• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

46 Excellent

About Redacted

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Would it be possible to include the option to have the turbo-props be run from electric?
  2. I really like the concept of the ramjet-ring as this will allow the user to mix and match what goes inside the ring. Case in point... want to add a Nerv or an ion-engine. Maybe add a docking point or tail cone to reduce drag. Lots of options with potential synergy here!
  3. One thing i see missing from the game is viable "small" jet motors for 1.25 or less. It's likely that your work could help here.
  4. Any design discussion of a Prop based craft is pointless so long as the motors induce Yaw when spinning in twin configuration. (CW and CCW)
  5. This is akin to saying that there isn't a problem with propeller based aircraft, when its clear via direct observation that this is indeed the case. Hell, it's not like we can build an aircraft "around" the problem to take advantage of the mechanics to make something that sorta flies as expected. With the game as it is currently there is no reliable in-game application for the Prop / Rotor system period! In the best of situations is a novelty and a poorly scripted one at that. Side note: Yes, I realize that the propeller angle / flutter is also part of the problem. That being said, on a test-stand with it's rotational axis locked, the props will still flutter about without the motors Yaw-Torque compounding things. From that I'm of the opinion that the problem has more to do with the games handling of physic's not being able to keep up with the rotational speed of the propellers. (Game tick rate limitations)
  6. @michaelbezos1 I'd much prefer that the motors rotational torque not also include a forward vector. (This is what propellers are for) Not the absolute spaghetti mess that passes for a propeller system under KSP. In a nutshell, what the current game mechanics mean is that any rear-ward facing motor would induce negative thrust with / without a propeller attached. Which if you think about it is bloody bonkers. Yeah granted, the motors should still induce rotational forces but those can easily be countered by adding a 2nd counter-rotating motor. Side Note: In a perfect system with the aircraft flying straight , the torque / thrust should be equal across both motors. (see preceding image) However this is not currently possible within KSP mechanics. Even on a test stand the entire system goes nuts as the angle of attack changes while the stand rotates from the induced Yaw. Its why a prop driven aircraft in KSP flies like poopy, no matter how well built they are.
  7. @jrodriguez Do you know if the same is true for the KAL-1000 ?
  8. @jrodriguez Strange thing is that I can see the AI providing Axis inputs via the games GUI, which if you think about it, is the same "input" I provide manually. Guessing there is a scripting disconnect between whats being input and the resulting behavior of the aircraft. Well anyways, BD Armory is missing out on being able to do some really cool things by not having the AI able to control a hinge or servo.
  9. Anyone know if the AI pilot can made use of the user created action-groups (axis) commands? Example: I've a G-0 hinge connected to a Juno motor and slaved via the Pitch Axis group. When i manually provide a Pitch input, the motor helps Pitch the aircraft in the desired direction. When I enable the AI the hinge no longer deflect despite obviously providing a Pitch input to the system.
  10. Its the ***-hats like that that end up destroying a community. Saw the same thing with Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. In a nutshell it came down between what the fan-boys wanted and what the modders (such as my self) were offering. They wanted a predictable game so they could continue to use their exploits (in tournaments), while the modders wanted to fix bugs and submit new content. In the end all of the serious modders left, leaving the game is a very sorry state that IMO is still one big exploit. Here is the link to the craft: Its not prefect but compared to KSP 1.9.1 its controllable.
  11. So far the KSP V1.9.0 craft i am messing with is working. Will upload it in a few, then post a link.
  12. Just did a Swing Test Stand experiment using version KSP version 1.9.0, had NO yaw deviation what so ever. Edit will attempt to load in the craft i was working on to see if this also true here.
  13. Anyone ever question why the Rotors speed limit is capped at “460”? One phenomena I’ve seen before is a games “Tick” rate can cause problems with the internal physics and video rendering. What i mean by this is that most games update at a predetermined Hz and the video rendering is often several times faster, in some cases a whole factor faster. What this leads to is a display where parts can become detached as physical behaviors are updated too slowly to be model effectively. (Sound familiar?) Case in point this can easily be observed in KSP as the physics-warp is enabled. Propellers will appear to separate from the Rotors, increasing their distance as the phsyics-warp is sped up. Now factor in the fact that each Propeller “Entity” is being modeled to provide lift and the whole simulation become garbage rather quickly. However in KSP’s case this garbage can happen without engaging physics-warp. Just spin up a rotor and the whole thing starts to become unstable. Which produces some rather unpredictable results as the Physics engine cant keep up with the rotational speed of the Propellers / Rotors.