Improve the Mk3 Passenger Module

[Capt Snuggler]

While I love the work of @Porkjet, I think the Mk3 passenger module could do with some improvements. This has been on my mind since .90

Its extremely large for only holding 16 kerbals and no other functions, it has allot of wasted volume.

first idea: I would cut it in half (2 windows) and only carry 8 kerbals allowing you to just squeeze in 8 more peeps to your shuttle without cutting out cargo space. if you need to move more than 8 kerbals then add another one OR just put loads of seats in a cargo bay. (this is the most efficient way to move kerbals)

second Idea: add service bays above and below the cabin. like this:

this way you could add extra RCS, Fuel or science parts, even a small rover or escape pod.

*edit: if the doors opened as pictured above, you could put landing legs in there!!!

*editedit: or vtol engines! or wheels! oh my!

thoughts?

Edited April 8, 2016 by Capt Snuggler

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Capt Snuggler said:

I think the Mk3 passenger module could do with some improvements. This has been on my mind since .90

its extremely large, holding 16 kerbals with no other functions, but also it has allot of wasted volume.

first idea: I would cut it in half and only carry 8 kerbals allowing you to just squeeze in 8 more peeps to your shuttle without cutting out cargo space. if you need to move more than 8 kerbals then add another one or just put loads of seats in a cargo bay.

second Idea: add service bays above and below the cabin. like this:

this way you could add extra RCS, Fuel or science parts, even a small rover or escape pod.

thoughts?

OOh, I like this idea a lot!

 It is a huge, heavy part that as you say has a lot of wasted space. I love the idea of service pays too. You could fit rovers in there or as you said extra RCS, batteries or what ever you wanted. You could even put seat in the bays. Economy class,

 It is am inelegant part for sure, and I think at least discussion about this is needed.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

This have been on my mind also. Having life support, or IVA movement inside vehicles could fix this, by adding additional cabins and life support hardware in the extra space. This is unlikely, though.

My best idea is to make it double-deck. That would also help on kerbals being too crowded in there.

[Capt Snuggler]

1 minute ago, CaptainTurbomuffin said:

This have been on my mind also. Having life support, or IVA movement inside vehicles could fix this, by adding additional cabins and life support hardware in the extra space. This is unlikely, though.

yeah but service bays would let you do that too. but yes, unlikely.

3 minutes ago, CaptainTurbomuffin said:

My best idea is to make it double-deck. That would also help on kerbals being too crowded in there.

but still this doesn't help with the huge size. also its not often you need to move so many kerbals at once and if you did need to, just add two half size modules.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

1 hour ago, Capt Snuggler said:

but still this doesn't help with the huge size. also its not often you need to move so many kerbals at once and if you did need to, just add two half size modules.

Indeed. Altough when I need to move kerbals, I either only have to use Mk.2 module, or four of the Mk.3 ones At least it's not my problem, but separating that crew cabin would definitely not hurt.

[Scientia1423]

39 minutes ago, CaptainTurbomuffin said:

 

My best idea is to make it double-deck. That would also help on kerbals being too crowded in there.

That would need extra space on the top with an adapter.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

1 hour ago, Scientia1423 said:

That would need extra space on the top with an adapter.

No, I mean keep the current size and make it double-deck that way. So that there would be passanger-area in the currently unused space in it

[Scientia1423]

Just now, CaptainTurbomuffin said:

No, I mean keep the current size and make it double-deck that way. So that there would be passanger-area in the currently unused space in it

Yeah but for double deckers we would need some space for the kerbals at the top and the cargo at the bottom, but then again it would look like a train:

Either way the cargo bay at the bottom is a certainly must. for exploiting the landing X:)

 I wish we could have options like in other mods (like b9) to remove menu clutter

[Capt Snuggler]

11 minutes ago, CaptainTurbomuffin said:

Indeed. Altough when I need to move kerbals, I either only have to use Mk.2 module, or four of the Mk.3 ones At least it's not my problem, but separating that crew cabin would definitely not hurt.

think you got that the wrong way around. Mk3 is 16seats. Mk2 is 4 seats.

To be clear, I'm suggesting making the Mk3 half the current length with 8 seats which is still a generous number of kerbals but a more reasonably sized package.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

1 hour ago, Capt Snuggler said:

think you got that the wrong way around. Mk3 is 16seats. Mk2 is 4 seats.

To be clear, I'm suggesting making the Mk3 half the current length with 8 seats which is still a generous number of kerbals but a more reasonably sized package.

I meant I either need a 4 seat or a 64 seat one But a 8 seat Mk.3 is also fine.

[vsully]

Why not both?

Make it half as long, and have one with 8 seats and the cargo bays underneath, and one with a double-decker layout that could carry 16 kerbals, 8 on top and 8 on the bottom.