Mk1-2 command pod orientation in v1.1

[lajoswinkler]

Will this finally get corrected?

Oh, and don't bother using these arguments. Mk1-2 is a command pod, not a lander. Even lander pods are lined up.

This is just frustrating and caused many Kerbals to detach or get ejected into space. It's a pain when you're a newbie and can't use EVA properly and just feels wrong when you're not.

Edited August 26, 2015 by lajoswinkler

[xtoro]

Yep, most annoying stock part. Have to SHIFT+Q/E whatever is underneath to line up ladders or make one at an angle. Command pod, lander pod, no difference. People use the command seats on Landers too. Everything is a lander in KSP! I do hope they change it.

[tater]

The hatch should be on the same side as the windows, as it was on Apollo, not on the bottom (as it is in Ven's otherwise awesome mod). All these orientations shown above demonstrate the need for a 45 degree RCS part. I always in fact end up rotating the hitchhiker and lab to basically match the mk1-2 pod on stations because my CM is usually overlapping with those parts, and I want RCS to not overlap rungs, hatches, or windows.

[NecroBones]

Yep, I find it really annoying too. Having the hatch at some funky 45-degree angle on the bottom makes it really hard to place things radially with any kind of symmetry, and not also cover over the windows. It frustrates me to no end.

[tater]

Yep, I find it really annoying too. Having the hatch at some funky 45-degree angle on the bottom makes it really hard to place things radially with any kind of symmetry, and not also cover over the windows. It frustrates me to no end.

Putting the hatches were they are for every other part cases the same problem, as if you want a good RCS placement you MUST place them all over the hatches, etc. We need stock 45 degree RCS.

[AbacusWizard]

Is there any actual reason to use the larger command pods? As far as I can tell a 4-seat hitchhiker can plus a probe core accomplishes the same thing (plus an extra seat or two) with less mass.

[problemecium]

^ This is true, but I too am on board with OP. Perhaps alongside fixing the orientation they can look into rebalancing the weight and other stats, because as things are now I never use this one, given that for less weight I can use a Hitchhiker and a probe core and send up four Kerbals rather than three.

[tater]

Is there any actual reason to use the larger command pods? As far as I can tell a 4-seat hitchhiker can plus a probe core accomplishes the same thing (plus an extra seat or two) with less mass.

Or use a mk3 cockpit, more crew, more impact resistance, more heat resistance, more battery, more mono, more torque... 25% lighter. For reasons.

[peachoftree]

vens stock revamp fixes this, the door is 180 degrees from the middle of the windows

[cantab]

Yeah, the three-Kerbal pod is a total boat anchor, it's frustrating. It should weigh about the same as three one-Kerbal pods. Maybe a shade more since it's more durable. But not four freaking tons.

[Temeter]

Putting the hatches were they are for every other part cases the same problem, as if you want a good RCS placement you MUST place them all over the hatches, etc. We need stock 45 degree RCS.

The RCS fits if you turn everything according to the capsule, tho!

Still, I'd probably prefer a more logical alignment of the ladder and 45 degree RCS. Luckily, KWR does have some solutions.

[Pax Kerbana]

Wow you guys jeez. This is one of my favorite parts. Yeah I think it is too heavy but it looks awesome. I use it for orbital transfers and to deorbit crew. Strap on some solids and send right back up again.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Pax Kerbana

[Alshain]

The part is perfect the way it is, all the others are wrong. If they aren't going to give us 45 degree RCS, then it needs to stay where it is and the others need to be fixed. Ven's pack moves the door, and adds 45 degree RCS, but the top and bottom nozzles on his 45 degree RCS are also angled, making it useless really.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Alshain

[Wjolcz]

Is there any actual reason to use the larger command pods? As far as I can tell a 4-seat hitchhiker can plus a probe core accomplishes the same thing (plus an extra seat or two) with less mass.

Exactly. I almost never (unless I really, really have to) use the Mk1-2 and do what you said instead.

I don't expect the Mk1-2 to be changed in 1.1. I would really like to get a Drangon V2 (with 4 crew to balance it instead of IRL 7) in-game counterpart, but that's probably not happening in 1.1.

[passinglurker]

The part is perfect the way it is, all the others are wrong. If they aren't going to give us 45 degree RCS, then it needs to stay where it is and the others need to be fixed. Ven's pack moves the door, and adds 45 degree RCS, but the top and bottom nozzles on his 45 degree RCS are also angled, making it useless really.

I can dig rla's ports being stock

[Wjolcz]

The part is perfect the way it is, all the others are wrong. If they aren't going to give us 45 degree RCS, then it needs to stay where it is and the others need to be fixed. Ven's pack moves the door, and adds 45 degree RCS, but the top and bottom nozzles on his 45 degree RCS are also angled, making it useless really.

5-way RCS port is the answer, not messing with the hatch placement.

[lajoswinkler]

Its mass was never a problem for me... I mean the thing can withstand over 40 m/s impacts so that's kind of expected.

But the hatch and the ladder... geez.

[Tourist]

I still use the part... largely for aesthetics. Its as close as stock comes to Apollo CM. I don't have that big of an issue with the orientation (although it would be better if you did not have to shift+rotate to align the ladders.) My main problem is that there are very few convenient "opposite sides" where you can attach things symmetrically without covering some graphic detail. Like those little upward facing windows at the top, or the vents.

I always find I need to place my radial parachutes asymmetrically to avoid something. (Node parachute not being possible because there is usually a docking port.)

Now, I know these things are not functional, so it doesn't really matter, but I like my craft to make visual sense as well. This is pretty nit-picky, I realize.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Tourist

[problemecium]

When I have a door in the way of my RCS ports, instead of having 4-way symmetry I use 2-way symmetry and a mix of 4-way blocks and single ports like so:

(^ = port; + = block)

^ + ^

=====

HULL

=====

v + v

This way I still get all six directions without blocking the hatch. I double the single ports so that each of the six directions has a total of 2 ports facing that way.

[ajburges]

I use this thing for my first Mun mission because it's low on the tech tree and has cool aesthetics. That's it. The hitchhiker pod is also overweight. My ferry is a Mk2 space plane sans wings.

[Alshain]

5-way RCS port is the answer, not messing with the hatch placement.

I don't care how it is solved, it's bad being inconsistent, it's also bad if all you do is move the door of the Mk1-2, 5-way ports and 45 degree ports are fine. Just don't move the door of the Mk1-2 until you are ready to fix both problems, because if all you do is move the door that is going to screw up the best command pod in the game.

- - - Updated - - -

When I have a door in the way of my RCS ports, instead of having 4-way symmetry I use 2-way symmetry and a mix of 4-way blocks and single ports like so:

(^ = port; + = block)

^ + ^

=====

HULL

=====

v + v

This way I still get all six directions without blocking the hatch. I double the single ports so that each of the six directions has a total of 2 ports facing that way.

The single jets don't have a lot of power. That's fine for size 1 craft, but it's not going to move bigger craft unless you put a lot of them there. (something I have to do on my planes, since there is no good way to put RCS on a plane)

[Tourist]

Also the command pod has the perfect number of seats. one for a pilot, one for a scientist, one for the engineer.... works perfectly. If you had more seats you'd have a Kerbal who is a fourth wheel.. four wheels... that would just be awkward.

[Jouni]

The Mk1-2 command pod works better with 3x symmetry than with 4x symmetry. For example, you can attach parachutes and engine nacelles at 4, 8 and 12 and landing struts at 2, 6, and 10 without blocking anything.

[Mikki]

I would like the hatch beeing moved upwards behind the windows on top... its a good capsule, but i refuse to use it because of this. And its way to heavy iirc... 2.5 tons would be a rather "reasonable" from my view. Its to difficult to use properly in some cases.

[eddiew]

I have to agree with the OP, the hatch position on this pod is a poor choice and would benefit from a rework. It wouldn't be that hard to put it squarely on the back side, surely? Then it could be used by landers with 4x radial boosters at 45-degree points, and not have them obscure the hatch.

That and when you put ladders up to it in the current position, your whole ship looks wonky :<