[1.x.x] Mk1-Cabin-Hatch [v1.0.1] ( 18 december 2020)

[Skalou 380]

Mk1-Cabin-Hatch

This "Mk1-Cabin-Hatch" mod adds a stock-alike hatch to the stock Mk1 crew cabin's roof from witch you can go and come in EVA.
The hatch is now available as a part variant for the stock "Mk1 Crew Cabin" part.
fully compatible with a running career and allow to be uninstalled without braking your crafts (the stock cabin part will just be without the top hatch).

 

Download from Spacedock

Download from CurseForge (No longer available)
Available on CKAN
Changelog

GitHub page

 

It sets "noAutoEVAMulti = False" to allow Kerbals to go in EVA from a ship with more than 1 part !
This part reuses the stock textures to save your RAM, those included are fake of 4×4 pixels.
You have to install the mod "Module Manager" to make this mod works properly (not included, you must download it separately)

BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY:
In previous versions older than v1.0.0 the option was toggle-able in the editor via the part's right-click menu "Add Top Hatch".
There is a compatibility patch file for the transition named "DEPRACTEDcompatibilityPatch.cfg.txt" located in "Kerbal Space Program/GameData/MK1CabinHatch", you have to rename it to "DEPRACTEDcompatibilityPatch.cfg" (remove the .txt extension at the end) to activate it. So you will have both versions of the hatch model and time to migrate your crafts and finish your running missions. Once none of your crafts have the old model you can rename the compatibility file back with the .txt extension.

KSP compatibility versions:

Mk1-Cabin-Hatch version	KSP version
1.0.1	min: 1.4.0 ; max: check here or the forum thread
1.0.0	min: 1.0.5  max: 1.10.1
0.2.0	min: 1.0.5  max: 1.9.1
0.1.0	min: 1.0.5  max: 1.9.1

This mod is really simple, it uses only stock features with a module manager patch,
and should work with many future KSP versions, check the dependency mods update too.
Check this forum thread end to know or report a  new KSP version compatibility.

Dependency mods:
- Module Manager  (not included)

Suggests:
- KSP-AVC add-on version checker

Installation:
- On update, remove any existing older version.
- Be sure to have Module Manager installed (not included in this download).
- Copy/paste the folder "MK1CabinHatch" in your "Kerbal Space Program/GameData" directory.
- Enjoy!

It uses the "KSP Add-on Version Checker" mod if you have it installed (not included in this download) to check its version by using a connection on my GitHub page, read the "KSP-AVC Add-on Version Checker" page for more details.

License

Edited January 26 by Skalou
1.0.1

[Noname115 110]

You did it. You won KSP.

[EatVacuum 53]

Sweet, I have to ask "what the <<expletive deleted>> were they thinking not putting a hatch on in the first place?". This is so needed!!! Thank you.

[Noname115 110]

3 minutes ago, EatVacuum said:

Sweet, I have to ask "what the <<expletive deleted>> were they thinking not putting a hatch on in the first place?". This is so needed!!! Thank you.

In essence, it's a passenger cabin. So you were never meant to leave it as if it was a capsule. Though, with the sandbox nature of the game, this was very needed.

[RoboRay 1,400]

Even passenger cabins have exit doors in the real world.  If Squad isn't going to provide some kind of airlock part, the passenger cabins should have an exterior door.

[EatVacuum 53]

 

4 hours ago, Noname115 said:

In essence, it's a passenger cabin. So you were never meant to leave it as if it was a capsule. Though, with the sandbox nature of the game, this was very needed.

So does that mean passenger trains or passenger cars shouldn't have doors? Passenger pidgeons don't have doors, it is true.

but more seriously the other passenger cabin does, why shouldn't this one have had a hatch as well? And it's been a pain in the @$$ having to debark a pilot then transfer the scientist to the cockpit and then debark him just to restore your goo cannisters and matls bays in each biome when you go hunting science in a plane or for that matter a rocket until you have access to size 2 parts. I don't mind imposing limits for realism, but to just make a part inconvenient for no good reason is just poor design.

But I agree, this mod is really needed.

[BigFatStupidHead 162]

Nice work. Installation imminent.

[fourfa 1,319]

This is brilliant

[Skalou 380]

17 hours ago, EatVacuum said:

 

[...]it's been a pain in the @$$ having to debark a pilot then transfer the scientist to the cockpit and then debark him just to restore your goo cannisters and matls bays in each biome [...]

Ahah, exacltly why i decided to do this mod! No more (boring) seat swapping dance..

I would like to restrict it a bit in career, maybe with the new part updrade system but it seems to be broken actually ( no one made it works), however i know you won't use it to cheat right?

Spoiler

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by Skalou

[ZobrAA 135]

@Skalou, Yes, YES! Thx you, sir! Can you also make working stack hatches for Mk2 Crew cabin? Please, PLEASE!

[Skalou 380]

21 minutes ago, ZobrAA said:

@Skalou, Yes, YES! Thx you, sir! Can you also make working stack hatches for Mk2 Crew cabin? Please, PLEASE!

The Mk2 already has a working hatch on the top, what do you would like exactly?

[EatVacuum 53]

3 hours ago, Skalou said:

... however i know you won't use it to cheat right?

There is no cheating. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. "

[eddiew 4,317]

This is immediately on my list of essential mods...  

[Benji13 159]

Welp, another mod to add to the pile . I was halfway through reading the OP and thought 'If only you could switch it'. Then I saw that you could. Congratulations. This is a perfect mod. 10/10, would hatch again. 

