Payload container

[Kasuha]

Background story:

In attempt to conquer the Jool system, I prepared a ship holding 13 probes. These probes were my masterpieces, small and light, unfortunately consisting of more than 100 parts each. Even though the ship I was trying to use to send them on the way was not very big, the part count turned the launch event into uncontrollable slideshow. And on top of it, these probes were not directly involved in anything, I just needed to transfer them to the Jool system. In the end I had to send three separate ships.

Suggestion:

Add a (procedural) part called "payload container". It could hold one other saved ship or subassembly, adjust its size to correspond to the "contained" ship, assume its mass but behave as a single part until it is open. When opening it, it would release its "contents" right into space, i.e. not attached to anything. That could be done simply by spawning the "contained" ship in place where the container was.

Released payload should assume the name under which the ship/subassembly was originally saved and it should be empty (no Kerbals inside).

There could be several shapes of such containers such as a box, a cylinder, and a cylinder with pointy end resembling currently used fairings. It should be possible to attach them both using mount points and radially.

Benefits:

- lower part count and increased framerate during launch and transfer

- mothership cannot inadvertently draw resources (monopropellant, fuel) from its payload

- staging setup of the payload does not mix with staging setup of the mothership

Edited August 19, 2014 by Kasuha
typo fix

[Wanderfound]

Like this?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88933-0-24-2-Hangar-v1-1-1-1

[Dodgey]

This is a very well thought out idea, I'm honestly surprised it has taken this long for someone to come up with it. There could also be different methods of deployment as it were. For example for one box only the end would open, needing the payload to be moved outside of the container but otherwise leaving it intact inside, or the container could split open like a fairing.

[Psycix]

I once made a thread about this. For some reason it got a lot of resistance from a handful of people, but many others thought it was a good idea.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43740-The-war-against-lag-Anti-lag-fairings

The hangar thing looks interesting. Glad to see something like it exists now, albeit a bit simpler.

EDIT:

Sorry for the ninja Kermunist! Haha

Edited August 19, 2014 by Psycix

[Kermunist]

This is a very well thought out idea, I'm honestly surprised it has taken this long for someone to come up with it.

Something broadly similar has been suggested before:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43740-The-war-against-lag-Anti-lag-fairings

and I like the idea. That thread went downhill rather fast though.

[r4pt0r]

the mass of the payload would be added to the container, naturally?

this is also how they should do cargo bays lol

[Dodgey]

Something broadly similar has been suggested before:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43740-The-war-against-lag-Anti-lag-fairings

and I like the idea. That thread went downhill rather fast though.

The idea is sound though, if the issue is with launching stupidly unbelievable payloads then just make the containers smaller and any useful for many small things such as in Kasura's example. There are plenty of ways to get around it.

[geb]

Yes. Agree.

It would be possible to exploit this mechanic to do stupid unrealistic things, but then you can say exactly the same of all kerbal technology. That's not really a flaw.

[Red Iron Crown]

Great idea. Should be combined with fairings. I don't really see the problem with having Kerbals in the payload, though.

[Schmonzo]

this has been suggested a lot in the past, it was how many people imagined the implementation of rovers and I for one still hope it will come, because in my opinion the launching and landing of rovers is very flawed right now...

[Frank_G]

I posted a similar idea to this in a fairings discussion a while ago, where payload should be handled as a single piece as long as the fairings are closed.

I totally second this suggestion.

[Apature rocket science]

There's some mod that dose this as a payload thing that you have to sent payloads to orbits but once you have done it you can launch it and skip the whole launch thing to the planet or wherever

[Capt Snuggler]

+1 this would be a nice, tidy way of handling fairings and reducing the drag of payloads. very nice.

question:

what about resources within the container? can they be used, burnt or otherwise accessed?

if the fairing/container was damaged would it just explode? or would it count as "opening", spawning the payload?

[Kasuha]

+1 this would be a nice, tidy way of handling fairings and reducing the drag of payloads. very nice.

I don't think it would have any significant effect on drag, at least in stock aerodynamics. But it would affect it if you used parts with different drag coefficient than the drag coefficient of the container.

what about resources within the container? can they be used, burnt or otherwise accessed?

They would not be accessible. Part of the idea is to prevent e.g. RCS system drawing monopropellant from payload's tanks. The payload would not need even have to be there, even graphically - to relieve some unnecessary stress off the graphics card.

if the fairing/container was damaged would it just explode? or would it count as "opening", spawning the payload?

I have no strong feelings either way. For the purpose of the suggestion this choice does not matter but throwing the payload in as soon as the shell cracks open would definitely feel more realistic (and bring more epic explosions).

[Majorjim!]

Personally I don't like the idea of knowing that my payload 'isn't there' until the fairing opens.

Quantum mechanical jokes aside, This seems like a unneeded solution to KSP's framerate issues. I also see many possible problems with the payload 'loading'.

Say you where using this method on your Jool rocket with those high part count probes. The moment the fairing opens there will be an almighty pause

as the game loads in said parts. This could lead to Kraken attacks and other unwanted effects.

[Kasuha]

There will be "almighty" pause, about identical to the one that happens when you rendezvous with such ship in orbit. And I don't see reason for Kraken attacks if velocities of the two ships are initially exactly the same, the game can handle such situations already. If there ever were problems, they were when the two ship's velocities were significantly different.

