Vostok 1 in ksp

[Jeb-head-mug kerman]

I realy think that ksp should have stock vostok 1/2/3/4 parts,and a stock soviet pack! We also know that 'yuri gagarin'was the worlds first man in space. Well,i thought that Squad should add  'gagarin kerman' but not too replace jeb of course! Also i would like a Lunokhod rover and a N1 moon rocket. My dear kerbals i am a fan of the N1!

Edited May 12, 2016 by Jeb-head-mug kerman

[qromodynmc]

1. Actually you can easily create these rockets with stock parts.

2. We dont have Neil kerman, so Yuri kerman is kinda unnecessary.

3. Real life nations may spark some fights in forums so lets not do that.

[Kertech]

as with all things in ksp, there's a mod for that

if you want it then get it yourself

[Gaarst]

Please do not suggest for new parts in the stock game. First off, Squad won't listen to it; second the parts you suggest are way too specific to make anything but dumbed down replicas.

There probably are a few mods adding an N1 to the game (I know SXT had one at a time).

And the KSP devs have made the choice of keeping the game far from actual spaceflight history, having parts for replicas or Kerbals named after actual astronauts wouldn't make any sense. As several people below made me notice, this is obviously false. Like really false, please stop quoting me

Edited May 14, 2016 by Gaarst

[tg626]

11 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

And the KSP devs have made the choice of keeping the game far from actual spaceflight history, having parts for replicas or Kerbals named after actual astronauts wouldn't make any sense.

I don't know about that... Mercury and Apollo are strongly implied.

[ferrer]

12 minutes ago, tg626 said:

I don't know about that... Mercury and Apollo are strongly implied.

Not to mention the SLS-style parts.

[luinux]

41 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

or Kerbals named after actual astronauts

Valentina?

 

[KSK]

1 hour ago, ferrer said:

Not to mention the SLS-style parts.

And the Shuttle. Or the orbiter at least.

[Gaarst]

5 hours ago, tg626 said:

I don't know about that... Mercury and Apollo are strongly implied.

 

4 hours ago, luinux said:

Valentina?

That's true, I was wrong on that one, shouldn't have said this as a justification, but I still believe the first two lines I wrote are right.

[Darnok]

5 hours ago, qromodynmc said:

 

3. Real life nations may spark some fights in forums so lets not do that.

 

Right now it is US KerbalSpaceProgram... so stock parts from other nations would be fair addition. Current parts set suggests that only US space program was/is important enough to be inspiration for stock parts, that is unfair in relation to other nations.

 

[tg626]

8 hours ago, Gaarst said:

And the KSP devs have made the choice of keeping the game far from actual spaceflight history, having parts for replicas or Kerbals named after actual astronauts wouldn't make any sense.

I have a secret wish for a 2 kerbal soyuz to fill the "other nations" and crew gaps.

[CobaltWolf]

47 minutes ago, tg626 said:

I have a secret wish for a 2 kerbal soyuz to fill the "other nations" and crew gaps.

I think a 2-kerbal capsule is needed, but how would it work in game? I don't think 2.5m is appropriate for a 2 man pod. Either a longer 1.25m pod (but that wouldn't result in the correct shape for reentry..?) or have it expand past the 1.25m diameter like the mk1 lander can does.

Maybe make its base 1.5m hahahahaha plsdontkillme

Edited May 12, 2016 by CobaltWolf

[Andem]

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

Right now it is US KerbalSpaceProgram... so stock parts from other nations would be fair addition. Current parts set suggests that only US space program was/is important enough to be inspiration for stock parts, that is unfair in relation to other nations.

 

Complete agreement. I would love to see some Chinese and Russian inspired parts in the stock game..

[CobaltWolf]

1 hour ago, Andem said:

Complete agreement. I would love to see some Chinese and Russian inspired parts in the stock game..

I would agree, but stock is VERY focused on only adding parts that significantly expand on gameplay. Having more parts just to be different isn't really appropriate.

[Andem]

4 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

I would agree, but stock is VERY focused on only adding parts that significantly expand on gameplay. Having more parts just to be different isn't really appropriate.

Good point.

[Jeb-head-mug kerman]

20 hours ago, Gaarst said:

Please do not suggest for new parts in the stock game. First off, Squad won't listen to it; second the parts you suggest are way too specific to make anything but dumbed down replicas.

There probably are a few mods adding an N1 to the game (I know SXT had one at a time).

And the KSP devs have made the choice of keeping the game far from actual spaceflight history, having parts for replicas or Kerbals named after actual astronauts wouldn't make any sense.

Well thanks, i will check on SXT.

Just now, Jeb-head-mug kerman said:

20 hours ago, Gaarst said:

Please do not suggest for new parts in the stock game. First off, Squad won't listen to it; second the parts you suggest are way too specific to make anything but dumbed down replicas.

There probably are a few mods adding an N1 to the game (I know SXT had one at a time).

And the KSP devs have made the choice of keeping the game far from actual spaceflight history, having parts for replicas or Kerbals named after actual astronauts wouldn't make any sense.

Well thats true.

 

[Gauga159]

If you want realism get rss/ro or orbiter 20xx

[Jeb-head-mug kerman]

21 hours ago, qromodynmc said:

1. Actually you can easily create these rockets with stock parts.

2. We dont have Neil kerman, so Yuri kerman is kinda unnecessary.

3. Real life nations may spark some fights in forums so lets not do that.

Yeah i don't want a fight,hey thanks for the idea for a stock vostok!

