4th Tier 4 Meter Parts and why they really should be added

[travis575757]

Right now in ksp there is 3 tiers which sounds good. I feel like there is really 2 tiers though. If you think about it .5 meter parts are just too small for any good use in rockets, they are for satellites probes and other small things. Im not saying that they make a good upper stage but there really needs to be a "real" 4th tier like 4 meter parts. Another Problem i frequently have with just 2 "real" tiers is that i can only put multiple rocket engines on 2 meter parts. You might not understand what i mean but ill explain. Lets say i have some LV-T45's, to make rockets look cooler and better i would get a 2 meter parts and put 3,4,5 or more underneath it. Its nice because you don't need mods and its just cool looking. It also helps if you don't have mainsails in career mode yet. Now if there was a step up like 4 meter parts now i can put 4 skippers on one and a mainsail in the middle, its like i have my own Saturn V without addons. Also another reason this would be useful is because of the booster issue. KSP at the moment has its own thing with flying. Instead of building more vertical stages people build horizontally with boosters. This is unrealistic and one of the reasons why it has to happen is because of how there are only 2 "real" sizes. If there were 2 then i could put MK1-2 command pod on top with some 2 meter parts then the main booster could be a 4 meter one. I really hope this is looked into for the sake of realism and just better gameplay, i know i could just download kw rocketry but i want to play legit kerbal space program, not with mods.

Edited January 18, 2014 by travis575757

[Comrade Jenkens]

3.75 and 5m parts are the currently accepted larger sizes as it goes in a linear fashion from the 1.25 and 2.5 parts.

However I agree with you that it is currently very difficult to make large rockets like Saturn V or the SLS so larger parts would be appreciated. I think that many other features should be worked on first like career and aerodynamics before this becomes important.

[travis575757]

Oh didnt notice on the wiki how it said meter scale and actual size, well by going like that i meant 4 meter so that would be 3.75 Meters in actual size.

[MC.STEEL]

Well i dont see 3.75m parts all that usefull(let alone 5m).

A central core of 2-3 jumbos and boosters with a mainsail is capable of lifting 8-25 tons.

the only thing is see it usefull is when you are launching fuel tankers,whole bases is one go and such.

so there shouldnt be all that much of them so maybe a scaled jumbo a scalled mainsail and some base parts like H.O.M.E. and thats that

[KN_Namida]

The fact is, since in KSP planets and celestial bodies in general are 10 times smaller than our regular ones, you don't need 7.5/8 kilometers of Dv to get into orbit, 2.5 kilometers is more than enough to make it to LKO. Well, the fuel cost to achieve that velocity is pretty low, you can easily make it with 1.25-meter parts for small payloads, while you can use 2.5-meter parts for larger ones. If you have to get to Eve, Duna or even Jool you just need to add boosters on the sides and you're ready to go.

What I'm trying to say is, I know it'd be fine to have 3.75-meter parts added, it would be realistic, yeah, but given how you really don't need 'em for any particular task, besides "looking good"... They would probably be just an overkill. You wouldn't build rockets with those parts if smaller ones can achieve the same goals and are easier to control.

[Comrade Jenkens]

5m parts are still small compared to real life. Saturn V was 10m!

[technicalfool]

Definitely needs to happen, after the various other things that are currently a higher priority.

For people saying there is no use, two words: Part count.

[federicoaa]

There's an actual use for larger diameter parts and it is fairings. In this version of the game aerodynamics are not fully implemented but later it may be, so for example launching big rovers would be quite hard without proper fairings.

[Cairan]

Exactly, later on when the drag model is closer to actual aerodynamics, there is going to be a need for fairings and such. Also, +1 on the part counts. You can have 2.25 times the volume for a cylinder by increasing it's diameter from 2.5 m to 3.75 m... Meaning, half the parts. When you get 5 meters diameters in play, that's 4 tanks parts vs a single one... But that's not the whole story!

So let's say you have a single 5 meter tank vs 3 orange tanks around a single identical core tank... You need 3 fuel lines, 3 radial separators, 3 nose cones... at least a pair of struts on each tank, and 3 more engines on the bottom of the side tanks... Don't forget 3 separatrons rockets so that we have a clear sep at side tank jettison... That's 24 parts more than if we have a single larger tank instead.

