tank capacity turned ON, and no fuel is gained

A commander can then install a very small main fuel tank for long but fast journeys (e.g. Buckyball Sag A*), and extra fuel tanks that remain turned off. When in the core, the fuel tanks can be turned on for surveying, and filled by scooping. For the voyage home, they can be turned off again.

As an example, an Anaconda could have a 40 ly jump distance with extra fuel tanks off, and 30 ly jump distance with them on, making a significant difference in the number of jumps plotted by the route planner.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I'm not sure the suggestion justifies the issue. Surely the few tons from each jump isn't all that significant to total range is it?
I mean, if you plot a single course comprised of 10 max range jumps versus plotting ten sets of individual max range jumps, surely the difference between the two wouldn't be more than ten percent or so would it?

 

[Andargor]

I'm not sure the suggestion justifies the issue. Surely the few tons from each jump isn't all that significant to total range is it?
I mean, if you plot a single course comprised of 10 max range jumps versus plotting ten sets of individual max range jumps, surely the difference between the two wouldn't be more than ten percent or so would it?

If you have ever gone into the black, you known you can easily make thousands of jumps on an exploration trip. It's between 650 to 1500 jumps to Sag A* from Sol depending on jump range, taking from 8 hours to 24 hours, a huge difference! Don't forget exploring once arrived, and then the trip home, as well.

Esviandary has made the calculations for going to Sag A* in this sheet as a demonstration of how jump range can significantly affect the number of jumps and travel time for long distances. He actually beat his theorycrafting by winning the Buckyball A* race a couple of days ago in under 8 hours.

My current Anaconda fit is not a racing fit, but rather a "deluxe multi-purpose exploration fit". However, you can see that at low fuel I can jump at 37.35 ly, but the route planner always gives me max 29.67 ly for a jump which corresponds to my full 160T of fuel. On my current trip to the core, this adds 200 jumps or 3 hours worth of jumping. My only alternative is plotting the route manually on low fuel, but as I found out on my first trip to the core more than a year ago (and all other early explorers like me), that is very painful.

If I could, I would turn off the 2 64T Fuel Tanks for the trip to the core, and only turn them on once I arrived at the neutron star fields to scan. Turning them off again for the trip home, saving a lot of time.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

If you have ever gone into the black, you known you can easily make thousands of jumps on an exploration trip. It's between 650 to 1500 jumps to Sag A* from Sol depending on jump range, taking from 8 hours to 24 hours, a huge difference! Don't forget exploring once arrived, and then the trip home, as well.

Esviandary has made the calculations for going to Sag A* in this sheet as a demonstration of how jump range can significantly affect the number of jumps and travel time for long distances. He actually beat his theorycrafting by winning the Buckyball A* race a couple of days ago in under 8 hours.

My current Anaconda fit is not a racing fit, but rather a "deluxe multi-purpose exploration fit". However, you can see that at low fuel I can jump at 37.35 ly, but the route planner always gives me max 29.67 ly for a jump which corresponds to my full 160T of fuel. On my current trip to the core, this adds 200 jumps or 3 hours worth of jumping. My only alternative is plotting the route manually on low fuel, but as I found out on my first trip to the core more than a year ago (and all other early explorers like me), that is very painful.

If I could, I would turn off the 2 64T Fuel Tanks for the trip to the core, and only turn them on once I arrived at the neutron star fields to scan. Turning them off again for the trip home, saving a lot of time.

I didn't word my post well. I think being able to turn off fuel tanks (and by doing so, dumping their fuel) is a fantastic idea. What I didn't understand is why this was so important to jump range.
However I was using figures like 32t vs 64t, which is an 8% difference (a difference so small you'll rarely actually realize it unless the area you're in is really dense). I honestly didn't see 160t as practical for an explorer so I failed to consider it.