Spaceplane Plus Integration: what do you want, what don't you want?

[Wanderfound]

I've been busy transporting a bunch of Kerbals to Minmus to spectate on the ice racing, and I spotted something that I hadn't noticed before: the SP+ passenger cabin doesn't have an IVA. This is a shame; those windows should provide awesome in-flight views.

This seems like something that would obviously be a good thing to add while integrating SP+ into stock, or at least as soon as possible afterwards.

So, this raises the question: what else? Those SP+ parts are damnfine, but what are the final bits of polishing that they need for perfection?

Initial candidates:

* Passenger IVA

* Toggle-able heat shields (apparently already there on some parts)

* Sort out the misalignment issues with the SP+ docking node

* Sort out the cargo bay loading niggles

* Add side- and bottom-loading cargo bay variants, with doors that have collision meshes: rover ramps!

* Larger cargo bays, preferably while maintaining the SP+ aesthetic

* SP+ shaped decouplers and SAS units

* Fix the wingtip CoL misplacement that causes the SP+ wings to be effectively more fragile than the already too-fragile stock wings

Anything else?

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm pretty close to begging for a Mk2 to 2.5M adapter, whether fueled or just structural. Would throw the rocket guys a bone in an update that is mostly spaceplane focused parts wise.

If adding Mk2 sized SAS and decouplers, might as well throw a battery in there, too.

Better looking aircraft landing gear, I hate putting together a sleek spaceplane and having to put landing gear on it that look like they came off a Cessna.

Also, Porkjet showed some of his development parts:

The 1.25m+2x0.625m to Mk2 adapter on the left is particularly nice for turbojet/48-7S hybrids, but the nosecone/tailcone parts are cool, too.

[magnemoe]

Yes IVA is a must, for internal view its plenty of other passenger modules to use as templates.

I would also want a reaction wheel like the mk2 probe core, and a decopler for an escape system as you say.

increase the crash tolerance on the passenger cabin to 20-30 m/s, its basically an inline cockpit with two extra seats instead of the controls and should not be far more fragile.

Larger parts especially cargo compartments would be nice B9 has lots of stuff here.

large radial air intakes, think Concorde style, even cooler if they was animated,

[magnemoe]

I'm pretty close to begging for a Mk2 to 2.5M adapter, whether fueled or just structural. Would throw the rocket guys a bone in an update that is mostly spaceplane focused parts wise.

If adding Mk2 sized SAS and decouplers, might as well throw a battery in there, too.

Better looking aircraft landing gear, I hate putting together a sleek spaceplane and having to put landing gear on it that look like they came off a Cessna.

Also, Porkjet showed some of his development parts:

http://i.imgur.com/Yfgm8Ag.jpg

The 1.25m+2x0.625m to Mk2 adapter on the left is particularly nice for turbojet/48-7S hybrids, but the nosecone/tailcone parts are cool, too.

Yes an MK2 to 2.5 meter adapter would be nice, also landing gears, I would want some tiny or low ones as helping wheels, out on wings and far back too.

[Sky_walker]

Cargo bays.

Everything else is secondary to that. Though the more parts, and more customizable we get - the better.

[Volcanix]

Cargo bays, IVA would also be great.

Rover ramps would be a great idea, it's not nice to always construct a special mechanism to load them into the ship.

[Liowen]

In game version of KAS so all that has to be updated is parts that are made by modders, or an ability to have fold away rovers. The second could work in conjunction with the first you detach the rover from the ship and "deploy" it on the ground, maybe make it so once deployed it cannot be put back on the craft. I like KAS and all but the function should be in game, parts aside, as it would open up new possibilities for modders, and make updating easier than it is now.

[Wanderfound]

In game version of KAS so all that has to be updated is parts that are made by modders, or an ability to have fold away rovers. The second could work in conjunction with the first you detach the rover from the ship and "deploy" it on the ground, maybe make it so once deployed it cannot be put back on the craft. I like KAS and all but the function should be in game, parts aside, as it would open up new possibilities for modders, and make updating easier than it is now.

