Jump to content

[1.1.2] K2 Command Pod: Two Kerbal stock-alike pod (v1.4)

jfjohnny5

By jfjohnny5
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

parrots

parrots

Posted
Posted
Heya,

Love this mod - especially useful with Nehemia's KEES experiments which require an Engineer.

Not to derail the thread, but do you have these working with 1.0? I ran into issues when I tested it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
micha

micha

Posted
Posted
Not to derail the thread, but do you have these working with 1.0? I ran into issues when I tested it.

<OT> Yes - see here. Testing and feedback very welcome. </OT>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just a suggestion - perhaps move the pod one tier down to "Flight Control"?

In its current node "Advanced Flight Control" means it's only 1 tier away from the Mk1-2 pod, but 4 away from the initial Mk1 pod. Seems like the early game has too much of a gap until you can fly with multiple Kerbals, and now that Kerbal Roles are important as well as Rescue and Tourist contracts are available very early on this pod could fill the gap very nicely.

In fact, to put it right in the middle, it would need to be two tiers lower, but there doesn't seem to be a relevant node for it.

I've been considering this. I'm playing through my own Hard Mode Career and I'm feeling like the K2 might come a little late. I'm still not 100% sold on moving it up sooner though (however its an easy change if you want to move it for your own game - just edit the CFG file). But I would be interested in hearing some other thoughts on its placement in the tech tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeadHunter67

HeadHunter67

Posted
Posted

I would also recommend moving it farther down the tech tree, as it's almost too late to be useful for its primary purpose.

I have noticed another issue with it - that being how heat affects components on the outside of the capsule. I'm not talking about stuff that extends past the diameter of the heat shield, I am concerned with battery packs (or radial chutes) partially embedded into the narrower cylinder near the nose, and a parachute that is on the nose of the capsule. Often times, the parachute will burn up and be destroyed - having never been deployed and usually just before the fire effects end and the mach effects begin. There should be no reason these parts should be subjected to any re-entry heat, especially considering the ablator only loses a few points from a normal low orbit.

Until I discover why this is happening, I can no longer use a capsule that may result in the death of its crew. Any ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smunisto

smunisto

Posted
Posted

The only thing that bothers me about the K2 is that it is not proportional to Kerbal actual size, while all crew pods more or less are. It is more an immersion break, than a real hassle, but it just bugs me sometimes when I EVA and see that the Kerbal on the hatch is almost as wide as the pod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeadHunter67

HeadHunter67

Posted
Posted
it just bugs me sometimes when I EVA and see that the Kerbal on the hatch is almost as wide as the pod.

If you've ever seen an actual Gemini capsule up-close in person, you wouldn't think that any more. They're smaller than a sub-compact car. You'd honestly be surprised that two people could fit in there for four days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rockowwc

rockowwc

Posted
Posted
Heya,

Love this mod - especially useful with Nehemia's KEES experiments which require an Engineer.

Just a suggestion - perhaps move the pod one tier down to "Flight Control"?

In its current node "Advanced Flight Control" means it's only 1 tier away from the Mk1-2 pod, but 4 away from the initial Mk1 pod. Seems like the early game has too much of a gap until you can fly with multiple Kerbals, and now that Kerbal Roles are important as well as Rescue and Tourist contracts are available very early on this pod could fill the gap very nicely.

In fact, to put it right in the middle, it would need to be two tiers lower, but there doesn't seem to be a relevant node for it.

+ 1 to this.. Just unlocked this in my 1.0.2 career game since installing it.. Love it, its gone onto my must have mods list.

I have to agree through it would be nicer to unlock it a tier or so earlier as its perfect for KEES contract which unlock earlier, but use kis and need an engineer to attach them as said..

Also perfect for the single tourist missions..

Rocko

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I would also recommend moving it farther down the tech tree, as it's almost too late to be useful for its primary purpose.

I have noticed another issue with it - that being how heat affects components on the outside of the capsule. I'm not talking about stuff that extends past the diameter of the heat shield, I am concerned with battery packs (or radial chutes) partially embedded into the narrower cylinder near the nose, and a parachute that is on the nose of the capsule. Often times, the parachute will burn up and be destroyed - having never been deployed and usually just before the fire effects end and the mach effects begin. There should be no reason these parts should be subjected to any re-entry heat, especially considering the ablator only loses a few points from a normal low orbit.

Until I discover why this is happening, I can no longer use a capsule that may result in the death of its crew. Any ideas?

