What do you feel is missing from the STOCK game as far as parts goes ?

[ModZero]

[quote name='Agost']please, just take TAC and make it stock[/QUOTE]

Pfft. USI-LS is where it's at. USI-LS + KeepFit.

[AndyMt]

For me:
- 1.875 m parts, including a 2 crew capsule
- a 350kN engine for 1.25m
- a smaller RCS block. The stock one is too big and powerful for 1.25m vessels.

Other than that I'm very happy with what we have. Too many spaceplane parts for my taste, but I just don't use them, so no problem.

[RocketPropelledGiraffe]

Electric propellers please! At the moment, the most fun part on Eve is getting away from it. Give me propellers to fly around and explore!

Oh, and maybe balloons to explore dense atmospheres.
Oh, and maybe something like air-cushions, something that can be used for boats as well as to soften lithobreaking of your probes on Tylo... Edited November 16, 2015 by RocketPropelledGiraffe

[theend3r]

Procedural parts, they should've been included a long time ago. They wouldn't need to be completely procedural (except wings) but just come in 4 sizes with fuel combination of your choice and maybe a paintjob of your choice.

[cantab]

Electric propeller is the big one.

Robotic parts would be a great addition too.

A limited range of 5m parts. I don't think stock needs a full selection but a few large tanks would really help shuttle builds look good.

Basically make DMagic science parts stock.

An EVA tether that's automatically there when you EVA, and you get a warning if you release it when you don't have any EVA fuel. Then we can get rid of the bottomless get-out-and-pushing

[GoSlash27]

Another vote for electric props. I'd also like to see hydrogen bags for balloons.

Best,
-Slashy

[Agost]

OH! And bigger SRBs.

Or maybe just procedural tanks.

[magnemoe]

[quote name='Xkay7']Why propellers? We already have jet engines for high efficiency atmospheric flight, and ion engines and nuclear engines for high efficiency space flight.[/QUOTE]
An electrical propel would be nice on Eve and Duna it might also be an light option for small stuff.

[Red Iron Crown]

Moved over to Suggestions and Development Discussion.

I may be the only person who thinks an electric propeller would be bad for the game.

The biggest gaps in the lineup for me are 2.5m LF tanks and 2.5m SRBs. Some larger landing gear for SpaceX-style recovery would be good, too.

[Starhawk]

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']I may be the only person who thinks an electric propeller would be bad for the game. [/QUOTE]

I'm curious as to why.

Happy landings!

[Red Iron Crown]

I guess I think that potentially unlimited endurance flight removes a lot of the challenge of the game, and a realistic electric prop would be really underpowered for any really useful purpose. If a prop is to be added, I'd rather it be dual mode (LF+IntakeAir and LF+O) with high Isp and restrictive thrust curves.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

+1 from me for a 2 man 1.25m capsule and/or lander can.

[Starhawk]

That's interesting. I wonder if making it realistic would be enough of a limitation that it wouldn't remove the challenge.
For instance if it was combined with some kind of lighter than air flight to make a slow-moving airship, but not powerful enough to push heavier-than-air craft that might allow it to be included without weakening the challenge too much.

Still, I see what you mean. Any kind of unlimited flight could have a significant effect on game balance.

Of course, that all takes us pretty far from space and towards aviation history which is not the focus of the game.

Happy landings!

ETA: And I'm another vote for a two kerbal Gemini type command pod. Edited November 16, 2015 by Starhawk

[problemecium]

- 2.5m Liquid Fuel tank(s)
- 2.5m LV-N (seems everyone wants this)
- 2.5m cockpit for those planes that use the 2.5m jet inline
- Giant landing gear to match the giant wheels
- Tiny winglets maybe
- Perhaps a propeller? For boats and aircraft, i.e. it only uses ElectricCharge but only works in atmospheres (regardless of oxygen) and perhaps has a speed limit

Oh, and also bigger wings for Mk3 planes. Perhaps simply make the Big-S spaceplane wing bigger so it fits proportionally on Space Shuttle replicas. Edited November 16, 2015 by parameciumkid
Big shuttle wings

[Mister Dilsby]

[quote name='Francois424']A 2 man V-shaped 1.25m capsule.[/QUOTE]
This one. Almost everything else on the list can be worked around, but this has been a gaping hole from the beginning--we cannot do a proper Gemini-style mission in stock!

