thoughts on the New porkjet 1.05 album

[Alshain]

Until you go to laythe

And do what? There is nothing to do there with atmospheric only planes either, except fly around a little. It's a space game, not a flight sim. I like planes, and planes that go to space should most definitely be a part of the core game. But these new engines are all designed to be less powerful than the current only Air Breathing engine that can go to space. Instead of turbofans we should have giant slightly-futuristic Turbo RamJets that can carry a large plane to space. It's not a flight simulator, it's a space flight simulator. If we want to take the Space out of Kerbal Space Program, then I suggest it be a different game.

It would make a good spinoff... Kerbal Flight Program. Without the needed stuff to make it a space game it could contain a lot more ground detail and other stuff you would expect from a flight sim. You could have all plane parts, commercial, military, but it would be "build-a-plane" just like KSP and have many runways and BD Armory stuff. Squad are you reading this? That's a freebie, your welcome.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Alshain

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I'm kinda torn on a lot of it. It looks cool, the idea seems cool for a mod. But, it is a space travel game, so we get a bunch of jet engines that will only work in the atmosphere and incapable of being an SSTO engine! I just don't get it. It's not like there is really anything to do with them, not without more mods. "Ooh look, I just landed a brand new engine on the island runway. Ok, now what? Oh right, that's all there is."

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of those mods, KAX, Firespitter, etc. I enjoy building planes, but it belongs in a mod, it's really outside the scope of the core game. Even the basic jet engine we have now doesn't belong in there. As far as I'm concerned the core game should be space and space related things only.

Actually, I could imagine using the goliath for huge SSTOs, and the juno for small ones, but the fighter jet jet and the basic jet don't seem super useful.

[Alshain]

Actually, I could imagine using the goliath for huge SSTOs, and the juno for small ones, but the fighter jet jet and the basic jet don't seem super useful.

It's a Turbofan, basically a larger version of the basic jet. I doubt it will be usefull for an SSTO.

[Rath]

Is there a "new" Porkjet album?

OP, why wouldn't you include a link to the very thing your thread is here to discuss?

Its the imgur link right there in the OP......

[Columbia]

And do what? There is nothing to do there with atmospheric only planes either, except fly around a little. It's a space game, not a flight sim. I like planes, and planes that go to space should most definitely be a part of the core game. But these new engines are all designed to be less powerful than the current only Air Breathing engine that can go to space. Instead of turbofans we should have giant slightly-futuristic Turbo RamJets that can carry a large plane to space. It's not a flight simulator, it's a space flight simulator. If we want to take the Space out of Kerbal Space Program, then I suggest it be a different game.

It would make a good spinoff... Kerbal Flight Program. Without the needed stuff to make it a space game it could contain a lot more ground detail and other stuff you would expect from a flight sim. You could have all plane parts, commercial, military, but it would be "build-a-plane" just like KSP and have many runways and BD Armory stuff. Squad are you reading this? That's a freebie, your welcome.

Squad has already said that they will be expanding rockets as well in their future plans. Geez.

I'm sorry if this offends you, but seriously.. Can't you let Squad do what they have to? There's no harm in expanding rovers, there's no harm in expanding rockets, and there's no harm in expanding planes. For God's sake, they added a new 1.25m engine that many of us needed. Many KSPers are here for the rockets, there are some here for planes, some even just to build things. And you can complete survey contracts with atmospheric planes. You can get more science to start a space program with planes. Even NASA has used atmospheric planes for experiments. If you don't want to use plane parts, then don't use them. They're not deleting rocket parts to make way for planes, are they?

I'm not going to be surprised if all of a sudden there was an update for rovers as well.. If anything, I hope there is.

[Alshain]

Squad has already said that they will be expanding rockets as well in their future plans. Geez.

I'm sorry if this offends you, but seriously.. Can't you let Squad do what they have to? There's no harm in expanding rovers, there's no harm in expanding rockets, and there's no harm in expanding planes. For God's sake, they added a new 1.25m engine that many of us needed. Many KSPers are here for the rockets, there are some here for planes, some even just to build things. And you can complete survey contracts with atmospheric planes. You can get more science to start a space program with planes. Even NASA has used atmospheric planes for experiments. If you don't want to use plane parts, then don't use them. They're not deleting rocket parts to make way for planes, are they?

I'm not going to be surprised if all of a sudden there was an update for rovers as well.. If anything, I hope there is.

You may not be aware of this but the title of this thread is "Thoughts on the New PorkJet 1.05 Album". Those were my thoughts. If that offense you, I'm sorry, but I don't think you have the right to censor my opinions. For what it's worth, I do like to build planes (pretty sure I said that but you didn't actually bother to read my posts), but this is still not a flight sim.

