Science vs. technology

[sputnikhead72]

First of all, I want to say that I do enjoy the current (as of 0.24) science/rep/money/mission mechanic. However, I had an idea for a new way to do things that I think would both be a bit better and would more accurately reflect how it works in real life. I don't know if anyone has suggested this yet or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.

In real life, the science being done by NASA/ESA/JAXA/etc. is more about the investigation of how nature works. Science done in space does not often directly inform the technology that they use to get there. The way they improve their rockets and life support and such is by studying it, testing it, and, ultimately, actually using it, and considering how it could be improved or altered to fit various needs.

What I propose, therefore, is a separation between science and technology. I still think collecting science is important; but I think science points should act more like science in real life, in which proposals to do science are what get money to space agencies. Collecting science, then, should be what gets you money (I think a mission proposal system might be too complicated, so maybe you just have a pool of science that gets you money and depletes over time). Missions should be focused on science objectives (they sort of already are, but I mean that science missions could be focused on doing specific science, say, temperature readings at a specific altitude or some such). So as you do science, you get money to do more missions. And, of course, the flashy missions, like Mun landings, would also be cash earners.

Technology would work differently. The more missions you do, the more parts you unlock. For example, if you use a basic Rockomax engine several times, eventually Rockomax will develop a more powerful or more efficient or larger-diameter or gimballed engine. If you use one of their small fuel tanks, eventually they'll build a bigger one. I think it would be cool if the part itself became more efficient or more powerful each time it's used (as that does happen with real-world rockets), but I'd be happy if you just unlocked new parts that way.

To sum up: Science gets you money. Money allows you to do more launches; every launch is a step toward new/improved/upgraded parts. And new parts allow you to do new and different missions and get more science.

Lastly, I am a big advocate for science to be an over-time thing for most science parts. E.g., if you launch a satellite that takes temperature readings, it should give you more science if you leave it up there for a year to study temperature, as opposed to just doing an instantaneous temperature reading and being done; or if you put a gravioli sensor in orbit, it should be more like a mapping tool, and map the gravity over the whole planet. But that's a separate issue.