Clampotron Sr. Docking Port PSA

[HeadHunter67]

Boom.

http://imgur.com/5k9pXl1

Did you steal that off the top of a Mexican restaurant?

I think the best way to make it clear is to make a note on the side that should face the hull - or make both of those surfaces so distinctly different that it's clear. As for edge-on, others have explained why an arrow is still ambiguous.

[shand]

Based on that picture, I can tell the docking port is the wrong way, but not because of the arrows, just because I can see the back of the port.

hehehe.

Ok guys be nice - no need to be rude about another persons work.

there is a fundamental problem that it needs to be clearly visible and obvious at a glance - but at the same time subtle enough that it doesnt break the immersion.

[Johnno]

Not sure where you are getting confused here.

Three pictures of the same components. One picture has a piece placed incorrectly. That was picture #1 The other two ports are placed correctly. The whole point was that given a limited camera view which happens at times you cannot easily, or even with effort determine if it is rotated correctly from the side.

I'm confused by the fact that your pictures don't match what it looks like ingame. If you haven't manipulated the visuals by forcefully placing them awkwardly and are using a stock game with snap-to function then your pictures simply don't match what it looks like ingame. The only last logical explanation is that you've uploaded/picked the wrong screenshots and have therefore a faulty premise and are arguing wrong evidence.

To hopefully (not going to happen) put this to rest, I took some pictures of my own in a more systematic manner. Even changing the camera angle you can CLEARLY see the difference, when the docking port is placed 'correctly' so that it's attached to the container and free to dock it snugly fits, when it's not you can see the angled rim of the port.

Look at these and tell me there's some way to be confused between the two. The port has only been rotated and/or flipped.

The last picture demonstrates 'manipulation' which would make it near impossible to tell from an angle while I feel that all other images clearly show the difference between snugly fitting (ie properly) and the wrong way around. Anyone in doubt of my images go try it ingame.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[HeadHunter67]

Johnno, that's all well and good when placed on an end like that, but not so much when placed on a surface.

[ThePsuedoMonkey]

I can't unsee the sombrero

[Sof]

None of those pictures have even tried to look at the bottom of the stucture. Rotating the camera down so you can see is easy.

All the docking ports start facing up. Quite often when you are using the smaller versions, your design is made so that they're at the top or on the sides so its easy to see even if it wasn't so obvious (although people were complaining that they didn't work when docking was first introduced.)

The big docking port seems better suited to connecting superstructures together and for that reason tends to get placed under the pods.

You just need to remember to flip it. Check to make sure because looking up isn't difficult to do.

[RoboRay]

there is a fundamental problem that it needs to be clearly visible and obvious at a glance - but at the same time subtle enough that it doesnt break the immersion.

You mean something like modeling and texturing an access hatch, pull-handle, and little viewing window on the side you dock another craft with? I like that idea. Let's make it happen.

[HeadHunter67]

Rotating the camera down so you can see is easy.

Check to make sure because looking up isn't difficult to do.

Usually, that's the case. Not always so, especially for larger designs which more commonly use these ports. I've seen rockets that take up the entire VAB.

[RoboRay]

Unless you're installing docking ports on the very bottom of an enormous launch vehicle that reaches all the way from the VAB floor to the ceiling, I have a hard time seeing why you can't easily look up. Unless the camera origin is right at floor-level, you can look up.

[Deadweasel]

It's not rocket science. Well, okay, maybe it is... a little.

This is my dock.

There are many like it, but this one is mine.

My dock is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I master my life.

My dock, without me is useless. Without my dock, I am useless.

I must place my dock true. I must place it straighter than the Kraken who is trying to kill me. I must check orientation before he kills me. I will....

My dock and myself know that what counts in this flight is not the altitude we achieve, the reliability of our ASAS, nor the RCS we use. We know that it is the docking that counts.

We will dock...

My dock is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weakness, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its alignment, and its texture. I will ever guard it against the ravages of bad placement and damage. I will keep my dock connected and ready, even as I am connected and ready. We will become part of each other. We will...

Before God I swear this creed. My dock and myself are the defenders of my vessel. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life.

So be it, until there is no enemy, but stars!

[Bunsen]

Unless you're installing docking ports on the very bottom of an enormous launch vehicle that reaches all the way from the VAB floor to the ceiling, I have a hard time seeing why you can't easily look up. Unless the camera origin is right at floor-level, you can look up.

The problem I have with that approach is the "Waitaminnit, did I remember to flip that port?" moment that comes after I've built a monstrosity of a booster under the thing with a bunch of struts and action groups that tend to get screwed up if you detach parts, which means that double-checking the port alignment is very much nontrivial. I know half the posters in this thread will simply respond "Well it's your fault for not looking the first time" (basically "absolutely everything is the user's fault," also known as "the Linux ethos") but there's this idea known as playability -- one which we can tell Squad cares about, because if they didn't then KSP would be Orbiter. An immersion-preserving texture change wouldn't be too hard, and KSP's asthetic leaves plenty of room for this sort of thing. If NASA can do this:

then KSP can get away with a little "↑ THIS SIDE TOWARD SPACE ↑" note on the edge of the big port.

[Deadweasel]

The problem I have with that approach is the "Waitaminnit, did I remember to flip that port?" moment that comes after I've built a monstrosity of a booster under the thing with a bunch of struts and action groups that tend to get screwed up if you detach parts, which means that double-checking the port alignment is very much nontrivial. I know half the posters in this thread will simply respond "Well it's your fault for not looking the first time" (basically "absolutely everything is the user's fault," also known as "the Linux ethos") but there's this idea known as playability -- one which we can tell Squad cares about, because if they didn't then KSP would be Orbiter. An immersion-preserving texture change wouldn't be too hard, and KSP's asthetic leaves plenty of room for this sort of thing. If NASA can do this:

then KSP can get away with a little "↑ THIS SIDE TOWARD SPACE ↑" note on the edge of the big port.

I've been doing a little work on this, but I'm facing a bit of a conundrum. I'm basically editing a stock part and changing the texture, so I'm a bit hesitant to just fire it off and share it here without the blessing of somebody in charge (though I noticed it seems to be okay to post up versions of stock parts that have been simply scaled).

Any thoughts on this?

[RoboRay]

If you've already fully assembled the craft, just zoom in and clip your camera inside the part below the decoupler, looking up. You can see the bottom of the next part up.

This really isn't as hard as some are trying to make it.

[MockKnizzle]

It already has a handle and a docking ring, what more do you need?

[Tiron]

It already has a handle and a docking ring, what more do you need?

Can't see the handle if that side's attached to something. The docking ring is so tiny and subtle that it's hard to see without looking very closely.

The problem is not that you *can't* tell which side is which, the problem is that it's too *difficult* to do so, due to the extreme subtlety of the differences, particularly as viewed from the side.

The whole point is that it could trivially be made easier.

[MockKnizzle]

But it's even less effort to just move your camera around a little bit and look at the part.

Besides, it behaves exactly the same as the other docking ports: you grab it and the docking ring is up. Why is that so hard to figure out if everything else is the same? I really don't have a lot of sympathy if people can't be bothered to just look at the thing.

[spikeyhat09]

i haven't had this issue. perhaps it only happens to space agencies with lower standards.

[Tiron]

But it's even less effort to just move your camera around a little bit and look at the part.

Besides, it behaves exactly the same as the other docking ports: you grab it and the docking ring is up. Why is that so hard to figure out if everything else is the same? I really don't have a lot of sympathy if people can't be bothered to just look at the thing.

Because it's NOT the same. The other docking ports have major, readily visible differences between the two sides. The CoT in particular sticks out quite a ways and has a substantially different diameter on the docking side. The Jr also sticks out a fair ways, and also has a smaller diameter on the docking side. They're also both shaped so that the 'base' side is flat, and it tapers down to the reduced diameter via a fillet.

