FlazeTheDragon

Im willing to become a martyr for the dark mode community if thats what it takes!

hmmmm, very interesting, ill need to run some tests on this. I mostly just assumed that a thicker wing would create more lift.... since thats how it should be xD And increasing wing thickness for a couple of my (not very much worked on ) builds that i thickened up the wing a lot for looks did seem to experience abnormally high drag. Ill run some tests in the future and make a prompt on the vid if i can get the same results.

Thats normal, if you look at any real plane, youll see that the elevator is going to be substancially larger then either roll or yaw controls. Out of these 3 axis, pitch takes by far the most energy to affect, which means that you need a much bigger control surface to affect it. Also, your center of mass/lift might be off, if you want really snappy pitch control, youll want your center of lift juuuuust behind the center of mass, the further it is, the harder it will be for your aircraft to pitch up or down. Aka, it wont be able to pull as much aoa

Could probably just set there specific themes to light mode and, in secret, change default to dark mode. They would never know

Very nice, addressing some big small pain points overall. Dark mode is also especially welcome! Idk why light mode is the standard default mode.... disgraceful If you can share this with us, would be curious to know if we can expect fixes for either the drag bugs, or asparagus bug in the next patch?

Dam, it looks like people really stepped up there game from the first highlights

Kinda forgot i made this after no one posted here for a while xD Thats a good question, yah, no staging.

yah thats a fair point, could of explained how drag actually works a bit better instead of blaming it all on the nodes The area of the part you're attaching should match up as perfectly as possible with the part you're attaching to (same fuselage sizes, basically), to cancel out that face's drag. But, you'll be adding the drag of whatever part you attached instead, so it needs to be pointy enough to make it worthwhile. Even tho thats how it worked in ksp1, ksp2 seems to be different. I havent ran enough dedicated tests to really say, but from the limited testing ive done, it seems like the optimal aerodynamic cone size is more related to the node size now rather then its actual size. covering the back of the rapier with the more round nose cone used to give slightly less drag in ksp1 but it actually gives slightly more drag in ksp2. In addition, using the smallest cone possible to cover up the cargobay nodes also seems to be beneficial compared to an appropriately sized cone, tho this might just be a weird bug interaction. Ive also experimented breafly with covering the back of the poodle with a cone, and once again, the smallest nose cone seemed to be the best, tho i havent tested it enough to really say as i lowkey ditched the concept of adding dedicated vacuum engines to rapier craft. Would be very interesting to see a new ksp2 based series on aerodynamic effects once you figure out how to properly test them (probs mods).

Ideally, you want to be traveling at ~1450m/s at atmospheric engine flameout (~20km) tho thats more of a rule of thumb then something you should go for with every single build. Really light ssto's will be traveling faster and really heavy ones will be traveling slower. The idea is that you want to gain as much velocity with the highly efficient atmospheric engines before switching over to less efficient vacuum ones.

So i got nearly 200h in ksp2, most of which was spent ''researching'' ssto technologies. I feel like i have most mechanics pretty figured out, considering ive made 200t+ lift ssto's, laythe ssto that can get back to kerbin with out refueling (well fairing 36kerbals) and ssto's with over 10k lko d.v in ksp2. If you want to check out all the tricks i use, and figure out why youre ssto isnt working very well... or at all even, check out my vid:

I dont think the game indicates wing drag, it basically adds it up to the ''lift'' part. But i can assure you that bigger wings will indeed increase your drag overall based on all the ssto's ive built

First installment of the Mun hotel, where i set up Com-net and land the first hotel module, with tons of cinematic edits!

Decided to make a couple of ssrt LKO reusable booster designs as they can look pretty sleek with the new cargobays. This is one of my intermediate designs, able to lift about ~25t's in to LKO with an efficient orbit burn along with a well executed suicide burn. Tho once the cargobay bugs are fixed, i imagine it should be capable of lifting more. Ive also considered adding dedicated vacuum engines, but i felt like it kinda ruined the ''sleek'' design. Specs: Mass: 246 / 48t Parts: 33 Engines: 4 vectors LKO Lift capacity: 25t Craft file: https://www.mediafire.com/file/sl5gwxuexidzoj5/ssrt_v3_various_takeoff.json/file

A bit more of a SpaceX inspired design rather then a re-creation, but i think it still fits in to the spirit of the challenge

@[email protected] Simpson Thanks for the update, this specific bug has been bothering me a lot haha. Glad i could help

Do you guys plan to re-add the old de-bug (cheat) menu? I think most people dont understand why its gone.

Would be curious to know when we can expect robotics and propellers

re-entry heating looking fire

Are you guys aware of the drag bug causing numerous parts to generate significantly higher drag then they should? +cargo bays/fairings not shielding anything from drag. If the team is aware, is this a low-priority bug? when could we expect it fixed? Thanks.

lmao, will need to test this out, could be huge. Edit: So i ran some tests and was not able to re-create the same effects with any of the parts. Im pretty sure the discrepancy in drag in your pics is down to the fact that the craft in the upper picture has substantially more aoa (17.5o vs 1.5o) which would increase its drag considerably.

Apollo 13 would be perfect for ksp lol

Giving KSP content a go, and heres my first Videos centered around one of the numerous challenges out there

Interesting to see you guys tune cargo bay mass, but not address the fact that they got wildly bugged drag calculations. I really hope this is a known issue. That said, its still a very impressive first patch, well done.

Really hope this gets adresed soon

Currently, the monopropellant rcs has extremely limited use cases, the only times where its useful is when youre docking. Heres the issue. If the craft is small enough to be controlled by the monoprop RCS blocks, the craft doesnt need rcs since it can be controlled with inbuilt reaction wheels. If the craft is large enough to need dedicated RCS, the monoprop RCS blocks are to weak and you have to use veerner oxydiser RCS. Would be nice to see much more powerful monoprop RCS blocks so we could actually use all the monoprop tanks that are currently just collecting dust in everyones VAB. Something like an RCS variant of the puff, or even larger thrusters for big craft.