Jump to content

So... now more emphasis on planes


KerikBalm
 Share

Recommended Posts

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.

A thrust plate seems to be a common thread in this um.. well, thread, and I'd like to see that too. I'd also like to see that low profile engine too.

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.

SSME engine is basically for planes~ On a more serious note though, I don't consider the Asteroid Day parts to be stock until and unless they appear in a pure vanilla install...

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).

I'd ONLY accept a stock tank switcher. Having LFO and LF tanks for planes is really cluttering up the fuel tank tab and getting rather dumb, so a stock tank switcher would be good at cleaning that crap up (plus nicely handling the issue that the adapters are only available in LFO variants).

But I think we could use:

0.625m SRBs

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

Definitely. I'd love a 0.625m (but long) SRB to help out with 1.25m launch vehicles..

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

The ant isn't useless - it's TWR is much higher than the ion drive as it doesn't have to carry a metric buttload of solar panels and/or batteries. However, I would like to see some longer variants for the oscar tanks (such as in RLA Stockalike or Fuel Tanks Plus, etc). That, and more RCS options (tiny thrusters and tanks, 45 degree quads, two-way thrusters, etc, ala RLA again).

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)

That would be nice, but there's other ways (below) of handling that.

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.

I think the most important part of pfaring's thrust plate is that it added a connection node to allow the rocket to continue below, without having to attach to one of the engines.... less #lolnoodlerockets, more sensible.. I'd definitely like to see a part like that become stock.

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.

Well yeah, but the current fairing system needs a lot of work. Being able to attach struts to it would help immensely, plus all eighty nine million of the fatal bugs need to be squashed (and it would be nice if they could fix the other 1.7e+60352 bugs re: fairings, plus implement some of the better requested features/Claw stock fixes like clamshell configurations and ejection force etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More space-plane parts would be good. In particular another MK3 cabin, a fast one as opposed to the shuttle one we have now.

Although, personally I think Space-planes are rather well served at the moment. What I would like to see is more planetary base components. In particular a living quarters and science bay which is oriented for gravity. The hitchhiker storage unit is clearly designed for space, and no matter which way you orient it on the ground it doesn't look right. If oriented with the attachment points horizontal, the window, the bedding and the ladders are all over the place. If you orient it vertically, then its a pain to connect a "walkway" (usually a structural fuselage) to its side, and of course, in IVA view their is no hatch where it connects, not to mention the occupants sleep strapped to the walls. The Science bay is worse still, its either a ridiculous tower with levels, but no means of climbing or descending the levels, or.... well, the other way just makes no sense in IVA view at all, but looks slightly better on the outside, but still not ideal. (Windows pointing towards the horizon, excellent, but hatch and ladders on top and bottom doing nothing useful.)

So yeah, a habitation module and a science workshop for work on planets would be great with bonus points for connecting walkways (preferably with windows... I know, I don't ask much).

Edited by Tourist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Would DEFINITIVELY like a N-1 1st Stage engine cluster part that can easily mount 30 mirrored engines on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although we're getting cool parts for planes and we could really do with things such as more cylindrical LF-Only tanks, the one thing I've yearned to see implemented in the game for a while now is 2.5m Rapier/Turbo jet engines with similarly sized supersonic-type air intakes.

Currently, if you have any intention on making a large MK3 SSTO craft, you must have to cluster many 1.25m engines somewhere and it's somewhat inconvenient. I think those are one of the most essential plane parts that have been seemingly ignored throughout the updates.

I think another very useful addition to the planes would be larger structural wings. Currently the only large wing pieces which have fuel capacity are the shuttle style delta wings (accompanied by wing strakes) and those large jumbo jet wings (which are arguably too small if you want a lot of MK3 sized parts on your craft).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More space-plane parts would be good. In particular another MK3 cabin, a fast one as opposed to the shuttle one we have now.

