Propeller engines, some minor part changes, parts for better early career flights.

[Ryu Gemini]

A space program may be focused on space, but the use of aircraft is by no means an afterthought. NASA used aircraft for both research and training ever since its earliest days, so why shouldn't Kerbals?

The gist of the suggestion is to add 2 or 3 new parts to an early research node, and to move a handful of others from later nodes to that node with the express purpose of allowing fledgeling programs to build aircraft. Suggested parts are as follows (naturally, the actual names should be made more Kerbalish):

[Propeller Engine] Uses fuel and intake air to produce thrust. This engine has a built-in air intake, and could be toggled in the editor between "pusher" and "puller," so that builders can place the engine where they want to. This engine has reasonably high power at a standstill, but its thrust decreases both as the vehicle it is attached to moves at higher speeds (in the direction it pushes/pulls) and as it reaches higher altitudes (altitude-wise is based on air pressure). Operationally, its ceiling is lower than any of the jet engines. It also produces a bit more drag then other engines.

[Old In-line Plane Cockpit] A basic 1-Kerbal in-line cockpit that looks less high tech then other aircraft cockpits. It is a proper in-line cockpit however so as to allow easy placement of the propeller engine. However, it is not as strong as the later Mk-1 cockpit. Additionally, it would have no built-in reaction wheel torque, and minimal electrical power.

[Early Wing] One of the existing wing component pieces could just be moved to the early fight node. A small rectangular one, of course.

[Early Elevon] Same as above, a small "Elevon" part could be moved to the early fight node.

[Fixed Landing Gear] A single unpowered wheel, like most landing gear. Just looks lower tech, and doesn't retract. This may fit a little better then simply moving one of the rather high-tech looking existing ones to an early node.

----------------------------------------------------------------

This next section is a list of some parts which could improve mid-game and later aircraft design options a bit. They are not necessary for the core purpose of this topic, but could be nice.

[Helicopter Rotor] A large propeller which makes use of many of the same mechanics as the other propeller. However, it is larger, more powerful, less efficient, and has a good chunk of the thrust vectoring mechanic to allow the rotor to adjust vessel tilt. Optionally, it can produce a small amount of torque, in which case you would also need:

[Tail Rotor] Uses electrical power (of an amount capable of being sustained by the Helicopter Rotor) to produce reaction wheel-like torque, but only for yaw. Its power would follow a similar mechanic to the next part.

[Electrical Propeller Engine] Converts electrical power into thrust. Its efficiency at doing so decreases with decreasing air pressure, and it also has a maximum efficiency (in other words, it won't be more efficient on Eve then it will be at low altitude Kerbin). Put another way, it always uses the same amount of electricity at a given throttle setting, and the amount of thrust simply decreases with lower pressure. This part would be a bit lighter than a normal engine, and have the same level of power. That said, you would rarely use it at full throttle because it would be rather power hungry. To put it one way, it should be possible, but very difficult, to create an "eternal plane" that can stay in the air indefinitely from solar panels and nuclear generators. Its typical use would likely be for short flights punctuated by recharge periods.

[Rounded Wingtip] A small half-circle wing part for placing on the end of a wing. An asthetic part that would likely be loved by people trying to build WW2 fighters and bombers, or old airliners.

[High-drag Wing] A wing with a fair bit more lift and drag then normal wings, intended for slow aircraft. Its lift-to-drag ratio would not be as good as other wings. This part could be the wing part included in the early research node.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

This last section is some quality of life stuff which would improve the ability to work with aircraft, as well as some non-aircraft vehicles, but which may be varying degrees of difficult to add to the game. The slider system especially would require some ambitious changes somewhere, and thus may not be reasonable at present.

[Flaps] Flaps have two states, on and off. When off, they don't do much but look pretty. When on, they add a large amount of lift and drag (disproportionately large for their size and mass), but at a much lower lift-to-drag ratio then normal wings (they are basically just forcing air downwards). When toggled, they go from 0% to 100% or vice versa over several seconds, rather then going all at once (for both realism and to avoid snapping wings off from instantaneous changes to lift profile). Flaps would be useful for landings and take-offs, naturally. A new button will need to be added in controls for this toggle, naturally.

[Flap Parts (or lack thereof)] There are two options for this. One is to implement flaps parts. These would be like the "Elevon" parts in that you attach them behind other wing parts, and their appearance would not be all that different. The other is to simply modify "Elevon" parts, such that when in the editor you can toggle them between acting as control surfaces and acting as flaps. That way, you don't need to make new parts, and instead just place an Elevon and then right click it and change it from "control" to "flap" in its part settings.