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm of the opinion that historical rockets should stay in the realm of mods (and there are some very, very good historical rocket packs out there). If there's a rocket that really flew, odds are you can find it in a mod for KSP somewhere. Having them in stock is a bit of a rabbithole, as everyone would want their pet favorite rocket in game and the number of parts would quickly become unmanageable. As mods you can pick and choose what you want to have in game.

[tater]

"Stock-a-like" would mean that the parts should be fairly generic, and able to be used in "Lego" fashion. Soviet parts don't match the others.

That said, with 1.1 fixing the memory issue, I'm all for adding a variant set of parts to stock. My suggestion would be that in sandbox they'd obviously all be available, but in career, you'd pick the country/style of parts. So you'd have a NASA set (what we have now), and then maybe a Soviet set with a different look (obviously some parts can be shared, like cylindrical tanks, though ideally stock would then get right-click options in the VAB to change the skin on the tank).

I would then have all the rescue contract always pull from the other side's parts, so you'd end up seeing both kinds in your career in a fun context. 

[Darnok]

16 minutes ago, tater said:

"Stock-a-like" would mean that the parts should be fairly generic, and able to be used in "Lego" fashion. Soviet parts don't match the others.

That said, with 1.1 fixing the memory issue, I'm all for adding a variant set of parts to stock. My suggestion would be that in sandbox they'd obviously all be available, but in career, you'd pick the country/style of parts. So you'd have a NASA set (what we have now), and then maybe a Soviet set with a different look (obviously some parts can be shared, like cylindrical tanks, though ideally stock would then get right-click options in the VAB to change the skin on the tank).

I would then have all the rescue contract always pull from the other side's parts, so you'd end up seeing both kinds in your career in a fun context. 

^ This +100

Nobody expects to have ideal replica of every part from every space program... but few parts that could represent each nation space program would be nice addition. Just like Gemini or Apollo capsules represent NASA, we could have design inspired from Soyuz/Shenzhou capsules, both look similar.

[tater]

Such parts would need to not actually look like Soviet stuff any more than stock parts look like NASA stuff. 

[John JACK]

23 hours ago, tater said:

Soviet parts don't match the others.

Like a Stayputnik Mk1? Or half of rocket parts compared to other half or rockets parts, not even to spaceplane parts?

Stockalike not-NASA inspired parts may match others just as well. Cylindrical Shenzhou orbital module or ATV pod or would be just right. And more stock parts is always good.

On 12.05.2016 at 0:15 PM, Gaarst said:

or Kerbals named after actual astronauts

Kerbonauts are expendable and all same, though there are iconic names in random pool. Half of KSC stuff, that are actually unique, have text line and character, are direct shout-outs of real NASA people.

[tater]

I meant the crew pods.

I'm all for soviet inspired parts, but the stock parts don't actually look like the US parts, either. 

Clearly the mk3 cockpit is a direct shuttle copy, but then again, so was Buran. Aside from that, the bulk of the reentry capsules are in fact conical in RL. The first 2 US capsules don;t actually look like the mk1, aside from color, as the mk1 lacks the nose.

Certainly the mk1-2 is roughly Apollo geometry, then again so are cut-100 and orion. Perhaps a 2-kerbal pod with the steeper geometry of dragon v2/PPTS would be in order, or a 2 man, and a larger diameter 4+ kerbal version?

One thing that needs to be included, though, are trade-offs. Soviet reentry vehicles could not land safely on water, and US RVs could not land safely on land. If that was built in, it would make far more sense to offer both, as there would be design trade-offs. Perhaps a stock-alike vostok has no top node, and is made such that any radial chutes big enough to land softly will burn off---then give kerbals a parachute option (you have to bail out). Maybe all the "koviet" capsules sink, but Soyuz-alike has landertron functionality. Make US-alike chutes not safe for land (have water vs land a thing).

[Andem]

43 minutes ago, tater said:

I meant the crew pods.

I'm all for soviet inspired parts, but the stock parts don't actually look like the US parts, either. 

Clearly the mk3 cockpit is a direct shuttle copy, but then again, so was Buran. Aside from that, the bulk of the reentry capsules are in fact conical in RL. The first 2 US capsules don;t actually look like the mk1, aside from color, as the mk1 lacks the nose.

Certainly the mk1-2 is roughly Apollo geometry, then again so are cut-100 and orion. Perhaps a 2-kerbal pod with the steeper geometry of dragon v2/PPTS would be in order, or a 2 man, and a larger diameter 4+ kerbal version?

One thing that needs to be included, though, are trade-offs. Soviet reentry vehicles could not land safely on water, and US RVs could not land safely on land. If that was built in, it would make far more sense to offer both, as there would be design trade-offs. Perhaps a stock-alike vostok has no top node, and is made such that any radial chutes big enough to land softly will burn off---then give kerbals a parachute option (you have to bail out). Maybe all the "koviet" capsules sink, but Soyuz-alike has landertron functionality. Make US-alike chutes not safe for land (have water vs land a thing).

I would really like a difference between the water impact tolerance and the land impact tolerance, and I really like this idea. I would also make the "soviet" parts a little lighter, but (actually) fare poorer during reentry.