Proper Fairings ASAP

[Tankman101]

Aerolfos has a point, though; It is true that they have spoken little on the subject and it is rather irritating, but I think we should cut them some slack for now.

They have actually spoken enough on the subject to paint a picture of what's happening.

Not to mention that one week they were on vacation.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Tankman101
Clarification

[Candlelight]

The KW clamshell fairings got ruined due to the 1.0 update! Now they are also confetti!

[Aerolfos]

There are no plans to abandon KSP at this point, they are working on another patch and Unity 5 after that, and afaik stock multiplayer is still planned for a future free update. I was more pointing out that because a lot or even most players wants some feature in particular does not obligate them to implement it, paying customer or not.

And if they are going to be opaque, how do you know that?

Pfft they could do anything. And that is a bit of a problem.

- - - Updated - - -

Not obligated to continue/communicate != Ignore everyone ever.

Stop being such a drama llama.

No. Hopefully not.

The problem is the worst case scenario, which COULD happen. Even a 1% chance is still a chance and all that.

Im a pessimist. I want to be right or pleasantly surprised.

[Red Iron Crown]

And if they are going to be opaque, how do you know that?

Pfft they could do anything. And that is a bit of a problem.

They're not entirely opaque, the things I mentioned are from public statements from Squad people. One could certainly argue that they should share more info, though.

[basic.syntax]

They're not entirely opaque, the things I mentioned are from public statements from Squad people. One could certainly argue that they should share more info, though.

Yeah... We'd gladly eat up whatever they are willing to share; Maxmaps is dropping hints of great things in store once the codebase is moved to U5. (Another Devnote Tuesday has come around - yay!) But, every feature they mention that doesn't end up happening for one reason or other - gets argued to death; I understand why many companies are shy about talking about their plans.

[Aerolfos]

Yeah... We'd gladly eat up whatever they are willing to share; Maxmaps is dropping hints of great things in store once the codebase is moved to U5. (Another Devnote Tuesday has come around - yay!) But, every feature they mention that doesn't end up happening for one reason or other - gets argued to death; I understand why many companies are shy about talking about their plans.

Honestly, they feel so contradictory in that. They are their own company, they set their own deadlines, so forth and so on (1.0 really seemed to have a deadline set many months back though), at the same time they want to be so open and listen to the community, and then they are kind of opaque and don't want to share because they want to change their plans..

[GeneralGuacamole]

Honestly, I don't care that much about the fairings, if they work, they work.

[Hcube]

Honestly, I don't care that much about the fairings, if they work, they work.

The fact is, they don't work. ( don't work as expected). Their mass, separation, drag, and building issues generally make it a better deal not to use them.

[Tankman101]

The fact is, they don't work. ( don't work as expected). Their mass, separation, drag, and building issues generally make it a better deal not to use them.

Whenever I don't use fairings my rockets become unstable, and I have had 0 issues with building/deploying them.

So yes, they work.

[basic.syntax]

The mass does encourage one to jettison them, as soon as practical. I worked my way up to them in a career game, went through various challenges of learning to balance lift with draggy upper parts, and was impressed how that all went away, once encased in a stock fairing. I'll take that mass vs. drag reduction trade, every time. (I also installed Claw's stock parts work around, which allows tweaking panel separation force, and number of vertical splits.)

[McPoisoned]

I completly agree with everything

[Vorg]

While I like the extra control over the shape the stock fairing has and the more compact base part over Procedural Fairings, I don't like the sharp edge look. Even the cone option fairing in Procedural Fairings rounds the edges a bit and I like the look of the eggshell fairings better.

I don't think they need to be confined to 2 parts, but again Procedural Fairings method looks better to me. Maybe they can get together with the modder on the design like they did with Rover Dude for resources and the Far people now for drag/heating model. No need to reinvent the wheel when you have one that works great.

[marc40k]

I don't like the sharp edge look. Even the cone option fairing in Procedural Fairings rounds the edges a bit

Sir, you're right

[xEvilReeperx]

A wrote a little fix for the confetti problem over the weekend since I couldn't find any mod that had done it already

[PB666]

The fairings can be tweeked but i like the current design.

If i was a space center manager i would hate the confetti style because of all the projectile hazards it would create in RL. The current fairings are unrealistic, but they work and compensate for other existing unrealistic things in the craft design (e.g. no concave part colliders on the easy).

If you want to deal with the space shrapnel issue just separate the fairing at 25000 m alt and drag deals with them.

One thing I've found is that muliple fairings are needed fo complex payloads, you might want to have fixed close fairing points at the same factor as the fairing. This affords the attachment and down directed strut connectors to the outer regions of the fairing base for stabikity. You cannot strut upward from the base but the area just inside the fairing attach will accept the connector ends. This creats a small weight disadvantage post fairing payload separation. That's life.

[GusTurbo]

http://i.imgur.com/ztkYUl2.png

A wrote a little fix for the confetti problem over the weekend since I couldn't find any mod that had done it already

I can't thank you enough for this! I hope Squad takes notice. How hard was this to code?

[Bomoo]

I can't thank you enough for this! I hope Squad takes notice. How hard was this to code?

3hard5Squid

I too would like to thank you, brave sir EvilReeper.

[Hcube]

Your mod is on Modding monday !

Sadly i believe that this means we aren't getting clamshell fairings in stock

[Virtualgenius]

I used to enjoy watching the petals of a fairing fly away it meant i made it to orbit and everything was right in the world, how did we end up with this confetti style procedural junk as viable alternative. Thankyou xEvilReeperx for putting some sanity back

[Rocketfeline]

Your mod is on Modding monday !

Sadly i believe that this means we aren't getting clamshell fairings in stock

How does that mean that we wont get clamshells stock? Darn..

[GusTurbo]

Your mod is on Modding monday !

Sadly i believe that this means we aren't getting clamshell fairings in stock

I don't think that is any indication that it won't be stock. Personally, I think it will spur them to add it, since it's pretty modest in terms of code, as I understand it.

[Hellothere!]

Wait, why the hell would you want to activate engines inside a fairing? Apart from that I agree. Well, I don't really care in how many parts the fairing breaks, but the other suggestions are reasonable.

[Superfluous J]

Wait, why the hell would you want to activate engines inside a fairing? Apart from that I agree. Well, I don't really care in how many parts the fairing breaks, but the other suggestions are reasonable.

Because they did it during the Apollo mission, and if you can't recreate that mission to every single exact bit of minutiae then KSP has failed as a product.

[GusTurbo]

It's not just that you would want to fire the engine inside the fairing, it's the fact that you can't fire an engine that has been inside a fairing, even after separation. That means you always have to jettison custom interstages before the engine will even activate, even though it is completely unobstructed.

Also, firing inside fairings is the sort of thing that might be considered "totally Kerbal."

[Majorjim!]

It's not just that you would want to fire the engine inside the fairing, it's the fact that you can't fire an engine that has been inside a fairing, even after separation. That means you always have to jettison custom interstages before the engine will even activate, even though it is completely unobstructed.

Also, firing inside fairings is the sort of thing that might be considered "totally Kerbal."

Any news of this being fixed in 1.03?