Rovers vs. Drag

[Slam_Jones]

Hello!

So I've got a small question/complaint/whatever you want to call it, and it's thus: the new drag system (may) have killed jet rovers.

What do I mean by this? Well, take a look at this screenshot:

If you look closely, you can see that my Eos Rover there (which circumnavigated Kerbin) is maintaining speed in the 50m/s range, with a TWR or 0.24

This seemed normal to me. My kart is light, and has a jet engine on the back. Makes sense.

Now, however, the drag system fights my rovers like heck. In order to get the same speed, with a similarly-designed rover, I need somewhere in the vicinity of 1.8 TWR. That's just ridiculous.

So what can I do to get back to the performance I've become accustomed to? I'm certainly not gonna run my rover at the TWR. The closest solution I've found is opening up the debug menu and changing the atmo drag... but to me, this feels like cheating, unless someone has figured out what settings to put it to, to make it back into the soup (or equivalent).

Another idea I've had is to just make a plane, then stick wheels on it... but then it'll look stupid and I won't drive it.

Has anyone else encountered similar problems?

Edited May 9, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Kozak]

Hello!

So I've got a small question/complaint/whatever you want to call it, and it's thus: the new drag system has killed jet rovers.

What do I mean by this? Well, take a look at this screenshot:

http://i.imgur.com/q73Ac1Y.jpg

If you look closely, you can see that my Eos Rover there (which circumnavigated Kerbin) is maintaining speed in the 50m/s range, with a TWR or 0.24

This seemed normal to me. My kart is light, and has a jet engine on the back. Makes sense.

Now, however, the drag system fights my rovers like heck. In order to get the same speed, with a similarly-designed rover, I need somewhere in the vicinity of 1.8 TWR. That's just ridiculous.

So what can I do to get back to the performance I've become accustomed to? I'm certainly not gonna run my rover at the TWR. The closest solution I've found is opening up the debug menu and changing the atmo drag... but to me, this feels like cheating.

Has anyone else encountered similar problems?

The picture looks like a wheesely jet engine, try the ramjet.

[worir4]

You could try put one of the small nose cones on front. That may reduce the lag, oooorrrr.....

MOAR BOOSTERS!

[mikegarrison]

Hello!

So I've got a small question/complaint/whatever you want to call it, and it's thus: the new drag system has killed jet rovers.

What do I mean by this? Well, take a look at this screenshot:

http://i.imgur.com/q73Ac1Y.jpg

If you look closely, you can see that my Eos Rover there (which circumnavigated Kerbin) is maintaining speed in the 50m/s range, with a TWR or 0.24

This seemed normal to me. My kart is light, and has a jet engine on the back. Makes sense.

Now, however, the drag system fights my rovers like heck. In order to get the same speed, with a similarly-designed rover, I need somewhere in the vicinity of 1.8 TWR. That's just ridiculous.

So what can I do to get back to the performance I've become accustomed to? I'm certainly not gonna run my rover at the TWR. The closest solution I've found is opening up the debug menu and changing the atmo drag... but to me, this feels like cheating, unless someone has figured out what settings to put it to, to make it back into the soup (or equivalent).

Another idea I've had is to just make a plane, then stick wheels on it... but then it'll look stupid and I won't drive it.

Has anyone else encountered similar problems?

What kind of drag is causing the problem, aero drag or wheel drag? If it's aero drag, what parts are the draggy parts?

[Norpo]

Hm, i'm getting okay results with a similarly designed one, i'm using radial intakes, i-beams to make the wheels further out, and not using a rollcage to protect the kerbal and I slapped on a bunch of SAS, and it's cruising at about 50 m/s at 0.24 TWR. Is it possible one of the wheels popped, or that the rollcage is causing a bunch of drag for some reason?

[Redshift OTF]

Are you using any control surfaces on your rover? They cause a lot of drag at the moment. Also try turning the Aero indicators on by pressing F12 and post a screen shot of that please.

[Slam_Jones]

Well as near as I can tell, EVERY part is producing drag. Even that ones that look like they should be occluded... Maybe I'm just doing something different and didn't realize.

Are you using any control surfaces on your rover? They cause a lot of drag at the moment. Also try turning the Aero indicators on by pressing F12 and post a screen shot of that please.

Only vertical ones as paneling, basically. I had a similar set-up in 0.90, but maybe the new system doesn't like how I set it up?

Are you using any control surfaces on your rover? They cause a lot of drag at the moment. Also try turning the Aero indicators on by pressing F12 and post a screen shot of that please.

Will do when I get home.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Slam_Jones]

Turns out it's the fact the girders and structural plates generate a ton of drag and provide no occlusion area behind them, meaning that if your rover is made of mainly those, then all of them are subject to drag... even if it looks like some parts should be sheltered.

So, basically, external seats and any sort of roll-cage or even minor decoration, or anything useful at all, really, is completely out of the question.

TL;DR - No more cool-looking rovers on Kerbin

Everything gets drag! EVERYTHING

[Starwhip]

I laugh in the face of your "no cool rovers on Kerbin".

Edited May 9, 2015 by Starwhip

[Slam_Jones]

I laugh in the face of your "no cool rovers on Kerbin".

Yeah but that just looks like an airplane minus wings.

If the only way to be efficient is to have them look like that, then that seems to be a damper on creativity.

