Maybe the joints between parts are a little Too strong...

[StrandedonEarth]

Still wobbly, but the joints just don't want to let go...

[toric5]

they aren't usually that strong. they are that wobbly. serves you right for supporting a 2.5m stack with a bunch of .675m parts.

[StrandedonEarth]

It wasn't planned, I just wanted to use up the leftover fuel in the tanks after docking. I didn't expect it to hold together that long.

[Guest]

The problem is that they are too flexible. They should be less wobbly, but maybe break more easily.

[bsalis]

Hmm, yeah. Pretty sure once the bend is past 90 degrees it should break!

Seen that happen on a re-entry that went bad but no... Nothing broke.

[Renegrade]

Still wobbly, but the joints just don't want to let go...

Yeah, when the ARM update came, part links were made much stronger, but not much stiffer.

The ARM update was supposed to allow stiffness and strength to be set separately -- apparently this isn't true or the wrong choice was taken~

[cantab]

That was spectacular And I thought this case (which could have stayed there forever) was bad. The strength-stiffness ratio is seriously out of whack. A degree of bend is desirable to make things visible to the player before they snap, but not full 180 degree springs.

[NecroBones]

I've had the front end of my asteroid grabbers do that before. Large masses and a small attachment point can yield some ridiculous results like that.

[LameLefty]

Using The Cars as a soundtrack was genius. You get some rep just for that touch ...

[Moar Boosters]

I think they're definitely too strong. Building giant rockets has lots much of it's challenge because everything sticks together so easily these days.

It should be refined as a feature. Different parts already seem to have different attachment strengths, and the stats should be listed in the game.

It's something that your Kerbals should progress with in career mode, with rockets starting off flimsy as hell and getting better through time. It'd give more use for structural parts as things like pylons would have stronger attatchments, and IMO it'd be a more "fun" restriction than some of existing ones in career mode.

Currently at the beginning of career mode we're limited by 30 parts and 18 tons. There's not really much "fun" to be generated from such restrictions. All they generate is annoyance when you build your perfect craft and it turns out to be 18.1 tons or needs 31 parts.

Joint strength limitations would be fun, and more in the Kerbal spirit. You can try and build a moon rocket whilst your kerbals are still using the basic spit and chewing-gum joints, but it'd probably be advisable to upgrade to school-glue or crazy-glue attachments before attempting a rocket so big.

To stop us wasting money in career mode with rockets falling apart on the launchpad, there could be a simulate stress button in the VAB which would turn all the attachment points different colors depending on the stress levels on the joints. It'd be a very valuable tool for the players to assess the riskiness of their launch vehicles before setting them on the pad.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Moar Boosters

[Frank_G]

Looks too much fun, to be taken out of the game... i now want too wobble my ship too!!!!

[rkman]

Especially with low mass parts, the connection can be so flexible that under certain circumstances a large gap can emerge between two connected parts, without the connection breaking.

[KotDemopan]

Joints too strong? i think you haven't attempted to land a Mk3 Plane yet.

[problemecium]

On the one hand, don't jinx it! We've come a long way since the days of even small rockets wobbling themselves to death on the launchpad!

On the other, part connections could stand to trade a little bit of tensile strength for rigidity. In the meantime, I prescribe struts.

[WWEdeadman]

Well, looking at your video I'd say yes. Then again, I softly land a plane made of MK III parts, and it falls to individual pieces. I'd say they're just very inconsistent in their stability.

[SofusRud]

Currently at the beginning of career mode we're limited by 30 parts and 18 tons. There's not really much "fun" to be generated from such restrictions. All they generate is annoyance when you build your perfect craft and it turns out to be 18.1 tons or needs 31 parts.

While i don't object to the rest of the stuff you said I will dispute that the current restrictions of early career mode don't generate "fun".

The craft below was built and perfected as a direct result of having to work with mass and part-count restrictions, and getting it to work as it needed to was many hours of fun.

Personally I would balance this aspect of career mode by adding more building tiers.

Sorry for the digression

[Renegrade]

While i don't object to the rest of the stuff you said I will dispute that the current restrictions of early career mode don't generate "fun".

The craft below was built and perfected as a direct result of having to work with mass and part-count restrictions, and getting it to work as it needed to was many hours of fun.

I agree with this ; the mass/part restrictions are fun (well, the first to second tier jump is way too big, there needs to be a first-and-a-half tier building set with like 60t/90 parts or thereabouts). However, I'd also like to see Moar Booster's concept of strength upgrades - no reason why we couldn't have both!

[StrandedonEarth]

Of course, that rocket did finally fail when the tanks collided...

This is the satellite in question that had so much flex to it:

You may notice that that staging needs correcting. When I launched it, it fell on the pad and destroyed it before the engines lit and the rocket successfully flew to orbit

And in 0.25 I had this plane that I forgot to to strut around the payload. Once I released the payload it got rather... flappy.... But it held together until it hit the ground.