The stock parts that you never ever ever use/hate.

[ron1n1]

Kerbal is a game with a lot of parts that everyone uses much more than they do other. What is your least used part?

Personally I never use the Probodobodyne QBE and the NCS Adapter.

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Probodobodyne_QBE

My pet hate part is the FL-A10 Adapter and I don't know why. I just hate that part. I prefer to stack my 0.625m probe on top of 1.25m rockets than add that thing to my part count!

[ToyotaTim]

About the NCS Adapter: In the good ole days this adapter was fine. But now with almost all the parts refitted with updated textures, this NCS Adapter doesn't fit inbetween anymore. TBH I find it plain ugly on the stack. I still use it though

EDIT: (I looked it up to be sure: Its textures originate from 0.16)

[Warzouz]

I don't like adapters. I usually put them because they make nicer rockets, then notice the are very weeak and "compress/wobble" a lot, so I remove them after the tests launches. Sadly.

[DavidBowman]

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit, the Structural Fuselage, and the XM-G50 Radial Air intake.

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit is ugly and impractical (without mods. But with mods it becomes more functional)

The Structural Fuselage is useless. Hey, If I'm adding you to the part count, you better have some fuel!!

After they added the Structural Intake, I stopped using the XM-G50 Radial Air intake, because it's plain ugly!!

[worir4]

I never use the ant engines. Because my kerbals are too cool for that.

[Tweety]

I have literally never used 'The not-rockomax' adaptor thingy.

I loathe it!

Tweety

Edited April 14, 2015 by Tweety
Rewording.

[ShadowZone]

Parts I have never used or maybe just to try them out:

LV-1 Engine

LV-1R Radial Engine

Structural Pylon

Probobodyne RoveMate

Swept Wings (since the Spaceplane Plus parts - they no longer fit in anywhere)

LT-5 Micro Landing Strut

PB-NUK (I really prefer solar to nuke... although I use the NERVAs regularly)

Inline Clamp-O-Tron (teh wobblies)

[KerikBalm]

The stack adaptors: they make a rocket look nice, but are dead weight, and completely useless with the current aerodynamics - I mod them to contain fuel, and then use them.

Ditto for the nosecones.

Given the OP ion engine, I have no use for ant engines. I very rarely use any of the radial mount engines, especially the larger ones.

I dislike the larger capsules, which are much heavier than simply using multiple small capsules.

Visually, I like them, but they need a rebalance.

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit, the Structural Fuselage, and the XM-G50 Radial Air intake.

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit is ugly and impractical (without mods. But with mods it becomes more functional)

The Structural Fuselage is useless. Hey, If I'm adding you to the part count, you better have some fuel!!

After they added the Structural Intake, I stopped using the XM-G50 Radial Air intake, because it's plain ugly!!

Under stock aero, the mk1 inline is superior to the normal nosecone, though I agree it doesn't look as good and an IVA is needed.

It is more practical, as I can put a docking port, or a parachute (for a tail sitter VTOL, its great to make the landings easy), etc on the nose.

I acutally use the structural fusalage.... is far as its length and weight, it can't be beat, even by the girders. An empty jet fuel tank weighs 50% more.

Those things only weight 0.1 tons, and have an impact tolerance of 70 m/s (!!!) - great for lithobraking.

I use them on my landers. I often use LV-Ns for landing on low-ish gravity worlds like the mun... and I need something to extend down past the LV-N nozzle (I don't part clip).

The structural fusalages are what I use. Light and very durable.

[Hcube]

The stayputnik probe. It doesn't even have SAS.

[StainX]

Parts i almost never touch:

-Adapters from MK* to *.*m

-The Rockomax Mark 55 Radial (whats the purpose of its existence anyway!?)

-LV-N (Radioactive fallout is a no-go for me)

-Premade EngineClusters

-Basic Jet Engine & Circular Intake (although i have to in career, until i get the TurboJet)

-Reaction wheels (RCS/Vernor prefered)

-Stack Seperators (more mass)

-Structural Pylon (i don't even know why i don't use this buddy)

-Probodobodyne RoveMate (no explenation needed)

Cheers

[Van Disaster]

Most of the structural parts, tbh - other than the cubic octagonal. The uglier intakes, the engine nacelle, the annoying pylon with the decoupler, the wings unless I'm doing something that has to be all stock, quite a few of the engines, the undercarriage, the larger decouplers, the tanks, probably quite a few more ...

