radial seperators

[rockets-don't-make-toast]

I built a really small flyer, to small for docking ports, and I put a bunch of them on a big plane and took off. I had to use radial decouplers and when I detached the decouplers were stuck to the flyers. The flyers were so small it threw off the balance. I think we should have radial seperators. Like the seperators we have now but for putting stuff on the side of the rocket or plane. that would be really helpful.

[Rath]

Stick on a cubic octagonal strut, attach .625m separator to that, stick on plane.

[magnemoe]

On 15.1.2017 at 7:11 AM, Rath said:

Stick on a cubic octagonal strut, attach .625m separator to that, stick on plane.

Does not work in all settings. 
As I understand here you have under wing payload you want to release in space, the radial decopler stays on the decoupled part and add weight and unbalance. 
Easiest would be an modified small hardpoint, either as an seperator or it stays on mothership like the hardpoints on fighter jets, this is probably safer in atmospheric flight. 
Would also be useful for probe dispensers with an series of small probes around an transfer stage,  
 

[Rath]

On 1/21/2017 at 9:42 PM, magnemoe said:

Does not work in all settings. 
As I understand here you have under wing payload you want to release in space, the radial decopler stays on the decoupled part and add weight and unbalance. 
Easiest would be an modified small hardpoint, either as an seperator or it stays on mothership like the hardpoints on fighter jets, this is probably safer in atmospheric flight. 
Would also be useful for probe dispensers with an series of small probes around an transfer stage,  
 

A .625m separator (not decoupler) on a strut detaches everything.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Rath

[magnemoe]

3 hours ago, Rath said:

A .625m separator (not decoupler) on a strut detaches everything.

Yes but it will require an structure to have the probe face the same way as mothership it would also be high drag in the atmosphere.
Has done this myself, then mostly with having an larger probe in front then multiple small probes on the side. 

An small hardpoint who decopled payload and stayed on the mothership would make lots of sense for fighter plane stuff. 
Realistically I don't think you would take under wing cargo to space simply because of drag and keeping it in an cargo bay eliminate the need for an fairing. 


 

[swjr-swis]

I would be happiest with a radial decoupler/separator that leaves no CoM/CoD-affecting residues behind, either on the (formerly) radially attached booster/missile/satellite/mini-plane or the main craft. But adding 'reversed' versions of the current ones that leave the residual structure on the main craft would solve most of my use cases for this.

I would very much welcome the option of selecting to which end the small and large hardpoints stick when decoupling - preferably as a toggle instead of duplicating parts, as long as we're in wishful thinking mode (and why not do the same for the radial decouplers too?).

Any residual structure of these radial separators (not decouplers) that comes loose of both ends should become negligible debris though, otherwise it becomes a liability in most cases.

[Frozen_Heart]

Nova made some good ones as a mod ages ago. Don't know if the mod still works though and can't find it.

 

They are (old) stockalike as he was the dev the made all the original ksp parts, so match the current decouplers and separators.

 

edit: found it: 

 

Edited January 23, 2017 by Frozen_Heart

[Sharpy]

It's a little work but works flawlessly,

 

[MinimalMinmus]

This.

I tend to send one huge probe with several microprobes as relays, and because of the lack of radial separators they act pretty weird at "birth"

[swjr-swis]

10 hours ago, Sharpy said:

It's a little work but works flawlessly,

I've been puzzling over this one for a bit now. Are you sure you're talking about the same thing OP is?

First, I haven't seen that part for... well, a couple of versions now, not sure when it was. The current (1.2.2) part called 'structural pylon' looks like a tweakscaled large version of the small hardpoint. And second... the current part does not need this entire procedure to 'force' it to separate from the main craft... because it does so natively. It separates from the parent part, and stays stuck to the child part.

Maybe my lack of sleep over the past days is playing tricks on me, but the trick shown in your link does not seem to work with the current pylon.

[Sharpy]

Works, but the new pylon makes the COStrut clip whole into it, so it's quite tricky to grab it for saving as subassembly - you have to move the camera into the pylon.

If you use Small Hardpoint instead, the problem should be gone though.

- the girder is attached to the COStrut, which is currently invisible, clipped into the hardpoint whole. I'm setting the girder as root.

I've moved the camera into the hardpoint and hover the cursor over the COStrut. It's green and the girder is not, that means clicking now will separate the correct "branch" for saving as subassembly.

The new "craft" Hecs2 is root, the pylon was attached to it, and now I'm attaching the subassembly. It defaulted to orientation that clipped it right into the "craft" so I had to use A/D to "rotate it out", now it's in the right position.

Ready "craft". Both decouplers moved to the same stage.

After separation: