Remove the nosecone on the new mk1Cockpit - Gifs and pictures

[HafCoJoe]

The picture with the ncs cone doesn't look like it would in-game, though. To find out, we would need a screenshot of it in-game.

Hmm...

Avera9ejoe, are you up for this?

Indifferent.

- - - Updated - - -

The incorrect scaling on the example pictures was also bugging me, since it made it look ugly and I knew it wasn't right. So I found out what it should really look like.

It should look like this:

http://i.imgur.com/gJV55u5.jpg

Hm... I'll look into that.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

As I said, that looks hideous. It doesn't match the slope of the cockpit for a nice smooth appearance like the original picture. I was actually talking about the small nose cone though. In either case they don't work, they have a sudden change in pitch. It needs to be lengthened and made more gradual to fit this cockpit.

I see what you mean, but I just figured out that the ncs nosecone has a slightly rounder shape, so it might fit right after all. Also, it mostly looks bad due to a tiny size difference that I just noticed, so it should be a little smaller. In-game, the angle difference would barely be visible.

[HafCoJoe]

lmftfy:

EDIT: I've got to admit it's quite interesting watching the votes. The bars have swapped leaders at least twice now.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Avera9eJoe

[Kuu Lightwing]

No. It just looks bad. We already have some parts that don't look good no matter what you attach to the front of them - Mk3 cockpit and both Mk2-to-Mk1 adapters. Don't turn the new smooth and sleek cockpit into one more of those parts.

And even if you make avionics hub fit, there's no other part that would look good in its place. Just no reason to spoil PorkJet's design.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Kuu Lightwing

[Azimech]

I want it, but with the original nose cone as a separate part and have it a seamless connection to the cockpit. This way, looks are retained for the ones who want it, while giving the flexibility to others.

[HafCoJoe]

I want it, but with the original nose cone as a separate part and have it a seamless connection to the cockpit. This way, looks are retained for the ones who want it, while giving the flexibility to others.

That would be a great possibility actually... It wouldn't lose any aesthetic appeal but still be replaceable with other parts. I hope that would be doable with textures...

Edited August 28, 2015 by Avera9eJoe

[Tankman101]

Yea, can we just not? It really does look bad.

[r4pt0r]

I want it, but with the original nose cone as a separate part and have it a seamless connection to the cockpit. This way, looks are retained for the ones who want it, while giving the flexibility to others.

Excellent. Agreed.

[Red Iron Crown]

I like it with the integrated cone better, tbh. It's one less part, affecting both performance and speed of construction. We already have a cockpit with a front node, this just seems redundant.

Semi-related: What really needs to happen is for the standard node sizes to actually be consistent. Try putting 0.625m parts on top of a Mk1 capsule, or 2.5m parts on a Mk2 lander can, it just looks bad.

[Starwhip]

Semi-related: What really needs to happen is for the standard node sizes to actually be consistent. Try putting 0.625m parts on top of a Mk1 capsule, or 2.5m parts on a Mk2 lander can, it just looks bad.

Or 1.25 meter parts on top of a Mk1-2 Command Pod. Agreed. If the MK1 was designed for the Mk-16 (is that the one? The small white one) parachute, then make the parachute 0.625 meters at its widest point (which will sit flush with the node) and widen the top connector on the capsule. Same goes for any parts. It would increase the fluidity of building, allowing more parts to interconnect seamlessly.

Edited August 28, 2015 by Starwhip
Top. I said top!

[MK3424]

And what about a docking port nosecone that can open up?

just like the delta glider from Orbiter:

[Red Iron Crown]

The shielded docking port fills that role to some degree, though aesthetically I wish it was sharper.

[MK3424]

The shielded docking port fills that role to some degree, though aesthetically I wish it was sharper.

Yep, but the one used on the delta glider is sharper.

But then.. the devs aren't the fastest when it comes to adding new parts.

[HafCoJoe]

I just updated the second gif to match lighting. It would be pretty easy to make the nosecones have a seamless transition.

[EnderKid2]

First thing I thought when I saw the new model: Needs front attach node.

[FishInferno]

Honestly why is there such a big fuss about this? I say leave the nosecone built in. Everyone was perfectly fine with the old cockpit having a built-in nose, so why is it an issue now?

[Aladran]

How will it work with our actual craft with Mk1 Cockpit? I have a bunch of craft using it, they would all look ugly noseless

[Stoney3K]

Honestly why is there such a big fuss about this? I say leave the nosecone built in. Everyone was perfectly fine with the old cockpit having a built-in nose, so why is it an issue now?

I always felt the old 0,625m nose cones were pretty useless, especially since there are stock fairings. When building aircraft, they never seem to fit 'right', and with anything bigger like the Mk3 noses, they don't fit properly in any design

IMO, the avionics nose cone, tiny nose cone and NCS were already overdue for an update, so the Mk1 cockpit revamp is only an opportunity.

[HafCoJoe]

How will it work with our actual craft with Mk1 Cockpit? I have a bunch of craft using it, they would all look ugly noseless

All you would need to do is add a nosecone back on. The textures could be made to match seamlessly so there wouldn't be any aesthetic loss. There really aren't any downsides to making the nosecone removable as all it would to is add one extra part, and reading up on Unity 5 is prooving to me that that will have very negligible effects in the next update of KSP.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

Actually, I'm starting to flip sides. I can't see any good use with removing the cone. I guess what I would like is to make this new cockpit a normal cockpit, and have the old one as a separate cockpit, and make the old one a two-seater with a new IVA and working air intakes. I guess I don't care whether it has a nose or not.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

Well, I guess I'm not done with this thread after all, and I'm staring to see some uses for removing the cone (A docking port jr., for example). Also, those who say that the NCS cone doesn't fit are wrong. Just look at the GIF.

See? It fits so perfectly!

The avionics cone does too. Told you the angle change would be barely noticable.

- - - Updated - - -

I still want my above idea to happen, with the two cockpits, but this would be one of the big differences between the two cockpits.

[Stoney3K]

How about throwing in a 0,625m intake nose while we're at it?

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

Well, we know we're getting one, but I don't think it will fit right.

[Spartwo]

This change would make up for making the cockpit look like an airliner's.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Spartwo

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

I just can't wait to put the new tiny jet engine on it and try flying a plane backwards.