[1.4.3]ALCOR,"Advanced Landing Capsule for Orbital Rendezvous" by ASET (08/02/2017)

[KhaosCorp]

Heh. Explain this:

Then get back to us on realism.

Realism?? Your firing imaginary green men off into imaginary space from an imaginary planet and your trying to argue realism???

Also, dont take much to change to IVA view and look around...plain as day that 3 kerbals fit rather well inside the pod....

[Zander]

Heh. Explain this:

Then get back to us on realism.

mine doesnt look like that, im using the scalled 4 meter pod in realism overhaul which is realistically sized.

Also, dont take much to change to IVA view and look around...plain as day that 3 kerbals fit rather well inside the pod....

obviously because the interior is bigger than the exterior. impossible in real life but possible in a game. if the interior was scaled correctly to the exterior then it would be far far more cramped with no room for 3 kerbals.

And to all those saying things like this game isnt supposed to be realistic.. YES IT IS.. if you dont want to play a realistic game go turn on star fox or space invaders. you bought a game that attempts to simulate a space program. its not unreasonable to want properly scaled vehicle interiors

[Mihara]

obviously because the interior is bigger than the exterior. impossible in real life but possible in a game. if the interior was scaled correctly to the exterior then it would be far far more cramped with no room for 3 kerbals.

Fortunately not the case here. Proof: See earlier discussion up the thread with screenshots.

[XanderTek]

mine doesnt look like that, im using the scalled 4 meter pod in realism overhaul which is realistically sized.

obviously because the interior is bigger than the exterior. impossible in real life but possible in a game. if the interior was scaled correctly to the exterior then it would be far far more cramped with no room for 3 kerbals.

And to all those saying things like this game isnt supposed to be realistic.. YES IT IS.. if you dont want to play a realistic game go turn on star fox or space invaders. you bought a game that attempts to simulate a space program. its not unreasonable to want properly scaled vehicle interiors

Not everyone expects the same level of realism from the game. Not every mod is going to have realism as a primary objective. You're free to play it as you want, but the stock game is pretty far from realistic when it comes to physics, dimensions, life support, and well just about everything. Telling other people how or what they should be playing is unproductive, and a good way to get people to dismiss any suggestions you may have.

[sirkut]

I think demanding a mod to go into the real of realism is uncalled for. Considering it's a small niche market I don't see the point in trying to support realism especially when it comes to crew capacity. It's a game of green men, give it a rest and make do with what the mod authors provide.

[jrandom]

mine doesnt look like that, im using the scalled 4 meter pod in realism overhaul which is realistically sized.

I have a preliminary ALCOR rescale for Realism Overhaul in my Additional Configs package. I haven't updated any mass numbers, but size-wise it should fit snugly beneath the 4-meter Mk1-2.

[HeadHunter67]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this part is 2.5m in diameter, is it not? That's 8 feet across. Is someone seriously trying to argue that we couldn't fit 3 lifeforms that are about 2/3 the size of humans in an 8 foot by 8 foot room? You could fit 3 humans in a space that size - with room for desks, computers, office chairs and a mini-fridge.

The passenger cabin of a four-door sedan is far smaller than 2.5m.

[Zander]

I did not demand anything, Indeed anyone can make a pod that's whatever size or realism level they want. But, the OP seems (at least from looking at his pod) to be going for something that's very realistic and he even said he modeled it after the apollo LEM. So if somebody makes a recommendation on what they think could make it more realistic, dismissing it by saying "the games not supposed to be realistic" is kind of unfair I think.

[Zander]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but this part is 2.5m in diameter, is it not? That's 8 feet across. Is someone seriously trying to argue that we couldn't fit 3 lifeforms that are about 2/3 the size of humans in an 8 foot by 8 foot room? You could fit 3 humans in a space that size - with room for desks, computers, office chairs and a mini-fridge.

The passenger cabin of a four-door sedan is far smaller than 2.5m.

I suggest you look here. http://www.ehartwell.com/LM/SCATPhotos.htm

This is the interior of the 4 meter LEM ascent stage. Now imagine how cramped a 2.5 meter module interior would be.

[Read have Read]

Kerbals are half the size as humans, and with short stubby legs and arms, they are mostly head.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Read have Read

[Zander]

Kerbals are half the size as humans, and with short stubby legs and arms, they are mostly head.

The walls slope in to meet the floor and cannot be stood on. This is the usable floor space

Now try to get them to stand within the usuable floor space and tell me thats not too cramped for 3.

[Camacha]

The walls slope in to meet the floor and cannot be stood on. This is the usable floor space

Now try to get them to stand within the usuable floor space and tell me thats not too cramped for 3.

http://ft.trillian.im/26ff886aedb257b5494e6296a47c202592541125/6lYweTga9kQezuqTqYhVpNtroYOxL.jpg

Yeah, usable floor space. You are forgetting that the space where it slopes in is in fact usuable, just not to stand on. Not something you do a lot when floating around in space.

[jrandom]

My Realism Overhaul rescale:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[rottielover]

Is this .23 safe?

[jrandom]

Is this .23 safe?

Should be. I haven't done much in .23 because Modular Fuels isn't working yet, so I can't say for sure. I think the RasterPropMonitor might cause problems and have to be disabled.

