Parts that would be nice to have

[Strawberry]

This is a thread for parts that won't radically change how you build, but would just be nice to have in general. This thread should be restricted to parts that won't dramatically change how you build rockets. 

1.  Medium to large and Large to XL plate adapters, its annoying that you can't have flat adapters meaning you have to directly attach these scales if you want to conserve on height which just looks bad.

2.  Circular XS trusses and circular XS and S Truss adapters! Square trusses just generally look bad compared to  these things.

3. Larger RCS thrusters, for large spacecraft you have to stack like 30 of these things to get meaningful thrust. 

4.  A medium sized fixed panel, would be nice for things like the JUICE recreation. 

Please add your additional ideas as well!

 

[Royalswissarmyknife]

5. 1.875 meter parts I miss them so much (Titan Like Parts)

6. Falcon Landing Legs

7. Circular Solar Panels Med. Large. Xl. (Cygnus like panels)

8. Procedural Surface Mounted Panels

9. Longer Oscar Tanks (to improve frames with less parts)

10. Airbrakes

11. More sizes of Srb's (Like Titan Srb's and GEM)

12. Orbital Srb's (Like Star)

Edited May 20, 2023 by Royalswissarmyknife

[EvelynThe Dragon]

13. Procedural Fuel Tanks  in all sizes and all fuel types.

14. XL Reaction Wheels

15. Larger ullage motors (sepatrons suck)

16. Procedural Wings with fuel

17. Hot-staging capable stage separators (think Russian open truss with blast deflectos like on N1)

18.  Nose cones with solid fuel motors for aiding radial separation to be used with

19. Radial separators incorporating solid fuel rockets to better eject boosters strapped to a core stage

20. Trusses with options to have fuel, RCS, batteries, and internal mounting nodes, etc. inside their structure to make building more compact stations or interplanetary vehicles/probes with fewer parts

[Royalswissarmyknife]

21. 0.625m/1.25m/1.875m Sized Engines meant for clustering with an ability to have some of the engines shutoff when you lower your thrust (like Falcon 9 and NG)

22. 1.875m Sized Docking port for large stations

23. 5m Sized Station Modules (Like super module)

24.  0.625m/1.25m/1.875m/2.5m sized Airlock Modules (like Quest and Voskhod)

25.  0.625m Sized nuclear engine

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Royalswissarmyknife

[Madishmike]

On 5/20/2023 at 8:36 PM, EvelynThe Dragon said:

13. Procedural Fuel Tanks  in all sizes and all fuel types.

14. XL Reaction Wheels

15. Larger ullage motors (sepatrons suck)

16. Procedural Wings with fuel

17. Hot-staging capable stage separators (think Russian open truss with blast deflectos like on N1)

18.  Nose cones with solid fuel motors for aiding radial separation to be used with

19. Radial separators incorporating solid fuel rockets to better eject boosters strapped to a core stage

20. Trusses with options to have fuel, RCS, batteries, and internal mounting nodes, etc. inside their structure to make building more compact stations or interplanetary vehicles/probes with fewer parts

Wings with fuel would be nice 

[KerikBalm]

On 5/25/2023 at 10:14 PM, Madishmike said:

Wings with fuel would be nice 

Wings can't carry fuel in ksp 2?!

[some_failure]

26. bigger RTG's i dont want to put like 10 small RTG's on a ship its to laggy

Edited May 26, 2023 by some_failure
accidently pressed , when i ment .

[Strawberry]

Just now, some_failure said:

26. bigger RTG's i dont want to put like 10 small RTG's on a ship its to laggy

We already have large RTGS? Unless you want a medium size as well

[some_failure]

6 minutes ago, Strawberry said:

We already have large RTGS? Unless you want a medium size as well

thats what i ment sorry lmao 

[AtomicTech]

27. Real Gemini Service Modules.

28. Real Apollo Service Modules.

29. More LES parts.

30. More Thermonuclear Rockets.

31. More Family Guy references. (Ex: P-TAH "Griffin" Advanced Nuclear Pulse Drive.)

[LuxStice]

lookin at these
3, 5 and 21 will be in SORRY soon

[EvelynThe Dragon]

32. Adapters to allow clustering Medium engines on XL tanks. 

 

[LuxStice]

so like XL to 10x MD?

10 minutes ago, EvelynThe Dragon said:

32. Adapters to allow clustering Medium engines on XL tanks. 

 

 

[Well]

1.875 meter parts is really missing, without them the only way to make some station rocket shape is to use fairing and a lot of parts, i really hope we could have them back.

[Lowi_Sace]

I rather want more cutamizable parts and not perce more parts. Already hard enough to find parts. So... 

feul tanks (for liquid feul) : procedural (in length) and being able to choose feul type for tank

engines: of liquid feul engines there is a version for methalox, hydrolox and keralox. Also engines have changable nozzles 

Solid rocked boosters: procedural in lengt and 3 sizes (s, m, l). with a lot of toggable (in  career later unlock able) features 

Also making things like cargobays procedural in lengt would be cool. 

Would all reduce part count, more cutamizable crafts and less searching for right part 

 

 

[Strawberry]

Medium sized xenon tanks!

[Kerbin Launch Coalition]

1) Procedural fuel tanks, both in width and length with a nice wide variety of texturing options. Why the developers made the conscious decision to continue having this stack of tanks  approach is beyond me. It literally just adds parts, and joints for literally zero benefit, it's actually the exact opposite if you compared a single monolithic procedural tank to five or six individual tanks.

 

2) Wings with fuel, WHY is this not just a base feature? Like, look to the real world and aeroplanes have had wing fuel tanks for like half a century or more. 

 

3) Part welding when it comes to wings, I absolutely adore procedural wings, but the biggest limiting factor (and again an absolutely pointless waste in terms of resources) is the fact the joints are absolute gash, and the wings flex far, far too much. You could solve this by allowing players to create the wing, using the existing procedural parts and then just weld, making it one single part!

 

4) Another I can't believe it wasn't included from day one . LIFE SUPPORT! Like for real why isn't this even an option? Why did Squad shy away from adding this in the first, and why are Intercept seemingly uninterested in it? Kerbal Space Program (the original) became an entirely different experience when Kerbalism was installed. Not having life support rewards players for poor planning, or just being lazy, having life support punishes players for not planning ahead. Where are your supplies coming from? When are they coming? This is a HUGE step backwards IMO.

 

5) Could be merged with the above, but part failure! Again, for a game like this, a niche, quite 'hardcore' simulation type game why is something as basic as bugger, the engine won't relight!  not even an option that can be enabled? Why do launch abort towers exist, when parts don't fail? Another Kerbalism game changer that totally changed the feel of the original (for the better). This and 4 should both be a choice, through difficulty settings.

 

6) More fuel types, Hydrogen, Kerosene, Methane and Hypergolic. Each bringing it's own advantages (and disadvantages). Looking to the real world for inspiration, which the game already does. Kerosene offers the best bang for buck, highest energy density therefore smallest tanks, easily stored with no cryogenic requirements. Hydrogen is a pain in the butt to store, but offers the best theoretical performance but also the lowest energy density. Methane is a nice middle ground, that also happens to be clean burning (for reuse purposes). Hypergolic is simple and tends to just work, also rather dense and requires no real storage considerations. ALL of these factors regarding fuel choices, their tankage, their storage requirements would make creating a vessel, planning a mission a much more involved experience that I think would add depth to the game.