A bunch of part suggestions/questions

[b0ss]

Mk2 Porkjet Parts

Anyone remember these? I feel like they are too nice to not put into the stock game.

 

Integration of Mk2/Mk3 Essentials?

So this addon has a bunch of stuff that seem to be missing from the stock game's Mk2 system (and also some Mk3). Since this guy's already done it, why not integrate it?

 

Mk2 mini-lab/materials bay

Mk2 shuttles are a really quick'n'cheap way to get some science in orbit and other places. I think that a nicely-fit Mk2 inline science part would be nicely convenient. I was thinking about a mini-lab the size of the crew cabin, but I feel that a Mk2-shaped SC-9001 Science Jr would be much more practical.

 

Mk3 Mobile Processing Lab MPL-LG-2

I think that, more than anything else in the Mk3 series, we are in dire need of a Mk3-shaped lab. Don't really have much else to say.

 

Mk3 PPD-10 Hitchhiker Storage Container

I love all the Mk3 parts, but a smaller crew cabin would be even better. Maybe a little four-seater (just like the Hitchhiker, but with a Mk3 cabin interior) would be a nice addition to the rather disappointing limitation of "16 Kerbals or nothing." It could even work like a flight-attendant galley for passenger jets if that's what you're making!

 

Are there plans for Mk4 and onwards?

So I know there's already a great Mk4 systems mod, but what does that mean for the Stock Game? Mark IV Spaceplane System is already stockalike, so will it be implemented if SQUAD decides to go on from Mk3? What about Mk5? The great stuff from OPT Spaceplane Parts and B9 Aerospace are kinda Mk5-ish...

Update 1:

"Heavy Duty" Struts and Fuel Lines?

On bigger rockets, the rather thin struts and fuel lines look pretty... How do I say this? Flimsy, I think. Some thicker lines with bigger bases might be more appropriate.

 

Larger Landing Legs?

Perhaps some large legs for things like Mk3 VTOLs would be nice.

 

More vertical landing struts?

Like the LT-05, but bigger and with more variants (i.e. legs that come out of the bottom instead of the side).

Update 2:

Mk3 Inline Cockpit

Just a cockpit that's Mk3 shape on front and back. IVA landings would be pretty hard without RasterPropMonitor but so are any inline cockpit IVA landings.

 

Ski-based landing gear?

Would be great for Polar/Minmus/Eeloo landing and takeoff.

Edited July 30, 2016 by b0ss

[b0ss]

UPDATED

[Crocket]

ey b0ss

Nice ideas! I'd like to see them in the game!

[NSEP]

Ey b0ss, i really like your ideas, but give me just a sec. Ey b0ss, Ey squad! Can we habe those parts pls?

[Alshain]

Spaceplane Plus != Mk2.  Those Porkjet parts are SPP, not Mk2.   SPP parts were not symmetrical and thus they would need to be recreated, they can't just simply add them.

Also, the Essentials pack is not quite the quality of PorkJets parts.  They don't quite look good together.  They too would have to be redone to match.

The science Jr fits inside a cargo bay and is more versatile as a single part.  There isn't a reason to duplicate its function as you can already do that.

The MPL function is intended to be used as a base or station, not a plane.

The Mk3 crew cabin is the Mk3 version of the Hitchhiker

[b0ss]

1. Dang. I recall seeing a mod that has redone SPP parts but it was really low quality.

2. I thought they looked pretty good...

3. There's a lot of space left over inside the cargo bay after a SciJr is inserted. I guess putting some goo canisters on the sides would solve that, but I really don't see the point of,

>open cargo bay

>activate scijr

>activate goo1

>activate goo2

When you could just do,

>activate mk2scijr

and with a better look!

4. MPL: mobile processing lab. The name implies it can move around. And Mk3 isn't just for planes, you could use a Mk3MPL in a "Grand Tour" shuttle.

5. Going from a little living space for four to a 16-crew passenger plane segment and calling it the Mk3 version is a bit silly.

You wouldn't call an interstate bus the heavy duty version of a dingy motel room, would you?

[b0ss]

Once again updated with Mk3 inline cockpit and skis.

[Crocket]

Skis would be great for anything Kerbal-related. You're underestimating their power.

[Stoney3K]

Can we have some heavy-duty landing gear that does not have an insane amount of ground clearance with respect to its (steerable) nose gear companion part?

Planes don't usually take off nose-first into the ground or have their main gear dangling off the roof to keep a level stance.

[Brownhair2]

One thing people seem to ignore is the potential for 2.5 meter plane parts. All we need is a 2.5 meter plane cockpit, a 2.5 meter crew cabin (besides the Hitchhiker because that doesn't look good when horizontal) and a 2.5 meter liquid fuel tank and I'd be happy.

