So can anyone explain what;s the point of Mk3 plane parts.

[Kerbonautical]

It's been a long time since I've played KSP but trust me when I say I've logged enough hours to know what I'm doing. What is the issue with the current Mk3 space plane parts? From a lot of experimentation recently there seems to be very few ways to actually use these parts. Aside from having to empty out enormous portions of the fuel just to get them off the ground it seems as if the current wing parts provide practically no lift to part of this size. Has anyone else been struggling to make use of these? Typically I'd have no issue making a plane but the Mk3 parts seem completely impossible to make use of no matter what I try.

[dryer_lint]

It's a known issue. The 1.0 update is supposed to have bigger wing parts on the way, so we'll actually be able to make Mk3 planes!

At the moment, I think they're mainly used for shuttles though.

[Sidereus]

I don't use them for space planes. I use them for rockets and bases where I need the crew/cargo capacity, where using the smaller 2.5m or Mk2 parts would either make the rocket overly long or not provide a big enough cargo bay.

[Wanderfound]

Some examples...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1610271&viewfull=1#post1610271

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1626248&viewfull=1#post1626248

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1636232&viewfull=1#post1636232

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1766813&viewfull=1#post1766813

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1739701&viewfull=1#post1739701

[Kelderek]

Bigger wings, including "wet" wings, more landing gear options, and the changes to aerodynamics should make Mk3 planes much more interesting and useful in 1.0. You can do stuff with them now, but it can definitely be a pain compared to mk1 and mk2.

[LordFjord]

Those new parts make excellent rocket parts.

Oh, and of course big spaceplanes. While they are a challenge to build, it's rewarding to be able to lift off with >300 tons.

Landing is a totally different story, but I'll get there eventually

Full post here

Here is another.

And here as well.

[Scotius]

It's big.

It's roomy (space for 16 Kerbals)

It's powerful (12 km\s dV with full tanks)

I love this ship

[Overland]

there good for deleting... their stock.. but not enough to matter.. hence.. once deleted KSP will run on a system with less than 3gb of ram

[Cirocco]

from personal experience:

- the MkIII cargo bay allows for large spacebase parts to be hauled up into space in SSTO spaceplanes

- the tanks actually have a pretty good fuel to dry mass ratio, though I will definitely agree that the current wing model makes using the tanks a bit iffy. Far from impossible though

- the MkIII passenger cabin carries a crazy high amount of kerbals

- and finally and probably the most important reason for me: they look cool

[Red Iron Crown]

Those new parts make excellent rocket parts.

This. I've stopped using the NASA 3.75m parts, the new Mk3 stuff has the best mass ratios of all the tanks.

I'm not much of a plane guy, I've made some successful small crew transfer SSTOs but I find bigger, payload carrying stuff is easier and lower part count with conventional rockets.

[Bill Phil]

The new wings should help.

That and the new landing gear.

[Ion Man]

It's certainly possible, but the scalability is bad for big and heavy parts to be lifted with an SSTO Spaceplane. It gets laggy and fragile.

[GusTurbo]

there good for deleting... their stock.. but not enough to matter.. hence.. once deleted KSP will run on a system with less than 3gb of ram

I don't believe they are good for that purpose.

Mk3 parts make good space shuttles. Check the Spacecraft Exchange for ample evidence of that.

[cantab]

From what I've seen, they're good for making things that spontaneously break up. The joints seem to be like tissue paper.

[RocketPilot573]

Not enough lift? This flies just fine. You can make bigger wings yourself. Though for part-count reasons, yes, bigger wings would be nice.

[Jouni]

They're good for building stuff that doesn't resemble real planes, shuttles, or rockets.

[Darnok]

You can use them for constellation like landers

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[AbacusWizard]

For spaceplanes I still just use Mk1 or Mk2 parts, but I've been finding the Mk3 parts very useful for huge interplanetary starships. The cargo bays are nice places to store landers, probes, etc., and the connector parts (Kerbodyne to Mk3, Mk3 to Rockomax, etc.) allow structural connections that double as fuel storage.

Note how the different sizes of parts in the engine nacelles connect:

The large cargo bay fits a science lab and a compact three-person lander:

[Vashts]

making traditional SSTO space planes seems to be a pain, the current air breathing technology and lack of proper wings and landing gear make scaling to MK3 a chore.

[LordFjord]

Actually, it is more the lack of bigger jets and intakes what makes it more difficult.

[wolfedg]

I must say it is very difficult to work with the current set of equipment and mk 3 parts. It took along time, but i finally made a stable aircraft. Ive given up on spaceplanes in mk 3 until we get better parts and aero.

My most reliable mk 3 aircraft at this point at the antarctic refueling station.

Edited March 9, 2015 by wolfedg

[Whirligig Girl]

I want someone to model an old style diesel train cab for Mk3 parts.

This would make the point of Mk3 plane parts at least twice as useful for me.

[Destroyer713]

It's nice they're making bigger wings and landing gear for 1.0, but I also think they need to make bigger intakes and air-breathing engines too. Seriously, I don't want to have to strap on 12 Turbojets (which are arguably overpowered to begin with) just to get a Mk3 aircraft off the ground.

[bonyetty]

Double layer the wings for the Mk3 parts. Or triple. It the workaround I've been using till 1.0 comes out.

[PB666]

there good for deleting... their stock.. but not enough to matter.. hence.. once deleted KSP will run on a system with less than 3gb of ram

Cargo bays for landers.

- - - Updated - - -

It's nice they're making bigger wings and landing gear for 1.0, but I also think they need to make bigger intakes and air-breathing engines too. Seriously, I don't want to have to strap on 12 Turbojets (which are arguably overpowered to begin with) just to get a Mk3 aircraft off the ground.

Scale mods, so simple.