Shnyrik

Members
  • Content count

    126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

1 Follower

  1. It seems that TweakScale somehow messes up control authority values. I have tweakable everything mod installed, and it shows negative control authority for resized SAS parts. However the same tweakable everything can fix the problem, as it allows putting in some more reasonable value by hand.
  2. Sorry, there were reports about used to have problems with terrain scatterers for mods that use Kopernicus for 1.3. So there, probably, will be no scatterers after I install the new version, am I correct? Maybe, it's worth mentioning in the OP, since there were a lot of questions about disappearing terrain scatterers in other threads.
  3. For now there is a walkway part, which has no interior itself, but at least can imitate that there is some interior inside hull parts
  4. Ducted fan is a bit more efficient, because it reduces losses in thrust from the tips of the propeller. And it is safer, of course, and looks cool
  5. Interesting idea As for the next video, I've been recently succesfully trying to land a WWII-style interceptor on an airparked airship. But since @Locob anounced beautiful pilot cap for open cockpits, I'll have to wait till release
  6. I can also add that you actually don't even need to land on the flight deck to refuel. Because landing on a moving airship with low relative speed technically does not differ much from docking to it. In one case you need hook and arresting wire and in the other -- winch and two docking ports The advantage is that relative size of the plane and the airship doesn't matter at all, only speed.
  7. Well, it's actually an inborn problem for all real world carriers. There always are a lot of planes which are just too big for a flight deck 150 m/s is 540 km/h or 292 knots. For a landing speed this is completly insane. Even my Starfighter (even with FAR) lands slower And at such a great speed even if you manage not to miss the landing deck, you'll have to use not only arresting wire, but also drag chute and brake rockets to stop in time I believe, it's easier to build a plane with lower landing speed. Something with a variable-sweep wing, may be. Yes, this is a problem. But still it depends very much on how fast you approach. At 30-40 m/s 2,5 km is tolerable, at 100-150 m/s this is too close, of course. Besides there is one more problem with OLS: unlike the rest of the ACA mod, OLS is still not compatible with FAR. However there is an alternative: I know a mod with laser pointers, which, I believe, can be used as a palliative.
  8. I see on the screenshot, that you use AirPark mod. Heisenberg itself has it's own version of air park included. When I tried to use both mods at once I had some conflicts. Try deleting AirPark. BTW, interesting design
  9. I use B9 procedural wings, which can be painted, and for hull I use procedural parts with modified texture from Kerbal Hacks mod. This are the modified textures (blue, red and stockalike light grey): https://www.dropbox.com/preview/KerbalHacks.zip And this is the source:
  10. Yes. This is a bit unrealistic. And besides, the fact that launch and landing area intersect bothers me. So now I'm thinking of a rail launch system. Something like that: B9 procedural wings, procedural parts, L-39 cockpit from Airplane cockpits and MAD Aerospace for intakes. Edge pieces are also from B9 mod.
  11. It’s time for the promised story of how to operate jets from carrier airship. I somehow managed to delete my save folder, so in comparison with the preview picture there will be a bit different airship and a bit different jets But that is for good, because I’ve managed to discover that in 1.3 stock wheels don’t bounce during undocking any more. That allows docking in a much simpler and more good-looking way. Besides, part of my problems with ALG’s instability was actually caused by Configurable containers mod For the beginning some theory. First of all I can only agree with @panarchist’s proposition that kerbal carrier airships would operate much similar to pre-angled deck carriers. However there still are some differences, caused mainly by inevitable constructive differences between naval vessel and airship. 1) Airship carrier is smaller than naval one and it’s flight deck is also much smaller. 2) Airship (no matter how big it is) is by it’s nature much-much-much lighter than any naval vessel. And due to that reason it is more sensitive to balance changes caused by airplanes driving along it’s flight deck. 3) Despite it’s behemoth-like appearance carrier airship is actually much faster then any of it’s naval colleagues. The constructive differences lead to different design and tactics of use. Let’s start from the elevator. For pocket carrier side elevator is the only choice, as it saves a lot of hangar space. There is only one nuance with it. Sometimes (especially after you load saved game) it’s animation may stuck. The reliable way to avoid this is to stow and then deploy the elevator right after you load from save. Now about storing planes in hangar and preparing them for take-off on flight deck. Considering balance issues, you would probably like to store your planes as close to the geometrical center of your airship as possible. The ideal place for your maintenance area is also right above the geometrical center and the center of mass. And, of course, you can play with counterweights to keep balance. See the picture below Now about take-offs and landings. I wouldn’t probably say something refreshingly new right now, but conventional landing on a very small deck is not an easy task There are some ways to make it easier: 1) you can build planes with low landing speed, 2) you can train and actually 3) you can build a supercarrier with a relatively big and wide flight deck Maybe we’ll speak about supercarriers some day later, but if we speak about small pocket carriers none of the above gives reliable results. Of course you can just give up using conventional planes and use VTOL planes or helicopters instead. But easy way is not a kerbal way So the only remaining decision is to invent some unconventional way to land a conventional plane And it’s now time to remember of airship’s advantage over it’s naval colleagues: speed. Naval carriers do use speed to help planes to take off. But airship is actually capable of flying at plane’s landing speed (or even faster). So instead of landing you can “dock” the plane to the flight deck with a very low relative speed. Very much like actual planes docked with USS Akron and USS Macon or like modern jets “dock” with flying tanker. And this leads to a sudden discovery: you don’t actually need flight deck to land on a pocket carrier And that in turn leads to sudden design solutions 1) Your flight deck will be used mainly to park your planes and to launch them, so it needn’t actually be longer then is needed for your plane to take off. 2) You can place your catapult in the rear end of your short flight deck. 3) Your plane don’t need runway to land, due to low relative speed arresting wire will stop it immediately after it touched down. So you can place the arresting wire right over the center of mass of your airship right in the middle of your flight deck – that will insure than newly landed plane won’t affect airship’s balance. Summing all above, for the most rational use of your flight deck space you should place your catapult BEFORE your landing area. In the scheme flight deck of your pocket carrier might look like this: Of course this means you cannot launch and land planes at the same time, but it’s OK for KSP There is an even more rational and at the same time more kerbal layout of the flight deck: you can put your catapult at the fore end and your ski-jump at the rear. So landing plane won’t have to jump over the one preparing for take-off. But enough theory, let’s have some practice I've added my comments as subtitles. You might notice, that despite my own recommendations, I do have long flight deck. There are two reasons: 1) my small and slow biplanes are actually capable of conventional landing on this training carrier, but they need long flight deck for that; 2) my training planes are supposed to imitate some early age jets and have low TWR and acceleration, they need long runway to take off. I only use one counterweight. That is because if you park planes on parking “slots” in numerical order only one counterweight is enough. And to be completely honest, my jets are light (they weight about 4 tons each) and my airship is rather heavy (it weights more than 200 tons), so jets can’t actually spoil balance too much and I don’t need that counterweight at all
  12. Works fine for me.