Tethers? Anyone?

[Pistache]

I was playing ksp the other day, and was trying to perform an EVA from my space station. I did what I wanted to do but failed to bring my Kerbal back into the module. That's when it struck me. I thought that tethers should be implemented in the core game. They are such a vital part of real life EVA's that I thought that it would make a lot of sense for Kerbals to have them. I dunno though, what do you think??   

[Mark Kerbin]

Well tbh eva rcs packs aren’t a normal part of irl evas.  

To avoid being flamed in the internet; they are however used as a last resort, “oh crap I’m floating away from my ship,” self rescue device.

And since tethers would probably be awesome in ksp I can’t completely say no but.... We already have op Eva packs and ksp does not like string like objects for whatever reason. Invites kraken attacks apparently.

Not totally impossible tho as far as I know. 

Edited June 28, 2018 by Mark Kerbin
Clarity and word kraken

[RealKerbal3x]

Real life EVA suits have RCS backpacks like what @Mark Kerbin said called SAFER (in case you’re curious, it stands for Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue). I think tethers would be cool, but once you figure out how to use the kerbal’s jetpack it’s not that hard to get around.

[Gargamel]

And the spacewalks that did use the MMU, which is what the Kerbal EVA pack is roughly based on, they were all untethered flight.  The EVA pack on a kerbal is standard, so there is no reason for the to ever be tethered. 

This is more of a piloting error more than poor game design.  Instead of working on a solution to a problem than really doesn't exist, work on a solution for the one that does.  :D.

I also don't know if tethers would even be doable in KSP.  It sounds fairly simple, but knowing how wonky kerbals on a ladder can be, I would think a tether is even more wonky.  A EVA kerbal and a ship are considered separate entities, so having one end of a kerbal attached to a ship might cause some serious errors.   

If this came out in a mod, with other gameplay changes to make tethers worth trying, then I'd give it a look, but base game?  No. 

[AVaughan]

When I was learning to play, moving eva kerbals was something a struggled with.  I'm not sure about the current version but back then kerbal attachment system came with a winch that could be attached to the kerbal's back, and reel him in if he got in difficulties.  Now KAS and KIS have undergone some changes since then, so that might not work anymore.  

I'd also like to second Garamels comment and say take the time to learn use the eva pack.  Have patience when moving kerbals around on eva.  Unless you are transferring from ship to ship, eg a rescue mission you don't need more a puff of eva to get him moving about 0.3 m/s which is fast enough to move around his vessel.  (Your kerbal set his ship as his target.  This makes it easy to see how fast he is moving).  Be slow and patient.  Your subsequent attempt to learn how to dock will be much easier if you have mastered maneuvering with the eva pack.

[Kesa]

Welcome to the forum.

 

KAS has thethers, but to be honest, I expect thether+ladders to be fun but much harder than EVA jetpack, on both piloting skill and designing skills.

[Mark Kerbin]

2 hours ago, Kesa said:

KAS has thethers, but to be honest, I expect thether+ladders to be fun but much harder than EVA jetpack, on both piloting skill and designing skills.

Oh yeah it does... aren’t they more just a black line between objects tho?

[Kesa]

1 hour ago, Mark Kerbin said:

Oh yeah it does... aren’t they more just a black line between objects tho?

Yes, they can be more than spacewalk tether, they can link any object to the part holding the tether (not sure tether is the name used in the mod, but that's basically a retractable tether).

 

What functionality a spacewalk tether has that KAS tether has not?

[ZooNamedGames]

I think they would be a great addition.

That said, and as others have mentioned, RCS packs are actually an uncommon occurance aside from the previously mentioned SAFER. Both the MMU and AMU (the predecessor to the MMU) have become abandoned and are not longer used so KSP stands out in this respect when it comes down to EVAs.

As a technical standpoint, packing them (and the fuel for them) is costly for a lot of missions, especially with missions performed in KSP, they'd be useless as a lot of my missions are dockings, station missions, etc. Not operations where I need to go free flight and use the pack.

From a historical standpoint (which really applies to career), they are a massive jump. Career mode acknowledges our inability to EVA at the beginning of spaceflight and requires you to upgrade the Astronaut Complex. Makes sense. What doesn't make sense is how you upgrade that and suddenly you've got access to technology that wasn't available to NASA until the mid 80s. (yes the AMU existed, however it was vastly simplified in comparison to the MMU that flew later which the Kerbal pack is modeled after). If Squad wanted to keep better inline with historical developments (if not that, then at least technical developments, since I know Squad doesn't intend to model real life history), then at least make the early pack short on fuel, lack SAS, lack a nav-ball, at least something that would make the middle ground pack seem more inline with the fact that early RCS packs, were not very efficient.

This is however my opinion.

