What is the most useless thing in KSP?

[DunaManiac]

On 3/5/2022 at 2:47 PM, Second Hand Rocket Science said:

For me it's the tiny jet engines you unlock at the start of the plane tech tree (can't remember the name). They are woefully underpowered and they have not featured in 1 of my wide collection of spacecraft and planes*.

*The term used "planes" refers to anything with wings mounted on, including the time Franco Kerman tried to make a jetpack. R.I.P.

Actually, for a small, lightweight drone, the Juno's thrust is more than enough.

Lately, I created a drone in attempt to Island-hop my way across Laythe to scout for landing sites. On laythe, small drones work even better than on kerbin due to Laythe's relatively thick atmosphere and low gravity. I was able to stay in the air at just 15 m/s, and it could also achieve speeds approaching 200 m/s. It also has a surprisingly long range, with careful fuel budgeting I was able to cross half of Laythe's circumference with a small tank. If I included more fuel, its range would increase even more. In career mode, I could easily see something like this with more fuel and early tech visit most of Kerbin's major biomes.

[SkyFall2489]

The 0.625M SRBs. Maybe useful as missiles, but other than that, I see no reason why the earlier stage couldn't be a hammer, flea, or thumper placed below.

If I need an extra powerful seperatron for some 200 ton dry mass monster of a booster, I tend to use .25M SRBs.

[10_Points]

Well probably the grip pads but idk

[minkar81002]

Can someone tell me what the point of the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector is? It weighs an astonishing 1.5 tons, and all it does is give you 6 small attachment points. But you could simply take an Octagonal Strut (0.001 t) and add 6 Cubic Octagonal Struts (6 * 0.001 = 0.006 t) and add an FL-A5 Adapter to each one (6 * 0.04 = 0.24) to achieve the same effect for 0.247 t total. Or you could use six BZ-52 Radial Attachment Points (0.04 * 6 = 0.24 t) surrounding an empty FL-T100 Fuel Tank (0.0625 t) for only 0.3025 t. You can make an entire spacecraft with capsule, parachute, fuel tank, and engine, and it'll still be lighter than this thing.

Is it a relic from early development, before radial attachment was a possibility? Did the devs just forget that it was a thing? Is it an insider joke?

[panzer1b]

18 hours ago, minkar81002 said:

Can someone tell me what the point of the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector is? It weighs an astonishing 1.5 tons, and all it does is give you 6 small attachment points. But you could simply take an Octagonal Strut (0.001 t) and add 6 Cubic Octagonal Struts (6 * 0.001 = 0.006 t) and add an FL-A5 Adapter to each one (6 * 0.04 = 0.24) to achieve the same effect for 0.247 t total. Or you could use six BZ-52 Radial Attachment Points (0.04 * 6 = 0.24 t) surrounding an empty FL-T100 Fuel Tank (0.0625 t) for only 0.3025 t. You can make an entire spacecraft with capsule, parachute, fuel tank, and engine, and it'll still be lighter than this thing.

Is it a relic from early development, before radial attachment was a possibility? Did the devs just forget that it was a thing? Is it an insider joke?

Part count or asthetics (it looks really good in restock modded style, way better then any jury rigged equivalent made from structural fuselages or anything of the sort).  But yeah, it shouldnt be that heavy given that for the meager cost of 2 more parts over the 1 i can use 3 structural fuselages ad get 03t worth of hardware.  I know KSP1 development is kaput, but the most reasonable thing id do to differenciate that part is give it a crew member slot, drop the weight by at least 50% of not more, and give it small windows on the exposed bits.  Ofc in reality, either edit the cofig if you so please (its a singleplayer game, whos gonna care if you alter its weight to be a more reasonable 0.5t or something like dat), dont use it, or use it in situations where you dont actually care about weight like ground hardware or space stations (or in the rare but useful case of ballast or to lower the CG of something (there are applications where minimal mass isnt always better, even if they tend to be super niche).

[Admiral Fluffy]

The goliath engine, little RSC, place anywhere 7 RCS, and Vernor Engine. 

