So... now more emphasis on planes

[KerikBalm]

So, before 1.1, there was some complaining about too much of a spaceplane focus.

I love spaceplanes, and didn't see a problem with it. I also thought a spaceplane overhaul was overdue.

However, recently for rockets, all we've gotten is:

* a LV-N change, that sort of forces people to use spaceplane parts as liquif fuel tanks

* Radiators

* heat shields

* half size 1.25 SRB

The heat shields are sort of irrelevant except on Eve/laythe... inadequate for Jool.

The radiators are really only useful for sun-diving,

The LV-N change lacks the LF tanks to go with it.

Now I see we're getting a new 1.25m LFO engine, which looks nice, but.....

A *lot* of very nice plane parts, and I'm starting to think maybe some people have valid arguments.

The question is, what is there left to do with rockets/non atmospheric spacecraft.

The remote-tech like system is also basically exclusively for space, and has nothing to do with the atmosphere, maybe that counts.

Suggestions? Thoughts about all the emphasis on planes?

As I see it, for rockets we need:

* LF only tanks

* long cylindrical cargobays... like size 3 cargobays, not just utility bays and fairings

* LANTR engines (dual mode LV-N, one uses LFO, one LF only)

* 2.5m LV-N (with thrust vectoring?)

* 1.25m/2.5m ion engines/near future propulsion like systems (VASMIR?)

* An air augmented Ram rocket? I could easily see this being used for spaceplanes as well on Eve and Duna, in place of oxygen breathing engines.

[MiniMatt]

I'd suggest the whole mining thing is a pretty big deal, independent of delivery format.

And personally I'm looking forward to the wheel physics in 1.whatever far more than anything else - that's something which has been long needed and yet is entirely (Dukes of Hazzard style jumps notwithstanding) land based.

Don't look on it as an unfair emphasis - look at it as one cool area getting 30% more toys, and another cool area getting 70% more toys - either way more toys!

Can't argue with your suggestions for future parts, but I dabble with mods which cover every one of them already. Everything Squad does from this point forward is a bonus as far as I'm concerned, regardless of perceived "emphasis" - I've more than got my money's worth.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Also keep in mind that there are some parts in development, so we didn't see all of them.

[regex]

The Asteroid Day pack added some more space parts and we're also getting some chunky, unattractive antennas for 1.1 which are mostly for space. Also the SSME-style engine. I don't see a huge focus on planes, we seem to be getting parts all around.

Some new fuel tanks for nukes would be nice though, or even a stock tank switcher (I would personally prefer that). A 400kn space engine would be pretty cool as well, or a restyled Poodle (god that thing looks bad).

[passinglurker]

Also keep in mind that we are getting more plane parts as a bonus cause squad let pork jet run wild

[severedsolo]

Ha, how times change. When I joined, back in 0.18 (ish) - people were complaining that rockets were getting all the love.

[Wjolcz]

I think the amount of parts for planes and rockets is pretty well balanced actually. We have only 3 air-breathing engines and like 15 LFO engines (not counting the "Puff" and the LV-N for obvious reasons).

People say we have too many plane parts, because there are so many fuel tanks (and wing pieces) dedicated for planes only. There are separate LF and LFO tanks, which is kind of silly in my opinion. We could simply get a fuel switch tweakable and cut the amount of tanks in half.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Veeltch

[KSK]

One thing I'd very much like to see is simply a larger capsule. Some way of getting more than three kerbals at a time into space and back again that doesn't rely on either spaceplanes or crazy contraptions that may or may not survive reentry intact. We have 3.75m rocket parts, we have a 3.75m heat shield - how about a 3.75m capsule to go with them?

Beyond that, I don't think there's a lot of spacecraft parts that need to be added in the absence of further game mechanics such as life support. Functionally, we're pretty much covered. However it would be nice to have more choices of habitation modules to make spacestation and base construction a bit more varied and interesting. It would also be nice to have a stock version of Infernal Robotics or similar - something that allows us to package up a relatively complicated structure into a lander, drop it on a planet and then unfold/deploy it into its final configuration.

[T-Bouw]

I remember reading somewhere about Squad wanting to implement robotics.

That's really high up on my wish-list and could be a good addition for space in particular.

What's happened with that I wonder?

[Jouni]

There are three rocket-related things I'd like to see in the game:

• A simple way for building interstages and engine clusters. For example, I might want to build a lander around a 2.5 m fuel tank, attach six Spark engines to the bottom, and then place the lander on top of a 2.5 m rocket stack.
  
• Large SRBs with meganewtons of thrust and 90-120 second burn times.
  
• A low-profile engine that's bigger than the Terrier but smaller than the Poodle. The Aerospike would work otherwise, but it's too late in the tech tree and it's missing the bottom node.
  

I'm not sure whether a larger nuclear engine would be a good thing.

[regex]

Large SRBs with meganewtons of thrust and 90-120 second burn times.

Those burn times are total overkill for Kerbin. Maybe a 90 second for a shuttle. Maybe.

[zxczxczbfg]

Concerning LF tanks: Just integrate StockFuelSwitch into the base game. That way, you wouldn't need multiple sets of tanks.

[Planetfall]

Yah there's definitely a lot of attention on planes right now, but I think it has a lot to do with the focus on air in general. While atmo isn't completely necessary for rockets I still think it's important for realism's sake (if not poor new players) and well, I like planes.

Any way theres no way to say Squad won't focus more on vac stuff later. Overall I'm happy with the scope and focus of the game.

Planetfall

Edited August 25, 2015 by Planetfall

[Alshain]

Planes have a much more complex design, so they need more available component to get more variety. For example, that 1.25m engine is really for space shuttles, not rockets. It's difficult to build a shuttle because the more powerful engines are all 2.5 or higher and it doesn't fit. That's just one way, we still could use more adapter parts and tail pieces (Mk 2 needs a tail for those who don't want single engine designs).

