RegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 12 天前An in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square12linkfedilinkarrow-up138arrow-down12cross-posted to: spaceflight@sh.itjust.works
arrow-up136arrow-down1external-linkAn in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.comRegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 12 天前message-square12linkfedilinkcross-posted to: spaceflight@sh.itjust.works
minus-squareMonkderVierte@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-211 天前And far more efficient than chemical propulsion.
minus-squareBimfred@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·11 天前But exactly because of that, they don’t have yeet. Long periods of low thrust are great for long duration missions, like satellites, stations and interplanetary probes, awful for a TLI burn.
minus-squarei_love_FFT@jlai.lulinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·11 天前Also, is a bit more complicated to use in kerbal, because the manoeuvring node expects strong instantaneous impulse.
And far more efficient than chemical propulsion.
But exactly because of that, they don’t have yeet. Long periods of low thrust are great for long duration missions, like satellites, stations and interplanetary probes, awful for a TLI burn.
Also, is a bit more complicated to use in kerbal, because the manoeuvring node expects strong instantaneous impulse.