Could you elaborate more on the "unneeded solution to KSP's framerate issues" part? My suggestion has IMO great potential exactly in this area as you can potentially pack hundreds of thousands of parts into single ship without impact on playability (as long as you don't release them all at once).

[Red Iron Crown]

Could you elaborate more on the "unneeded solution to KSP's framerate issues" part? My suggestion has IMO great potential exactly in this area as you can potentially pack hundreds of thousands of parts into single ship without impact on playability (as long as you don't release them all at once).

I have to agree with this. IME with playing on an older PC, part count is the largest factor in performance. I tried the part welding mod a while ago (which does something similar to this suggestion) and the effect on performance is substantial.

[Majorjim!]

There will be "almighty" pause, about identical to the one that happens when you rendezvous with such ship in orbit. And I don't see reason for Kraken attacks if velocities of the two ships are initially exactly the same, the game can handle such situations already. If there ever were problems, they were when the two ship's velocities were significantly different.

Could you elaborate more on the "unneeded solution to KSP's framerate issues" part? My suggestion has IMO great potential exactly in this area as you can potentially pack hundreds of thousands of parts into single ship without impact on playability (as long as you don't release them all at once).

The pause will be much longer than when docking as the parts will actually have to be loaded when the faring opens.

I can elaborate, yes. Look at it this way:

Problem, low frame rate due to high part count.

your solution, don't load parts until in orbit (this is effectively cheating as you don't have to worry about engineering issues as it would be a single part).

Not to mention the fact that when they do load there will be a long pause and possible dis-assembly issues when loading the parts.

We all know how finicky the game can be and this just seems like an inelegant solution. Surely you can just make the craft with fewer parts. And not have to resort to magically appearing payloads.

It goes against the spirit of the game.

[Kasuha]

The pause will be much longer than when docking as the parts will actually have to be loaded when the faring opens.

Did I mention docking? No. I did not talk about docking. I was talking about rendezvous. That is, the pause which occurs when the ship you're visiting comes closer than 2.3 km. Yes, there would be such pause, proportional to the complexity of the payload.

your solution, don't load parts until in orbit

Oh no no, there's nothing about orbit. The idea is, don't load the part until it is needed. So I can fly to Jool system with 13 probe packages counting as 13 parts and as I fly through the system, I can release these probes one by one. Or I can bring a rover on Mun packaged and only unpack it after landing. I can leave whole mothership in orbit, not mentioning crazy lifter getting it off from KSC and their parts will never meet parts of the rover.

(this is effectively cheating as you don't have to worry about engineering issues as it would be a single part).

I don't share your opinion on cheating and a couple of well placed struts usually take good care of all engineering problems. Even (some of) current fairings allow putting struts between them and payload to prevent the payload clipping through the fairing during launch phases. I agree it would make this phase simpler and would get rid of this (IMO unnecessary) strutwork and most importantly high launch part counts.

Not to mention the fact that when they do load there will be a long pause and possible dis-assembly issues when loading the parts.

We've already discussed this.

We all know how finicky the game can be and this just seems like an inelegant solution. Surely you can just make the craft with fewer parts. And not have to resort to magically appearing payloads.

It goes against the spirit of the game.

While I dont share it, I respect this as your honest opinion.

[Majorjim!]

I appreciate your reply mate. Debate is always healthy.

Wouldn't the welding mod do exactly what you want to do?

[Kasuha]

Wouldn't the welding mod do exactly what you want to do?

I don't know much about the welding mod but I doubt I can weld whole scientific probe or e.g. lander into one piece and expect it to be fully functional. It also cannot "unweld" previously welded things.

[Skyler4856]

That'll allow me to launch absolutely absurd crafts...

[Laie]

That'll allow me to launch absolutely absurd crafts...

But strapping rovers to the back of your rocket is perfectly sane, right?

Seriously: Patently absurd payloads can safely be taken to orbit though the power of MOAR STRUTS. This wouldn't let you do something that you can't do anyway -- it will, however, remove the part count penalty. As I see no point in wasting CPU cycles, I'm very much for it.

[tater]

Not even just fairings, but things like the (real) Apollo rocket. Some standard diameter tubes with an internal decoupler (little or no ejection force), and open on one end. So your CM is built. You have a subassembly already made of a lander that fits inside the standard tube and you stack that with more tanks and engines below. Blow the stage before the payload tube. Now your CM can separate. You maneuver to dock, and on the bottom of the payload tube (invisible before, and not done by hitting "space") you can click "decouple payload" when ready.

Different versions might open the container like a clamshell, or split it lengthwise, drop a ramp, etc.

[DocMoriarty]

+1

I like the idea of sizeable fairings / cargo bays that "compress" part count until pandoras box is opened.

IMO they should work as follows:

- sizeable by user but payload must fully fit in there so that CoM of payload is right in the center of the cargo bay. That said the port to which payload is connected must extend enough to precisely center payload. This would make it a lot easier to build space planes with correctly aligned / balanced payload

- sizeable either without limit or with very wide limits

- there should be "top", "front" and "end" docking ports inside

- CoL, CoT of stuff inside is completely ignored as well in SPH/VAB as in game

- Drag of stuff inside is ignored, instead the cargo bays drag value is used along with the combined weight of payload and cargo bay

It should also be usable for stuff like this long extended "docking bar" for a space station:

Or for this transport of 4xPotatoe landers here on a test flight around KSC:

If you give me then a reasonable space plane cockpit that is attachable to rockomax size my transporters would actually start to look like something.

Edited August 22, 2014 by DocMoriarty