What do people use Stayputnik in career for in the newest version?

[ghpstage]

Now it may just be the way I play career mode, which tends to involve rushing through the early milestone contracts as soon as possible, but looking at the Stayputnik now I can't help but think its been nerfed into obscurity.

In 0.9 I found Stayputnk to have value for a few reasons,

1. Solar panels and OKTO were on separate 90 science techs and solar panels were more useful for general use.
   
2. The only Mun milestone mission was 'Explore' which was very well set up for a one way probe.
   
3. The Terrier engine was on the same tech path as the Stayputnik.
   
4. Funds were a significant barrier to rapid progression.
   
5. Low weight meant more space for Science Jrs and goo pods.
   

All this gave it uses as early satellites, rescue craft and to complete the lucrative 'Explore Mun' and Minmus contracts using batteries or panels. However even in 0.9 people generally recognised it wasn't particularly useful, primarily due to its awful tech location (a problem that has been made much worse since 1.0!)

Instead the changes have attacked the previous values in several ways,

1. Additional contracts and vast increases to milestone rewards have made the cash for upgrades practically fall from the sky, the cash barrier is no more.
   
2. The addition of the return from the Mun contract, which is impossible to complete with batteries and a level 1 VAB, can block the appearance of the Mun landing contract.
   
3. Solar panels and the OKTO are now on the same tech. Meaning the OKTO, being pretty much an absolute upgrade is available for any mission that requires panels, including all satellite contracts.....
   
4. Scientists being able to reset experiments drastically improves the science-weight efficiency of manned missions. Now a scientist can take one of each and get science from every biome he passes through. This also greatly increases the rate at which science can be accumulated.
   
5. Moving the Terrier to the top of the tree, where the other parts required for manned landings were made early probes less attractive.
   

In the current version I can see uses in two areas, for rescue missions which are safer with solar panels (and as a result OKTO), and early orbital and sub-orbital tourist contracts that are a total waste of time from a cost-benefit perspective....

I still use it occasionally as I like the aesthetics, but has anyone found solid uses for it in the post 1.0 career mode?

Edited August 27, 2015 by ghpstage

[mrclucks]

I always start with max science and funds to reduce the beginning grind. Then I'll plop a stayputnk on top of a SRB to quickly do the speed and altitude milestones. Other than that its basically useless due to not having any torque

[SpacedCowboy]

The only time I use it is for part testing contracts out on the launchpad.

[Snark]

It's handy for "rescue kerbal from low Kerbin orbit" missions really early in the tech tree. I put a Stayputnik on top of an empty Mk1 command pod. (Admittedly, this doesn't last long, I swap it out for an OKTO as soon as I can.)

But truth be told, I never used 'em all that much even pre-1.0.

[ajburges]

The lack of SAS keeps me away. Might be good for early/cheap comm sats in the next version though.

[capi3101]

As soon as I have the other parts, I slap a fuel tank, a Wheesley engine and a set of bush-plane gears to the end of a Stayputnik, maybe a battery/solar panel if I have them. Set a couple of them out on either end of the Runway to act as the visual component of an ILS (for when I have the parts down the road to start doing more serious things within the confines of the SPH). Other than that, I don't touch Stayputniks at all.

[monstah]

I hate it. It was pretty and it was lightweight, and I used it always in any simple probe because of that. Now, it's really, really useless: no torque, no SAS. Adding reaction wheels nerfs its lightness. Really, it was the thing that annoyed me most in the 1.0 era (before I discovered the absolutely infuriating random explosions bug in the heating system, that is).

[Edax]

I find Stayputnik useful on my spaceplane that has a whiplash engine at the end of the plane, and a LV-N at the front (since I don't have to worry about aerodynamics in space). I need a Stayputnik pointed backwards so that I can reverse the navball so that I can make use of the maneuver point (since there isn't an anti-maneuver point.)

[ghpstage]

Thanks for the replies all.

