Lander Can Earlier in Tech Tree

[Whirligig Girl]

I think we need the Mk1 Lander Can earlier in the tech tree. By the time you get it you already have 2.5m parts and the window on the pod is useless for landing. And it doesn't really make sense that we have to make our poor Kerbanauts use that tiny window on the Mk1 pod, when the lander can would be so much better. I don't even know HOW my pilots can land on the Mun in a Mk1 pod. They can't even look down!

See the entry "Pilot View" Here:

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/landing.php

[Kegereneku]

Ok with that.

A thought :

Since we know have an incentive to have multiple Kerbal on a mission, who's interested by making it a 2 seater ? (very tight I now) And the Mk2 a 3 seater ?

Not worth remaking the IVA view ?

[Anquietas314]

I don't even know HOW my pilots can land on the Mun in a Mk1 pod. They can't even look down!

Well, isn't that what the RADAR altimeter is for? I think it really depends on your difficulty settings though. In my 0.90 career I was physically unable to go the Mun (required both VAB and launchpad upgrade) until after I'd already unlocked the lander can anyway.

(disclaimer: no doubt somebody's figured out a way to do it without the upgrades.... I am not that guy )

[MKI]

Ok with that.

A thought :

Since we know have an incentive to have multiple Kerbal on a mission, who's interested by making it a 2 seater ? (very tight I now) And the Mk2 a 3 seater ?

Not worth remaking the IVA view ?

Really the game needs a two seat command pod. But balancing that sort of pod is difficult. If its 2.5m large, its to large as its competiting with the 2.5m lander can (which is already to heavy) and the 3 man command pod.

And its hard to believe a 1.5m pod can hold two people. Kerbals just have to large of a head.

I must agree with the OP. Currently the MK1 lander can appears with 2.5m parts, and normally I have landed on all the nearby bodies of kerbin with the first pod. I always felt its existence there would change once we get re-entry effects, so you can't just use the lander can instead of the pod early. But for now it could be moved down a tier.

But I totally believe Kerbals can land without seeing where they need to go, they have all those intraments for a reason haha.

Plus what about the inline mk1 spaceplane cockpit?? Theres more dire questions to be asked than how do they land with a tiny window haha.

@armagheddonsgw

I play on intermediate and I landed on the mun before i upgraded the VAB. The key was i landed with a sptunick probe (no sas very interesting) on a one way trip to finish the explore the mun contract, to finish off getting the cash for the VAB upgrade.

[Anquietas314]

@armagheddonsgw

I play on intermediate and I landed on the mun before i upgraded the VAB. The key was i landed with a sptunick probe (no sas very interesting) on a one way trip to finish the explore the mun contract, to finish off getting the cash for the VAB upgrade.

Well yeah I guess there's that. I probably should have clarified; I meant a manned lander lol (nice job landing a stayputnik on the Mun with no SAS!)

[thereaverofdarkness]

1.25m long pod that seats two. Squad add it to the game.

[Capt Snuggler]

If the tech tree was re-designed in the way described by Cpt. Kipard, it would allow the player to chose where they want to develop there tech on a part by part basis.

the "Test part" contracts would advertise new parts to the player and let you "try before you buy".

see Cpt. Kipard's idea here:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99521?p=1567918&viewfull=1#post1567918

[KrazyKrl]

1.25m long pod that seats two. Squad add it to the game.

I can see it now... A 2 seater that's as long as the FL-T800. You need to stick all those snacks in there somewhere, it goes to space. I can't even think of a reasonable way to use it.

[MKI]

Well yeah I guess there's that. I probably should have clarified; I meant a manned lander lol (nice job landing a stayputnik on the Mun with no SAS!)

A manned version would of done better, but he would have to chill for a month until I can come rescue him. But in the end the whole mission would of been more efficient science wise.

I think the best bet is something akin to the MK1 inline pod, but "gemini looking" with 2 kerbals 1 in front and 1 behind. It could be roughly the size of the MK1 spaceplane pod, with a quarter tank extra extension in length.

balance it to where its a "better deal" to send two kerbals for only the price of one and a half(lol) in terms of space, and weight.

I can see it now

[Wallygator]

I would suggest a parallel line of vostock, soyuz-esque pods, 1 2 and 3 man with built in SAS as a homage to the soviet programme. they might cost differently to balance it all out, but that would be a nice set of options peppering the tech tree.

[Whirligig Girl]

Maybe we should get a new size class of parts. 1.875m (Size 1.5) parts, like in Homegrown Rocket Parts.

[Anquietas314]

Maybe we should get a new size class of parts. 1.875m (Size 1.5) parts, like in Homegrown Rocket Parts.

Well, okay, but what purpose would they serve that the existing parts don't already accommodate to some degree? Remember a whole new class of parts means a significant investment of the devs' time, or incorporating a mod that already exists (which admittedly will still use a lot of dev time due to planning and so on). If there's not a significant benefit for that, I don't think it's worthwhile at the moment

A larger class of parts than the ones in the game, for example, would serve a purpose: you can lift even bigger things to orbit with them. Similarly a smaller class would let you build even lighter probes/satellites/etc allowing you to send a probe to, say, Laythe, for even less than is currently possible.

I do of course want to see more parts in the game, but only if there's a decent reason for them being there