[Zander]

Yeah, usable floor space. You are forgetting that the space where it slopes in is in fact usuable, just not to stand on. Not something you do a lot when floating around in space.

Yes but it is a lander. which means at some point people will be living in it in gravity and limited to the floor.

@jrandom, that is great. probably a little bigger than the actual lunar module but this one fits 3 people. i would say since its a modern capsule it can use lighter material and it doesnt have to enter an atmosphere so 3 tons would be a good weight for me to use right? the CM was almost 6 tons

[jrandom]

@jrandom, that is great. probably a little bigger than the actual lunar module but this one fits 3 people. i would say since its a modern capsule it can use lighter material and it doesnt have to enter an atmosphere so 3 tons would be a good weight for me to use right? the CM was almost 6 tons

I rescaled it so the circular attachment ring was 2 meters in diameter to better fit with the rest of the Realism Overhaul rescales. The full width of the module is less than 4 meters which means it should fit nicely in fairings behind the 4-meter Mk1-2. I didn't alter the mass since fuel, engine, life support, batteries, etc... still have to be added, which will probably round out the weight.

Feel free to grab the .cfg from that .zip I linked to earlier and modify the settings to suit.

[Kanddak]

... Except the stock 1-kerbal lander cans.

(replying to me, "I love this dearly, but man, the mass-per-kerbal sure is ridiculously low in comparison to anything else right now.")

The Mk1 lander can is 0.6 tons per kerbal.

ALCOR is currently 0.533 tons per kerbal. Ok, so it's only a little low compared to the Mk1 can and then ridiculously low in comparison to everything else. Granted, every stock multi-kerbal pod has a ludicrously high mass per kerbal.

For mass-per-kerbal to match the Mk1, ALCOR would be 1.8 tons.

ALCOR also has a better reaction wheel torque per unit mass than any stock pod, with 7.5; its nearest competitor is the Mk1 pod with 6.25 torque per unit of mass. For comparison, the Mk2 lander can has 6 and the Mk1-2 pod has 3.75.

And it also has built in KAS storage and basically the best IVA ever.

In short, if you have ALCOR installed right now, there's no reason to ever use any stock pod for anything, unless you know you only need 1 kerbal and have an extreme need to minimize mass.

Summary balance suggestions: If balance with stock pods is a consideration for this project (which it certainly doesn't have to be), then ALCOR should do one (or some combination) of the following:

(a) Go back down to 2 kerbals, remaining an exceptionally good pod and a really fantastic improvement over the Mk2 can (as originally intended?). It would then be 0.8 tons per kerbal, the same as the Mk1 pod.

( Keep the 3-kerbal capacity, but increase mass to something greater than 0.6 tons per kerbal. A slight mass penalty over installing multiple Mk1 cans is justified by the stronger reaction wheels, KAS storage, cool IVA, and convenience/reduced partcount. ALCOR would then be positioned as more of a direct competitor to the Mk1-2 pod, while not being quite so overwhelmingly better than everything.

© Pay for the amazing mass-per-kerbal and IVA by getting rid of the KAS storage and having terrible reaction wheels, maybe less electricity storage, something like that.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Kanddak

[jrandom]

As an alternative, the impact tolerance could be drastically lowered to reflect the very light mass. Might be an interesting tradeoff. Better yet, a .cfg could be made to add another ALCOR entry. You could have one with higher mass and impact tolerance and SAS, etc..., and a lighter, much more fragile one with little to no SAS, and support for only 2 kerbals (via the maximum crew setting).

[Camacha]

Yes but it is a lander. which means at some point people will be living in it in gravity and limited to the floor.

Remember what happened with the landers the this one of modeled on? They left one man upstairs and did a little field trip. There should be enough space for two Kerbals to poop and sleep in there. If they even poop, that is. Or sleep. I am not sure what the little buggers are up to in their private lives.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Camacha

[Ledenko]

Remember what happened with the landers the this one of modeled on? They left one man upstairs and did a little field trip. There should be enough space for two Kerbals to poop and sleep in there. If they even poop, that is. Or sleep. I am not sure about what the little buggers are up to in their private lives.

They defy physics because they can, dammit! Personally I'd also prefer it to be a two kerbal lander but it's the author's call. Incidentally, wouldn't the realism config balance talk be better suited in the realism mod thread? I'm not sure it's conducive to balancing this module for the stock universe.

[Boamere]

Hey anyone know what the IR button does on the pod?

[jrandom]

They defy physics because they can, dammit! Personally I'd also prefer it to be a two kerbal lander but it's the author's call. Incidentally, wouldn't the realism config balance talk be better suited in the realism mod thread? I'm not sure it's conducive to balancing this module for the stock universe.

Whether its balancing for Realism Overhaul or balancing for Stock, the same idea apply -- you just plug in different specific numbers. I'd consider the posts relevant.

[alexustas]

Hello everyone! I'm back from my vacation and back to work on ALCOR. I hope to publish an update in the upcoming week unless work interferes.))

[alexustas]

Hey anyone know what the IR button does on the pod?

The "IR?" button is just a spot reserved for the prospective Infernal Robotics control menu, which may or may not materialise. Same as the "kOS?" button which is reserved for a prospective kOS interface.