Proper Fairings ASAP

[Majorjim!]

KasperVld just said this on the AMA on Reddit:

"Fairings are something I’ve been waiting to play around with for quite a while. While I’ve had mods such as procedural fairings installed in the past I think the stock implementation is much, much more versatile. I can’t wait to see what our playerbase will come up with, it will no doubt surpass our wildest dreams."

Make of that what you will....

EDIT: He added this:

"We'll add the option to divide them in two panels after release. Since they produce debris that is not actually persistent, we are okay with leaving the very flashy, rather kerbal method alone for now."

Edited April 26, 2015 by Majorjim

[basic.syntax]

After watching some streams I've noticed that crafts acceleration doesn't increase at all when they've jettisoned, even on tiny craft with huge fairings. I think that the weight is on the base part so jettisoning the fairing doesn't reduce the mass.

I hope I'm mistaken though...

Great question... and easy to check. If true, that would be a gameplay problem, vs "confetti" separation being a SoKerbal design choice.

(...Which doesn't bother me, but I'm finally going to place a vote here, for Adjustable. 1.0 has just about left the building, the thread should be renamed for KSP v1.1, now.)

---

EDIT: From the AMA:

[–]xDaze 11 points 52 minutes ago

In 1.0 (or even in 1.x) will be possible to do clamsheel like fairings? If not why the current system is limited to "confetti" fairings explosion?

[–]

Maxmaps

6 points 10 minutes ago

We'll add the option to divide them in two panels after release.

Since they produce debris that is not actually persistent, we are okay with leaving the very flashy, rather kerbal method alone for now.

Edited April 26, 2015 by basic.syntax

[Daze]

http://www.reddit.com/r/iama/comments/33ys4s/we_are_the_team_behind_kerbal_space_program_tomorrow_we_launch_version_10_and_leave_early_access_ask_us_anything/cqpn6wv

I've asked for this in the AMA

[Majorjim!]

I'm happy they will have a proper clamshell setting but I fear they will not have the modularity they should have. I fear we wont get the choice of one side before the other or more than two sides.. This will suck big time.

Squad needs to be better than the mod makers!! We paid money for this.

[klgraham1013]

So, did they set out to make it lolsokerbal instead of realistic?

...or is the confetti a result of how it was implemented and now they have to go back in and figure out how to make it work as a clamshell?

[Majorjim!]

So, did they set out to make it lolsokerbal instead of realistic?

...or is the confetti a result of how it was implemented and now they have to go back in and figure out how to make it work as a clamshell?

That's unclear. What is clear is that Squad isn't that bothered by the confetti.

[basic.syntax]

So, did they set out to make it lolsokerbal instead of realistic? ...or is the confetti a result of how it was implemented and now they have to go back in and figure out how to make it work as a clamshell?

It's clear to me - based on HarvesteR's devnote comments - that he designed a versatile system that could crack it open horizontally, vertically, or only on Tuesdays. I look at the fragments and can grin along with the developers over their choice... Kerbals as cartoon characters don't seem big on neatness. All the official Squad trailers show their haste, messes and accidents.

[GusTurbo]

So, did they set out to make it lolsokerbal instead of realistic?

...or is the confetti a result of how it was implemented and now they have to go back in and figure out how to make it work as a clamshell?

I think it's a result of how they were implemented, since they break apart at every place you click. Seems like a strange way to have done it, but I do believe that is the case.

That's unclear. What is clear is that Squad isn't that bothered by the confetti.

Harvester suggested that they didn't have time to make it work clamshell style, so it sounds like they were really constrained by how they implemented it. Also, initially I thought they could only split into halves, but I saw in a stream that someone had it split into 6 sides, so I think it's based on your symmetry mode, which is good I guess. That should allow me to do the 4-way petal fairings using stock fairings on my Saturn V.

Edited April 27, 2015 by GusTurbo

[Kurotenshi]

I'm very hyped about 1.0, and I'm very happy to finally see fairings added, but as mentioned many times before, they're sort of... lacking in some regards. Actually only in one regard IMO, their separation.

As with most of what I've seen for 1.0, their look and construction are great, and as far as weight and balance issues is concerned, we'll see when we get to test them out. But the potato chip separation is the only thing they don't have me hyped for. I know they're trying to sell it as "omg so kerbal", but when I heard that further options aren't implemented yet due to time constraints, it kinda sounds like more of an excuse, to me at least. I really hope they get around to it soon, as I'd hate to have a kerbal-style fairing sep on my replica craft. It's ok for the people who like the kerbal style, but it's an eyesore for replicators like me, who like things somewhat realistic and sensible.

I don't mind constructing them in several procedural parts, it's still a vast improvement over 0.90 stock fairings. But some sort of exrta staging options would be greatly appreciated.

So here's to hoping the devs will listen to us once more!

[GusTurbo]

Harvester suggested that they didn't have time to make it work clamshell style, so it sounds like they were really constrained by how they implemented it. Also, initially I thought they could only split into halves, but I saw in a stream that someone had it split into 6 sides, so I think it's based on your symmetry mode, which is good I guess. That should allow me to do the 4-way petal fairings using stock fairings on my Saturn V.

