Quick question for folks more in the know:
Do engine-mounted (ie, no crit) heat sinks beyond the automatic first 10 take up tonnage? I have a 300 right now that has 2 slots for "extra" heat sinks. So using those 2 slots means losing no critical space but taking on 2 more tons...right?
0
Engine-Mounted Heat Sinks
Started by Gaius Quentius Quentii, Dec 10 2012 02:34 PM
4 replies to this topic
#2
-
-
- 65 posts
Member
Posted 10 December 2012 - 02:39 PM
Quentius, on 10 December 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:
Quick question for folks more in the know:
Do engine-mounted (ie, no crit) heat sinks beyond the automatic first 10 take up tonnage? I have a 300 right now that has 2 slots for "extra" heat sinks. So using those 2 slots means losing no critical space but taking on 2 more tons...right?
Do engine-mounted (ie, no crit) heat sinks beyond the automatic first 10 take up tonnage? I have a 300 right now that has 2 slots for "extra" heat sinks. So using those 2 slots means losing no critical space but taking on 2 more tons...right?
Yes
#4
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 455 posts
Member
- LocationEarth... I think. (Hey, you don't know if you're in the matrix either, do you?)
Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:03 PM
Yes, they do take up more tonnage.
However, this is why DHS is so useful; it takes up the same tonnage, but it has better efficiency in the engine.
Because it takes up the same amount of space, regardless of whether the heatsinks are double or single.
A standard engine takes up 6 slots in the CT, regarless of size.
A 300 engine has 2 more heatsink slots inside it, which can house either single or double heatsinks.
A single heatsink takes up 1 ton, and 1 critical slot.
A double heatsink takes up 1 ton, and 3 critical slots.
A 300 engine with single heatsinks has used up 6 slots out of those 6, and gives you enough space to use up another equivalent 6, 4 of which are at no extra tonnage cost.
A 300 engine with double heatsinks has used up 24 slots out of those 6, and gives you enough space to use up another equivalent 24, 4 of which are at no extra tonnage cost.
See the benefit?
However, this is why DHS is so useful; it takes up the same tonnage, but it has better efficiency in the engine.
Because it takes up the same amount of space, regardless of whether the heatsinks are double or single.
A standard engine takes up 6 slots in the CT, regarless of size.
A 300 engine has 2 more heatsink slots inside it, which can house either single or double heatsinks.
A single heatsink takes up 1 ton, and 1 critical slot.
A double heatsink takes up 1 ton, and 3 critical slots.
A 300 engine with single heatsinks has used up 6 slots out of those 6, and gives you enough space to use up another equivalent 6, 4 of which are at no extra tonnage cost.
A 300 engine with double heatsinks has used up 24 slots out of those 6, and gives you enough space to use up another equivalent 24, 4 of which are at no extra tonnage cost.
See the benefit?
#5
-
-
- 13 posts
Member
Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:47 PM
Spirit of the Wolf, on 10 December 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:
See the benefit?
Yes, but it was never as mathematically clear before.
I always go for DHS, actually, (when the c-benjamins are rolling in
). I just wanted to see if there was a chance that this was a bug and then I could cram something other than a machine gun in my current dragon's right arm.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
