Resizable engine fairings

[mrmcp1]

When you place a decoupler below an engine an engine shroud that is the same size as the engine will appear but this only works if the engine and fuel tank are the same width. If the fuel tank is larger than the engine it results in a shroud that is too small which makes the shroud look very odd in the ship. My suggestion is when you place a small engine such as the rockomax 48-7S under a larger fuel tank the engine shroud should be the same width as the fuel tank. I think this would make rockets look much better. I hope that one day this will be implemented. Thanks for listening to my suggestion.

[Sky_walker]

If the fuel tank is larger than the engine it results in a shroud that is too small which makes the shroud look very odd in the ship

Use bigger engine.

There are engines for each size of a fuel tank. Use them accordingly.

I like current system - allows you to attach additional things next to the engine. For example: I've got 6 linear RCS around main engine on my moon lander.

[the_bT]

I agree with the OP, the current implementation of engine shrouds would probably need a complete rework though so I'm not sure if that will happen...

Edit: the ability to attach things next to the engine would remain as shrouds only appear once you place the decoupler. They don't collide (except for NERVA's) so there would be no issue.

Edited June 19, 2014 by the_bT

[mrmcp1]

Use bigger engine.

There are engines for each size of a fuel tank. Use them accordingly.

I like current system - allows you to attach additional things next to the engine. For example: I've got 6 linear RCS around main engine on my moon lander.

I know you can use a bigger engine size but when I build a Mun lander the LV-909 Liquid Fuel Engine is often too big and the rockomax 48-7S has the perfect size and thrust. I suppose that the different sized decoupler could alter the size of engine shroud. SO if you put a rockomax 48-7S under a 1.25m tank but you place a 0.625m decoupler under the engine it could make a 0.625m shroud that way you can either have a place to put stuff around the engine or have a shroud that fits the tank.

[Sky_walker]

What about adapters? Why you don't want to use them?

[edit]: FL-A5 Adapter should solve your problem with Rockomax 48-7S

Edited June 19, 2014 by Sky_walker

[Random Tank]

Why do NERVAs fairings have collision? I never knew why, and it makes it a PITA when trying to put more than 1 on an adaptor...

I'd like this, it could be useful for inline Farings too... +1

[mrmcp1]

What about adapters? Why you don't want to use them?

[edit]: FL-A5 Adapter should solve your problem with Rockomax 48-7S

An adapter makes the engine look better but if you then put a decoupler below the engine then an adapter below this there is a gap in the spacecraft so the problem is still there.

Sorry I got confused about the adapter and did not enplane it very well. Here is a mock up spacecraft to enplane my view.

Thanks for the responses and people suggesting ways around the problem. I am pleased people think this is a good idea.

Edited June 19, 2014 by mrmcp1

[r4pt0r]

adapters also increase the height of the craft, and that may be bad for stability and for some designs.

[Sky_walker]

An adapter makes the engine look better but if you then put a decoupler below the engine then an adapter below this there is a gap in the spacecraft so the problem is still there.

Gap in a spacecraft? No clue what you're talking about. But anyway - if you don't like it this way, put decoupler between fuel tanks and adapters instead of adapter and an engine - this way everything will be in line and a perfect shape.

adapters also increase the height of the craft, and that may be bad for stability and for some designs.

If they'd add resizeable engine fairings - they'd need to change mass too. In the end it's the same thing, perhaps slightly lighter, but we start talking here about kilograms, something that can be easily saved by improving your take off procedure.

I don't know why people want "free" stuff all over this forum. Mass-less items, items with no drag, complains about adapters that weight something.... if you want to play an arcade games - play something else. Otherwise: don't complain that things have a mass.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Sky_walker
typos

[Capt Snuggler]

i agree with the op. putting a small engine like the LVT-30on top of a Rockomax Brand Decoupler should produce a tapered fairing.

ether that or make the Rockomax Brand Adapter and the FL-A10 Adapter hollow, to allow appropriately sized parts to be hidden inside.