The Sr. is nearly symmetrical, filleting both ways: The shape is basically the same as the large stack separator. As a result, it fits nearly flush with the part it's mounted on. The docking ring has a diameter only slightly smaller than the base. It also has no stand off at all, unlike both of the other ports; it's literally just stuck on the end.

And no offense. But one guy spending 10 seconds to edit the texture slightly is definitely not more effort than hundreds or thousands of people repeatedly spending several seconds zooming in and rotating the camera.

Edit: Actually I was wrong. Ironically, the large stack separator has more readily visible differences between the two sides than the large docking port does.

Edit2: What the hell was I thinking, actually? The bases of the other two ports aren't flat, but they don't need to be: They have visible extensions that clip inside the part they're placed on. Which really just makes it worse: The Sr. Doesn't follow the conventions established by the other two parts at ALL. It has more in common with a decoupler than with a docking port, in terms of how it's shaped.

Edited August 7, 2013 by Tiron

[loknar]

Can't see the handle if that side's attached to something. The docking ring is so tiny and subtle that it's hard to see without looking very closely.

The problem is not that you *can't* tell which side is which, the problem is that it's too *difficult* to do so, due to the extreme subtlety of the differences, particularly as viewed from the side.

The whole point is that it could trivially be made easier.

The fact most people admit being fooled is testimony there is room for improvement; I assembled a 5 part space station before I noticed this and I had to scrap the whole thing. Now, in frustration, I use dual-ports connection instead of big port.

[Tiron]

The fact most people admit being fooled is testimony there is room for improvement; I assembled a 5 part space station before I noticed this and I had to scrap the whole thing. Now, in frustration, I use dual-ports connection instead of big port.

Honestly, next time I build a station (if I ever do), I'll probably use KAS instead of docking ports(for the refueling points anyway). The total weight of a KAS docking system is higher than using docking ports, but it's all concentrated on the winch side: the connector port on your actual craft weighs very little.

The downsides are that it's dramatically more wobbly than docking ports, and it REQUIRES a kerbal on EVA to make the connection, but the weight savings on the craft are probably worth it at least some of the time. Not to mention you can 'dock' at distances up to 50m that way.

[FEichinger]

most people

[citation needed]

All I see is a vocal minority, just like with the End Flight button.

[shand]

Has anybody played the "we're in alpha, all artwork is pretty much placeholders" card recently?

Also howcome you guys aren't screaming that probe bodies need clearer "this way forward" markings?

I'm all in favour of adding a window to the port for pretty viewingness but it won't make it clearer.

we've already seen some obvious pics of side on viewing

And the ends are blindingly obvious!

can you post a screenshot, or craft file, of a situation where you might struggle at the time of connection?

(checking later is hard with every part - so thats not fair. how do you check your engine is on the right way up if you've already got a decoupler below? you detach the bits beneith, and check. why expect anything different with your docking ports.)

I still maintain that its easy to tell as you place it, and checking at the end of construction when you've surrounded it in bits you cant take off for various reasons is a really bad design process

[Brigonos]

How did this make it to 10 pages? It should have ended after the original post and then one person saying "good point - let's fix it."

Let me pose a few quick questions to people arguing against a minor texture change:

1. Could this possibly help some people?

2. Will it impact you negatively in any way?

3. There is no question three. Please get over yourself.

[Princepapa]

Oh, THAT was the problem? I spent nearly two hours trying to dock to the damn thing only to find out it was backwards? Shouldn't it automatically place itself docking-side-out like the other docking ports do?

[Tiron]

Oh, THAT was the problem? I spent nearly two hours trying to dock to the damn thing only to find out it was backwards? Shouldn't it automatically place itself docking-side-out like the other docking ports do?

None of the docking ports do, actually. It's just a lot easier to tell when it hasn't with the others.