[Frozen_Heart]

LV-N (Radioactive fallout is a no-go for me)

I thought nuclear rockets didn't create fallout unless you exploded them?

Anyway:

The Mk-55 engine. I know its been buffed but by pure habit I never even glance at it.

The LFB, and the KS-25 rockets. I prefer to build my own versions which is more in the KSP spirit. using 2 mainsails, or 4 skipper respectively.

The advanced canard is too ugly to consider looking at either.

[Warzouz]

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit, the Structural Fuselage, and the XM-G50 Radial Air intake.

The Mk1 Inline Cockpit is ugly and impractical (without mods. But with mods it becomes more functional)

The Structural Fuselage is useless. Hey, If I'm adding you to the part count, you better have some fuel!!

After they added the Structural Intake, I stopped using the XM-G50 Radial Air intake, because it's plain ugly!!

I use the structural fuselage for space station. It's light weight and looks nice to emulate access tubes to docking rings.

[Superfluous J]

I used to never use the QBE, but now most of my command pods get one clipped in for the SAS if there's no pilot. I never use the hydraulic decoupler, because the regular ones do fine.

I almost never use the small engines or the 2 biggest inline decouplers.

Hmmm. What else? In stock career, I never bother with the Mystery Goo or Science Jrs because they're heavy, not easily rerunnable, and science is so easy to get from contracts that it's not worth the bother. It's barely worth the bother to bring the lighter and more usable experiments!

Oh and those huge wheels. I've never made something that actually needed them.

[ddenis]

I don't use:

- stock adapters and nosecones - too heavy, can't hold fuel, procedural parts instead

- most of fuel tanks - part count is lower with procedural parts

- radial white engine

- Structural Fuselage parts (procedural parts instead)

- wings, except tails - B9 procedural wings is everithing what I desire in theis case - lower part count and better in everything

[Moonfrog]

I never use: Hydrolaulic decoupler, anything that does not provide sas, the capsules that weigh far too much for a single kerbal. The structural pieces, not really been able to find any use for them, in terms of normal design.

[Xaver]

Mh.... engine nacelle and radial engine body are really unused in my space program.

[theend3r]

...

-LV-N (Radioactive fallout is a no-go for me)

...

There is no fallout, especially if you recover it as you should.

[LostOblivion]

I think reaction wheels should be added to the probe cores again, only starting with very, very little torque on the Stayputnik, a little more on the next, and so on.

[prophet_01]

The Poddle. I want to use it, it's low profile and 2.5 size is rly handy. But everytime I use it and check the stats of my vessel bitter disapointment strikes again. I hate that thing. It has been wasting my time and goodwill so many times, just by making me redesign entire upper stages or landers after sheding a tear about theire crappy twr and delta-v stats. A week ago I couldn't help myself anymore and simply deleted that damn thing. Take that, engine that I won't miss!

[StainX]

I thought nuclear rockets didn't create fallout unless you exploded them?

i play with a few mods like DRE, RT2, FAR, but even without, explosions happen!

[monstah]

I thought nuclear rockets didn't create fallout unless you exploded them?

Yeah, it's a sad common misconception that NERVAs have radioactive exhaust; IMO it should be added to the description that the radioactive stuff is always kept within and safe unless you burn the engine on reentry or some crazy thing like that.

[GusTurbo]

I have literally never used 'The not-rockomax' adaptor thingy.

I hate it!

Tweety

I don't hate it, but I also never use it. It's kind of an odd part.

[radonek]

Yeah, it's a sad common misconception that NERVAs have radioactive exhaust; IMO it should be added to the description that the radioactive stuff is always kept within and safe unless you burn the engine on reentry or some crazy thing like that.

There may be a little fallout due to impurites in fuel (not much, stuff in fuel tends to make rockets go kaboom) and part erosion (even less, for obvious reasons :-) ).

However, nukes are very easy with shielding to save weight. Anything close while they are operating will become irradiated quite a lot due to neutron flux. NERVA itself was never meant to be used as first stage since launch facility would be geting hot with repeated starts.

[Wjolcz]

As some people said: the old wings could go and I wouldn't cry about that.