Stock fairings are cursed...

[SkyRender]

This is getting ridiculous.  I built a craft that is perfectly stable on the launchpad with no fairings, doesn't wobble one bit.  I add a fairing to it, it explodes on the launchpad.  I adjust the fairing to be a bit further away from the payload, it explodes even more violently.  I'm pretty sure that's not how "physics easing" is supposed to work!

[Xyphos]

known bug in 1.3.0, it does it to me too, it should be fixed in the next update.

[Geonovast]

If the fairing is touching the payload you should be fine.

Edited August 5, 2017 by Geonovast

[Kerbart]

59 minutes ago, Geonovast said:

If the fairing is touching the payload you should be fine.

The problem is if it's too close to the payload (eg. touching) it will rip off (folded) solar panels when releasing.

[Geonovast]

Well it only need to touch at the top. Like so:

If it's not touching like this, it'll likely 'splode:

 

I've found that if the "Close Fairing" is in blue, when it's touching you should be ok.  If it's not touching, and "Close Fairing" is in green, you won't be.

[AlamoVampire]

why they insist on an inferior fairing instead of just making Procedural Fairings (which are easier to use, to undestand and AUTOMATICALLY adjust to fit your payload, where stock is and does none of this) is beyond me. Never have understood it and always will question it.

 

original post time 16:54:30

[The Aziz]

The thing is, that joints between fairing base and the payload are extremely weak. Thus, fairing provides only aerodynamic protection, not structural.

[SkyRender]

I just switched to good ol' Procedural Fairings.  Those have so many more advantages.  Like being able to strut to the fairings themselves.

[AlamoVampire]

4 hours ago, The Aziz said:

The thing is, that joints between fairing base and the payload are extremely weak. Thus, fairing provides only aerodynamic protection, not structural.

if you are referring to the stock attempt at fairings, this would be yet another reason for Squad or TT to dump what they have and put the Procedural Fairings in.

1 hour ago, SkyRender said:

I just switched to good ol' Procedural Fairings.  Those have so many more advantages.  Like being able to strut to the fairings themselves.

yet another reason why Procedural Fairings are infinitely superior in every way to the stock ones.

 

original post 22:33:30

[klgraham1013]

Personally, I'd like to maintain the lego style and have KW fairings.  Having procedural and lego in the game is just weird to me.

[Haruspex]

Ah, so that's the reason my Eve expedition kept exploding until I ditched the rover (which was in a fairing). Interesting.

[MR L A]

17 hours ago, SkyRender said:

I just switched to good ol' Procedural Fairings.  Those have so many more advantages.  Like being able to strut to the fairings themselves.

The contents of a stock fairing, afaik, are auto-strutted to the surrounding fairing. Relatively certain this was in one of the dev notes and/or patch notes

[The_Flower141]

The curse of the fairings have taken another form in my game. Recently i tried to launch a space station module. All was well and fine until the rocket had loaded and then the 2.5m fairing popped clean off my rocket for no apparent reason. The same happened to the 3.75m one.

[natsirt721]

I find that if I use more than 3 pieces, when I go to detach it turns the contents into a blender.  2 and sometimes 3 seems to be ok (n.b. version 1.2.2), but any more than that fail miserably.  

I swear, if SQUAD had fewer qualms about integrating mod content like they did with SPP back in .25, KSP would be in a MUCH better place...  

[Allocthonous]

Does using clamshell deploy make any difference? I haven't encountered any problems with this bug yet, and I always change my fairings to clamshell. But then, I've only been using the 1.25m fairings in my latest career game. It sounds like the larger fairings have it worse.

[AlamoVampire]

I keep hoping, I keep wishing that Squad would accept the fact that their fairings are (my opinion) an unmitigated disaster especially when you consider that:

a. the mod procedural fairings is by far the gold standard of simplicity, ease of use and customizability and could have been assimilated with less hassle than designing what we have now.  

b. the fact they openly did just this with the space plane parts but seemingly will not for what ever reason(s) with other mods that do things better than whats in stock.

kinda makes it unnerving if you ask me.

original post 22:00:30

[Mako]

1 hour ago, natsirt721 said:

I swear, if SQUAD had fewer qualms about integrating mod content like they did with SPP back in .25, KSP would be in a MUCH better place...  

 

38 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

I keep hoping, I keep wishing that Squad would accept the fact that their fairings are (my opinion) an unmitigated disaster especially when you consider that:

a. the mod procedural fairings is by far the gold standard of simplicity, ease of use and customizability and could have been assimilated with less hassle than designing what we have now.  

b. the fact they openly did just this with the space plane parts but seemingly will not for what ever reason(s) with other mods that do things better than whats in stock.

kinda makes it unnerving if you ask me.

original post 22:00:30

Unless a mod has a license that allows the work to be used in a commercial product without permission, they would be setting themselves up for a lawsuit if they just picked mods they liked and put it in their game.

I don't know what the license allows regarding the procedural fairings mod, but I doubt Squad can just take it and insert it in their game without opening themselves up to legal trouble. And if I'm wrong about the procedural fairings license, the point still stands for any mod you might want added to stock that has a commercial-use restriction in its license.

For the record, I have no issues with stock fairings. Barring any bugs I prefer not having to install a mod to have fairings that get the job done. I think they have improved upon their initial implementation in a satisfactory manner, and I don't need to update anything when a new version of KSP releases.

I understand why you would want them to be stock, but I bet you can find a significant number of players who don't care and/or prefer the stock implementation to have them remain in mod territory. Options are good, and thankfully mods were considered important enough to support. Instead of lobbying for this mod, or that mod, or my pet mod to be included in stock (which is likely impossible for many mods), we should all be lobbying for more access for mods so that modders can create more freely with more possibility and less limitations.