[Auxillary Sliders action groups, and add Throttle to the action group controls in the editor] An extra slider or two similar to the throttle slider, and some corresponding default keybinds somewhere currently unused for their adjustment. These sliders would be set up with parts the same way action groups are, but rather then on/off they are instead gradual like throttle. Parts which only support on/off will simply treat over 50% as "on" and equal to or below 50% as "off." The other thing is that since sliders are now in the action groups, you can have the default throttle there too. Meaning you can have an engine which IGNORES the throttle if you want. Perhaps for each action group you could have an editor toggle that determines whether it gets a little button/slider in the UI too, though that could be pushing it.

Combine the two systems (along with the action groups we already have) and you can get some nice conveniences. You could make a helicopter with jets for instance, with the top rotor and the jet engines having two different throttles. The jets would use the default in this case, while the rotor would have had its default throttle control disabled (by removing it from the parts list under the throttle action group), and then would have been placed in an auxilary slider group. The default throttle would no longer affect the rotor because you had disabled it, but you can now control it separately since you did add it to a slider group. Depending what non-engine parts support gradients, you could also use it for flaps controls, or perhaps you could set only a particular set of Elevons to it to act as a trim tab (specifically, one which doesn't affect ALL the control surfaces like the default trim, which could be useful for some more unusual designs). You could even use the disabling feature to prevent specific pieces of lander gear from deploying when you hit the landing gear button (perhaps to then deploy them later with an action group press).

Alternatively, you could make all action groups capable of being either toggles (on/off) or gradients (throttle-like), with you choosing which is which for each action group. While at it, perhaps adding two more action groups for - and = for those times when 10 aren't enough. The default controls would be the same as normal for toggle one, so if 1 is set to a toggle, it will act the same way it does now. If you set 1 to being a gradient action group though, 1 will increase it towards 100%, and holding a button in conjunction with 1 would decrease it towards 0. Normally, I'd suggest shift, but that is currently used.

[Gradient-enabled parts] If you are able to add slider options to action groups, you could potentially enable some parts other than engines and control surfaces to have variable effect. If robotic arm joints are ever added, those parts would be a candidate. The flaps from before would also work. Lights could be too. This can all be added after the fact of course.

.

[Bill Phil]

Yeah. Now that there is Survey contracts on Kerbin, we need early aircraft. A simple straight wing, a very low-tech basic jet engine, and ailerons. Also one of the small rectangular wings for tail pieces. Wheels, too. They don't even have to be retractable. Adding these parts/moving them to earlier nodes would make the early game so much better. I don't want to launch my Kerbals on IRBMs for these contracts, and while some like to do that, they still could if this change was done, because it wouldn't take parts away, only add parts.

[Ryu Gemini]

Indeed. My thoughts merely differed in that I figured a propeller engine would be nice rather then a low end jet for the early flight parts.

I mean, I would hope 2-3 propellers get added to official eventually anyway, but this would give them an excuse to at least get the first one in.

[iliketrains0pwned]

You have to remember though. If propellers are added, we NEED bigger wings to work with.

[Wanderfound]

Supported.

I don't see any good reason not to include low-tech plane parts. The game can handle it easily, so why not?

[MKI]

The biggest killer to any "we need planes earlier" is the fact they aren't supported very well. Yes the game has recon contracts around kerbin that are best completed by plane. But to GET THERE isn't very friendly. For decent distance contracts you can either :

1. Fly there for half an hour and possibly run out of fuel/meet other problems (and fly back if possible)

2. Take a rocket/plane hybrid and get there fast, but at a cost of rocket fuel. (and fly back if possible)

3. Take a rocket/glider and get there fast and efficiently, but have no chance at returning.

Take for instance a Prop engine. It seems all fun and dandy, except it would be outclasses extremely quickly and basically mediocre at doing almost anything. I already feel the sluggishness and limited potential with the lower end Jet engine. Make a weaker, less capable one and Ill just stick with expendable boosters or Rocket Planes.

There just isn't much potential in making a propulsion system that is weaker than Jets until there is more support for long duration flights inside the atmosphere. Rockets are too cheap to compete with in very basic tasks. Why build a Plane that is slower, costlier, more limited and needs to be flown for ten times longer to get to the same place? Jets still are basically unrealistically efficient just to make them useful at SSTO engines.

The lower end jet isn't even used very often. Its only used if the Ram jet is not available, or the current design is to be used only with a low atmospheric situation. Such as a VTOL secondary engine, or effecient trust propulsion for a boat or something.

These sort of parts are cool, but are best left to mods. The game really doesn't need helicopters or even Prop planes. It is a space game, and these sort of propulsions are just as useful as a train and train tracks. (so we can build a real hypetrain)

[harlikwin]

I think there should be a basic aircraft node in the tech tree, mainly to deal with things like this, if there are Kerbal survey missions initially (and I'm not sure how much I like them frankly) there should be a fairly easy way to do them, and in reality it should be doable with level 0 technology. Maybe fork the aeronautics and rocket tech trees right at the begining with basic prop aircraft (now with actual landing gear), and basic rockets and then progress from there.