Also, there is harm to it. Asside from the RAM usage, the VAB/SPH GUI sucks and it clutters the menu which is already annoying cluttered enough.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Alshain

[Columbia]

You may not be aware of this but the title of this thread is "Thoughts on the New PorkJet 1.05 Album". Those were my thoughts. If that offense you, I'm sorry, but I don't think you have the right to censor my opinions. For what it's worth, I do like to build planes (pretty sure I said that but you didn't actually bother to read my posts), but this is still not a flight sim.

Also, there is harm to it. Asside from the RAM usage, the VAB/SPH GUI sucks and it clutters the menu which is already annoying cluttered enough.

Well, I'm sorry, then. But still, my opinion stands as well. I just get irritated when people call KSP "Kerbal Flight Simulator" or something like that.

I hope you understand, I was pretty grumpy writing that.

[Alshain]

Well, I'm sorry, then. But still, my opinion stands as well. I just get irritated when people call KSP "Kerbal Flight Simulator" or something like that.

I hope you understand, I was pretty grumpy writing that.

More evidence you didn't read my post. I was suggesting a second game, a new project for Squad, where planes could be given more attention than they can here in KSP but still have the construction techniques in KSP. The problem is there is nothing to do with them in KSP and that isn't likely to change because even with 64bit RAM they don't want to cram in so much it would overload all of their users computers. So we aren't likely to see much in the way of new runways, air strips etc. But with a second game, you remove all the planets and all the rocket parts and suddenly you can add prop planes and military planes and BDArmory type stuff, add a Kerbin with more detail, more buildings and airports and military bases. I'm just saying these parts would make more sense in a second project where the scope is limited to planes, while letting KSP be Space, including Spaceplanes of course, but not so much on the atmospheric planes.

I guess it's just wishfull thinking.

Edited October 14, 2015 by Alshain

[SpaceplaneAddict]

It did say the Panther jet would have performance equal to the pre 0.90 basic jet. Hmm.....

[Columbia]

More evidence you didn't read my post. I was suggesting a second game, a new project for Squad, where planes could be given more attention than they can here in KSP but still have the construction techniques in KSP. The problem is there is nothing to do with them in KSP and that isn't likely to change because even with 64bit RAM they don't want to cram in so much it would overload all of their users computers. So we aren't likely to see much in the way of new runways, air strips etc. But with a second game, you remove all the planets and all the rocket parts and suddenly you can add prop planes and military planes and BDArmory type stuff, add a Kerbin with more detail, more buildings and airports and military bases. I'm just saying these parts would make more sense in a second project where the scope is limited to planes, while letting KSP be Space, including Spaceplanes of course, but not so much on the atmospheric planes.

I guess it's just wishfull thinking.

I'm sorry, then, I saw it as mocking KSP as a Flight Simulator, since people do whenever a new plane part is added.

- - - Updated - - -

And I did read your post, I merely misunderstood it :/

[passinglurker]

Well these new subperformance jets wouldn't be so bad if there was a way to earn the ability to fly them on duna, eve, or other planets they may yet add with atmospheres.

*dodges the rotten tomatoes from the realism crowd*

[Pthigrivi]

There are already a lot of LF/ O rockets. There were only 3 air breathers. I don't mind seeing more options there, but yeah ultimately this is a space game and I'd love to see the focus there. I expect they we're just fleshing this out as they soon will with other parts, and I have to say porkjet's work on this looks fantastic.

[vasco]

What Squad could do is to release new plane parts as official DLC (like Astronomer's Day). So it won't clutter VAB and memory for us who are not into planes and still will be considered as stock parts.

[klgraham1013]

I like the idea of the giant Jet engine and how its all pasted together. If you were to take it apart, you would get 1 large intake, and 1 large engine. Most of the time you would use the 1 large intake with the 1 large engine right? So throwing them together makes sense, and allowing them to stack keeps it from being a 1 use part.

So, what if you want a longer fuselage between that intake and engine? ...or you don't want the structural pylon? There is no harm from giving players choice. Where, there is harm in unnecessary limitation.

- - - Updated - - -

...

Although I agree that planes have been to much of a focus recently, I see no problem with them being included in the game. It's not necessary to have a Kerbal Flight Program. Let the game be more than just it's title. That being said, I do agree that space exploration is being ignored. The sever lack of rover and station parts is quite distressing. Two things which are primary pieces of our own space program.

- - - Updated - - -

Let me make an analogy about the Mk3 wings and the Goliath. They are parts of a model kit, specifically designed for one craft. Sure, you could glue them onto a different model, but they clearly belong to an ideal form.

The old wings, intakes, and engines are lego pieces; able to be placed in a number of creations and not look the slightest bit out of place.

That is the difference.

[Pthigrivi]

We did just go through a big aero overhaul, a lot of the recent focus on planes has been related to that.

[klgraham1013]

We did just go through a big aero overhaul, a lot of the recent focus on planes has been related to that.

