PSA: Clean Drive Tuning is NOT for Explorers

[Nazdakka]

This "PSA" is basically just saying "I play this way, and my way is right!" And it's not, it's really, really not. My aim was to get above 70ly range so I could go further on less jumps because I'm interested in exploring places that aren't easy to reach, and I want the safety to be able to pick and choose when I can refuel. Focusing on heat management because I want to feel like I can leap past systems without even looking at them isn't exploring to me. So this whole thread is a lot of good data collection in the service of very, very bad "science".

Mate, you keep posting these walls of text, and I do read them, but I've never reached the point where I understand the point you are making.

The point of this thread is to say that the Clean Drive Tuning mod is pretty much useless outside a small set of very specific tasks (stealth and hot high-G landings).

You're waxing lyrical about how you don't like being told what to do, how heat management doesn't matter to you, how we should stop to smell the metaphorical roses, and about how you like to jump as far as possible each time (despite saying that we should pause to experience the places we travel through???). That's nice and all... but how does any of that stuff relate to the quality of the G5 Clean Drive engineering mod?

Gotta go, just found an NS orbited by two ringed water worlds

 

[lenna]

Mate, you keep posting these walls of text, and I do read them, but I've never reached the point where I understand the point you are making.

The point of this thread is to say that the Clean Drive Tuning mod is pretty much useless outside a small set of very specific tasks (stealth and hot high-G landings).

I believe their point was that you are making too many assumptions and then projecting those assumptions on to exploration in general which they feel is inappropriate.

I get the points both of you are making BUT I personally believe their point is very valid - this thread's title (and overall thread premise) is a bit presumptuous.

 

[Konnivar]

Sure, I can understand that, it sounds cool, and if you're telling me that the G5 clean mod is the best way to make that safe, I'm totally willing to believe you.

I do think that we hit problems when that leads people who are into it to recommend the G5 clean mod for exploration, when hot high-G landings and stealth builds are pretty much the only things G5 clean is good for, especially considering that its name and stats lead people to think it makes their ship cooler in SC and better at scooping. I had a G5 clean mod on my Asp's thrusters for a while until I caught on that it was making my ship actively worse for what I use it for.

Wish I could +rep you again because this is exactly my point.

I believe their point was that you are making too many assumptions and then projecting those assumptions on to exploration in general which they feel is inappropriate.

I get the points both of you are making BUT I personally believe their point is very valid - this thread's title (and overall thread premise) is a bit presumptuous.

It certainly is a valid point; it could be argued that excluding High G planet landings heat doesn't matter much. However, with a colder ship you have the option of using the buckyballing technique (more effectively) if you want, but arguing the importance of heat in exploration isn't the purpose of this thread. The point is to display the data which I have collected and my conclusions from it.


I will admit that the title is a bit loaded, but my intent was in no way malicious. I am simply attempting to bring to light the mediocrity that is Clean Drive Tuning; I believe this mod has a name that is deceptive in regards to what it is best at. I'd much rather see this mod renamed "Silent Drive Tuning" and have a new mod that reduces thruster weight while also reducing thermal load with a trade-off of worse optimal mass. A mod with these stats would be a clear boon to explorers as optimal mass/speed means next to nothing out in the black.

 

[Captain Willard]

Actually I found clean drives very good. I went for the best thermal load AND a very small power draw "which causes heat" this worked well for the ships I was building as I wasn't that interested in the high end boost speed. Kudos for your time invested, always nice to look at builds in a different light.

 

[lenna]

optimal mass/speed means next to nothing out in the black.

Not entirely true, lower speed means lower thrust-to-mass ratio which in turn would affect planetary landings.

 

[goemon]

Not entirely true, lower speed means lower thrust-to-mass ratio which in turn would affect planetary landings.

only up to ~1,6 g afaik, after that all thruster work the same with 5 m/s acceleration (independent of modding; that number might go up by modding, but still to something still below 2 g.

 

[B1rdy]

"but it's hardly a necessary part of exploration." - imho building an exploration ship is preparing for the unexpected. you don't need heatsinks, but you might need one once on 10 000 jumps, for a close trinary star system.

According to Obsidian Ant, in 2.4 beta you drop out in a safe distance from all stars.

 

[lenna]

only up to ~1,6 g afaik, after that all thruster work the same with 5 m/s acceleration (independent of modding; that number might go up by modding, but still to something still below 2 g.

1g is notionally 10m/s2... the general point is lower the thrust-to-mass ratio the more chance you have of crashing on landing and the harder it will be to actually escape the planet's gravity on launch... that is simple maths and basic Newtonian physics.

Overall, it does not really matter what the precise numbers are... the point is that the assumption that engine performance does not matter in an exploration context is false.

 

[Crank Larson]

I've always stuck with Dirty Drive Tuning anyway, as you get a faster ship... However, I do have to ask why you would be having problems scooping with an AspX? I have G5 dirty drives, armed, shielded, etc. AspX and I've never had any heat problems while fuel scooping. The AspX and the DBX are two of the coolest running ships available - you've really got to try hard to encounter heat issues. What are you doing?

Of course, the Cutter on the other hand.... Doesn't like scooping one bit!

 

[lenna]

The AspX and the DBX are two of the coolest running ships available - you've really got to try hard to encounter heat issues. What are you doing?

IME scooping issues in general are down to one of two main things... poor judgement/tiredness resulting in pilot error OR bad luck when scooping in close coupled binary systems.

It is generally possible to fuel scoop without overheating in pretty much any ship it just may take a little longer in some.

