Where are my airplane parts?

[StoneyXC]

When I go to build my airplanes, none of the parts appear in the menu. I've done some looking around these forums and nobody seems to have the same problem. I know I could install mods, but I feel like there are stock parts (intake and wings mainly) that aren't showing up in my list of items. The only parts I can use are the rocket parts I use over in the VAB. I read somewhere that the planes work well with trying to conduct my first observational survey over a certain sector, but I would also like to know how to fly. Thank you for any help, I just want to know where I can get my very basic plane parts!

[Aethon]

You may already know this, if you're in career mode, parts need to be unlocked with science points in the research and development building.  

Welcome to the forums.

Edited December 22, 2015 by Aethon

[StoneyXC]

8 minutes ago, Aethon said:

You may already know this, if you're in career mode, parts need to be unlocked with science points in the research and development building.  

Welcome to the forums.

I feel so silly. I definitely didn't look far enough into the unlocks, I guess you just have to unlock the basic parts. Thank you! 

[Pecan]

2 hours ago, StoneyXC said:

When I go to build my airplanes, none of the parts appear in the menu. I've done some looking around these forums and nobody seems to have the same problem. I know I could install mods, but I feel like there are stock parts (intake and wings mainly) that aren't showing up in my list of items. The only parts I can use are the rocket parts I use over in the VAB. I read somewhere that the planes work well with trying to conduct my first observational survey over a certain sector, but I would also like to know how to fly. Thank you for any help, I just want to know where I can get my very basic plane parts!

The same parts are available - and useful - in both the VAB and SPH.  Although building in each, er, building starts with different assumptions (rockets and vertical, 'planes are horizontal, etc.) it's otherwise the same.

Wings and intakes, if you have any unlocked in a science or career mode game, are under the 'aerodynamic' tab.  Note that building 'planes is much harder than building rockets and that the extra considerations of career mode will make trying different designs harder than science mode.

[Snark]

17 hours ago, Pecan said:

Note that building 'planes is much harder than building rockets and that the extra considerations of career mode will make trying different designs harder than science mode.

Well, building a plane that goes all the way to orbit is harder than a rocket, yes. 

Less ambitious planes are pretty easy, though.  The very basic parts you need (Mk1 cockpit, simple landing gear, wings, control surfaces, Juno engine & small intake) are very cheap & early on the tech tree, and it's not hard to build a plane with them that will fly okay.  It won't take you to space, or even the upper atmosphere, but it can be very handy for tootling around Kerbin and gathering science from various biomes.

Once you get the hang of a simple Juno-powered plane that will fly you up to 12 km altitude or so, it's not much of a further step to stick a bit of LFO with a rocket engine (Terrier, if you've got it) that can then enable you to do short hops up to the 20-25 km range, which is great for picking up contracts of the "do <thing> in flight above <18ish km> at <place near KSC>" variety.

And the investment to do that much is very minimal, just need to unlock a very cheap tech node; it's not much of a career decision.  Heck, unlocking that node is worth it just so you can build a Juno-powered rover to gather science around KSC-- it pays for itself right there.

Beyond that, though, I agree with you-- for going to orbit, "spaceplane SSTO or multi-stage rocket" is a big career decision (it involves investing in a different branch of the tech tree), and I'd advise someone new to KSP to go the rocket route until they're more experienced.

Edited December 23, 2015 by Snark

[Pecan]

20 minutes ago, Snark said:

Well, building a plane that goes all the way to orbit is harder than a rocket, yes. 

... for going to orbit, "spaceplane SSTO or multi-stage rocket" is a big career decision...

Agreed that 'planes aren't too difficult but the reason I say they are harder to build is just that there are a lot more things to thing about - control surfaces, Col/CoM, fuel drain.  Otherwise, no great argument there.

On your final point, don't forget that rocket SSTO is perfectly viable - and still easier than a spaceplane - for those that want to get the recovery fees.  Rocket no more means multi-stage than SSTO  means spaceplane.

