[1.1.2]AoA Tech Aviation Parts Ver. 1.3.5 PRE 04MAY2016

[martinezfg11]

I've noticed that on KerbalStuff many are downloading ver 1.0... Version 1.0 is an old version and things have changed quite a bit since then. I'm not sure if that is a result of the mod being on CKAN or some other type of website that consolidates all the mods on the KS website.

[boostedM]

These look great. Thanks!

[martinezfg11]

Update! See OP for change log.

Edit: Pic.

Edited September 13, 2015 by martinezfg11

[Azunki]

Just a heads up, this last update conflicted with the OPT spaceplane parts mod, as well as a few other that added wings and stuff, like b9 procedural wings.

It made wings nonfunctional, not even producing any lift.

My friend tracked down the problem to the "AoA_FAR_Config.cfg" file, and managed to make a temporary fix, but we're not modders, so i suggest you take a deeper look into it.

[VenomousRequiem]

Cool jet. Are you using FAR?

Nope! No FAR.

[martinezfg11]

Just a heads up, this last update conflicted with the OPT spaceplane parts mod, as well as a few other that added wings and stuff, like b9 procedural wings.

It made wings nonfunctional, not even producing any lift.

My friend tracked down the problem to the "AoA_FAR_Config.cfg" file, and managed to make a temporary fix, but we're not modders, so i suggest you take a deeper look into it.

That's weird, I thought I squashed that bug a while ago. I used my mod with both PWings and B9 Procedural parts without issues.

So you mind sharing your fix?

Edit: I've installed both OPT and the latest B9 procedural wings and haven't had any issues. Do you mind posting your output log?

Edited September 14, 2015 by martinezfg11
Update

[Azunki]

That's weird, I thought I squashed that bug a while ago. I used my mod with both PWings and B9 Procedural parts without issues.

So you mind sharing your fix?

Edit: I've installed both OPT and the latest B9 procedural wings and haven't had any issues. Do you mind posting your output log?

Here is our temporary fix:

@PART[kuCockpit]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR] {
    @minimum_drag = 0
    @maximum_drag = 0
    @angularDrag = 0
    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
}
@PART[falkenDrone]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR] {
    @minimum_drag = 0
    @maximum_drag = 0
    @angularDrag = 0
    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
}
@PART[cobraCockpit]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR] {
    @minimum_drag = 0
    @maximum_drag = 0
    @angularDrag = 0
    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
}
@PART[droneTwo]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR] {
    @minimum_drag = 0
    @maximum_drag = 0
    @angularDrag = 0
    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
}
@PART[falkenTwo]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR] {
    @minimum_drag = 0
    @maximum_drag = 0
    @angularDrag = 0
    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
}

    //Mass changes for FAR; Thanks to AccidentalDissasembly for the recommendations.

@PART[cobraCockpit|kuCockpit|falkenTwo]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]
{@mass *= 0.7}


@PART[droneTwo]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]
{@mass = 1.4}



//TEST

//@PART[ADVfin]:FOR[FerramAerospaceResearch]
//{
//@module = Part
//@maximum_drag = 0
//@minimum_drag = 0
//@angularDrag = 0
//@dragCoeff = 0
//@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
//    !MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface] {}
//MODULE
//{
//vname = FARControllableSurface
//MAC = 1.42
//MidChordSweep = 15.47
//b_2 = 2.5013
//TaperRatio = 0.56481
//maxdeflect = 20
//        transformName = ctrlSurf
//}
//}

Where can i find the output log though? and should i grab it with the old config file?

[martinezfg11]

The output log is located in your KSP directory (KSP_Data\output_log.txt).

Please run the game with the old config file, and post screenshots of the issue if possible and list your installed mods, I think I have an idea as to whats going on, I just want to verify.

[Azunki]

The output log is located in your KSP directory (KSP_Data\output_log.txt).

Please run the game with the old config file, and post screenshots of the issue if possible and list your installed mods, I think I have an idea as to whats going on, I just want to verify.

Here's a picture of what happens

As you can see, i'm pitching up all the way and it's barely lifting. The wings control surfaces don't even move either. The RCS and the reaction wheels are doing most of the work there.

And, if i right click the wing, it only shows options for the fuel tank inside it.

While the body seems to be somewhat producing lift, in the editor the lift vector doesn't appear anywhere, unless i put some stock wings there

The wings don't produce any lift, as proven by the reentry which made me bump into this issue the craft was absolutely unstable at high speeds, as if it had no wings, but thankfully i was able to land on body lift and reaction wheels alone.

Here's the output log, i put it on dropbox because it's unmanageably huge:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44181259/output_log.txt

And my installed mods:

All installed through CKAN, except for B9 aerospace which is still in development and thermal nuclear from Eskandare

[martinezfg11]

OK, I see you're not using FAR. Quick and dirty fix; just delete the AOA_FAR_config.cfg file. I added an incorrect syntax in the ADVFin code, I'll adjust it for the next release.

By the way, let me know if you run into any other issues with my part and StockAero, as I've only tested using FAR.

Thanks for being thorough.

[Azunki]

OK, I see you're not using FAR. Quick and dirty fix; just delete the AOA_FAR_config.cfg file. I added an incorrect syntax in the ADVFin code, I'll adjust it for the next release.

By the way, let me know if you run into any other issues with my part and StockAero, as I've only tested using FAR.

Thanks for being thorough.

No problem, thanks for the better fix too.