Which would be better: physical bays with ramps, or a stock version of the Hangar mod? There's pros and cons both ways; physical allows more creativity, Hangar drastically reduces part counts.

I second Rusty on the landing gear, BTW. They're looking increasingly out of place, on both sleek small planes and big chunky cargo lifters.

There's a desperate need for adjustable height gear, too; having to stick the front gear on a wobbly pylon is a nuisance, and it should sharply reduce the amount of newbie aircraft engineering questions on the forum. Half of the design problem posts seem to relate to gear-induced takeoff and/or tailstrike problems.

[Renegrade]

I'd like to see some more rigidity on some of the parts - the SP+ inline clamp seems to add a lot of flop to the craft, and if you go for a large wing design, the wing bits can get rather floppy too. Not sure if that can be done on a part-by-part basis (despite what was promised for the ARM update).

I'd like to second the idea of an mk2-2.5m adapter. I think I could make some neat looking rockets that were built around the SP+ cockpit and parts.

Which would be better: physical bays with ramps, or a stock version of the Hangar mod? There's pros and cons both ways; physical allows more creativity, Hangar drastically reduces part counts.

I'd actually like a stock Hangar-mod equivalent, personally, although having the SP+ cargo bays will still be a big leap forward.

There's a desperate need for adjustable height gear, too; having to stick the front gear on a wobbly pylon is a nuisance, and it should sharply reduce the amount of newbie aircraft engineering questions on the forum. Half of the design problem posts seem to relate to gear-induced takeoff and/or tailstrike problems.

Yes please!

[astropapi1]

Yeah, we definitely need some new types landing gear. The current ones haven't been touched since 0.15, and we're expected to use them both on small Duna gliders and on cargo planes of leviathanic proportions.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Keep current SP+ attach nodes, cargo bays (openable in editor, of course), the inline cockpit, intakes and the toggleable heat shielding, and the docking port. Add missing IVAs, nosecone, SAS and decoupler . Fix CoL and the spazzy thing that happens when you try and attach a wing directly in the middle of another wing, as well as some other things I'll think of when i hit Submit.

[Frank_G]

...Also, Porkjet showed some of his development parts:

http://i.imgur.com/Yfgm8Ag.jpg

That flat heat shielded nose cone... is AWESOME. This part mod is simply great and i am very happy, that it will make it into the final game, one way or another.

[lordlundar]

I want all the parts!

*ahem* sorry. A little overreaction there. But simply put I'm not going to object to new parts added in for a clearly underdeveloped core frame.

[Porkjet]

Hope you're not too dissapointed about the lack of black heatshields. Having them at a fixed location on the part models just wasn't the way to go. This and the fact that the parts are now symmetric increases freedom of building quite considerably.

[Guest]

Spaceplane Plus Integration: what do you want, what don't you want?

You're kidding, right?

[Wanderfound]

Hope you're not too dissapointed about the lack of black heatshields. Having them at a fixed location on the part models just wasn't the way to go. This and the fact that the parts are now symmetric increases freedom of building quite considerably.

BTW, I tried to make this clear in the phrasing of the original post, but in just in case it didn't come through: absolutely not intending any criticism of you or SP+ with this. Love your work; thanks.

I'm not bothered about the heatshields, but I will miss the fashionable gothy blackness of them. You could do some interestingly aesthetic things when building vertical rockets from SP+ parts by carefully arranging which side was visible in each bit.

Anyone want to join me in campaigning for a stockified Kerbpaint equivalent in 0.26?

[Wanderfound]

You're kidding, right?

Thinking more of "what don't you want them to mess up?" rather than "which bits of SP+ do you think should be inexplicably discarded?".

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm not bothered about the heatshields, but I will miss the fashionable gothy blackness of them. You could do some interestingly aesthetic things when building vertical rockets from SP+ parts by carefully arranging which side was visible in each bit.

I know you've seen this Wanderfound, but I can't help but share it again as it looks unlike anything else I've built:

[Wanderfound]

I know you've seen this Wanderfound, but I can't help but share it again as it looks unlike anything else I've built:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61004449/KSP/SP%2B/screenshot141.png

Yup.

