SSTO payloads

[tutrakan4e]

With all the discussion about using SSOTs to launch things into orbit, I started thinking: Will shuttle hangar bays be included in the update? If not, how can we go around that problem?

[Ikaneko]

I don't think so. Don't worry, however: download B9 Aerospace or similar mods that add cargo bays.

[Tex]

How do you go around any problem involving a part that should be in the game? MODS! The great Kerbal Kommunity has many addons and bits and baubles to suit your wildest dreams, and there are at least four different mods for cargo bays that I can remember.

[Hodo]

With the right application of mods you can do this... and I actually calculated the total cost of this project and it was considerably cheaper by about 2/3rds then launching it by rocket every time.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[tutrakan4e]

I was afraid this will happen.

Of course there are mods! But why would anything be added to the game? Yeah, let's all forget about Vanilla development altogether and use mods.

I don't want big mods like B9 Aerospace etc. because they add about a million and two parts. Please consider a vanilla save.

Edited June 12, 2014 by tutrakan4e

[Hodo]

I was afraid this will happen.

Of course there are mods! But why would anything be added to the game? Yeah, let's all forget about Vanilla development altogether and use mods.

I don't want big mods like B9 Aerospace etc. because they add about a million and two parts. Please consider a vanilla save.

Partly because the stock parts have none of the following.

-Cargobays

-Large enough parts so you aren't building 1000+ part monstrosities.

-Intakes that don't look like they were cut from the bottom of a beer can.

-Airplane parts that actually fit together and work.

But that wasn't the point of my post, to promote the use of mods, just saying that reusable space craft, is definitely cheaper then launching a dozen rockets that are not reusable. But I can see you are one of those players so I will leave you to your wishes.

[MR4Y]

I was afraid this will happen.

Of course there are mods! But why would anything be added to the game? Yeah, let's all forget about Vanilla development altogether and use mods.

I don't want big mods like B9 Aerospace etc. because they add about a million and two parts. Please consider a vanilla save.

You're two years too late to say this. Good luck trying to find any sensitive info about development as well.

[rtxoff]

I was afraid this will happen.

Of course there are mods! But why would anything be added to the game? Yeah, let's all forget about Vanilla development altogether and use mods.

I don't want big mods like B9 Aerospace etc. because they add about a million and two parts. Please consider a vanilla save.

You don't have to use all the B9 parts. You are perfectly fine with keeping the cargo bays and deleting all other parts to save memory. However if you use B9, cargo bays alone won't fit with stock parts.

Also i saw guys making shuttle bay doors with stock parts.

[MR4Y]

You don't have to use all the B9 parts. You are perfectly fine with keeping the cargo bays and deleting all other parts to save memory. However if you use B9, cargo bays alone won't fit with stock parts.

Also i saw guys making shuttle bay doors with stock parts.

You can do that. However, you'll end up using more parts that have a likely possibility of dropping you game speed and introduce errors on physics calculations, since you most likely will have to clip parts.

[rtxoff]

You can do that. However, you'll end up using more parts that have a likely possibility of dropping you game speed and introduce errors on physics calculations, since you most likely will have to clip parts.

Nope, i know it is not like this cause i tried it already. No dropping in game speed, no physics errors i kept only the parts i need. Works perfect.

[MR4Y]

Nope, i know it is not like this cause i tried it already. No dropping in game speed, no physics errors i kept only the parts i need. Works perfect.

Keep in mind that you're talking about a game in development that has an assortment of bugs that happen to some people but not others. Good for you that no bugs happens, because some people might not have the same fortune.

[Kasuha]

and I actually calculated the total cost of this project and it was considerably cheaper by about 2/3rds then launching it by rocket every time.

All stock part prices are placeholders which are only getting some overhaul now before 0.24. And regarding part costs in mods, they're pure fantasy of their creators and will likely need some rebalancing after 0.24 as well.

One of key reasons why space shuttle program was ended was that using it for space travel was too expensive.

[MR4Y]

All stock part prices are placeholders which are only getting some overhaul now before 0.24. And regarding part costs in mods, they're pure fantasy of their creators and will likely need some rebalancing after 0.24 as well.

One of key reasons why space shuttle program was ended was that using it for space travel was too expensive.

One could argue that the primary reason of the Space Shuttle program failing is that the vast majority of (North) Americans only know how to spend money. When something akin to sustentability is mentioned, it's a big nono.

[Hodo]

All stock part prices are placeholders which are only getting some overhaul now before 0.24. And regarding part costs in mods, they're pure fantasy of their creators and will likely need some rebalancing after 0.24 as well.

One of key reasons why space shuttle program was ended was that using it for space travel was too expensive.

This is not the point. The point is that using the current cost as indicated, the same mission is cheaper when used the way I did it then launching the same cargo in a rocket that is not reusable.

It doesn't matter what currency you use as long as it is consistent between the experiments.

[the_bT]

Reusability is tricky in real live because you most likely have to take the craft apart and do inspection on a lot parts before the next mission and all such problems. In KSP however you do not and likely will not. So one more point why one shouldn't compare them too tightly...

Also if y'all derail the thread to discuss public spending and the space shuttle the OP is going to be a sad panda.

So... Is there truly no mod that has stock like looking cylindrical (so they fit without adapters) cargo bays? I find it hard to believe, I might need to try to make them then

If there were such a part mod, what problem would using it be? Yeah it would be a mod but just like 2 or 3 parts.

I don't know how the B9 cargo bays work without FAR, do they do anything actually? I ever only shielded cargo in bays or behind fairings while using FAR as well...

If they do nothing, adding them in stock would not be useful at all.

But if adding cargo bays means also putting in code that is related to the place-holding aerodynamics that part of it is work that will need to be redone when the place holder gets redone. Not ideal.

Biggest problem with reusable SSTO crafts in stock is loading cargo anyways, bays do not make that any easier

[Hodo]

Reusability is tricky in real live because you most likely have to take the craft apart and do inspection on a lot parts before the next mission and all such problems. In KSP however you do not and likely will not. So one more point why one shouldn't compare them too tightly...

Also if y'all derail the thread to discuss public spending and the space shuttle the OP is going to be a sad panda.

So... Is there truly no mod that has stock like looking cylindrical (so they fit without adapters) cargo bays? I find it hard to believe, I might need to try to make them then

If there were such a part mod, what problem would using it be? Yeah it would be a mod but just like 2 or 3 parts.

I don't know how the B9 cargo bays work without FAR, do they do anything actually? I ever only shielded cargo in bays or behind fairings while using FAR as well...

If they do nothing, adding them in stock would not be useful at all.

But if adding cargo bays means also putting in code that is related to the place-holding aerodynamics that part of it is work that will need to be redone when the place holder gets redone. Not ideal.

Biggest problem with reusable SSTO crafts in stock is loading cargo anyways, bays do not make that any easier

Stock it doesn't matter if you have anything shielding them or not. You can just slap whatever to whatever and if you put enough intakes and jet engines you can take it to anywhere in the universe with a single nuke engine.

[tutrakan4e]

Stock it doesn't matter if you have anything shielding them or not. You can just slap whatever to whatever and if you put enough intakes and jet engines you can take it to anywhere in the universe with a single nuke engine.

We can all aggree that that will look uglier than the old space center.

[LethalDose]

To address/support the OP's question: I would love to see cargo bays in stock for Spaceplanes and other applications.

I would refer to them as "cargo" bays, though, instead of "hangar" bays. Hangar bays would be for vehicles, and to me at least denotes multiple vehicles, while cargo bays would be for any payload.

And yes it's a nitpicky point and I'm shutting up about it now.