By the way, any chance we can get an intakeless falken? i think it would look better if i'm not going to put the turbines on the main body

Also, have you ever thought about making COFFIN cockpits? i'm guessing you already know about this due to the falken's name. you got a great mod going there

[martinezfg11]

Ok, so you just blew my mind. I named the part Falken because a forum user (named Falken) requested it. The "falken" part was originally intake-less, I'll fix it up and re-release the intake-less version at a later date.

So with those Coffin cockpits, I never new about them until I clicked that link above, and it's awesome! I'll probably be doing some of those in the future... Thanks!

[Svm420]

Would you consider in the long term updatIng your cockpit to use ASET avionics? They have functional gauges for eveythIng a real cockpit would have and make flying in FAR that much better. Maybe after 1.1 drops. These are some great cockpit is why I ask and ASET props make a cockpit perfect IMO best RPM props available.

[falken]

Oh wow, I just saw you updated models. These are seriously beautiful and I think they will be my new go to cockpits

e: It makes me warm inside knowing that there's a part named after me.

[martinezfg11]

Would you consider in the long term updatIng your cockpit to use ASET avionics? They have functional gauges for eveythIng a real cockpit would have and make flying in FAR that much better. Maybe after 1.1 drops. These are some great cockpit is why I ask and ASET props make a cockpit perfect IMO best RPM props available.

Yes that is my plan for the future, I also have in mind of creating a supplementary prop pack, but that's later down the road.

[StahnAileron]

Sleek cockpits. I like them. The Falken Drone core looks like a killer. (I saw it, read the name, and instantly thought of Ace Combat.)

A couple of requests/suggestion:

1) Any plans to incorporate the BDArmory Targeting Pod camera to the Kerbin Hawk? You already added some BDArmory integration. For the Kerbin Hawk, I figure the Targeting pod functions would be a logical step. (I love that camera system. I want a basic version for general use.) I'd like to call a version with the camera system the Kerbal G(h)awk (another play on the Global Hawk name.)

2) This something I've been wondering about with modders and how KSP handles Intakes and engines. Would it be a reasonable idea to give cockpits with intakes 2 of them? KSP uses a very odd priority system based on the order parts were added to a design to distribute the IntakeAir resource to engines. Many Mk2 designs tend to have 2 engines on them. This coupled with the aforementioned resource distro method makes it very possible to get asymmetric flameouts at the upper limit of engine performance. This is something the mod Intake Build Aid helps mitigate, the best being able to symmetrically distribute the engine/intake assignments. Having an odd number of intakes disallows that, of course, but most designs don't have/need 2 identical cockpits with intakes. This is just something to consider. (Otherwise, I can do it myself for my own install.)

The asymmetric flameout thing has been less of a concern in 1.0.x, but it's still a possible and potentially disastrous scenario. (Like going at Mach 7 at 40k with dual wide-set Ramjets and suddenly having one flameout while the other is still going strong... OPT Ramjet, BTW.) It can also be a problem for any super-maneuverable plane designs. (I built a small stunt jet that can turn on a dime, essentially. One engine was flaming out at high AoAs. The cause of this was I forgot to use IBA (Intake Build Aid) to split up the intakes across the engines.)

[martinezfg11]

So for your first request the answer is YES. I'll fiddle with the Kerbin Hawk and add the targeting pod module to it.

For your second question, I don't quite understand, the cockpit intakes on my mod have two IntakeTransforms , one for each side. As for the asymmetrical flame-outs, I don't really know what to tell you other than to continue using the intake aid mod. I wish you could assign intakes to engines in stock KSP, after all, that is how intakes work.

[TMasterson5]

Any idea why this doesnt work with B9 procedural wings? They generate no lift when i have this mod installed

[martinezfg11]

Any idea why this doesnt work with B9 procedural wings? They generate no lift when i have this mod installed

If you're not using FAR, then delete the AOA_FAR_Config.cfg in the MM Configs folder. There's an error in the config that messes with parts when FAR isn't installed.

If you are using FAR, then please let me know. So I may troubleshoot further..

[martinezfg11]

So here's my plan for the KerbinHawk update...

[martinezfg11]

BahamutoD's target camera plugin works awesome with the KerbinHawk update. I just need to work out some kinks with the FLIR Ball. I don't want it to salve to the horizon..

[Svm420]

Would you still release the intake less falken? I love it as a drone cone for hypersonic flight. Thanks!

[Reiver]

Man, I love these things so very much. Do you have any intention of providing interior lighting for them? Silly as it looks, I've a soft spot for the bright glass at night.

A tiny thought I had the other day, which may be out of scope but I thought I'd suggest in anyway - I'd love to see a single-seat Mk2 cockpit. Similar to the Cobra, I suppose, but more streamlined in return for a smaller canopy.

For those extra-fightery types.

[martinezfg11]

Man, I love these things so very much. Do you have any intention of providing interior lighting for them? Silly as it looks, I've a soft spot for the bright glass at night.

A tiny thought I had the other day, which may be out of scope but I thought I'd suggest in anyway - I'd love to see a single-seat Mk2 cockpit. Similar to the Cobra, I suppose, but more streamlined in return for a smaller canopy.

For those extra-fightery types.

I can probably add an emissive in the future for the light up cockpits.

Right now I'm getting stuck on exporting animations..

[Svm420]

I can probably add an emissive in the future for the light up cockpits.

Right now I'm getting stuck on exporting animations..

https://youtu.be/PgtHydB2XDk

Just my opinion, but a part that shape and size really will be limited by being landing gear. That said the animation looks really good.