Part suggestion: Adapter for same sized tanks but different quantity at output.

[Jeq]

I would like to have adapter to connect any tank size to any tank with desired amount of nodes. 

 

Image of custom adapter:

https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/14PsRMlFuzpGaZ5ZzWlIy2PaS4ZjkF0QHVwSqJGLT_p4/edit?usp=drive_link

Example:

Currently if i want to convert one medium tank for two medium engines, i would need to build it myself using radial attachments and lot of nose cones, often movement limits prevents t his so it needs further adjustments.. I would like to have one single part make this possible, if possible all adapters of same kind could be same part but amount output tanks could be variable in part, so there will not be part mess in VAB.

furthermore:

i would like to see current adapters from medium to small tanks (tvr200,tvr 1180c,tvr2160c) be same part but with node variable i could choose 2,3 or 4 nodes.

same thing could be done for tvr200L,tvr300l and tvr400l adapters.

Edited December 28, 2023 by Jeq
picture

[DailyFrankPeter]

Procedural adapter. Why not. +1

[Periple]

I disagree, a big part of the fun for me at least is to find solutions with limited parts -- I especially like it when I find a solution like the custom adapter you built!

[DailyFrankPeter]

@Periple OK, so leaving aside aesthetics, which are a personal thing... I'm worried that kitbashed adapters like these, which often have many, partly exposed, parts (e.g. nosecones half-buried in central core), are treated by the aerodynamics simulation as whole parts exposed head-on to the airstream. This means what looks like a streamlined solution with only 2x the area, can in fact be calculated as e.g. 10x the area and 10x the drag. At least I think this was the case in KSP1. 

Can anyone in-the-know comment how it works in KSP2?
 

Edited January 19 by DailyFrankPeter

[Periple]

The aero model in KSP2 is very similar to KSP1.

That said an adapter like this wouldn't be too draggy because the nosecones are fairly slippery and they shield the stacks behind them. It'll likely be a bit worse than it ought to be but if you assemble it sensibly the difference will be more like 10-20% too much drag rather than 400% too much drag.  Part of the challenge/fun is to build them so they don't get too draggy!

[DailyFrankPeter]

Good to know. 
Would be even better to see the drag coeff. of current craft (like we can dV).

Edited January 19 by DailyFrankPeter

[Jeq]

22 hours ago, Periple said:

The aero model in KSP2 is very similar to KSP1.

That said an adapter like this wouldn't be too draggy because the nosecones are fairly slippery and they shield the stacks behind them. It'll likely be a bit worse than it ought to be but if you assemble it sensibly the difference will be more like 10-20% too much drag rather than 400% too much drag.  Part of the challenge/fun is to build them so they don't get too draggy!

In ksp 1 according to wiki, fuel tanks drag is 0.2 to 0.3, nose cones drag is 0.1

Ratio between nosecone and cylinder drag is very bad, nose cone should be lot more aerodynamic. Hopefully ksp 2 this is better. Now if i make adapter with 3 nose cones results are not far better than just fitting those tanks together. We need better options,  either multinode adapters or further decrease nose cones drag.

Edited January 20 by Jeq

[DailyFrankPeter]

Seems like we haven't agreed whether devs should put more m-to-n-node rocket adapters in the game or make you solve custom transitions using nosecones,
but I think it became clear that the workaround transitions with nosecones should be looked at in terms of drag.

Edited January 20 by DailyFrankPeter

[Jeq]

54 minutes ago, DailyFrankPeter said:

Seems like we haven't agreed whether devs should put more m-to-n-node rocket adapters in the game or make you solve custom transitions using nosecones,
but I think it became clear that the workaround transitions with nosecones should be looked at in terms of drag.

That could be done by wind tunneling vessel each time it has parts removed or increased during flight. Not sure if there is any easier way at current Unity.  Maybe at future Unity versions this has been considered. (Tag unity developer here so they gets this feedback). 

I really hope than when thermal is fixed developers finds some magic way to do this too, because atmo heating and drag is very related calculations.

Edited January 20 by Jeq