The mk3 is already better in every way than the mk1-2 capsule (more crew, more battery, more torque, more mono, more impact resistant, more heat resistant, vastly larger)---and masses 25% less. Maybe they can make a streamlined one with infinite battery, and zero mass?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that planes and space planes have been getting a lot more love than rockets but they were also heavily under developed considering they started out as a mod, and even after inclusion, remained an afterthought until the new aerodynamics system was released. However, that isn't to say space has been fully neglected as probes and satellites are getting some love now too. I think it's more Squad expanding the horizons of the game and providing more choice. I know it's easy to get tired of the same engines but if you think the selection of thirteen rocket engines could use some love, planes had TWO for the past three years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mk3 is already better in every way than the mk1-2 capsule (more crew, more battery, more torque, more mono, more impact resistant, more heat resistant, vastly larger)---and masses 25% less. Maybe they can make a streamlined one with infinite battery, and zero mass?

I should probably have clarified what I mean, its purely the aesthetics. It doesn't look fast enough to reach orbit like a spaceplane.... coming back, certainly it looks like the shuttle. I have no problems with its functionality (although I have not yet managed to get a MK3 spaceplane to orbit from the runway yet.. but that's my fault). Yes, I realize I'm purely judging the old bird on its looks. I should be ashamed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that more SRB options would be nice, but what I really want is elbows and other structural parts.

The gizmos are godsend for making intricate structures, but most inline parts look horrible unless you connect them strait on. Elbows would also make STS replicas better.

Some better torus building blocks would also be cool. I keep revisiting a segmented torus idea, but the poor mesh of docking ports and modules brings me back to one piece designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Hmmm... someone to compliment PorkJet.... we need a PorkRocket! Errrrrr....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand all the hate the poodle is getting. I realy like that engine.

It's a fine engine, stats-wise, but it's kinda weird looking (what's with that huge bulb around the combustion chamber?), and it's rather tall for use with big landers (even the biggest landing legs aren't so great at clearing it adequately from the ground).

(Funny thing is, I think the look of half the engines pictured in the second shot are adequate - the 48-7S/24-77 and Mainsail. Plus the 1.25m tanks and Jumbo64 aren't that bad, although the Jumbo doesn't match any of the other tanks color-wise. The 2.5m oil drums and big fat 2.5m decoupler need serious work though)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... someone to compliment PorkJet.... we need a PorkRocket! Errrrrr....

OK, will do: Porkjet is a fine modder and a swell human being. Oh--compLEment--sorry. You're right. But if I were such a designer I would call myself...HamNozzle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand all the hate the poodle is getting. I realy like that engine.

It's a good engine and I use it fairly often, but it looks like something out of a cartoon. It's got a ridiculously tiny engine bell, a strange spherical combustion chamber, and pipes/nozzles sticking out wherever they thought it would look good. It looks nothing like a real-life engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I kinda like the oil drums and poodle in a flashgordon sort of way especially when paired with the rounded fuel cap from the turbonisu mod.

Don't get me wrong of I want them redone (lose the corrugated sheeting) brought up to the atheistic par and made more ram efficient. I would just hope when they do they go for the shiny atlas look instead of space shuttle orange, and they don't make the poodle too realistic so I can keep up my space opera antics ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's room in this game for both types of aesthetics - new and shiny, and old and crappy. After all, aren't most of these parts rejects from a junk heap cobbled together and just waiting to explode into orbit?

JR

Except for 100% of spaceplane parts, which now all look awesome, you are entirely correct. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a good engine and I use it fairly often, but it looks like something out of a cartoon. It's got a ridiculously tiny engine bell, a strange spherical combustion chamber, and pipes/nozzles sticking out wherever they thought it would look good. It looks nothing like a real-life engine.

http://spacefellowship.com/news/art14630/armadillo-aerospace-and-nasa-tests-fuels-of-the-future.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for 100% of spaceplane parts, which now all look awesome, you are entirely correct. ;)

I guess they're not getting them from the side of the road any more... Oh wait; read the descriptions - they might be!

JR

Edited by Jolly_Roger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...