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

[Atlas2342]

I would really love a hab part like the hitchiker module...

[tater]

Some rocket parts that don't look awful.

Lander pods that don't look awful.

Some dedicated crewed spacecraft parts (if you put them on a spaceplane, they'd explode).

[Trentendegreth]

im after a size 3 and size 2 cargo trunk, some more solar options. moar lights, and some habitation options.

 

[zolotiyeruki]

On 1/29/2016 at 2:35 PM, Threadsinger said:

For a start, any larger versions of parts I see players needing to spam (assuming Tweakscale isn't used) such as the aerospike engine, ion engine, NERVA, air intakes, RTG's, etc. Just to keep part numbers down. 

...

Some 5m parts, especially a cargo bay so that landers built with the big ISRU (for example) can be bigger without seeing some clipping by wheels, etc. (In this instance, I'm sure this is up to each player's ability and preferences about building craft to fit in other craft, I just find that a lot of my mining landers use big wheels that don't quite fit right in the airframe cargo holds...)

A larger sepatron, and if possible, one that is stackable (like the stack separators), but fires either perpendicular to the stack direction, or angled away. Or a hydraulic detachment manifold that really pushes something away.

 

I like these ideas.  One variation on the stackable sepatron--how about one that works similar to the 1-way RCS port or vernor engine?  Surface attach, simply points outward, etc.  That would make booster separation a lot easier.

[Fearless Son]

I would love to have an extendable docking assembly.  

Something like a traditional docking port, but can telescope out on pistons with an "accordion" style collapsing tube held within the frame.  For balance's sake, maybe make it a little heavier than an equivalently sized traditional docking port, with a weaker connection strength.  

I can see two particular uses for this.  First, they would enable oddly-shaped ships to dock with each other.  For example, a space-station could use these to dock a craft with lots of odd protrusions that would get in the way but also cannot afford a large extension for a docking pylon, like a spaceplane.  Secondly, they would be very useful for putting surface bases together.  Instead of having them with built-in docking extensions, or modular ones that take up a bunch of parts and are hard to get straightened out, these could allow surface modules to detach from docking bays and extend out wider docking ports to connect to other surface modules.  

[EDIT]: Let me add another use: docking in internal cargo bays.  Suppose I have a rover that I keep in a cargo bay that I want to reuse.  I want an extendable interior docking clamp that I can roll the rover under and dock it that way.  If I lack one of those, I might need to try and find a way to move the lander up, which is hard to do on a high gravity world.  But an extendable one can allow plenty of room beneath it and still dock with the cargo bay.  This is important because an unsecured piece of cargo in a bay can clip outside of it during physics warp, but as long as it is docked it will be a part of the ship and benefit from being calculated as the same physics object.  

Edited March 9, 2016 by Fearless Son

[juanml82]

Ways to dock surface bases together

2.5 m nuclear and rapier and engines, as well as SRBs

The full 3.75m lineup, including probe cores, batteries, reaction wheels, nosecones and docking ports

inline rtgs, at least in the 1.25m lineup, probably as a single part which resembles a service bay of sorts with clustered rtgs

Heavier landing legs

Inline drills

Several Mk2 parts, like intakes, nosecones, reaction wheels, low drag rcs modules, batteries

 

[LorenLuke]

For service bays to be more like cargo bays (opening on one side only and being stackable with having bulkheads between them be a tweakable option).

A different RTG setup with isotopic resource (depletes over time to power generator).

2.5m and 3.75m SRBs (because space shuttle).

5m parts (because Saturn V).

EVA interactable/attachable struts.

Pure oxidizer tanks (for when you want to rocket power your space plane without wet wings being dead weight).

Higher thrust Ion engine.

VASIMR Ion engine (with toggleable high/low thrust modes).

Configurable resource storage tanks (can hold X amount of fuel/oxi/monoprop)

Impact resistant airbags.

Ballutes.

Core sampler for probes (retrieves surface sample).

GPS (displays coordinates as a tweakable toggle, like how thermometer or barometer works).

3 man lander can.

More lander cans.

Radial fuel/ox containers (like monoprop).

Solid fairings allowing for inner radial attachment.

Tiny sized fuel cell.

Stacked Lateral Separatron (fits like a decoupler, small solid rocket that projects sideways thrust like the Launch Escape System when activated) in .625m, 1.25m, and 2.5m size.

Mk.2 and Mk.3 (shuttle) inline reaction wheels.

3.75m reaction wheel.

1.25m and 2.5m octagonal strut.

[EdusacconBR]

helicopter props and a fuel cell that works on LF+Intake Air

[KSACheese]

I'd like some more rover-based parts. All the cockpits are designed specifically for spacecraft/aircraft (duh), but I feel that there's a lacking in the usefulness of rovers.