[eberkain 716]

Not many mods should truly be made a part of the stock game.   But I think anyone that has put in some hours would say this one should be. 

[Kerbart 4,600]

20 minutes ago, eberkain said:

Not many mods should truly be made a part of the stock game.   But I think anyone that has put in some hours would say this one should be. 

That is based on the assumption that the Mk I has no hatch on the "outside" is an oversight, not a deliberate decision as has been stated in the past.

[lajoswinkler 3,582]

On 11/4/2016 at 1:03 AM, Noname115 said:

In essence, it's a passenger cabin. So you were never meant to leave it as if it was a capsule. Though, with the sandbox nature of the game, this was very needed.

In every autobus I've travelled with, there was this thing on the roof.

 

It's silly that this KSP part lacks a sideways hatch.

[eberkain 716]

13 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

That is based on the assumption that the Mk I has no hatch on the "outside" is an oversight, not a deliberate decision as has been stated in the past.

I think that not having one is totally deliberate, i can also think that its a really bad design choice at the same time.  The only thing that not having one gets you is a hassle of shuffling crew around through a pod that does have a door.  How is that supposed to be meaningful gameplay?

Edited November 5, 2016 by eberkain

[Kerbart 4,600]

5 minutes ago, eberkain said:

I think that not having one is totally deliberate, i can also that its a really bad design choice at the same time.  The only thing that not having one gets you is a hassle of shuffling crew around through a pod that does have a door.  How is that supposed to be meaningful gameplay?

Because having a hatch would make it easy to use a hexcore pod (or any of the other models) and add a tank and engine and get an ultra-cheap, 2 kerbal space craft. Something for which the aircraft cabin was deliberately not intended. In the current state of the stock game you still get to use the cabin, but there's a price you have to pay for it. To me that feels like a fair balance.

5 minutes ago, lajoswinkler said:

In every autobus I've travelled with, there was this thing on the roof.

It's silly that this KSP part lacks a sideways hatch.

Pray tell me, what airliner has a "thing" like that on the roof? And if you say "but they have emergency exits," tell me the model that has an emergency exit every other seat?

Edited November 5, 2016 by Kerbart
seat, dammit. seat

[RoboRay 1,400]

Pray tell me, what airliner has only two seats?

What you're fundamentally arguing is that the KSP part should have more than two seats, so that the one hatch which really should be on the part would appear less frequently than "every other seat".

And, for what it's worth, the Lockheed Electra airliner had a similar looking escape hatch in the roof.

If you don't like the mod, don't use it.

Edited November 5, 2016 by RoboRay

[Kerbart 4,600]

16 minutes ago, RoboRay said:

If you don't like the mod, don't use it.

The discussion at this point is if it should be stock or not. For reasons outlined, I don't think it should be stock.

And you're absolutely right. I'm not using it.

18 minutes ago, RoboRay said:

What you're fundamentally arguing is that the KSP part should have more than two seats, so that the one hatch which really should be on the part would appear less frequently than "every other seat".

Yes, I think a 16 seat part, with the mass that goes with it (so it won't be abused as a cheap capsule) is absolutely fine. I wouldn't mind a part like that, even with a hatch on the outside. Perhaps we could lobby for that. As it would have 2*2*2 (or 2³) times as many seats as the Mk-I cabin, I would recommend calling it a "Mk-III cabin."

[SmashingKirby148 398]

Oh my goodness, you are a god...

SOMEONE PROMOTE THIS MAN!

This is exactly what I needed! Thanks a million!

[RoboRay 1,400]

3 hours ago, Kerbart said:

 (so it won't be abused as a cheap capsule)

Mk1 capsule costs 600 funds.

Mk 1 crew cabin plus a probe core costs 850 funds and 135 science points just to unlock them.  The expenditure to reach this combination justifies it having a second seat considering the disadvantage of relying on a second part for flight controls.  And by the time you get to it, a couple of hundred funds difference is meaningless.  It's not a game-balance issue.

Edited November 5, 2016 by RoboRay

[ZobrAA 135]

19 hours ago, Skalou said:

The Mk2 already has a working hatch on the top, what do you would like exactly?

I mean this:

So Mk2 crew tank is opposite to Mk1 crew tank - working top (side), but no working back (stack) hatches...

[Skalou 380]

On 05/11/2016 at 2:12 PM, Kerbart said:

The discussion at this point is if it should be stock or not. For reasons outlined, I don't think it should be stock.

the question for me is, is it fun to have this limitation? answer for me: no, beacause seat swapping is just boring, an other way to solve this could be to allow EVA by sending them on the nearest airlock in an other part, but i don't code, so i choose this way

and there are a lot of other way to cheat in KSP

what about this kind of design?

you can't transfer fuel trought the heatshield but you can transfert kerbal throught it and fueltank, i don't see why exept for balance(good reason for a game), especially with a so big shroud that could give a pupose, exemple:

the thing on the side, propbably for electrical stuff ( of course youcan"t had a fuel line has it in stock...could have been too easy )

hole in the shield for the leg ( could be a fuel line too)

 

You want to use it for your base like this? no, you can't, because in stock you can't exist via the airlock if the craft has more than 1 part ( only for rescue mission i suppose), it means too if you crash partially your own ship you can't rescue your kerbals inside if 1 part or more is attached to the crew cabin .

20 hours ago, ZobrAA said:

I mean this:

So Mk2 crew tank is opposite to Mk1 crew tank - working top (side), but no working back (stack) hatches...

Yes, why not, good suggest! the harder will be to find a name for this mod

Edited November 6, 2016 by Skalou