I hate it. It was pretty and it was lightweight, and I used it always in any simple probe because of that. Now, it's really, really useless: no torque, no SAS. Adding reaction wheels nerfs its lightness. Really, it was the thing that annoyed me most in the 1.0 era (before I discovered the absolutely infuriating random explosions bug in the heating system, that is).

Those all changed for 0.9, and while I didn't mind those changes to make probe cores different the fact that it got nothing in return for what it gave up left it a shadow of its former self, with only a few niche uses remaining. and 1.0 seems to have cleared away almost all of remaining niches.

I find Stayputnik useful on my spaceplane that has a whiplash engine at the end of the plane, and a LV-N at the front (since I don't have to worry about aerodynamics in space). I need a Stayputnik pointed backwards so that I can reverse the navball so that I can make use of the maneuver point (since there isn't an anti-maneuver point.)

This is a very creative way to use them!

But I suspect more often than not either a better probe core or a docking port would be much more useful here.

As soon as I have the other parts, I slap a fuel tank, a Wheesley engine and a set of bush-plane gears to the end of a Stayputnik, maybe a battery/solar panel if I have them. Set a couple of them out on either end of the Runway to act as the visual component of an ILS (for when I have the parts down the road to start doing more serious things within the confines of the SPH). Other than that, I don't touch Stayputniks at all.

I'll have to pinch this if I ever start building spaceplanes

The lack of SAS keeps me away. Might be good for early/cheap comm sats in the next version though.

With the current tech tree solar panels, which are required for any worthwhile satellite come with the same tech as the OKTO. The OKTO costs only a small amount more, while the Stayputnik requires some additional, generally expensive source of torque (a reaction wheel on its own is more expensive than an OKTO), OKTO with its two attachment nodes are also easily launched in multiples. In short the OKTO will work out cheaper in almost all cases.

It won't be useful for this without additional rebalancing.

I always start with max science and funds to reduce the beginning grind. Then I'll plop a stayputnk on top of a SRB to quickly do the speed and altitude milestones. Other than that its basically useless due to not having any torque

That's unconventional, but I don't see how the Stayputnik really adds to this.

It's handy for "rescue kerbal from low Kerbin orbit" missions really early in the tech tree. I put a Stayputnik on top of an empty Mk1 command pod. (Admittedly, this doesn't last long, I swap it out for an OKTO as soon as I can.)

Seems to be the only notable niche it has left now unfortunately.

[Sharpy]

Can you suggest another SPHERICAL structural part?

[GoSlash27]

I use it for all the early stuff where I need a controller. Once I have a better controller, I ditch it.

Best,

-Slashy

[cantab]

I used it for my science drone for taking Kerbin survey contracts. I don't like SAS on planes, I prefer using trim and FAR Flight Assistance. I don't like relying on torque either, I prefer to do things properly with control surfaces. The round shape looks good and I think it's more aerodynamic than the OKTO at least if you don't have a good nosecone, and even once the nosecone is unlocked it's still an extra part.

I also use it is a "Control From Here" point when I need one, for example I might attach a Stayputnik to the lower stage of a wobbly rocket so the controls behave better during the launch. For that application the lack of features is irrelevant since they'll be somewhere else on the craft.

[capi3101]

I'll have to pinch this if I ever start building spaceplanes

Be my guest. If you set a third one another kilometer or two inland, it really helps with getting your planes aligned with the Runway from further out. Reclass teach of them as a base and you can see it from a hundred klicks out. You can even use them to guesstimate a good glide slope - that bit takes some explaining but I'll fill in the details if you're curious.

Another thing you can do with Stayputniks in the SPH - slap an empty fuel tank on them and turn them so they'll sit upright. Put hunk of crap on Runway; reclass as base. Instant, cheap-as-almost-free KSP target marker for those in the early going who want to try and practice precision de-orbiting. Gives you something to do with that part of KSC until you've got the parts to build Stayputnik End-of-Runway-Devices.

If you go to build them, make sure you park them off the raised Runway area (the "ski jump") on both ends. Otherwise the game will try to clear them off when you go to try to launch a plane.

[eddiew]

Absolutely nothing... can't be bothered faffing around without any SAS so I prioritised crewed missions until I could get a proper probe core.