Ok maybe not. So the number of sides may actually depend on the size of the fairing base. 2 sides for 1.25m, 3 sides for 2.5m, and 6 sides for 3.75m. Not 100% sure on this though.

[Starwhip]

Squad needs to be better than the mod makers!! We paid money for this.

Just wanna repost this here. Same concept applies, really. We paid 20 bucks for it and we complain at such a (relatively) small thing which has been clearly stated that they will fix?

What I find amazing is when I see the attitude that most people can pay $20 for KSP, play it for hundreds or thousands of hours and then cry foul when asked to pay $5 for additional content (whether that be DLC or mods).

And then many of us (myself included) won't bat an eye at paying $5 for a latte.... Every day.

[klgraham1013]

Just wanna repost this here. Same concept applies, really. We paid 20 bucks for it and we complain at such a (relatively) small thing which has been clearly stated that they will fix?

If you don't want feedback from your community, don't say you want feedback from your community. Squad asked for our opinions, so we give them.

[Superfluous J]

If you don't want feedback from your community, don't say you want feedback from your community. Squad asked for our opinions, so we give them.

#lolconfettipotatochips is not feedback. "I hate the fairings and they're stupid and you're stupid and everybody is stupid" is not feedback. "I think the fairings that separate into many pieces do not look realistic and would like clamshell fairings" is feedback. Now, many have actually given feedback but many more have just been complaining.

And you may think I'm complaining about it, but really I'm just trying to give feedback.

[Twreed87]

So everyone is talking about how many pieces the fairings split into, but what about the speed at which they fly off? I think the confetti style works with the speed at which they go flying away, but if they went with clamshell, I'd like them to float away quite a bit slower. Also I kinda wish they were fully persistent debris, but that's because I like building up lots of debris.

[sgt_flyer]

Guess the speed at which they come off is in part be ause of the confetti style - with so many debris, you don't want your rocket to ram into them

Else, they should really correct the fact that all the weight is 'inside' the baseplate of the fairings.

Next, onto clamshell separation - would be great if we could choose how much sides we need.

For now, we need to get it in our hands, to see what we can come up with.

(Though i'm worried onto how we will be able to pull off constellation style landings - it doesn't seem there's currentky a way to only partially separate fairings)

[Brotoro]

...Else, they should really correct the fact that all the weight is 'inside' the baseplate of the fairings...

Wait. What? All the mass of the fairings is in the base part? Does the mass of the ship not decrease when you confetti-off the fairings?

[Kerbart]

That's unclear. What is clear is that Squad isn't that bothered by the confetti.

In all fairness... They're not bothered by it right now. They have other things to worry about, pushing out a million new features in 1.0. Which brings me to a different subject that needs to stay out of this thread.

[basic.syntax]

Wait. What? All the mass of the fairings is in the base part? Does the mass of the ship not decrease when you confetti-off the fairings?

That's not been made clear ... that I have noticed posted, yet. Ought to be easy to verify, check mass before/after. And complain about, if true.

[sgt_flyer]

Wait. What? All the mass of the fairings is in the base part? Does the mass of the ship not decrease when you confetti-off the fairings?

Seems so - at least, that's what was noticed by watchers of saturday - sunday preview streams. (That, and that the 1.25m fairing baseplate already weights 1 ton...

[Overfloater]

the 1.25m fairing baseplate already weights 1 ton...

O.O well screw that, i'm launching my ships naked.

No not really...

[Hcube]

I highly doubt the mass doesn't decrease when the fairing is jettisoned, that makes no sense at all, SQUAD wouldn't do that. I would also be a bit surprised if the mass of the whole fairing was modeled in its base...

By the way, the fairing bases seem to be sooo heavy ! why is that ?

[Columbia]

I highly doubt the mass doesn't decrease when the fairing is jettisoned, that makes no sense at all, SQUAD wouldn't do that. I would also be a bit surprised if the mass of the whole fairing was modeled in its base...

By the way, the fairing bases seem to be sooo heavy ! why is that ?

Well, that's heavier than the ARM Claw and the small landing can.

Strange..

[Technical Ben]

If you don't want feedback from your community, don't say you want feedback from your community. Squad asked for our opinions, so we give them.

They pre-empted the feedback, have a plan in progress... and decided working implementation, but less graphics release was better than nothing or waiting an additional month. Really, the forward planning from these guys is amazing (EG the resources are "barebones" for gameplay reasons, but extremely open and modifiable for any who want to add RL/exotic stuff. Same goes for the fairings, it's just back end so you cannot see it yet).

[Frozen_Heart]

Ok after some tests I've confirmed the only the fairing base weighs anything. The fairing itself is weightless so jettisoning it does nothing.

[Paul Kingtiger]

Ok after some tests I've confirmed the only the fairing base weighs anything. The fairing itself is weightless so jettisoning it does nothing.

Well that sucks

Hopefully this is something that will be fixed in a future release.