Have you ever built a craft, and then asked yourself why you ever built it?

[KerikBalm]

As the title says: Have you ever built a craft, and then asked yourself why you ever built it?

If so share your story. Here's my story of how I just build a few jet variants, and ended up with just about the most flawed concept and useless craft I think I've made in KSP (to be sure, I've made stupid designs before... but they were trying to achieve a concept that made more sense)

So 2 weeks ago I lost most of my files due to a corrupted hard-drive (those not lost were hosted on dropbox, or a pretty old backup), and I set about re-making many designs I like to use. First this was stuff I actually used, like heavy cargo SSTOs, expendable rockets of a given payload range for a 3x rescale, rover modules that can deploy from a mk3 cargobay+ramp, etc.

Then I decided to not just recreate what I lost, but make some new designs (deployable and recoverable rovers not based on the mk3 cargosystem).

Then... I thought I'd go even further, and thought of the XF-85 Goblin:

A jet fighter designed to fit in the bomb bay of a B-29, - I was going to make jets that could deploy from mk3 cargobays and then return into them...

I did succeed in making multiple designs which could do this... but... when I started to refine them for actual use, I asked myself "What would I actually use these for?"

I had a Wheesley powered variant. I was thinking that an SSTO (playing on 3x here, so they are more specialized designs) may have poor handling, high landing speeds, limited landing places, a poor turning radius... so being able to deploy a smaller low speed jet could allow for exploration of harder to reach places (like flying around in the cauldera of a volcano on the mod-planet Rald)... the problem was that a design that fits into a mk3 cargobay does not meet this criteria. Its landing gear has a very narrow track, and it had a rather high landing speed due to its very short wings (although with stock KSP aero, and part clipping, I could make it work, but I don't abuse part clipping in my designs).

Then I figured, OK, I'll make the mk3 deployable jet into the SSTO. Then  the mk3 craft could be something like this for trips around the surface:

In the past I've sent 2 planes to laythe, one to ferry stuff to and from orbit, and another with panthers and wheesleys (so it can back up), lots of wing area, the ability to land on water, etc, for ferrying things to different islands that may be hard for the SSTO to reach

Spoiler

So, it would be like that, except the non-space plane would carry the spaceplane... but then I though... why? The spaceplane would still need to land near a flat equatorial place, probably launch from it too (in my 3x game, the spaceplane dV margins are rather low). So the sub-orbital plane would still need to fly back and forth from SSTO suitable landing locations. Its an SSTO, it launches and lands on its own... what the heck is the purpose of making it able to deploy from and recover into a mk3 cargobay? All I've done is make a plane that doesn't do its job as well, and can be moved by a mk3 cargo craft to locations where it isn't of any use.

Why did I ever think this was a good idea?

Some of the craft in question:

Spoiler

What would I ever use these for?

This could barely maintain altitude when flying over this crater rim, it could not turn much without losing significant altitude. It did not perform better than SSTOs, it also had horrible stability when landing.

 

This could barely make orbit on 3x Rald, and its stability when touching down and decelerating was atrocious. It was so bad that I put a drogue chute at the rear to help, which meant it needed to be serviced by an engineer between uses, in addition to requiring a refuel after each use.

But hey.... they could fit in a mk3 cargobay, which was important for... reasons...

 

Edited February 11, 2018 by KerikBalm

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Crafts with no practical use are my favorite kind!

[Gargamel]

What I hate is when I make a series of planes or rockets trying to work out a design.  I end up over the course of a week or so naming them different things.  Cool stylish names, like "Gull".  Then 4 months later after I take a break from KSP, I have no idea what plane can do what exactly.  So instead of booting up a premade design I have to fufill a contract, I end up re-testing each design, not liking any of them, and starting from scratch.   The I started naming my craft things like MAV (Munar ascent vehicle, for shuttling between Kerbin and the Muns) or SRV (Space rescue vehicle), and then I end up with all these acronyms I can't remember they mean, so I have to go through the whole process again. 

[SupperRobin6394]

"Have you ever built a craft, and then asked yourself why you ever built it?"

Pretty much half of my creations.

[Superfluous J]

I don't think I've ever done this. Ever. Every single trip to the VAB or SPH has been with a goal in mind. Even if that goal was "Look like the space shuttle" or "Crash into the Astronaut Complex but not the VAB" I always had a goal.

I don't even know how to build a rocket without a purpose.

[Guest]

I'll just leave this here.

It's a miniature jet... with unicycle landing gear. It's a lot of fun to fly and can land anywhere. And take off from anywhere. Where there's air, anyway.

(I did think of a mission for it afterwards, but it most definitely started out in the "because why not?" category.)

[KerikBalm]

Oh, but those are super fun... I was designing on of those for ferrying crew across islands on laythe, or just scouting landing locations for bigger craft... working out how to refuel it was difficult though:

Spoiler

Modified, larger wings, had to refuel at sea with a claw

I recently made one using the most basic steerable non-retractable landing gear (a set of 3 of them... no brakes... so... drogue chute maybe?).

I also tried to make a 0.625m based SSTO, as a drone SSTO for laythe... for uh... I guess a tiny robot lander to get surface/atmospheric science from laythe on the cheap.

I also made a kerbin capable version of it, using a trolley/sled for launching. IIRC, or was going to come down on the intake or something/skid along for a landing... I forget... I know it could just do a water landing near KSC for ~98% recovery.

Spoiler

It did use a bit of part clipping exploits though.

But I don't consider these as dumb as the aircraft that fit in the mk3 bay... they are either light weight kerbal transports, scouting /science collection vehicles, or contract completers (like having a 0.625m SSTO to grab a science in orbit  contract if you don't want to leave sats up there that clutter your flight list and serve no purpose except to wait for those contracts).

-or some of these designs I know serve no purpose (like my neutrally buoyant laythe sub), but I knew it was a novelty from the start.

I'm talking about designs/concepts that you started as if you thought that you would seriously use them, only to realize it was a ridiculous concept.