[Dodgey]

Because it is a purely astecic feature.

[mrmcp1]

Gap in a spacecraft? No clue what you're talking about. But anyway - if you don't like it this way, put decoupler between fuel tanks and adapters instead of adapter and an engine - this way everything will be in line and a perfect shape.

If they'd add resizeable engine fairings - they'd need to change mass too. In the end it's the same thing, perhaps slightly lighter, but we start talking here about kilograms, something that can be easily saved by improving your take off procedure.

I don't know why people want "free" stuff all over this forum. Mass-less items, items with no drag, complains about adapters that weight something.... if you want to play an arcade games - play something else. Otherwise: don't complain that things have a mass.

Sorry I got confused about the adapter and did not enplane it very well. Here is a mock up spacecraft to enplane my view.

As you can see there is a noticeable gap in the spacecraft.

You are right that if this was implemented mass would have to increase with size.

[Sky_walker]

Ohhh.... ok, your image explains a lot

You should attach it in the original post. I think I just misunderstood what you mean.

Ok, I'd like to see that too Perhaps even in a slightly different form - you know how decouplers have this fairings added when you mount them on the engines? They should detect if the next part after it has a same diameter as a decoupler and if so - add them. This way you could create perfectly smooth rockets not only in a situation like yours - with small engine - but also when ship ends with something else than an engine - for example let it work well with clamp-o-trons or RCS or antennas or... well: anything.

[mrmcp1]

Thanks for all the responses. I am pleased other people think this is a good idea. It would be good if it did it for other items as well.

[Red Iron Crown]

I agree with this suggestion. Fairing size should be based on the decoupler size and the size of the parent part of the engine. The fairing should be able to be disabled via tweakables to cover situations where that doesn't work. (I use the Tweakable Everything mod to do this now, but it should be stock IMO.)

Stock LV-N fairings are awful, I wish they were simple cylinders like every other engine.

[Sky_walker]

The fairing should be able to be disabled via tweakables to cover situations where that doesn't work. (I use the Tweakable Everything mod to do this now, but it should be stock IMO.)

Definitely. I'd love to see that too.

[karolus10]

Actually I never was a fan of engine fairings as they are currently, they only for cosmetic purpose (no structural support) and they got in your way if You want to use engines in configuration other than sticking one stage bellow engine of next stage.

I think that engines shouldn't be used for coupling stages together in all ship designs, but rather use improved decouplers and interstage shrouds with adjustable size and length...

In such case we would had 2 flat decoupler rings (one under the upper stage and second on top of the stage bellow) with hollow inter-stage (one piece) or fairing (breaking on parts after decouple) placed in between of both coupling rings.

Fairing could be created by stacking 2 coupling rings (it could be available as one integrated part too) under the stage and then "pulling down" (or up if you do it on top of the stage) second ring to stretch space between both rings and create fairing of suitable length and re-sizing the ring for changing the diameter of each end.

Quick illustration:

(This picture is bit misleading - actually, we would adjust decoupler and then stack fuel tank bellow it, like with decouplers now)

Also for easier engines clusters we could had "thrust structure" part interchangeable with upper decouple ring and would be acting like a converter (like bi/tri/quad-couplers now) with adjustable amount of attachment points for engines as well as anchor for decoupler.

(UCR/LCR - coupling rings)

This design eliminates need of making rocket engines base as wide as the fuel tanks, making clustering easier and add much more space around engines for decoupler fairing between stages and other things like RCS tanks.

Real (i.e. not cosmetic) structural inter-stages would be also useful for making hollow trunk/service module sections where we can put smaller parts inside (If I remember, there is a mod that add hollow tube parts for just this purpose) or even create fairing similar to one that housed lunar module in Saturn V rocket.

Anyway, if engine fairings stay like they are, it would be good thing to had option of turning them off if not needed.

Edited June 19, 2014 by karolus10