[Snark]

8 minutes ago, Pecan said:

On your final point, don't forget that rocket SSTO is perfectly viable - and still easier than a spaceplane - for those that want to get the recovery fees.  Rocket no more means multi-stage than SSTO  means spaceplane.

Yes, but in practice I suspect that 95%+ of the SSTOs that people fly are indeed spaceplanes.

I've never once been even slightly tempted to build rocket SSTOs.  The recovery fees are simply not worth it to me.  I do only two kinds of launches:

• Rent-money launches, i.e. for contracts to pay the bills.  And then recovery is a pointless waste of my time.  If I make 400,000 funds from a contract that requires a rocket that costs only a tenth of that to complete, it's simply not worth bothering spending a lot of my time to recover some fraction of that 40K.  The non-recover option is a whole lot faster in terms of my personal time (and I can use the time saved to fly another 400,000-fund contract).
• For-fun launches, i.e. missions that I launch just because I want to.  And then recovery is a pointless waste of my time, because I generally don't launch many of these missions until I've made enough contract money that funds aren't a problem.  And a single 400,000-fund contract pays for a lot of for-fun launches, while taking much less time than trying to recover those launches.

The real reason to build an SSTO is because it looks cool, and SSTO rockets don't look particularly cooler than multi-stage ones.  (Less cool, actually, at least for me.  Watching the stages separate and peel off is fun.)  I never bother with spaceplanes myself, but I can understand the appeal.  They certainly look cool.  And if you're building a spaceplane, SSTO makes sense.

(The exception to my neglect of rocket-SSTO is if I'm on an interplanetary mission where I have an orbiting mothership and want a reusable lander, either for gathering science or mining resources.  Then it needs to be SSTO because of reusability.  But that's generally not on Kerbin, and most places are a whole lot easier to SSTO than Kerbin is.)

[Pecan]

6 minutes ago, Snark said:

Yes, but in practice I suspect that 95%+ of the SSTOs that people fly are indeed spaceplanes.

I've never once been even slightly tempted to build rocket SSTOs.  The recovery fees are simply not worth it to me.  I do only two kinds of launches:

• Rent-money launches, i.e. for contracts to pay the bills.  And then recovery is a pointless waste of my time.  If I make 400,000 funds from a contract that requires a rocket that costs only a tenth of that to complete, it's simply not worth bothering spending a lot of my time to recover some fraction of that 40K.  The non-recover option is a whole lot faster in terms of my personal time (and I can use the time saved to fly another 400,000-fund contract).
• For-fun launches, i.e. missions that I launch just because I want to.  And then recovery is a pointless waste of my time, because I generally don't launch many of these missions until I've made enough contract money that funds aren't a problem.  And a single 400,000-fund contract pays for a lot of for-fun launches, while taking much less time than trying to recover those launches.

The real reason to build an SSTO is because it looks cool, and SSTO rockets don't look particularly cooler than multi-stage ones.  (Less cool, actually, at least for me.  Watching the stages separate and peel off is fun.)  I never bother with spaceplanes myself, but I can understand the appeal.  They certainly look cool.  And if you're building a spaceplane, SSTO makes sense.

(The exception to my neglect of rocket-SSTO is if I'm on an interplanetary mission where I have an orbiting mothership and want a reusable lander, either for gathering science or mining resources.  Then it needs to be SSTO because of reusability.  But that's generally not on Kerbin, and most places are a whole lot easier to SSTO than Kerbin is.)

At the risk of taking this too far from 'planes and their parts ...

That's all pretty interesting, especially as I hardly bother with anything except rocket SSTOs - and I'm in sandbox where money doesn't even exist.  All my vehicles are infinitely reusable (with added fuel) - as you say in your small print.  I don't see any reason to treat Kerbin differently so my launches there are also with SSTOs.  Since the payloads can be large and awkward shapes, I use a family of tried and tested rockets for the job, although in my case the exception is spaceplane crew shuttles.

For me, spaceplanes don't look cool; they look like planes that can struggle into space.  Atmosphere is not where my interest lies but the important thing is that KSP caters for everyone, even those of us who want to build rockets that go to space, despite all the focus on flight simulators over the past 5 or 6 updates.