[nothingSpecial]

Now as we can have crew transfer without hatch, we can have not-so-Gemini command pod for two kerbals without helmets and with no EVA capability, and not-so-Mercury pod with one Kerbal and EVA capability (the current one).

(And short light 1.25m crew can for one Kerbal for that not so Gemini to make not-so-Soyuz...)

[pTrevTrevs]

Propellers. I know it's Kerbal [I]Space[/I] Program, but the game could still use propellers. Imagine sending planes to Duna or Eve with electric propellers, or launching aircraft or missiles from a prop-driven airplane! People could build proper tiltrotors, and, most importantly, I wouldn't have to clip a jet engine in whenever I try and build an old style fighter plane!

[Kaos]

For compactness I write only about parts I wish for that relate to current implemented features and not for example to life support.

Parts I miss for which I think, they might be simple to implement:
electric propeller
atmospheric oxygen extractor
balloons/ballutes

Parts, which may be more complicated:
inflatable space tanks with better mass/fuel ratio; can only be filled, when inflated, explode in atmosphere or above 0.5g when inflated
robotic parts (flexible joints, hydraulics, robot arm)
Stuff that can be rigid connected to celestial bodies
docking areas: Docking port with huge surface and compatible to some sort of landing clamps (for stations without the need for precise docking, or for planetary landing platforms; the claw feels so wrong in its ability to dock everywhere)

[Capt Snuggler]

[B]New parts wanted:[/B]
Procedural wings.
Radial mounted Hinge
in-line rotation majigger.
size 0 (.625m) in-line mono prop engine.
Electric propeller.
Large lightweight liquid fuel tank covered in gold foil.
larger RCS thruster block.
MK2 nose cone.
MK2 flat tail section.
rounded size 3 (3.75m) fuel tank butt
inflatable air bag for floatation and/or impact
intermediate 1.75m SRB (2.5m is too big)
size 1 to 4x size 0 adapter

[B]changes to existing parts wanted:[/B]
revise models for rocket engines sizes 1 and 2 (1.25m & 2.5m)
revise model for mono-prop engine
revise models for service bays (+ open one door at a time)
revise models for size 2 (2.5m) fuel tanks
add fuel to adapters or make them hollow.
engine shrouds adapt to tank size.
change Flea SRB to size 0 (.625m) and twice as long. Edited November 16, 2015 by Capt Snuggler

[Francois424]

wow 5 pages of this waking-up.

Thanks, that was good read !

[Alshain]

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']I may be the only person who thinks an electric propeller would be bad for the game.[/QUOTE]

Nope
.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

BTW if anyone wants to test the 2 kerbal command pod idea this is a good one [url]http://kerbal.curseforge.com/projects/k2-command-pod[/url] Seems pretty balanced, I've been using it in my 1.05 game and it is great- I think it makes pilots more useful because you can use them for rescue and science missions.

[Ayylmao]

That's what kerbal planetary base systems does

[Captain Vlad]

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']I guess I think that potentially unlimited endurance flight removes a lot of the challenge of the game, and a realistic electric prop would be really underpowered for any really useful purpose. If a prop is to be added, I'd rather it be dual mode (LF+IntakeAir and LF+O) with high Isp and restrictive thrust curves.[/QUOTE]

Could you define 'useful purpose'?

[Red Iron Crown]

[quote name='Captain Vlad']Could you define 'useful purpose'?[/QUOTE]
Carrying any significant payload. Have a look at some of the real world electric prop-powered planes, especially the solar ones.