rotate mk 1-2 command pod

[omelaw]

why it's ladder isn't in line with every other parts in the game?

[razark]

Because that would interfere with RCS placement and symmetry of lower stages.

[Tyko]

I always found this to be annoying too since they don't worry about RCS placement with any other parts...I wish they'd fix that, but in the meantime Ven's Stock Revamp mod reskins with Mk1-2 with a really nice looking capsule

[Wjolcz]

I really wish we already had a 2.5m Dragon-like 4 man capsule. Just so I don't have to deal with the overweight Mk1-2 and use Hitchhiker as a station/base module not crew transport. Wouldn't cry if it was gone.

[ZooNamedGames]

And I want smaller windows on the Mk2 Lander Can, and I want the Kerbals to stand rather than sit, and I want it to be lighter...

We can want want want all day. Doesn't do anything.

[Tyko]

21 hours ago, Veeltch said:

I really wish we already had a 2.5m Dragon-like 4 man capsule. Just so I don't have to deal with the overweight Mk1-2 and use Hitchhiker as a station/base module not crew transport. Wouldn't cry if it was gone.

My current 5 person crew transport is comprised of a Mk1-2 capsule with a 2 man lander can placed, inverted, directly below it. The heat shield goes below that. The Lander is a bit smaller in diameter than the heat shield. That appears to create a safe zone during re-entry in which you an place any RCS, Solar panels, etc. My other favorite benefit, the CoM is low enough to hold the heat shield towards retrograde - a big problem I had with hitchhikers.

...I should mention the I use the Community MM Patch that reduces the mass of both the Mk1-2 and the 2 man lander can to something more in line with the other command pods.

Edited January 9, 2017 by Tyko

[Aegolius13]

4 hours ago, Tyko said:

My current 5 person crew transport is comprised of a Mk1-2 capsule with a 2 man lander can placed, inverted, directly below it. The heat shield goes below that. The Lander is a bit smaller in diameter than the heat shield. That appears to create a safe zone during re-entry in which you an place any RCS, Solar panels, etc. My other favorite benefit, the CoM is low enough to hold the heat shield towards retrograde - a big problem I had with hitchhikers.

...I should mention the I use the Community MM Patch that reduces the mass of both the Mk1-2 and the 2 man lander can to something more in line with the other command pods.

I do a similar thing for my standard 5 kerbal new recruit trainer, but with a Mk 1 passenger cabin attached to the pointy end of the command module, instead of a landing can on bottom.  I find that the command module still provides enough torque, it's quite aerodynamically stable on reentry, and it lets the sturdy butt-end of the command pod bear the brunt of reentry heat and landing.    

On the minus side, my rig looks kinda dumb, and the Kerbals can't EVA directly from the passenger cabin (though they usually don't have to).

I too tried a Hitchhiker with a 1-man command pod on top, and found the reentry performance a bit... explodey.

I also heartily support lopping some mass off those fat Mk 1-2 parts.  I almost never used them in my previous game at full mass, but with a reasonable trim, they've become mainstays of my fleet.