Hmmm, I honestly haven't seen that in my playthrough. I'm not aware of any special setup related to the new aero and heat model. My understanding is that heating is based on the cross section profile of what's "visible" as the capsule is flying. In other words, it should just be based on the geometry. The nose-mounted parachute especially puzzles me.

Is anyone else experiencing issues with occluded parts overheating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmashBrown

SmashBrown

Posted
Posted

Thanks for the part, it really fits the "niche" well for a 2 man pod. Is there any chance you could provide a .cfg with it to put it inot the community tech tree, in the "simple command module" node?

Also i think it should be in flight control, not advanced flight control. Just my personal opinion. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KerbMav

KerbMav

Posted
Posted
This pod does NOT look good on the 1.25 meter decouplers. Maybe because the decouplers don't look nice.

The stock decouplers - escpecially the monstrous 2.5m one - never appealed to me.

I think I was using those from ProcFairings, gotta take a look, now that I remember.

If you've ever seen an actual Gemini capsule up-close in person, you wouldn't think that any more. They're smaller than a sub-compact car. You'd honestly be surprised that two people could fit in there for four days.

The helmets of Grissom and Young were supposedly small enough ... :wink:

But lets wait how the IVA looks like when he finishes it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The helmets of Grissom and Young were supposedly small enough ... :wink:

But lets wait how the IVA looks like when he finishes it. :)

Yeah... Anyone know how to get in touch with The Doctor? I think I may need his help getting everything to fit. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Meridius

Meridius

Posted
Posted
If you've ever seen an actual Gemini capsule up-close in person, you wouldn't think that any more. They're smaller than a sub-compact car. You'd honestly be surprised that two people could fit in there for four days.

I saw this (Gemini) capsule in D.C. at the Smithsonian and it was indeed small. It is amazing. There was only enough room to sit and it kind of favors the cockpit of the F111 Aardvark, except the seat were set at about a 20 degree angle to one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexinTokyo

AlexinTokyo

Posted
Posted

Loving this part :) It really bridges the gap between the one- and three-kerbal pods.

One request, could you throw a mod (part?) version number in the OP of this thread? I don't use enough mods to make dealing with automagic management tools worth it to learn, but I do like to check for updates every now and again.

Apologies if there is one but I've just completely missed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Olsson

Olsson

Posted
Posted

I use this over the other alternatives out there, it just looks better in my opinion!

However there are two things I'd like to see adjusted.

The COM is slightly off, during re-entry with one heatshield attached and one mk16 parachute the pod is not balanced and will pull side to side from the retrograde marker, making it a ..... to control.

Also the top of the craft is supposed to hold a parachute, that's what that little tower is for right? But there is no parachute so we end up having to place one ontop of it.

I suggest either adding a parachute part that's just reskinned to look like the tower ontop of the gemini (preferably with a node ontop for docking ports) or toning the tower down slightly to compensate for this.

But that's just my opinion and I understand if you'd keep it the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I'm not saying "no." It's definitely on my "to do" list, but probably not soon. I've played with RPM a bit, but haven't ever created content for it, so I need to start by investigating how to do that.

Edited by jfjohnny5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I use this over the other alternatives out there, it just looks better in my opinion!

However there are two things I'd like to see adjusted.

The COM is slightly off, during re-entry with one heatshield attached and one mk16 parachute the pod is not balanced and will pull side to side from the retrograde marker, making it a ..... to control.

Glad you like it. I can't say I've seen the same issue with the CoM. I usually just turn off SAS on reentry and let it naturally orient itself. I haven't really run into issues.

Also the top of the craft is supposed to hold a parachute, that's what that little tower is for right? But there is no parachute so we end up having to place one ontop of it.

I suggest either adding a parachute part that's just reskinned to look like the tower ontop of the gemini (preferably with a node ontop for docking ports) or toning the tower down slightly to compensate for this.

But that's just my opinion and I understand if you'd keep it the way it is.

Ha, a reworked nose cone *may* very well be the next update I want to work on - along with a service module ala the actual Gemini craft... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ruedii

Ruedii

Posted
Posted

Nice work.

You should look at Lack's notes on how to use stock texture remaps for your exterior textures. That would save you memory footprint, and avail yourself to all the nice KSP stock textures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jfjohnny5

jfjohnny5

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Nice work.

You should look at Lack's notes on how to use stock texture remaps for your exterior textures. That would save you memory footprint, and avail yourself to all the nice KSP stock textures.

Thanks.

Link to that info on stock remaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...