Jump to content

Linkageless

Members
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Excellent

About Linkageless

  • Rank
    That rattly bit somewhere down on the left

Profile Information

  • Location
    In a discontinuity nowhere nearby

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Excellent to have this in stock, I love it! Ooh! So potentially, the lightest crewed craft just got lighter!
  2. Another interesting tidbit I hadn't appreciated - I don't know if this has changed from previously as I'd never tried - when a backward facing part is selected as root, the green & yellow plots get mirrored to the side I'd expect. Perhaps this is just this craft, the backward part in this case is a long mk2-mk1 adapter tank.
  3. I, too, am wondering why I can't make sense of the graphs. I haven't compared with 1.9.x or earlier, but am wondering if the Torque vs AoA are reversed somehow. Is the right hand side positive AoA, left side negative AoA? I think it's a fair assumption that up is upward torque. What I see is the green and yellow lines start from the top left and slope down to the bottom right on what seems like a generally well balanced craft. To me, it appears the upward torque is on negative AoA, going to downward torque on positive Aoa, which is the opposite of reality. I suppose you could a
  4. I'll second these two button feature requests. I'd also request that an 'immediate update' tick box be added, disabling the 'apply angle changes' button. I'm not sure they'll solve the mirror symmetry issue we've described, but would at very least make working around it easier.
  5. It does seem like it's down to floating point errors. Seeing them right in front of you makes them all the more frustrating! I suppose the thrust of my question is, what do people do to mitigate this? Build in tolerance? (eg moar dihedral, lots of roll authority) Find a way to balance out the errors so they mostly average out? (Not so easy on a small, fast aeroplane). Do people just cope with it in flight? (eg trim, or constant/repeated control input). Come to think of it, this may be why I've generally shied away from very small spaceplanes. It seems easier to build a mid or l
  6. There's something that's really bothering me at present while working on spaceplanes. I feel it's more a problem with KSP than Precise Editor - it's the precision that's showing KSP up in this case. I use Precise Editor for almost all my spaceplane builds as I've found it's perfect for getting everything 'just so', and then tweaking by tiny amounts when very subtle changes are needed. What troubles me is that the mirror symmetry in the SPH just isn't perfect. Position is sometimes out by one or two points (ten thousandths, ie 0.0001) but the main problem for me seems to be angles, the
  7. I've had more luck with much closer pairs of docking ports. My usual system is to have a pair of Clamp-o-tron Sr. side by side, mounted on the smallest Rockomax tanks. Even these need care to align when docking, but it's nice and robust once docked. Being at apoapsis in a high orbit helps lots, both vessels can be pointed prograde, normal or radial and won't be greatly twisting relative to each other. If that's not an option, perhaps pointing them both radial will be the stablest attitude. One thing that doesn't seem to have been mentioned, and possibly isn't the case here - bewar
  8. Looking forward to this. The content of this post seems rather familiar, though.
  9. It is regrettable that KSP appears to consider lift from rotor blades as negative drag vectors. An illustration of this is that to get maximum forward prop thrust for any particular situation I need to adjust blade pitch to maximise the negative 'Total drag' shown in the AeroGUI. ie - the forward thrust from the prop blades has been subtracted from the total drag of the plane.
  10. In case it helps, @Booots, I've given 1.2.4 from CKAN on KSP Linux 1.10.1 just to see if there were any differences. I loaded up a fairly complex spaceplane and after a few moments hit the wind tunnel button. Sadly it lasted only a few moments, not long enough to touch any controls. KSP.log entries were along these lines: [LOG 09:09:56.827] FAR not installed [LOG 09:09:56.991] Fuel: 0.01773419, ISP: 85, Thrust: 0.173913 [LOG 09:09:56.991] Fuel: 0.01773419, ISP: 85, Thrust: 0.173913 [LOG 09:09:57.006] Fuel: 0.01773419, ISP: 85, Thrust: 0.173913 ... [LOG 09:09:58.440]
  11. So... We have 1.11.0 coming... will there still be a 1.10.2 with at least a fix for the resource transfer bug?
  12. I've found my mammoth/vector based SSTOs work best with <50m/s dV saved for a final landing burn. There's no need for heat shields as long as you don't have a heavy fuel load, have a big draggy docking port Sr. or decoupler where your payload was, and be careful about what you mount your engines to so the heat is distributed well. I slow to manageable landing speeds with a combination of airbrakes (authority tweaked to be sufficiently in plasma shadow, or pumped with the b key), then drogues, then a few parachutes (all set to 10 spread angle but stepped in altitude so the G doesn'
  13. I'd not noticed any such bug on my 1.10 on Linux. How far into the ground is the drill going? You'll probably want about half it's extended length into the ground. Could you post a screenshot showing the drill and it's part action menu?
  14. I'll agree that rigid attachment may be over the top for this, and may even have a negative effect given that they remove a lot of the springy resilience that normal joints, struts and autostruts provide. I wouldn't agree that they should never be used. I've found there's more than just mechanisms that may need consistent tolerances, for example if you wish to reduce/remove wing flex. Sometimes, keeping certain parts rigidly together is what you want to prevent additional strain on other parts. I would encourage the OP to experiment with what works best, as learning what works best in
  15. Seconded - I find that often rigid attachment removes that bit of flexibility that almost works like a shock absorber for certain structures. It's not something I would usually use on landing gear, but elsewhere on things that need to keep their shape like wings.
×
×
  • Create New...