[Atoning Unifex]

I use KW rocketry and the 3.75m launch vehicles are my most efficient 'go to' vehicles. Using solely the 2.5m tanks would cause me to create some quite part intensive vehicles, plus launching my 2.5m landers and station modules would be tricky. I would certainly encourage these parts to be in game.

5m tanks I think I have rarely used because, currently, the 3.75m ones handle the largest of my payloads, but once aerodynamics have arrived they may well find a place.

[Flixxbeatz]

I use KW rocketry and the 3.75m launch vehicles are my most efficient 'go to' vehicles. Using solely the 2.5m tanks would cause me to create some quite part intensive vehicles, plus launching my 2.5m landers and station modules would be tricky. I would certainly encourage these parts to be in game.

Not to mention you can easily recreate real-life rockets out of those things (instead of clustering tons of small parts).

[KASASpace]

And maybe some SRBs that actually have realistic burn times? I mean that the SRBs in-game bun out too fast to be recovered. I would like to recover them, so I could make a cheaper space program.

[Wahgineer]

In the end, who wouldn't want to make a stock Saturn V? 3.75 and 5 meter parts would greatly expand are options, as well as let us cut down our part count and build stronger rockets (less connections=less breaking points).

[tetryds]

Yeah, i agree with that, but these insane part sizes should be pushed way down the road on the research tree.

So you just get to use them when you already know how do the task with the smaller parts, it would be more of a time saver.

[MR4Y]

The fact is, since in KSP planets and celestial bodies in general are 10 times smaller than our regular ones, you don't need 7.5/8 kilometers of Dv to get into orbit,

In real life, you need 11/12 Km/s dV to leave Earth.

[Comrade Jenkens]

2.5 kilometers is more than enough to make it to LKO

Good lord. takes me about 4500-5000m/s dV to get into LKO

[WhiteWeasel]

Good lord. takes me about 4500-5000m/s dV to get into LKO

That's what you could get away with on SSTO's I believe, but you need 4500 m/s at the minimum for a rocket to make it into LKO.

[MR4Y]

That's what you could get away with on SSTO's I believe, but you need 4500 m/s at the minimum for a rocket to make it into LKO.

4 Km/s is enough to escape the Sun. SasquatchM's Pulse Detonation Engine was able of that. And that's even before leaving Kerbin's SOI.

[Comrade Jenkens]

4 Km/s is enough to escape the Sun

From Kerbin sea level? Sorry the FTL egg doesn't count here

[Jijonbreaker]

You do realize to even make orbit around Kerbin, you need over 2 km/s? (without factoring in the dV needed to reach that altitude) And the fact that orbit around Kerbol is in the tens of km/s?

[MR4Y]

From Kerbin sea level? Sorry the FTL egg doesn't count here

From Low Kerbin Orbit (Stupid 10 char limit).

[KN_Namida]

Sorry, when I was talking about 2.5 kilometers/second, I didn't mean Dv but the actual final velocity you are travelling at when you reach LKO. In a low earth orbit with a periapsis just above 100 kilometers you'd need a bit more than 7 km/s, or something like that. That's the main difference.

For the rockets, if you really want to recreate so much the Apollo missions or whatever else you may come up with, why don't you just play Orbiter? I'm not saying that it's wrong to ask for such parts to be implemented in KSP, but right now they wouldn't be of any real use...

[Wahgineer]

I'm not saying that it's wrong to ask for such parts to be implemented in KSP, but right now they wouldn't be of any real use...

You have to be kidding me.

The reason they added 2.5 meter parts in 0.16 was because that people were starting to launch payloads that were reaching the upper limit of the current stock parts capabilities. The same thing is happening now: people are starting to reach the upper limits of the 2.5 meter parts capabilities. By adding 3.75 and 5 meter parts, we can easily give people a larger margin, as well as opening up the opportunity for more parts.

[KASASpace]

You do realize to even make orbit around Kerbin, you need over 2 km/s? (without factoring in the dV needed to reach that altitude) And the fact that orbit around Kerbol is in the tens of km/s?

But really, in orbit over Kerbin, your moving at the speed of Kerbin around Kerbol. Meaning that if you exited Kerbin's SOI, you would be either going slower or faster than Kerbin itself.