Allow EAS-1 external command seat to be populated from VAB/SPH

[cicatrix]

Really, this is very frustrating and meaningless. When I test a rover with a command seat I have to 'launch' an unmanned rover then go back to SPH/VAB, get a command pod with a Kerbal inside, 'launch' it as well, then go EVA, walk all way the to the rover in order to drive it. Or I have to invent some other cumbersome ways in order to get a Kerbal on a command seat. Why can't I just put him in while in VAB?

[SaturnV]

Squad want to prevent player use it as the command unit in manned missions, as it's mainly designed for light rovers.

In my opinion, if they add basic life support to stock, hight temperature and deadly airflow will prevent player doing that automatically. One more points for adding life support!

[cicatrix]

Squad cannot prevent me from launching a Kerbal to orbit sitting in it if I want to. In fact, I did this many times Why restrict me?

[Tuareg]

agree with op, i think its a big problem u cant launch rovers with commandseat only. i hate it...

[Vector-5]

I think this could be a good idea if the option was toggleable in the VAB or SPH. Sometimes defaulting to filling the seat with a kerb could be a bad idea. Say you launched a rover Apollo-style to the Mün. The rover will never come back to Kerbin, but will be left on the surface. If that seat is automatically filled, then your second kerbal (who traveled by rover to the Mün) will be left behind. Thus begins a tedious rescue mission to brig him back. So, I propose that the option to be filled should be available via right-click on the command chair. This could make the problem of including pods for rovers negligible, but could have negative repercussions not unlike the one I describe above.

-Vec

[Tuareg]

I think this could be a good idea if the option was toggleable in the VAB or SPH. Sometimes defaulting to filling the seat with a kerb could be a bad idea. Say you launched a rover Apollo-style to the Mün. The rover will never come back to Kerbin, but will be left on the surface. If that seat is automatically filled, then your second kerbal (who traveled by rover to the Mün) will be left behind. Thus begins a tedious rescue mission to brig him back. So, I propose that the option to be filled should be available via right-click on the command chair. This could make the problem of including pods for rovers negligible, but could have negative repercussions not unlike the one I describe above.

-Vec

it already works in the VAB/SPH so can fill or empty a seat. they would just need to enable the commandseat too

[cicatrix]

I think this could be a good idea if the option was toggleable in the VAB or SPH. Sometimes defaulting to filling the seat with a kerb could be a bad idea. Say you launched a rover Apollo-style to the Mün. The rover will never come back to Kerbin, but will be left on the surface. If that seat is automatically filled, then your second kerbal (who traveled by rover to the Mün) will be left behind. Thus begins a tedious rescue mission to brig him back. So, I propose that the option to be filled should be available via right-click on the command chair. This could make the problem of including pods for rovers negligible, but could have negative repercussions not unlike the one I describe above.

-Vec

Yes, by default, the seat should be empty. BUT I want it to be possible to manually assign a driver without resorting to 'tricks' with docked command module or EVA walking.

[michaelsteele3]

Support.

But as a workaround for now, be creative

[klgraham1013]

You have no idea how many times I've wanted to test a rover, but have had to launch a pod first and run the Kerbal off the runway.

Actually, you probably do.

[Alshain]

Really, this is very frustrating and meaningless. When I test a rover with a command seat I have to 'launch' an unmanned rover then go back to SPH/VAB, get a command pod with a Kerbal inside, 'launch' it as well, then go EVA, walk all way the to the rover in order to drive it. Or I have to invent some other cumbersome ways in order to get a Kerbal on a command seat. Why can't I just put him in while in VAB?

This is not me saying the idea is bad, I think it's a great idea and should be done.

But in the meantime, an easier way is to attach a command pod to the rover with a decoupler. EVA out of the command pod, get in the seat, decouple the pod. Still a bit silly, but better than launching two craft and walking.

[Coam]

I would like to see this implemented. Vector-5's way of doing it seems better than treating it as just-another command pod.

[Technical Ben]

Squad want to prevent player use it as the command unit in manned missions, as it's mainly designed for light rovers.

In my opinion, if they add basic life support to stock, hight temperature and deadly airflow will prevent player doing that automatically. One more points for adding life support!

The game can already decide to allow or disallow command control in the vab (though it might need to be overridden by an extra bit of code to do it just for the command seat). So should be doable without much change. Just set it to allowing "passengers" only from the VAB, but it defaults to a command/control seat after launch.

[Wabbit]

It's annoying, and I support this- if I want to launch a rover somewhere I have to include an intricate seperatron-fired and decouple pod machine. Just to test the darn thing, I need to risk flipping it over on the runway. Support!

[CaptRobau]

I've barely used the command seat because there's a lot of hassle with extra command pods and such. People who want to misuse it to build ultra-light launchers and such will do so if it's populatable from the VAB or not. Might as well make it easier to use for the other 99% if they're going to do that anyway.

[pokeman]

If I recall correctly this issue is a consequence of the way the seats work, more like a docking port for the kerbal "part". So it's not as simple to add crew in the VAB on the code side as the normal pods.