Guess what I should say is, no more structural-plate-and-girder rovers.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Amram]

Try it in far, bet you get better results. If parts ~should~ occlude, they will, and stock doesn't have a snowballs chance on moho of matching it.

[Slam_Jones]

Try it in far, bet you get better results. If parts ~should~ occlude, they will, and stock doesn't have a snowballs chance on moho of matching it.

That's a good suggestion, thank you. I'll give it a try.

[Armchair Rocket Scientist]

Yeah but that just looks like an airplane minus wings.

If the only way to be efficient is to have them look like that, then that seems to be a damper on creativity.

Guess what I should say is, no more structural-plate-and-girder rovers.

You are aware that's what pretty much every real-world car capable of going 200 m/s looks like, right?

That said, somebody got a lawn mower to go 50 m/s, so your rover really ought to perform better at that speed.

[Slam_Jones]

You are aware that's what pretty much every real-world car capable of going 200 m/s looks like, right?

That said, somebody got a lawn mower to go 50 m/s, so your rover really ought to perform better at that speed.

Yes, but I'm not trying to build a land-speed-record car...

In any case, I installed FAR, and now things that should be occluded are occluded, and my rovers behave how I expect them to

[martinborgen]

50m/s = 180km/h. I see no problem - look at any sports car. Makes me like the drag model more. Occlusion doesn't really happen for a rollcage-like structure, so in this case stock>FAR.

Edited May 11, 2015 by martinborgen

[Linear]

New aero system. Stop complaining about old designs not working, figure out new ones.

Being able to have a rover like that going 50m/s is just..what

[Levelord]

You are aware that's what pretty much every real-world car capable of going 200 m/s looks like, right?

That said, somebody got a lawn mower to go 50 m/s, so your rover really ought to perform better at that speed.

Except OP's car is powered by 2 jet engines. If you want to argue realism at least try to be accurate.

[martinborgen]

Except OP's car is powered by 2 jet engines. If you want to argue realism at least try to be accurate.

Arguably, a jet engine shouldn't perform very well on a beach buggy at 50m/s

[mikegarrison]

Well, you know, in real life beams and hoops and whatever are in fact very draggy. Even the wires they used to use to tension biplane wings were very draggy. Slapping an aerodynamic fairing over all that stuff would cut the drag substantially if you were building that car in reality.

[Linear]

Arguably, a jet engine shouldn't perform very well on a beach buggy at 50m/s

Arguably.

[Rocket Farmer]

You are aware that's what pretty much every real-world car capable of going 200 m/s looks like, right?

That said, somebody got a lawn mower to go 50 m/s, so your rover really ought to perform better at that speed.

Umm 200m/s is around 720km/h or around 450 mph. Therefore I can't say I would know why a car capable of that speed looks like because I expect there are very few of them (not going to say they don't exist but i haven't seen one yet).

As for the lawn mower at 180km/h (110 mph) that seems little fast for a lawn mower too.

[Roflcopterkklol]

I feel your pain OP, my jet ATV no longer works which is annoying considering i have been working on the design since 0.23... now its just useless...

Oh yeah the surface collision bug is worse than ever before as well.

Umm 200m/s is around 720km/h or around 450 mph. Therefore I can't say I would know why a car capable of that speed looks like because I expect there are very few of them (not going to say they don't exist but i haven't seen one yet).

As for the lawn mower at 180km/h (110 mph) that seems little fast for a lawn mower too.

Well i know over 100m/s used to take something that looks like this.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Roflcopterkklol

[RayneCloud]

Hello!

So I've got a small question/complaint/whatever you want to call it, and it's thus: the new drag system (may) have killed jet rovers.

What do I mean by this? Well, take a look at this screenshot:

http://i.imgur.com/q73Ac1Y.jpg

If you look closely, you can see that my Eos Rover there (which circumnavigated Kerbin) is maintaining speed in the 50m/s range, with a TWR or 0.24

This seemed normal to me. My kart is light, and has a jet engine on the back. Makes sense.

Now, however, the drag system fights my rovers like heck. In order to get the same speed, with a similarly-designed rover, I need somewhere in the vicinity of 1.8 TWR. That's just ridiculous.

So what can I do to get back to the performance I've become accustomed to? I'm certainly not gonna run my rover at the TWR. The closest solution I've found is opening up the debug menu and changing the atmo drag... but to me, this feels like cheating, unless someone has figured out what settings to put it to, to make it back into the soup (or equivalent).

Another idea I've had is to just make a plane, then stick wheels on it... but then it'll look stupid and I won't drive it.

Has anyone else encountered similar problems?

You do realize that rover is currently doing a 111.85MPH/180.005KPH right? What else do you want? A 200 mile an hour rover jumping over terrain that no vehicle on earth in the real world would be able to maintain that speed over? Come on now...

[Sirrobert]

You have to remember that 50m/s is 180 KM per hour. That's REALLY fast for a rover

You are aware that's what pretty much every real-world car capable of going 200 m/s looks like, right?

That said, somebody got a lawn mower to go 50 m/s, so your rover really ought to perform better at that speed.

Someone's confusing m/s with Km/h

Edited May 11, 2015 by Sirrobert

[Moon Goddess]

The Ariel Nomad has a top speed of 60 m/s so it should be comparable to your rover,

Look at the streamlining on it to deal with drag http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/nomad/introduction/

I have no idea who to calculate the TWR of that thing but I bet it's high.