That aero overhaul was also about how rockets fly, not just planes.

[Alshain]

Although I agree that planes have been to much of a focus recently, I see no problem with them being included in the game. It's not necessary to have a Kerbal Flight Program. Let the game be more than just it's title. That being said, I do agree that space exploration is being ignored. The sever lack of rover and station parts is quite distressing. Two things which are primary pieces of our own space program.

Except what I'm suggesting is that planes do not get enough focus in this game, and likely never will because of limitations of combining a space game and a flight sim in one. No flight sim I know of has you build the planes before flying them, I think Squad could take it further if the plane were on their own platform and weren't being held back by the space travel side of the game.

[Pthigrivi]

That aero overhaul was also about how rockets fly, not just planes.

True, but most of the basics were there for that and just needed rebalancing, while wings needed some major reworking. I think we agree in principle though that adding a couple of new jet engines isn't crazy.

[klgraham1013]

Except what I'm suggesting is that planes do not get enough focus in this game, and likely never will because of limitations of combining a space game and a flight sim in one. No flight sim I know of has you build the planes before flying them, I think Squad could take it further if the plane were on their own platform and weren't being held back by the space travel side of the game.

Thanks for the clarification. I still think both could fit in one game, but, with Squad being such a small team, I can see your point.

[Snark]

I'm trying to understand the need/justification for the Vector: a 1.25m engine with fully half the thrust of a Mainsail. That seems incredibly overpowered to me.

The only other 1.25m thing that has that kind of thrust is the Kickback, which has the compensating disadvantage of being awkwardly shaped (super tall). As pictured, the Vector seems like it could be a game-changingly powerful engine without a corresponding downside.

Thoughts? If there's some important use case that the existing engines don't cover, which motivates the need for the Vector, what is it, exactly? And could something then be done in the design to make it less of an overpowered solution to other use cases besides that?

[Red Iron Crown]

It seems to me that the Vector is intended to be used as the main engines on Mk3 shuttle-style craft, for which three of any other 1.25m engine is generally inadequate unless the payload is quite light. I agree that it threatens to make all other 1.25m lifter engines obsolete (and possibly the Skipper as well).

[passinglurker]

I'm trying to understand the need/justification for the Vector: a 1.25m engine with fully half the thrust of a Mainsail. That seems incredibly overpowered to me.

The only other 1.25m thing that has that kind of thrust is the Kickback, which has the compensating disadvantage of being awkwardly shaped (super tall). As pictured, the Vector seems like it could be a game-changingly powerful engine without a corresponding downside.

Thoughts? If there's some important use case that the existing engines don't cover, which motivates the need for the Vector, what is it, exactly? And could something then be done in the design to make it less of an overpowered solution to other use cases besides that?

It's about the size of one of the mammoth or twin bore engines so it seems believable to me. I'm not really worried about OP because it's a single player game, and squad needs to start doing more thorough ballance overhauls anyway

[Alshain]

It seems to me that the Vector is intended to be used as the main engines on Mk3 shuttle-style craft, for which three of any other 1.25m engine is generally inadequate unless the payload is quite light. I agree that it threatens to make all other 1.25m lifter engines obsolete (and possibly the Skipper as well).

Placement in the tech tree can balance that though. If its for a shuttle it will be in the last two tiers when you probably arent using any of those as much. Also the larger bell may cause some extra drag on a 1.25m Stack, it looks wider than that stack.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Alshain

[Frozen_Heart]

I'm trying to understand the need/justification for the Vector: a 1.25m engine with fully half the thrust of a Mainsail. That seems incredibly overpowered to me.

The only other 1.25m thing that has that kind of thrust is the Kickback, which has the compensating disadvantage of being awkwardly shaped (super tall). As pictured, the Vector seems like it could be a game-changingly powerful engine without a corresponding downside.

Thoughts? If there's some important use case that the existing engines don't cover, which motivates the need for the Vector, what is it, exactly? And could something then be done in the design to make it less of an overpowered solution to other use cases besides that?

Its mainly needed to make space shuttles work. We can make then atm but the giant engine bases stick out from the shuttle and just look bad which is why a 1.25m base looks better.

[Red Iron Crown]

Placement in the tech tree can balance that though. If its for a shuttle it will be in the last two tiers when you probably arent using any of those as much. Also the larger bell may cause some extra drag on a 1.25m Stack, it looks wider than that stack.

Kinda messes things up for sandbox players, though. I suspect a little more drag will not be enough to offset having 3-4x the thrust of the any other 1.25m engine, as well as better TWR.

Its mainly needed to make space shuttles work. We can make then atm but the giant engine bases stick out from the shuttle and just look bad which is why a 1.25m base looks better.

Which sort of raises the question: Why not just remove the large tankbutts from the existing models? Skippers or Mainsails were already up to this task, they just looked bad doing it.

#DownWithTankbutts