Testing Parts Contracts Worthless?

[justidutch]

I recently conducted two missions that together netted me 350+ science and almost 2,000,000 kerbucks. One was to test a nuclear engine, the other to test the KR-2L engine, both in orbit around Mun. I was going there anyways to gather science (another mission) and plant a flag (another mission).

Since my career is on the Hard setting, doing this is vital, though I have not played around with any of the strategies. I'm tempted to use the funds --> science one but am worried that I won't have enough funds to buy the parts when unlocking them. Plus I really over-engineer stuff, therefore all my missions cost more than they should, but that's the way the way the way I like it. KC and the Sunshine Band

[Franklin]

No amount of funds in the game is worth how dull and tedious part-testing contracts are. I'll pick one up if it just happens to fit into an existing mission, but otherwise they're a snoregrind.

[merendel]

testing a part outside of its normal use window may sound strange at first but then when you realise they want to see how the part tests outside of its use margins it becomes realistic - I've seen a few people post silly tests like testing solids in high atmosphere and testing aircraft undercarrages at splashdown.

On the other hand I find it highly doubt that nasa would design a special rocket to deliver an undercarage out to the ocean just to test how it reacts to salt water. that sounds more like something theyd subcontract the delivery to the test site if nothing else. Droptests happen all the time for things like testing a pod splashdown but they dont strap it to a rocket, they build the test rig and then contract a helicopter or something to go take it out over the ocean and drop it. I also somehow doubt any of the shuttle SRB's were ever tested on the edge of space. Theres "testing outside of margins" and then theres "We cant even see the margins anymore from our test site on pluto"

[Dwight_js]

I've tended to avoid parts testing, particularly the "in flight" tests as i just can't be bothered to alter my mission profile to fit in something that offers no significant reward. I also don't like how the tests are completely irrelevant to the progression of the game. Running tests doesn't change anything about the part in question - it performs exactly the same whether it gets tested or not.

Side-note: I also don't like rescue missions. I would rather rescue the Kerbals stranded as a result of my mistakes, not some randomly spawend Kerbonaut floating in just his space suit (where's his ship?).

I wish there were a system where I could build my own contracts (call it "Negotiation"). I pick a type of mission (rescue, test, satellite placement, etc.) which brings up a form with blanks that I can fill out from drop-downs: "Land on (body name) and (return/transmit) science of type (surface sample/eva report) for X reward." New destinations would give you more reward, with return diminishing the more you repeat the same missions.

[psyper]

On the other hand I find it highly doubt that nasa would design a special rocket to deliver an undercarage out to the ocean just to test how it reacts to salt water. that sounds more like something theyd subcontract the delivery to the test site if nothing else. Droptests happen all the time for things like testing a pod splashdown but they dont strap it to a rocket, they build the test rig and then contract a helicopter or something to go take it out over the ocean and drop it. I also somehow doubt any of the shuttle SRB's were ever tested on the edge of space. Theres "testing outside of margins" and then theres "We cant even see the margins anymore from our test site on pluto"

The contract doesn't say you have to use a rocket to test these parts and I use my ssto for a lot of the testing which is a close as I can get to a helicopter. For spash-down its not to hard to design a vessel which can go out in the the sea and try the landing gear out over there and with a few mods under your belt you can construct a chopper with a winch and test things that way too. But we have to use rockets as its the kerbal way. SRB's in space, its not nasa but it certainly kerbal - I've seem planes on Mun land successfully - nasa would not be doing that so why would they need to test jet landing gear on the moon - in ksp however, its almost required. I've seen sepatrons being used as thrusters for space station escape pods (scott manley even used them) - so kerbal scientists want to know the exact isp of solid fuel out of the atmosphere - why not send a tonne up there and kick it off and see what happens. Perhaps Mr Engineer Kermin wants to have a firework display in orbit for Mrs Engineer Kermin's birthday... who knows!

Edited October 15, 2014 by psyper

[OgreMagi]

the simple fact is that some contracts are just simply unworkable. I used the easy ones to build up my cash and continue my missions to explore when I have the cash.

sstos are a great way to test some items, on my Munar mission I attached a space probe to test the small rockets at escape velocity, all in all it a tricky prospect to test them all.

but that's kerbal space program, half the fun is its quirky program.