[AlamoVampire]

@Mako I would imagine they had to get permission to take Space Plane Plus or w/e it used to be called and make that stock. BUT, here is the thing, if I level the playing field for a second, Procedural Fairings were a thing for a considerable amount of time before the aerodynamics in stock were altered to be more "FAR" like or more "real" which ever direction you wish to look at that one. They had a mod out there that is simple to use, easy to understand, allows for easy duplication, adjusts to YOUR payload INSTANTLY, has INTERSTAGE fairing modules and does not potato chip upon jettison. ALL they had to do is take 1 look at it and either jump through what ever legal hoops were/are needed <most likely the selfsame hoops needed to make SPP into stock, so, um why did they not?> and either assimilate THAT or make a decent copy. Did they? NOPE. They took the idea of fairings and botched it beyond reason. Having a pale shadow of something that existed before courtesy of the community and making a poor iteration of it is in MY OPINION just an absolute insult.

To each his own honestly, but, the stock fairings are an inelegant mess, and if you can make use of them, you are a more patient person than I am.

original post time 23:21:30

[Mako]

@AlamoVampire

I don't want to play "What If..." all day, but it's likely that procedural fairings were not appealing to the development team as there are no procedural parts in the game at all. They had a specific lego-style design in mind for vessel creation, and I'm guessing they wanted to stick with it. But we'll never know what they were thinking. For all we will ever know they could have asked for permission to use/offered to buy procedural fairings and been denied. Either way, it's extremely unlikely to change.

Thank goodness for mods, right? Hopefully they'll give modders even more freedom and control before they wind down development, but at least before then it sounds like they're still working on pesky bugs like the one in this thread.

[AlamoVampire]

@Mako To be blunt, I am not what ifing at all. They made a bad fairing that is not elegant or easy to use and clearly has issues. My opinion ofc.

op 03:58:30

[natsirt721]

I could see this either way - having never used PF I can't really comment of its ease of use but I don't really have qualms with the way stock fairings are implemented, except for when they totally and utterly faily to function as intended. That I can and will disagree with.

22 hours ago, Allocthonous said:

Does using clamshell deploy make any difference? I haven't encountered any problems with this bug yet, and I always change my fairings to clamshell. But then, I've only been using the 1.25m fairings in my latest career game. It sounds like the larger fairings have it worse.

The last time it happened was with a 3.75 and 3x clamshell. I would concur that the smaller ones seem to be more stable.

[selfish_meme]

23 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Mako I would imagine they had to get permission to take Space Plane Plus or w/e it used to be called and make that stock. BUT, here is the thing, if I level the playing field for a second, Procedural Fairings were a thing for a considerable amount of time before the aerodynamics in stock were altered to be more "FAR" like or more "real" which ever direction you wish to look at that one. They had a mod out there that is simple to use, easy to understand, allows for easy duplication, adjusts to YOUR payload INSTANTLY, has INTERSTAGE fairing modules and does not potato chip upon jettison. ALL they had to do is take 1 look at it and either jump through what ever legal hoops were/are needed <most likely the selfsame hoops needed to make SPP into stock, so, um why did they not?> and either assimilate THAT or make a decent copy. Did they? NOPE. They took the idea of fairings and botched it beyond reason. Having a pale shadow of something that existed before courtesy of the community and making a poor iteration of it is in MY OPINION just an absolute insult.

To each his own honestly, but, the stock fairings are an inelegant mess, and if you can make use of them, you are a more patient person than I am.

original post time 23:21:30

License:
[CODE]
All copyright for textures and models of SP+ are held by Porkjet
You may reuse textures and models of this mod for personal use.
You may not redistribute modified or unmodified versions of SP+ as a whole or parts of it without permission.

Since Porkjet became an employee it was a simple task to contribute or sell that licence to Squad. An open-source licence would impose restrictions on the distribution of KSP (maybe not really but they would need tohave rigorous and expensive legal and physical seperation). That's why mods don't get incorporated, and if they stole the ideas of too many mods it would upset the mod authors. Bad publicity by big names.

Most of the bugbears with stock fairings have been eliminated, we have strutting, autostrutting, interstage, interstage frameworks, clamshell and confetti. You can see how versatile they are here.

Edited August 9, 2017 by selfish_meme

[AlamoVampire]

@selfish_meme which is why I keep on saying that they could have used it as a blueprint to make something that is far superior to the disaster that is the stock fairings. Assimilating a mod is but ONE course of action. Duplicating with like features or similar ways of doing things would have been superior to the again inelegant mess that is stock. I remember when they were first added and taking almost an HOUR to figure out they needed to click and drag to work. then watching them turn into potato chip crumbs and saying what the.... and going right back to using the superior procedural fairings.

OP 22:38:30

[SpecialSpock]

I personally hope that some mods are integrated into stock. Either that or allowing mods to come to Xbox. 

[selfish_meme]

17 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@selfish_meme which is why I keep on saying that they could have used it as a blueprint to make something that is far superior to the disaster that is the stock fairings. Assimilating a mod is but ONE course of action. Duplicating with like features or similar ways of doing things would have been superior to the again inelegant mess that is stock. I remember when they were first added and taking almost an HOUR to figure out they needed to click and drag to work. then watching them turn into potato chip crumbs and saying what the.... and going right back to using the superior procedural fairings.

OP 22:38:30

I am saying the opposite though, the stock fairings, as I have shown, are pretty good now. And incorporating mods is difficult because most mods have Open Source licences.