Should the reskin of the mk1 lander can have a redesign to the lk lander?

[CornDoggo]

I wanted to do this because the mk1 lander can would maybe be used more than the mk1 command pod. Because it would barely dive into the failed soviet moon missions of the 60's and 70's idk just a thought maybe people might use it more often if it had a reskin :/

[klesh]

Welcome to the forums. 

 

You can already make a pretty good LK lander with the Making History parts...

(pic courtesy of Brotoro)

[KerikBalm]

Reskin implies a texture swap, this would need a new 3d model

[radonek]

Why should I want to recreate failures of the past? Hell, why should I want to recreate past successes? Making my own mistakes is what I love about KSP.

[Ozymandias_the_Goat]

17 hours ago, radonek said:

Why should I want to recreate failures of the past? Hell, why should I want to recreate past successes? Making my own mistakes is what I love about KSP.

At the same time, everybody has different demands as to what would make ksp fun for them.

On 3/4/2019 at 8:27 AM, CornDoggo said:

just a thought maybe people might use it more often if it had a reskin

I feel like it sees a decent amount of use anyway, even in the late game, for stuff like vacuum landers. Even for a single command pod mission, the lander can is still a decent option earlier in the game as opposed to the heavier mk-1 command pod.

[Tyko]

On 3/4/2019 at 5:27 AM, CornDoggo said:

I wanted to do this because the mk1 lander can would maybe be used more than the mk1 command pod. Because it would barely dive into the failed soviet moon missions of the 60's and 70's idk just a thought maybe people might use it more often if it had a reskin

Welcome to the Forums...The Tantares mod already has all the parts you need to recreate Russian/Soviet missions. You may want to check it out.

 

Edited March 5, 2019 by Tyko

[Ol’ Musky Boi]

On 3/4/2019 at 4:08 PM, klesh said:

Welcome to the forums. 

 

You can already make a pretty good LK lander with the Making History parts...

(pic courtesy of Brotoro)

What is it with the soviets and ball shaped spacecraft?

[Loskene]

6 hours ago, Ol’ Musky Boi said:

What is it with the soviets and ball shaped spacecraft?

Usable volume, structural stability, having to fit neatly alongside other components in a narrow-diameter fairing, and a few other concerns dictated by the technology and knowledge of spacecraft operation at the time. Someone had to figure all this stuff out first. Start with a rough idea of what you want based on what the mathematics say, then refine your theory with practice. The eventual "car headlamp" shape of re-entry capsules like on the Soyuz was developed in response to the spherical capsules of earlier missions like Vostok only being capable of ballistic entries due to their shape. The flatter leading surface and an offset centre of mass could be used to control the capsule's lift/drag and G-force experienced by the crew by rolling the capsule as it plunged through the airstream.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Loskene
.

[Gapone]

Mk1 can has a 1.25m top node, LK lander would have 0.625m.

[Ol’ Musky Boi]

On 4/1/2019 at 5:37 AM, Loskene said:

Usable volume, structural stability, having to fit neatly alongside other components in a narrow-diameter fairing, and a few other concerns dictated by the technology and knowledge of spacecraft operation at the time. Someone had to figure all this stuff out first. Start with a rough idea of what you want based on what the mathematics say, then refine your theory with practice. The eventual "car headlamp" shape of re-entry capsules like on the Soyuz was developed in response to the spherical capsules of earlier missions like Vostok only being capable of ballistic entries due to their shape. The flatter leading surface and an offset centre of mass could be used to control the capsule's lift/drag and G-force experienced by the crew by rolling the capsule as it plunged through the airstream.

All very good suggestions, but I was thinking it was more because of this...