tetryds

Official FAR Craft Repository

Recommended Posts

Most of my crafts, which flies good in stock, completely messed up in FAR.

Russian IL-76 replica. Only craft which fly good enough to not break the keyboard in a rage attack

[spoiler=]

http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37f9e/UYxAu2G2-z0.jpg

But... when i tried to turn it's just splash into piecies. Lolwhut??!

Russian Su-27 replica. Constantly flips to the back, constantly shakes in flight, almost uncontrollable. In stock aero it can do same what it's real prototype do. I mean supermaneuverability. But in FAR... it's pretty miserable.

http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37fa7/-0nyxddhMFM.jpg

---

http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37fb0/NHx3G2N8PHY.jpg

And last - SR-71 replica, which flies exactly like a brick. Besides it's almost unreal to take-off despite the fact that center of lift matches the center of thrust.

[spoiler=]http://cs625729.vk.me/v625729249/37fb9/YSWDKJREjbo.jpg

Your SR-71 doesn't have enough length or wing for the craft this is why it flies like a brick. The real SR-71 had a pretty large wing area and was a REALLY long aircraft. Far longer than most people expect. Kind of like the U-2 having seen one of each in person that wasn't a museum piece, they are some REALLY impressive sized aircraft.

If you increase the length of the SR-71 and the wing to match the new length you will find your wave form will smooth out quite a bit and make the craft almost a joy to fly at supersonic speeds.

EDIT- Quick question where is the cockpit from on your IL-76?

Edited by Hodo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick question where is the cockpit from on your IL-76?

Mk.3/Mk.2 Expansion Pack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From my own experience with flaps in front of wings, you'd need to set deploy angle to negative to get them to generate lift. Else they will deploy downwards and actually cause negative lift. Also, you need to set negative AOA else the flap will stall ( along with the rest of the wing) as soon as you pull up .

On my plane, I set flap deploy to -13.5 degrees, AOA to -90% and control surface deflection to 10 degrees

See if that helps.

Edit:

for true slats, we'd need something that pushes the leading control surface fowards.... Insane robotics might work except it'd be wobbly... Or maybe Ferram can add code to deploy slats?

That seems to be as close to what I wanted as it'll get. Had hoped for something that's more on-off, but it works.

Now just to tune my new P.1110 for B9PW with slats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That seems to be as close to what I wanted as it'll get. Had hoped for something that's more on-off, but it works.

Now just to tune my new P.1110 for B9PW with slats.

I use leading edge slats on several of my aircraft and they deploy downwards, I just dont have them deploy out to the standard 20+deg like most people. My leading edge slats are usually between 2.5-15deg to keep them from causing negative lift. They are often used in conjunction with flaps this gives me more "lift" at lower speeds and at higher AoA.

Like this older design has leading edge slats and flaps. You can just make them out on the inside of the leading edge of the wing.

3vNaqzL.jpg

This one also has slats. But it was from an older version of FAR but the design still works.

q1fpyh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I use leading edge slats on several of my aircraft and they deploy downwards, I just dont have them deploy out to the standard 20+deg like most people. My leading edge slats are usually between 2.5-15deg to keep them from causing negative lift. They are often used in conjunction with flaps this gives me more "lift" at lower speeds and at higher AoA.

Like this older design has leading edge slats and flaps. You can just make them out on the inside of the leading edge of the wing.

This one also has slats. But it was from an older version of FAR but the design still works.

Maybe I should've said: on-off, but still automatic. Like RL automatic slats (= spring, or similar, extends slat when airflow holding it back is too weak).

EDIT: And now I feel seriously stupid. Been reading the green graph as lift the whole time *facepalm*

Edited by FourGreenFields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a bit of a break from KSP, but sat down and made another aircraft again. Ended up with a pretty fun to fly and acceptably agile aircraft.

77430088F5B4D4669A3BFD330E3E4E8D2838A369

B9C05DD5C060E923A8E2A7E1CD0483354462FA75

146D36FB5A205426C3E210BCC6C6C394102276EC

Surprisingly stable despite having very neutral pitch stability when subsonic. Sustains a 5G turn all the way down at 135 m/s. Is rated for up-to 18G's at low altitude. Still has good maneuverability up to 15km assuming EAS is around 130-350 m/s.

Wing stall occurs at around 45 AoA, stall characteristics are pretty forgiving with very little rolling tendencies.

Mods: Mk2 expansion, tweakscale, Adjustable landing gear, B9 procedural wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally getting around to posting one of my aircrafts. Pretty basic design but neat to fly.