EDIT:

I'm having a hard time imagining what a Mk 3 inline cockpit would look like.

Edited July 30, 2016 by Brownhair2

[Stoney3K]

11 hours ago, Brownhair2 said:

I'm having a hard time imagining what a Mk 3 inline cockpit would look like.

That could be something along the lines of a 747's upper deck cockpit, with a cargo bay underneath. How many people would want a nose-mounted cargo ramp?

[b0ss]

On July 31, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Brownhair2 said:

I'm having a hard time imagining what a Mk 3 inline cockpit would look like.

A mk3 cargo bay with a mk2 cockpit clipped slightly in from the roof, with some extra crew capacity in the bottom. Think of the Mark IV crew cabin.

On July 31, 2016 at 0:34 PM, Stoney3K said:

How many people would want a nose-mounted cargo ramp?

You should check out Lack's Stock Extension mod! OPT's K-size cargo ramp can also be used as a nose.

[tater]

Once the rocket parts don't all look awful ('cause they do), then sure.

[Alshain]

On 7/29/2016 at 7:29 AM, b0ss said:

1. Dang. I recall seeing a mod that has redone SPP parts but it was really low quality.

2. I thought they looked pretty good...

3. There's a lot of space left over inside the cargo bay after a SciJr is inserted. I guess putting some goo canisters on the sides would solve that, but I really don't see the point of,

>open cargo bay

>activate scijr

>activate goo1

>activate goo2

When you could just do,

>activate mk2scijr

and with a better look!

4. MPL: mobile processing lab. The name implies it can move around. And Mk3 isn't just for planes, you could use a Mk3MPL in a "Grand Tour" shuttle.

5. Going from a little living space for four to a 16-crew passenger plane segment and calling it the Mk3 version is a bit silly.

You wouldn't call an interstate bus the heavy duty version of a dingy motel room, would you?

1. Maybe, I don't know of one.  But that would still be redoing the parts.  I'm not saying they shouldn't be, those are really good looking parts in that screenshot.  Just that it isn't as simple as importing them into the game.

2. I suppose it depends on your screen size/resolution or maybe the individuals attention to detail.  The details look fuzzy to me when placed along side the Mk2 parts.  Don't mistake that for saying it is a bad mod, it's just not PorkJet quality and if it were going to be stock it would need to be.  Look at this screenshot here, pay attention to the definition around the edges of the windows, notice how they look raised on the Mk2 cockpit, the little nuances like the RCS ports (which sadly do not function).  The one on the left just looks more bland and it's curves are decidedly less curved, it has ridges.  They creators are clearly at different levels, this probably comes from experience and possibly a little obsessive compulsive disorder. 

 

3. That argument could be used to justify a dozen Mk2 science pieces, but the science is considered cargo and the cargo bays are there for that purpose.  If you don't like the methods of activating it, there are action groups to do it all in 1 command.

4. Mk3 was designed for planes, as with anything in KSP people find other ways to use them.

5. Expecting to live on planes is a bit silly.  Even the NASA space shuttle wasn't really lived on, they are temporary journeys.  Planes are for transportation, not dwellings.

 

Edited August 3, 2016 by Alshain

[b0ss]

2. Yup

3. Not really? The SciJr is pretty much the only inline science part.

4. Seriously? I always thought they were intended for shuttles. The cockpit even looks a lot more like NASA shuttles than Boeings

5. I don't mean an actual living space, just a smaller Mk3 passenger hold.

[James M]

Okay so I've been really looking into Space X's recent development lately and while watching a video on YouTube, ran into an idea that may seem simple but for new and experienced players may lend a helping hand. I believe that having drones be able to plant "beacon sites" would allow for more accurate trajectories and landings especially if one intends to make Munar bases. Agree or Disagree?

[b0ss]

Can't you just "Set Target" on the drone and work from there?

[Alshain]

11 hours ago, b0ss said:

4. Seriously? I always thought they were intended for shuttles. The cockpit even looks a lot more like NASA shuttles than Boeings

Yes it was, but the Shuttle is a plane.

 

11 hours ago, b0ss said:

5. I don't mean an actual living space, just a smaller Mk3 passenger hold.

But to what end?  If you want a 4 passenger transport plane, build a Mk2 plane, it would be a lot more efficient anyway.

[b0ss]

5. What if you wanted a little more crew than the cockpit allows on a shuttle?

[b0ss]

I must also add, if you wanted a cargo VTOL with a stable CoM plus crew, you could put the cargo bay between two 8-crew Mk3 cabins.

[ZooNamedGames]

Personally I say we don't need anymore aircraft parts unless they're larger mk3 wings.

Issue is I see a LOT of complaining about the career mode as is. If you continue to add more parts that are useless for career mode once you've drained the science from Kerbin.