@RegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish • 17 days agoAn in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square12fedilinkarrow-up136arrow-down13
arrow-up133arrow-down1external-linkAn in-space propulsion company just raised a staggering amount of moneyarstechnica.com@RegularJoe@lemmy.world to science@lemmy.worldEnglish • 17 days agomessage-square12fedilink
minus-square@MonkderVierte@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglish3•edit-216 days agoAnd far more efficient than chemical propulsion.
minus-square@Bimfred@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish5•16 days agoBut 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-square@i_love_FFT@jlai.lulinkfedilinkEnglish3•16 days agoAlso, 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.