Hypergolic fuels are important in the history of spaceflight. Many early rockets were adapted from ICBMs which had to be ready to fire at a moment's notice. Naturally, using a fuel and oxidiser that was stable at human-tolerable temperatures was a logical choice. Hypergolics have been largely superseded by cryogenics but are still used today.
However.
I don't think they have enough modern significance and unique gameplay effects to justify their inclusion in KSA. Their unique advantages such as lack of boil-off and reliable ignitions are not enough to make up for their pitiful specific impulse, and it's almost always preferable to use cryogenic fuels with a cryocooler or kerosene for high density storable fuel. Everything hypergolics can do, monopropellant can do simpler and kerolox can do better.
Also, they're harder to produce in ISRU, as opposed to the dead simple electrolysis and Sabatier reaction.
I know rocketry history fans (such as many KSP/KSA fans) are fond of them, so if you disagree, I absolutely want to hear.
However.
I don't think they have enough modern significance and unique gameplay effects to justify their inclusion in KSA. Their unique advantages such as lack of boil-off and reliable ignitions are not enough to make up for their pitiful specific impulse, and it's almost always preferable to use cryogenic fuels with a cryocooler or kerosene for high density storable fuel. Everything hypergolics can do, monopropellant can do simpler and kerolox can do better.
Also, they're harder to produce in ISRU, as opposed to the dead simple electrolysis and Sabatier reaction.
I know rocketry history fans (such as many KSP/KSA fans) are fond of them, so if you disagree, I absolutely want to hear.
Upvote
0
