Downsizing your power plant: Any downsides?

For trade ships A2 has been very kind to me. It's cool, have high power and light. It will happily power anything up to a trading Clipper & Python.
 
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?

Capacitor capacity and recharge all comes down to your power distributor. Your power plant instead determines how many toys you can operate at the same time.
 
Incorrect. The closer you are to 100%, the hotter your ship runs. If you add a better power plant that leaves you running at 60% power usage, you'll run MUCH MUCH cooler.

Source: I play stealthy :D

unless they have suddenly changed something with power plant heat in the last week, the better the grade of plant, the lower your overall running temp is...

In my viper I had it running at 126% (98% with weapons retracted), it made little difference to heat levels, my heat was rock solid at 40 - 43% running heat levels... and only climbed realistically in battle when I was firing high thermal load weapons constantly...

In my type 6 I had A grade max class reactor that would fit, and I was running below 40's and I attribute SOME of the additional heat saving to not being quite so close to 100% power draw with weapons retracted but not all... the most significant heat reduction I was seeing was in the grade of reactor
 
Moreover, does a smaller power plant use less fuel - whilst outputting the same power levels?

I don't know about same power levels, but I'd really like to know if bigger plants draw more fuel from the Auxilary Reservoir? I mean, if I cram the engine of a Porsche Boxster into a Mini Hillman, I expect a seriously faster car, if it doesn't shake apart, but I definitely also expect it to be thirstier.

Can I just put the the biggest, most efficient plant in my Viper, and not worry about excessive fuel drain?


And sorry to resurrect this thread, but I was looking for answers on Google...
 
Power USAGE makes a difference in heat, as does power plant grade - I always run A rated for that reason in every ship. Power PRODUCTION does not however - if you can get away with a smaller A grade power plant, do so. Although sometimes a larger power plant that is low emission is better still.

If you want to see how much difference power usage makes, get in a maxed out cutter and try to scoop. Then disable power hungry stuff like shield boosters and try again - it's rather remarkable.
 
I don't know about same power levels, but I'd really like to know if bigger plants draw more fuel from the Auxilary Reservoir? I mean, if I cram the engine of a Porsche Boxster into a Mini Hillman, I expect a seriously faster car, if it doesn't shake apart, but I definitely also expect it to be thirstier.

Can I just put the the biggest, most efficient plant in my Viper, and not worry about excessive fuel drain?


And sorry to resurrect this thread, but I was looking for answers on Google...
Hmmmm. That I don't know the answer to. The ship displays fuel use per hour while in supercruise so I guess you could try and see if it changes?
 
I don't know about same power levels, but I'd really like to know if bigger plants draw more fuel from the Auxilary Reservoir? I mean, if I cram the engine of a Porsche Boxster into a Mini Hillman, I expect a seriously faster car, if it doesn't shake apart, but I definitely also expect it to be thirstier.

Can I just put the the biggest, most efficient plant in my Viper, and not worry about excessive fuel drain?


And sorry to resurrect this thread, but I was looking for answers on Google...

Nope, doesn't seem to.

I have an 8A PP in my Corvette and it uses 2.88 fuels per hour.
I stuck an 8D PP in it, instead, and that also uses 2.88 fph.

FWIW, I took the 8D PP to get it overcharged and see if it could provide enough juice to run my 'vette and help with the jump range.
It does actually do the job but it makes fuel-scooping a bit of a drama due to the fast heat build-up.
 
You should check your facts. It looks like you refer to the 80 Plus certificate, but misunderstood it. It doesn't mean most efficiency at/above 80% usage, but 80% efficency in general, leading to 20% energy lost to heat. Every PSU performs best at 50% load. Check the table at wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80_Plus

And if you check your facts even further you will note that there is basically no difference in efficiency at 50% and 80% - unless you have some crappy cheap PSU.
 
My 2 cents. There is no reason not to use a smaller class power module provided meets all of your power needs and has a buffer in case the module takes damage (as it cannot be repaired by the ARM).
 
Back
Top Bottom