Alternately get rid of the kerbin survey stuff and focus on space since KSP is about space.

[Bill Phil]

Well, I hear that better aerodynamics is coming soon. Maybe move some plane parts to the second node of the tech tree. Also maybe put the Stayputnik at Tier 0 of the tech tree, so people that want probes first can have it...

[sherkaner]

I'm a big fan of more early game aircraft, but honestly I think starting it at the jet age makes a lot of sense. The basic jet engine should be moved to the bottom of the tech tree along with a fixed wing, gear and mkI cockpit. But I think propeller-driven flight goes a bit unnecessarily far -- what would they offer that a simple jet engined craft wouldn't? Or if you want to take a historical perspective, we came out of the WWII with both liquid/solid rockets and jet engines so it makes for a nice sensible technological starting point.

[Francois424]

Maybe, just maybe well get 2 more parts.

1- LiquidFuel propeller

2- (later) electric propeller.

ok, maybe a 3rd part, wood/cloth wings that snaps at more than 1.5g maneuver (could be starting tech)

I really want to make re-usable drones.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Francois424

[Ryu Gemini]

While NASA specifically was created after WW2, even it made use of propeller-driven aircraft a lot in its earlier years. Most famously, propeller-driven bombers as a launch vehicle for the X-series aircraft like the Bell. Propeller-driven trainers saw use for some time as well until Jet aircraft really got going. And even after that point propeller-driven seaplanes were still used for some time as recovery craft.

An early, inefficient jet part would be nice too, but a low altitude, high efficiency propeller engine would be a realistic and useful addition to early parts. And not merely for completing contracts either. Don't forget one of the purposes aircraft have at a real space agencies: Trainers. They are one of multiple tools used to train astronauts.

This aspect could very well be incorporated into KSP. Naturally, it would take fewer training flights then real life to avoid making it grindy, but the concept of training missions are something that should be considered for implimentation. In which case, one of the training tools necessary will be long-range aircraft even early on.

[mattinoz]

Didn't the developers say that all the plane parts were going to get overhauled?

Mk2 and Mk3 have been done in spectacular fashion so that would leave Mk1.

Mk2 seems to take clues from the Blackbird, Mk3 is very much the space shuttle and both of these sit in-between the rocket parts of the same Mark.

I wonder if the new Mk1 parts will be smaller more oval so they would work more with 1 or 2 .625 meter engines instead of 1.25 engines. Which in turn would require a whole range of tiny size engines to work with.

Maybe wishful thinking but I'd like to see a range of conventional engines and more in the tiny range.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

About that early career Thing:

Take a look at Sounding Rockets, something crazy/quirky like this would fit nicely into Stock KSP

[Guest]

Not gonna happen. SQUAD is too busy making barns and goats.

[spinomonkey]

Eh. I think rather then new parts they need to balance the current ones better. Meaning moving things like landing gear earlier in the tech tree.

[mattinoz]

Sounding rockets are great fun and the sort of thing the stock game really should have in the low end.

[Wanderfound]

A lot of the early-tech options (prop planes, sounding rockets) can be achieved with a minimal part addition (props, low-tech cockpit, couple of small SRBs and nosecones, done). Ditto for helicopter bits (main rotors, small and large, borrow the aircraft prop for the tail rotor).

The possibilities offered are large, the cost involved is small.

[Ryu Gemini]

Eh. I think rather then new parts they need to balance the current ones better. Meaning moving things like landing gear earlier in the tech tree.

Moving some aircraft parts earlier is also something that would be good.

A lot of the early-tech options (prop planes, sounding rockets) can be achieved with a minimal part addition (props, low-tech cockpit, couple of small SRBs and nosecones, done). Ditto for helicopter bits (main rotors, small and large, borrow the aircraft prop for the tail rotor).

The possibilities offered are large, the cost involved is small.

Exactly. If you look at early prop aircraft alone, you would just need the propeller if you really wanted to be low-new-part (and just move a wing and some landing gear to wherever it is). Ideally, you'd also want one or two other new parts of course, but in general the concepts in the topic can add a lot with minimal need for change.

When the eventual aeronautics and/or aerodynamics overhaul does come about, they can further rearrange flight parts.

[Vasious]

Starting Tech Prop Aircraft was my first thought when I saw the starting Tech Runway at the KSC

Trainers and nearby survey missions, later superseded by the Jets that travel further, higher and faster.

That would also give more meaning to unlocking Jets, making the KSP the cutting edge of technology air and space

[Louella]

electric propeller engines would be useful for such things as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Pathfinder

And for making an atmospheric flying rover, to take along on missions to planets/moons with atmospheres, so your Kerbals can have more options to explore.

a solar powered microlight, that sort of thing.

- - - Updated - - -

also, for atmospheric exploration of other planets, why not a monopropellant engine powering a tip-jet rotor ?