Tail Connecter A, Basic Fin, AV-T1 winglet, LY-99 Extra Large Landing Gear.

MK25 Parachute (Big drogue chute), work lamp (stand), small ladder, dome light, navlight, and spotlight.

Those are all the parts i find pretty useless. 

Here are parts i use little. 

MK3 Cockpit, QBE, HECS, MPO + MTM stage, all the external tanks, oscar-b, the spaceplane adapters, MK0 LF, all monoprop tanks, all xenon tanks, Radial ore tank, Drain Valve, Spider, Ant, Dart, Mammoth, Flea and Hammer, Separatron, Mite, Shrimp, Dawn engine, Fly-By-Wire thing, RSC engines, Multi point thingy, The bi, tri, and quad couplers, 650 I-Beam, Not rockomax micronode, TT-70 radial decoupler, Inline and MK2 clamp-o-tron, Engine Nacelle and Pro-cooler, A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S. Type B nose cone, most all wing parts, most control surfaces, Non retractable landing gear, and the big landing gear. micro landing gear, All heat shields that don't fit a cockpit, most power stuff, most communications (88-88 always), science lab, Experiment storage unit, the telescope, Survey stuff, Science Jr. (its too big), most cargo, deployable stuff, drogue chutes,  ladders, (why not use the EVA pack?), lights, LES, MK2 + MK3 crew modules, all mining parts, and the flag parts.

[Second Hand Rocket Science]

On 3/25/2022 at 5:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

Engine Nacelle and Pro-cooler

Those come in handy on high-altitude flights. I made a plane that can go up past 20k metres w/o flameout with them. Mk2 fuselage, strange wings, and two long pipes made of Mk1 fuselage down the side. Every one of the 1.25m parts down the side were nacelles/pro-coolers, and it made for so much air intake I was getting 200kN+ of thrust on stock jets.

[swjr-swis]

On 3/24/2022 at 9:51 PM, minkar81002 said:

Can someone tell me what the point of the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector is? It weighs an astonishing 1.5 tons, and all it does is give you 6 small attachment points.

On top of that, it doesn't even allow populating the nodes with radial or mirror symmetry, which really should've been possible in at least one of the planes. And it's arguably of the wrong node size: the only stock station-building parts are 2.5m.

I don't think I've ever once used this, or the micronode, in any actual craft or construct that made it out of the VAB/SPH.

 

On 3/25/2022 at 6:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

place anywhere 7 RCS, and Vernor Engine

• Linear ports suffer less drag than the other RCS thrusters, although in more recent versions the difference is smaller.
• They're also the smallest available heatshields (!). A single linear port on the very nose of an Mk1 (or even Mk2) cockpit is often enough to save it from heat damage.
• They're one of the smoothest stock bearings available.
• Up until very recently, both the linear ports and the vernors were also one of the most impact-resistant parts, and so useful as lightweight and unobtrusive bumpers for small/delicate craft.

On 3/25/2022 at 6:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

Basic Fin

The most light-weight lift-providing part is also the most efficient (+20% over the standard lift to weight ratio). Awesome for atmospheric challenges. Just make sure you keep them in the heat 'shadow' when doing high mach numbers.

 

 

[Superfluous J]

On 3/25/2022 at 1:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

Vernor Engine

Basic Fin

LY-99 Extra Large Landing Gear.

small ladder

I use all of these quite often.

The Vernor is frequently the only RCS port I use so I don't have to bring RCS along.

The Basic Fin is my launch fin of choice in early career, well after I've unlocked bigger fins.

The Extra large gear is great for very heavy ships, especially mining rigs.

I don't recall the last time I used a ladder that was NOT the small one (I assume you're talking about the one that's just 4 rungs that stick out of whatever you place them on). Most notably, they make orbital construction much easier.

[KerikBalm]

Regarding Junos, I have found an additional benefit for them, only since the update where engineers can add and remove parts.

