1.25m and 2.5m Cargo Bay

[Baybrawler]

Adding the 1.25m cargo bay would be essential part of gameplay that would be of extreme use to all players. It would be perfect for mk1 size spaceplanes that need to deploy small satellites without them awkwardly hanging off the side or cramped into a service bay (when they're small enough to fit). Additionally, they could be used as a larger, better service bay for use with science experiments, communication modules, and everything else people want to move around the galaxy. Most of the design for it already exits with the 1.25m LF tank and the mk2 cargo bay, so why not merge two designs and add this one part for all to enjoy!

 

[KSPFanatic102]

Nothing would fit in there seriously

[Alshain]

1 hour ago, Space_taco said:

Nothing would fit in there seriously

This has been discussed 1000 times before, but yes, plenty would fit in there.

[AlphaMensae]

Modular Rocket Systems has a 1.25m cargo bay, and yes, plenty does fit in it.  Think small sats and probes, 0.625m-based

 

[Mecripp]

Here is the one out of Stock Part Revamp  just unzip and copy to KSP/GameData  so it looks like KSP/GameData/Mk1parts     https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/72893034/MK1parts.zip

 

Here is link to Ven's  all credit to him License: CC-BY 4.0 International

 

[magnemoe]

On 15.10.2016 at 7:25 PM, Alshain said:

This has been discussed 1000 times before, but yes, plenty would fit in there.

Yes for one it would be an larger service bay, has used the short MK3 cargo hold as service bay for life support power and science stuff. 
the 2.5 meter would be larger than the MK2 bay, the MK2 one is anyway not much larger than an 1.25 one. 
 

[The Aziz]

Or maybe instead, make service bays lenght tweakable? Like fairings? Shouldn't be too hard to implement.

[Red Iron Crown]

On 10/15/2016 at 1:00 PM, Baybrawler said:

Adding the 1.25m cargo bay would be essential part of gameplay that would be of extreme use to all players.

While I don't disagree that it would be a useful part, this is a bit of hyperbole, no? After all the game is entirely playable right now without it, so it must not be "essential"; and any generalization to "all players" in such a broad game is likely untrue.

[Gaarst]

6 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

While I don't disagree that it would be a useful part, this is a bit of hyperbole, no? After all the game is entirely playable right now without it, so it must not be "essential"; and any generalization to "all players" in such a broad game is likely untrue.

Confirmed. I don't give a darn about these.

[Jonfliesgoats]

I want these too.

[TheDestroyer111]

On 10/15/2016 at 5:30 PM, Baybrawler said:

 

It would be naisss, but we have firespitter with its 2.5m bomb bay and B9 aerospace with its 1.25m bay. Hmm... What if the service bays could have the capability to switch meshes properly when several of them are stacked on top of each other? That would be a simple solution,y  and while it would take a bit of part count, you don't usually deploy huge payloads with this size of craft, and 1.2 gave us autostruts 

[StahnAileron]

2 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

While I don't disagree that it would be a useful part, this is a bit of hyperbole, no? After all the game is entirely playable right now without it, so it must not be "essential"; and any generalization to "all players" in such a broad game is likely untrue.

Lots of people like to state something as hyperbole to upsell the thought. It's why I dislike it when people start a suggestion with, "We Need...!" rather than "I think..." or "I would like..." Not many like to take responsibility (and ownership) for their own thoughts, it seems, when it has the chance of being rejected. (... Huh... Seems those group interaction and communication classes I had to take are still with me... Just realized it now.)

I've used Size 1 & 2 cargo bays via mods before. They are useful, but not "essential". I'd rather have the devs focus on user-experience/quality-of-life and gameplay mechanics than parts at this point. KSP is half-defined by its mod community. Part mods are abundant. Let them serve an individual's wants while the devs work on actual needs. (Seriously, at this point, if the devs think they need more parts, I think it'd be easier to license parts from existing mods.) When it comes to just parts, I'd rather just ask a modder about their interest in my idea than pester the devs. (Shout out to @SuicidalInsanity, as he's implemented a couple of my ideas. THANKS!)

[omelaw]

7 hours ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

It would be naisss, but we have firespitter with its 2.5m bomb bay and B9 aerospace with its 1.25m bay. Hmm... What if the service bays could have the capability to switch meshes properly when several of them are stacked on top of each other? That would be a simple solution,y  and while it would take a bit of part count, you don't usually deploy huge payloads with this size of craft, and 1.2 gave us autostruts 

as it has a floor so it can't store anything longer then length of service bay

[septemberWaves]

Oh, cargo bays are enormously useful; I speak from experience with using them from mods. Anything larger than 0.625m can fit at least some stuff in there, and personally I've found them to be an incredibly valuable asset in my exploration, both for one-way trips and reusable vehicles. It's good to have a multitude of ways to store a payload. Fairings can now accomplish some of the things that cargo bays can, now that they have the interstage trusses, but they still cannot be closed again once deployed.

[Baybrawler]

@TheDestroyer111 That's a great idea having switchable meshes, perhaps in the toggles menu. That would prevent cluttering in the part section, while allowing larger service bays/cargo bays to be available!