If you can't think of interesting uses for SP+ that aren't spaceplanes, then you have failed to comprehend the true Kerbal way.

Planning on taking four of these to the Minmus ice races for use as start/finish line marker posts, BTW.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Wallace]

One thing I don't want is 18 bazzillion very slightly different parts. We need enough parts to give us a good range of options, but not so many that we have page after page of variations.

[Razz]

I want it all and I want it now! I've seen the mod and I love it. I'm so glad Squad has decided to include mod integration in their releases. Mostly what I like is:

1 High alt air intake

2 Cargo hold

3 Propellers - electric so we can fly them on Eve/Duna

[Wjolcz]

Hope you're not too dissapointed about the lack of black heatshields. Having them at a fixed location on the part models just wasn't the way to go. This and the fact that the parts are now symmetric increases freedom of building quite considerably.

No worries. When I first saw them I thought they looked even better without the heatshields. Although it would be nice if someday, when the DRE is included into stock game, they would be toggleable.

Really hoping to see cargo bay ramps for rovers. Won't be dissapointed if it does not make it way into .25, though.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Veeltch

[Wanderfound]

One thing I don't want is 18 bazzillion very slightly different parts. We need enough parts to give us a good range of options, but not so many that we have page after page of variations.

Better organisation in the VAB/SPH menus makes most of that issue go away, however. Sort by theme, sort by most used, customisable ordering and show/hide options, making the damned names visible while you're looking through the parts (the pictures are too small to see properly anyway, just give me a list with columns for name/cost/weight/thrust/ISP/etc), fixing the misbehaving pop-up part info screens that obscure what's behind them and refuse to go away, etc.

My preferences aren't too far off yours; I uninstalled KW rocketry about ten minutes after getting it because I just didn't need that much clutter. But it was the clutter that was the problem, not the parts.

Whether it's parts or contracts or difficulty modes or whatever, I'll reliably vote for expanding options as much as possible; let everyone play the game that they want to play. But smooth interface design is a key part of making that work.

[tater]

I'm not terribly keen on spaceplanes currently because they seem too… optimistic. That said, pork jet's models make me want to anyway, lol. I'd love to see a rocket cargo bay.

[Sky_walker]

Better organisation in the VAB/SPH menus makes most of that issue go away, however. Sort by theme, sort by most used, customisable ordering and show/hide options, making the damned names visible while you're looking through the parts (the pictures are too small to see properly anyway, just give me a list with columns for name/cost/weight/thrust/ISP/etc), fixing the misbehaving pop-up part info screens that obscure what's behind them and refuse to go away, etc.

My preferences aren't too far off yours; I uninstalled KW rocketry about ten minutes after getting it because I just didn't need that much clutter. But it was the clutter that was the problem, not the parts.

Whether it's parts or contracts or difficulty modes or whatever, I'll reliably vote for expanding options as much as possible; let everyone play the game that they want to play. But smooth interface design is a key part of making that work.

Search. Just add search and it'll solve good 99% of issues.

I type "tank" or "fuel" - I want to see all fuel tanks.

I type "mk 1" - I want to see all spaceplane parts in MK1 shape

I type "engine" - I want to see all engines, including Ion, Rockets, Turbojets, etc. (and again: why the heck Ion isn't in a propulsion tab?!)

I type "energy" - I want to see all solar panels, RTG and batteries (everything that's main function is either producing or storing the energy)

And the combinations: "rocket engines", etc. etc.

Yes - it'd require SQUAD to spend some time trying to figure out a base of keywords and then tag all of the parts appropriately, but damn - this would resolve good 99% of the issues people ever had with finding parts in KSP.

One thing I don't want is 18 bazzillion very slightly different parts. We need enough parts to give us a good range of options, but not so many that we have page after page of variations.

You're complaining about something that isn't a problem nor will be in next 20 years or so. We don't even have a full set of existing parts for all radial sizes. So prepare for many, many more items ahead. And the stuff they add through SP+ was long due to be released into the game - they're all logical components that make perfect sense and are NOT just a "variations" on the existing stuff. Rather - a whole new future for space planes.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Sky_walker