[Fearless Son]

6 hours ago, EdusacconBR said:

helicopter props and a fuel cell that works on LF+Intake Air

Like a little kerosene-powered camping generator.  

[EdusacconBR]

23 hours ago, Fearless Son said:

Like a little kerosene-powered camping generator.  

Exactly! xD

[Fearless Son]

17 minutes ago, EdusacconBR said:

Exactly! xD

That reminds me, does the "Juno" have an alternator in it?  Because if it did, that would qualify a small, air-breathing, liquid-fuel consuming electrical generator.  It generates thrust too, but not much and you could position two of them to cancel each other's forces.  

I know the "Wheesley" definitely contains an alternator, but that is considerably heavier and hungrier (but not as much as a "Whiplash" would be.)  

[EdusacconBR]

Dunno if the juno has the alternator, but the smoke and the heat isnt that safe

[ag3nt108]

The parts i feel are most missing from the game are anything supporting the landing and construction of surface installations.  I think I tried just once to use the currently available docking nodes etc in stock to assemble a surface base.  It is an extremely frustrating experience as things stand.  In a non related issue, why are ladders advanced space exploration?  (I think thats the name of the science node that unlocks them).  Spacecraft before the humble ladder?  I always feel like I'm inventing the combustion engine before the wheel!

[zolotiyeruki]

15 hours ago, EdusacconBR said:

Dunno if the juno has the alternator, but the smoke and the heat isnt that safe

Yes, the Juno includes an alternator.

[EdusacconBR]

12 hours ago, ag3nt108 said:

The parts i feel are most missing from the game are anything supporting the landing and construction of surface installations.  I think I tried just once to use the currently available docking nodes etc in stock to assemble a surface base.  It is an extremely frustrating experience as things stand.  In a non related issue, why are ladders advanced space exploration?  (I think thats the name of the science node that unlocks them).  Spacecraft before the humble ladder?  I always feel like I'm inventing the combustion engine before the wheel!

Kerbals are beings that throw themselves to space before figuring out how to do a wheel

[spacebrick3]

Something that I feel would be a good addition are surface lights, as the large, clunky lights that we have now are good for illuminating landings and rovers, but are vastly too big for illuminating things like space stations or bases.

Also, large monopropellant engines would be useful, along with more 3.75m parts.

[EVA_Reentry]

Sounding rockits

[zolotiyeruki]

I wish kerbonauts got their experience when they actually perform the action, rather than having to trek all the way back home in order to be promoted.

[Wjolcz]

6 hours ago, zolotiyeruki said:

I wish kerbonauts got their experience when they actually perform the action, rather than having to trek all the way back home in order to be promoted.

Oh, yes. That part would be very useful. But would need good Isp and vac thrust. Great suggestion.

[Octa]

- hinges for payload bays

- Mk3 Inline docking adapter

- 3 Man lander can

- Crew cabins for rockets (the hitchiker looks more like a station part)

Assuming that larger rockets / rendouvous missions need at least 2 kerbals to operate (pilot + engineer for a bit roleplaying) there are no nice-looking ways for me to deliver a crew to a space station or to get some kerbals from space down to kerbin with a rocket.

[astrobond]

For the tiny landers:

-Just a 0.625 "light" Inline Reaction Wheel of 20Kg and 0.5 0.5 0.5 torque

(or adjustable torque on the reaction wheels)

[Gojira1000]

Hmm. An entire build and tech scheme in early career for .625-meter rockets? With many happy little parts?

And because I always say this - tweakable/stretchable tanks.

[Empress Neptune]

There are a few parts that I often find myself wanting when trying to build.

A 1.25m engine with 300-450 thrust

Two sizes of landing gear between the small and medium, the jump in size is huge and the Medium gear is just about the biggest I would ever need

Oxidizer tanks, or wings with fuel+oxidizer

Small wings with fuel tanks

Radial separators because radial decouplers and cargo don't mix

Large adapters with fuel

Larger lander legs

 

There is probably more, but those are some of the big ones for me. In addition there are a lot of "that would be nice" parts but I don't think they are absolutely necessary. Electric propellers, large ion engines, etc.

[IncongruousGoat]

Bigger .625 m fuel tanks, a bigger .625 meter engine (Yes, really. As it currently stands the 48-7S is NOT powerful enough for my purposes) and a smaller radial decoupler for .625 meter parts. All these things would be REALLY useful for building efficient light landers, especially for Eve. And maybe a heat-resistant fairing (obviously much heavier than a regular fairing), again for Eve.