Not to say that the SPN can't do anything, but I just don't consider it worth the effort of doing it.

[rofltehcat]

I find Stayputnik useful on my spaceplane that has a whiplash engine at the end of the plane, and a LV-N at the front (since I don't have to worry about aerodynamics in space). I need a Stayputnik pointed backwards so that I can reverse the navball so that I can make use of the maneuver point (since there isn't an anti-maneuver point.)

You can use a docking port (or a mechjeb module if you use the mod) for that. Less restrictive in placement.

[Edax]

You can use a docking port (or a mechjeb module if you use the mod) for that. Less restrictive in placement.

There wasn't room for a docking port (at least facing backwards), and the mechjeb would have to be mounted on a strut just like the Stayputnik. This is a very small spaceplane with only 2 engines, one at each end, and using only MK1 parts. I favored the Stayputnik because it was cheap, light, and wouldn't give me off-centered torque and wouldn't draw too much power. Maybe mechjeb would have been better, but I'm not fond of the green/red light it gives off.

[cantab]

I thought the Mechjeb computer attached radially?

MRS includes a radial mount probe core, but of course that's only good if you're using that mod.

[Bloody_looser]

1. Part testing on launchpad obviously.

2. Getting 'Reach 2500m/s velocity' record.

Since if you successfully orbit - this record just disappears mysteriously. And if orbiting in any reasonable fashion you won't get 2500m/s. But the record is kinda juicy - pays like 60k on medium, so it's not good to miss it. So - Stayputnik-BACC.SRB-decoupler-BACC. Add fins the way it pleases you and launch it straight up. We get a high ballistic trajectory, good buck and success for otherwise suicide mission.

I didn't use Stayputnik for anything else in the recent career.

P.S. OK, maybe I used it for testing parachutes and stuff at unreasonable speeds and altitudes. For lethal and strange tests Stayputnik is a way to go.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Bloody_looser

[Deutherius]

I used it very early to fulfil suborbital tourist contracts on Kerbin - just a BACC with basic fins, decoupler, Mk1 capsule, Stayputnik and two radial chutes. Launch straight up and hope you won't be landing over mountains west of KSC.

I sometimes still use the thing despite having SSTO tech available, just because I don't feel like waiting 5 minutes for an SSTO to ascent... That and I'm too lazy to open up the design and switch the probe core to HECS or OKTO. And I'm also kinda fond of the thing.

[Edax]

I thought the Mechjeb computer attached radially?

MRS includes a radial mount probe core, but of course that's only good if you're using that mod.

Maybe a visual aid would help. I need a control-from-here point backwards so that I can use the maneuver point on the navball for the LV-N. I've tucked a Stayputnik in-between the landing gear pointed aft for that purpose, and the only place to fit that on is via strut. I could have put a mechjeb in the cargo bay, but then I'd have to move the monopropellant tank or battery elsewhere, plus I'd having an annoying red/green light coming out of the cargobay.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Edax

[Sharpy]

You could have fit a docking port jr. in the service bay. Or even a standard docking port on the cargo bay with the whiplash attached to it.

Also, instead of the strut, you could have put a docking port on the belly of the ship just like the "main" one and use the "rotate" tool to point it backwards. Also, if the tech tree is open far enough, there's an MK1 profile probe core you could have put next to the reaction wheel in the stack, pointing backwards. Or OKTO2 in the service bay.

That strut is extremely draggy. A terrible idea for attaching anything to a spaceplane.

[Edax]

You could have fit a docking port jr. in the service bay. Or even a standard docking port on the cargo bay with the whiplash attached to it.

Also, instead of the strut, you could have put a docking port on the belly of the ship just like the "main" one and use the "rotate" tool to point it backwards. Also, if the tech tree is open far enough, there's an MK1 profile probe core you could have put next to the reaction wheel in the stack, pointing backwards. Or OKTO2 in the service bay.

That strut is extremely draggy. A terrible idea for attaching anything to a spaceplane.

Jeez, didn't think I'd get so much flak for using a stayputnik...