The benefit is simply that they can be added and removed by engineers (and not too many kerbals are needed to assist). I oftne make 2 stage craft, where the 2nd stage craft is a rocket-glider. When it lands, its empty or nearly so, with no really suitable propoulsion system. If I want to move it around to re-dock with its first stage carrier, its a pain in the cheeks when only the 1st stage has airbreathers/ fuel left, and I'm going to need to get both of them to an  ISRU fueling station ot re-use them (such as when playing on a scaled up system and/or with alien space programs which move KSC off of Kerbin).

Wheeseley are nice for thrust reverse, but I'd rather not use them as they are useless dry mass for most  of the flight. 

Well, now, my ISRU fuel truck/first stage craft/recovery craft  can just carry some Juno engines. Upon meeting the glider/craft that I want to be able to back up, I have an engineer mount some Juno engines and small fuel tanks, and now I can move my glider around, have my first stage craft back up, etc.

I can also add enough Junos to allow the rocket-glider to fly on airbreathing power, and remove the Juno's before the next orbital flight.

Their small size and mass that is compatible with the new engineer construction mechanic make them very versatile.

14 hours ago, Second Hand Rocket Science said:

Those come in handy on high-altitude flights. I made a plane that can go up past 20k metres w/o flameout with them. Mk2 fuselage, strange wings, and two long pipes made of Mk1 fuselage down the side. Every one of the 1.25m parts down the side were nacelles/pro-coolers, and it made for so much air intake I was getting 200kN+ of thrust on stock jets.

They don't work like that. Air hogging is not a thing anymore. You don't need them to get past 20k without flameout.

The benefit of precoolers and engine nacells is their high "static suction". I can use one shock cone intake to supply 4 or 5 rapiers at supersonic speeds, but going fulll throttle from a stop on the runway with such a setup will result in a flameout. Using a precooler/engine nacelle solves that problem.

On 3/25/2022 at 6:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

The goliath engine, little RSC, place anywhere 7 RCS, and Vernor Engine. 

Goliath? tbh, I don't use it except on novelty airliner recreations. 

TBH, I almost never seriously use the wheesley or panther engine either. THe panther may see use as an early space plane engine before the whiplash is unlocked, and the wheesley may see use on a laythe sub, or some laythe airplanes that I want to be able to back up - where the thrust reverese is convenient for ground handling.

The RCS/vernor engines, those are great... for RCS (esp if you don't want to rely on OP'd reaction wheels), they really help with docking larger ships, and are just handy for small maneuvers in space, as well as final maneuvering just before small on spaceplanes landing on Duna for example (particularly control during VTOL landings).

On 3/25/2022 at 6:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

Tail Connecter A, Basic Fin, AV-T1 winglet, LY-99 Extra Large Landing Gear.

tail connector A. I don't use it much, but it gets some use for light kerbin exploring planes early on, can also be used as a very low drag nosecone.

The winglet and basic fin are usefull on expendable rockets for stability purposes

Extra large landing gear? Oh I use that frequently on my large spaceplanes:

Spoiler

 

 

On 3/25/2022 at 6:01 PM, Admiral Fluffy said:

MK25 Parachute (Big drogue chute), work lamp (stand), small ladder, dome light, navlight, and spotlight.

The big drogue chute... yea, I rarely use it. Its aesthetically supperior to the radial ones, but really, just one radial chute is almost always enough to slow descent enough to use the main chutes. If its not, you may not want all the force going to one part, and distributed radial mount drogues may be better.

Drogue chutes in general aren't so usefull except on Duna, and for stabilizing planes when landing (again, particularly on duna to keep them going straight), and here, the radial mounts are more versatile.

Work lamps are useful if you don't want to wait until daylight to do certain things. The lights can be very useful, but are generally redundant with each other.

I use the illuminator mk1 the most for landing at night, but the smaller lights could be usefull on rovers... again, if one insists on driving them at night rather than waiting for daylight.

They are also just usefull for making your craft look cool.

[Second Hand Rocket Science]

I really don't care that much if my methods are "dumb" "old" "un-practical" etc. Air hogging may be a thing of the past, but it still works. Ish.

[KerikBalm]

16 hours ago, Second Hand Rocket Science said:

Air hogging may be a thing of the past, but it still works.

No, it doesn't