 

[goemon]

1g is notionally 10m/s2... the general point is lower the thrust-to-mass ratio the more chance you have of crashing on landing and the harder it will be to actually escape the planet's gravity on launch... that is simple maths and basic Newtonian physics.

Overall, it does not really matter what the precise numbers are... the point is that the assumption that engine performance does not matter in an exploration context is false.

... only for game reasons our ships don't follow newtonian physics. as well as we can't get above a certain speed by boosting, every thrusters give at least 5 m/s acceleration under any g-force. which basically means, under higher G (when heat-up from drives is most notable), undersized d-class thrusters perform the same as the best a-class thrusters.

as the minimum multiplier is changed by drive tuning, that leads to: under higher g-force the thruster-mass ratio has zero effect for ship handling in elite dangerous, while tuning still has.

 

[Nazdakka]

I've always stuck with Dirty Drive Tuning anyway, as you get a faster ship... However, I do have to ask why you would be having problems scooping with an AspX? I have G5 dirty drives, armed, shielded, etc. AspX and I've never had any heat problems while fuel scooping. The AspX and the DBX are two of the coolest running ships available - you've really got to try hard to encounter heat issues. What are you doing?

Of course, the Cutter on the other hand.... Doesn't like scooping one bit!

If you want to travel quickly (say <50s/jump), then it helps to start charging the FSD with the scoop still going, deep in the corona. The combination of FSD and running very close to the star can lead to things getting very toasty if you aren't careful

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

I'm an explorer, and I am honestly missing the whole point behind tuning engines at all. I'm in super cruise most of the time, and when am utilizing thrusters for landing and taking off, I'm not exactly trying to out run anyone in the process (due to the fact that there is no one to out run...)

My anaconda's heat load hangs out at 19%, and when fuel scopping I can hug the limits of the exclusion zone, maxing out my scoopage and I start charging my FSD as soon as I am around the other side and have clear line of sight to the nex system, staying right around 50s/jump if I'm in a hurry. My heat is typically around 74% when I jump, and if I wait until I stop scooping, I won't get above 64%.

So how are my drives tuned, you may ask?

They're not! I have the smallest drive reauired to move the ship, and my slot for a grade 8 distributer is fitted with a 1C distributer, and only then because it can't stay empty.


So yeah, CD tuning may not have much impact, but it kinda feels like even talking about drives for exporation is already the wrong conversation.

Basically, if you want to minimize your heat thermal load while exploring, then you will likely see the biggest results if your conversations are about what you are able to do without, especiallt when it comes to drives, shields, power supplies and distributors.

 

[lenna]

undersized d-class thrusters perform the same as the best a-class thrusters.

I believe you are incorrect with this... IME there is a difference though it may be capped there is a minimum performance consideration... especially under higher gravity conditions.

 

[Konnivar]

Not entirely true, lower speed means lower thrust-to-mass ratio which in turn would affect planetary landings.

That's a fair enough point. It does stray into High G planet territory, which are less common.

I'm an explorer, and I am honestly missing the whole point behind tuning engines at all. I'm in super cruise most of the time, and when am utilizing thrusters for landing and taking off, I'm not exactly trying to out run anyone in the process (due to the fact that there is no one to out run...)

My anaconda's heat load hangs out at 19%, and when fuel scopping I can hug the limits of the exclusion zone, maxing out my scoopage and I start charging my FSD as soon as I am around the other side and have clear line of sight to the nex system, staying right around 50s/jump if I'm in a hurry. My heat is typically around 74% when I jump, and if I wait until I stop scooping, I won't get above 64%.

So how are my drives tuned, you may ask?

They're not! I have the smallest drive reauired to move the ship, and my slot for a grade 8 distributer is fitted with a 1C distributer, and only then because it can't stay empty.


So yeah, CD tuning may not have much impact, but it kinda feels like even talking about drives for exporation is already the wrong conversation.

Basically, if you want to minimize your heat thermal load while exploring, then you will likely see the biggest results if your conversations are about what you are able to do without, especiallt when it comes to drives, shields, power supplies and distributors.

This is one of the conclusions that can be made from the data I collected. Clean Drive Tuning has very similar performance to standard drives, just with higher power draw and a better optimal multiplier. I'd very much like to see a thruster mod added that is designed for explorers with reduced mass and thermal load and some reasonable downsides like reduced optimal mass/multiplier, and/or reduced integrity.

The only reason I'm currently running G5 DD on my Anaconda is because I couldn't stand how slow it was and the terrible drift that came with my 6D thrusters.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Everybody who has Grade 5 Access at Felicity's, can go see the 2A and 3A Enhanced Performance Thrusters, that might be the end of the discussion, if scaled up to larger sizes. They are 1.6 MCr and 5 MCr, respectively. That's a A class module for a Cobra, for the Class 2A Enhanced Thruster Module. This represents Frontiers idea of the cost of grinding (more than 10 times retail).

The reason that there have been no PTW rants is *because* they are so small. They can't be used for anything above an Adder. Imagine Python's with suitably upscaled modules.

Now, imagine the big I Win ships with such modules. A Cat 5 Forum Meltdown would occur.

 

[Crank Larson]

If you want to travel quickly (say <50s/jump), then it helps to start charging the FSD with the scoop still going, deep in the corona. The combination of FSD and running very close to the star can lead to things getting very toasty if you aren't careful

Yes, with both my AspX and DBX I charge the FSD as soon as the FSD cooldown has finished. The AspX is normally full at this point (that scoop is awesome), while the DBX has to keep scooping for a few seconds longer. They've both got dirty drives, I've never even considered clean.