That said I like to do both rockets and planes, and shuttles (best of both worlds ). I think part of the problem is that PorkJet excels at plane parts. Personally I like Ven's rocket parts (but I really don't like his plane parts). If Squad could get him on the payroll to do rockets and fill in the other side, that would be amazing. Some of the new parts in his pack are very useful, I especially like his take on a LES decoupler... I never used that thing before installing his pack, and now I never go without it.

[Sharpy]

One thing I'd very much like to see is simply a larger capsule. Some way of getting more than three kerbals at a time into space and back again that doesn't rely on either spaceplanes or crazy contraptions that may or may not survive reentry intact. We have 3.75m rocket parts, we have a 3.75m heat shield - how about a 3.75m capsule to go with them?

You've got shuttle parts for that - MK3. They aren't just for planes.

[Edax]

The only "rocket" part I'm looking for, other than more LF tanks or switcher, is a size 2 control cockpit that seats 2 Kerbals. The cupola looks cool, but it only seats one Kerbal, and hasn't got enough control panels to look impressive enough as the command center for a large spaceship, plus the Kerbal has to wear a helmet at all times. Spaceplane cockpits look cool on the inside, but they look really awkward if you try use them as the command center of a spacestation/spaceship, which are all size 2, and the adapters are too large to consider for aesthetics.

A Size 3 command module would be cool if it looked like the bridge of the Enterprise though!

Edited August 24, 2015 by Edax

[Thomas988]

Rockets were fine before the spaceplane updates, so I think they're still fine. What concerns me the most is a lack of space station and base parts and features. Despite being after release, establishing a home for the Kerbals beyond Kerbin still doesn't have much purpose other than "for the fun of it."

[Jouni]

Those burn times are total overkill for Kerbin. Maybe a 90 second for a shuttle. Maybe.

The normal burn time for my liquid boosters is 120-150 seconds, so 90-120 seconds feels suitable for solid boosters.

[KerikBalm]

Well, the ISRU requires being landed... like a base.

And the science labs have higher output when landed...

What more do you want aside from science and mining?

I also thought that rockets were fairly complete before 1.0 /1.04 came out, so I thought people calling it "Kerbal flight simulator" (as I just read on another thread) were being a hyperbolic.

Its true a look at the number of engines makes it pretty clear... planes have just 1 size engine, 3 types total.

Rockets have 4 engine sizes... and a lot total >20

But I think we could use:

0.625m SRBs

2.5m SRBs (as other people mentioned and I left out)

Some variety in the 0.625m stack mounted engines... we have the ant, which is sort of useless because it has the same thrust as an ion drive, and the 48-7s, which is basically the only real viable option for 0.625m parts

Another thing I just thought of... engine fairing shrouds: If I have a 0.625m engine between 1.25m tanks parts, (or 1.25m engine between 2.5m parts), it would be nice if the fairing increased to make a smooth stack (and counted that way for drag too)

I also wouldn't be opposed to a 2.5m aerospike either

[Alshain]

Rockets were fine before the spaceplane updates, so I think they're still fine. What concerns me the most is a lack of space station and base parts and features. Despite being after release, establishing a home for the Kerbals beyond Kerbin still doesn't have much purpose other than "for the fun of it."

Except they aren't fine, the textures aren't up to snuff with the planes. They were fine BECAUSE the planes didn't exist.

[GoSlash27]

I don't think planes are getting more emphasis. The gameplay in science and career modes still require rockets almost exclusively and pretty much everything that's worth doing beyond LKO is easier to do with rockets.

It's just that airplanes have been getting most of the new parts. Why? Because PorkJet is making them and he's primarily an airplane guy. He's not obligated to make anything at all, so rather than complaining, I'm going to be thankful for the new toys he's bestowed upon us.

This is not to say that I wouldn't appreciate new and upgraded rocket parts. Perhaps if they enlist the help of a rocket guy/ gal to complement PorkJet...

Best,

-Slashy

[Jett_Quasar]

I think we're just getting bits and pieces of what's being done for V1.1. I'm going to hold my comments until I see the actual update - but I will say this: I would much prefer that Squad would simply add new parts rather than redesign existing ones in order to increase the design options and fill out the tech tree to a greater degree.

JR

[Halo_003]

I assume at this point that focus now is on plane parts and once they are completed to the satisfaction of the developers that rockets will be focused on once again. We don't need LF only tanks, why add more parts to the game when they could just add a button to switch the fuel from LFO to LF. It's a hollow cylinder. It makes no sense why we would really need more fuel tanks*. They could use a fresh face, but I don't think more big ones are really needed**.

*specifically to add LF only capabilities.

**To expand, I mean at this moment, as in there are other things that should take priority first.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Halo_003

[pincushionman]

As somebody mentioned earlier, we need a better system for self-built engine clusters and interstages. Sort of like KW Rocketry's thrust plate (or was it Procedural Fairings? I remember it being procedural), to put multiple engines on back of a stack to tailor the thrust output, without causing a big drag problem with the surface mount options.

And the interstage engine shrouds need to go; they've given us a fairing system we can use to make our own - including properly surrounding engine clusters and diameter changes.

[regex]

As somebody mentioned earlier, we need a better system for self-built engine clusters and interstages.

Agreed.

Sort of like KW Rocketry's thrust plate (or was it Procedural Fairings?

pFairings.

And the interstage engine shrouds need to go; they've given us a fairing system we can use to make our own - including properly surrounding engine clusters and diameter changes.

And tank butts. Tank butts are terrible. Give us the means to make proper boattails that can handle multiple engines. Good god I hate tank butts. VSR is Doing It Right.