[Gargamel]

22 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Both the MMU and AMU (the predecessor to the MMU) have become abandoned and are not longer used 

I think this was because it was a cost/weight issue, compared to the need for it..   An MMU would be great for getting around something huge that doesn't have safety connection points for tethers, like an Asteroid.  Everything else in space we have built does not need an MMU to safely work on.  Everything either is within one tether length of a door, or has multiple attachment points for tether's along it.  There's just no benefit for hauling MMU's and their fuel up to space today.  Someday, the need for MMU's will return.  I wouldn't say they were abandoned, just shelved until they become needed. 

[ZooNamedGames]

On 7/5/2018 at 11:27 AM, Gargamel said:

I think this was because it was a cost/weight issue, compared to the need for it..   An MMU would be great for getting around something huge that doesn't have safety connection points for tethers, like an Asteroid.  Everything else in space we have built does not need an MMU to safely work on.  Everything either is within one tether length of a door, or has multiple attachment points for tether's along it.  There's just no benefit for hauling MMU's and their fuel up to space today.  Someday, the need for MMU's will return.  I wouldn't say they were abandoned, just shelved until they become needed. 

Sadly in real world history, they have been abandoned as with the close of the Shuttle program, humans have only visited space stations which are purpose built with the intent for crews to be moving around them. The only objects that MMUs could be used to move around, that lack things like tether points, or rails for crews to traverse on, are satellites, or asteroids and other natural space debris. Of which, we've only visited one of those two things. So they frankly are not of use to us as we don't have anything we would need to use them for.

[0something0]

I would still like to see teathers in a mod or something because why not 

[Athen]

I think tethers would be cool from a recreation standpoint. It would be fun to re-create some of the first spacewalks. 

Or maybe like what ZooNamedGames said,

On 7/4/2018 at 11:06 AM, ZooNamedGames said:

From a historical standpoint (which really applies to career), they are a massive jump. Career mode acknowledges our inability to EVA at the beginning of spaceflight and requires you to upgrade the Astronaut Complex. Makes sense. What doesn't make sense is how you upgrade that and suddenly you've got access to technology that wasn't available to NASA until the mid 80s. (yes the AMU existed, however it was vastly simplified in comparison to the MMU that flew later which the Kerbal pack is modeled after). If Squad wanted to keep better inline with historical developments (if not that, then at least technical developments, since I know Squad doesn't intend to model real life history), then at least make the early pack short on fuel, lack SAS, lack a nav-ball, at least something that would make the middle ground pack seem more inline with the fact that early RCS packs, were not very efficient.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2018 by Athen

[GKSP]

If tethers are used, I have an idea on how to make them more versatile.  Give them a "hook" that can attach to any ladder-like rung.  For example, you could attach it to the pod's ladder, or even those tiny ladders on the Z4k Battery bank or the Hitchhiker pod

[Xd the great]

KIS can be used as a tether. Proof that a tether works.

Though the strings are just lines and can pass through stuff.

[Gargamel]

But..... why?   What point would a stock tether have over the stock MMU pack? 

[HansonKerman]

Ooh, this seems like a good idea. I like this. I support this cause.

 

[Katten]

Disregarding the fact that we already have over-powered jetpacks, I don't think it would be that difficult to implement a tether... could be nice for other related things like Mars landers... (and as mentioned, KAS already have them, tho it is a straight line visually)

Edited July 14, 2018 by Katten

[Blasty McBlastblast]

with a tether i could tow my craft instead of push...

[DoctorDavinci]

14 minutes ago, Blasty McBlastblast said:

with a tether i could tow my craft instead of push...

With a tractor beam you could do it in style 

 

[Blasty McBlastblast]

@DoctorDavinci who needs a beam to tractor stuff?! 

[DoctorDavinci]

2 minutes ago, Blasty McBlastblast said:

@DoctorDavinci who needs a beam to tractor stuff?! 

That tractor would look much nicer with DCK coloring on it 

[qzgy]

3 hours ago, DoctorDavinci said:

That tractor would look much nicer with DCK coloring on it 

*cough* obvious shameless plug *cough*

I think as others mentioned, tethers along with jetpacks doesn't quite make sense. The best use I can think of for them is for keeping a kerbal decently close to some large structure like a space station. Maybe some mechanic to link onto attachment points could be nice. Really not sure what the point would be though after you get adept with the jetpack (in sandbox at least)

[HansonKerman]

20 hours ago, Katten said:

Disregarding the fact that we already have over-powered jetpacks, I don't think it would be that difficult to implement a tether... could be nice for other related things like Mars landers... (and as mentioned, KAS already have them, though it is a straight line visually)

That's actually nice, and I  like it because it tells you where you came from.

14 hours ago, qzgy said:

*cough* obvious shameless plug *cough*

I think as others mentioned, tethers along with jetpacks doesn't quite make sense. The best use I can think of for them is for keeping a kerbal decently close to some large structure like a space station. Maybe some mechanic to link onto attachment points could be nice. Really not sure what the point would be though after you get adept with the jetpack (in sandbox at least)

Some people aren't adept with the jetpack. Some people.

notmenotmetotally notme.

[Xd the great]

Still, it helps with reality. No idiots will use jectpacks without tethers.