Watch the throttle on the the turbojet though! Managed to set my plane on fire a couple of times when flying low altitudes...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Craft file here

Originally designed with Eskandare's Thermal Nuclear Engines and Nertea's Heat Control but revised to be completely stock and rebalanced.

Mods used - Adjustable landing gear by BahamutoD

Fuel amounts have been carefully calibrated to have zero COM movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first two SSTOs that actually do what they're supposed to. :)

SP 4 "Fat Lady II", meant to carry anything up to 2 "Jumbo" fuel tanks to low Kerbin orbit and/or back. 14 RAPIERs, 2 nukes. Max cross section area to Mach one wave drag area ratio of about 5.1 on strict settings, and about 6.2 on default settings.

She also likes to kill my FPS...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Craft on KerbalX

SP 2 "Shooting Star", meant to carry one pilot, and 9 other Kerbals to low orbit. 2 1m RAPIERs, one default-size nuke. Mach one wave drag ratio of about 5 using strict, about 6 using default settings.

Pretty agile, thanks to relatively low wing loading and near-neutral stability. Although, ofcourse, I saved weight on wing strength, so she easily breaks apart when pulling hard down low.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Craft on KerbalX

Both use the airbrakes on their tail to stay stable, and not burn up during reentry.

Edited by FourGreenFields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to get your fat 2.5m payloads into LKO:

Sensible Spaceplane Transporting Oranges, or SSTO for short

26.37 m2 max cross section area, 4.25 m2 wave drag area.

Less than 18k √ for a full fuel load.

Tested with an orange tank, ~36t payload.

Does not qualify for this week's Reddit challenge. :(

Imgur album

Craft file on KerbalX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new entry for the low fast flyer contest, basic jet division:

B0fS6TA.png

Mach 1.23, altitude 359.2cm (and increasing, showing that it's not a crash pic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... Just wanted to share a few things I learned about designing planes in nuFAR.

When I started learning to design planes for FAR, the rule of the thumb was that as long as the Center of Pressure/Center of Lift marker is behind the center of mass, then the plane should be fine. However, it doesn't over work this way with nuFAR.

Compare this two similar looking designs.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

You'd figure that performance be about the same right? However, the second design will actually have a tendency to pitch up. The reason? Average COL may be behind COM, with the majority of the life from the main wings in front of the COM, the lift from the main wing will cause the aircraft to pitch up.

The good version

The bad version

Try it out for yourself.

Note, you'd need SuicidalInsanity's Mk2 Expansion set's MK-1 Chines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So 1.0.3 is upon us! I guess the aero changes per se aren't going to affect FAR users, but I did notice...

* Halved intakeAir requirements for jets. Slightly raises service ceiling, mainly helps mitigate flameouts due to resource transfer issues.

* Jet thrusts rebalanced for new drag (thrusts lowered, BJE curves altered). Jet Isp halved due to increased fuel quantity and lower drag.

* Buffed heat resistance of spaceplane parts.

...all of which could be relevant and interesting. I imagine the denizens of this thread will figure out pretty quickly how much change that improved heat resistance will bring :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So 1.0.3 is upon us! I guess the aero changes per se aren't going to affect FAR users, but I did notice...

...all of which could be relevant and interesting. I imagine the denizens of this thread will figure out pretty quickly how much change that improved heat resistance will bring :)

Also noticed: Mk1 LF tanks no longer suck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I am new both to KSP and FAR.

Could someone advice me, please, on what I am doing wrong? I have read the basic concepts on stability. However, my aircraft is totally unstable and even on the runway it is dragged leftwards, despite being perfectly symmetrical. I barely lift it to the air, but it starts rolling CCW when looking from the tail.

5vLDs53u.png

kjrWNQwE.png

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,

I am new both to KSP and FAR.

Could someone advice me, please, on what I am doing wrong? I have read the basic concepts on stability. However, my aircraft is totally unstable and even on the runway it is dragged leftwards, despite being perfectly symmetrical. I barely lift it to the air, but it starts rolling CCW when looking from the tail.

http://i.imgbox.com/5vLDs53u.png

http://i.imgbox.com/kjrWNQwE.png

Thank you

Could be a bunch of things, but to eliminate some of the obvious ones:

* How are your control surfaces set up? You should have the rudder set to yaw only, the canards to pitch only and the elevons for roll/pitch. Double-check; it's easy to accidentally set your rudder to respond to pitch controls etc.

* Is the steering unlocked on your nose gear?

* Is the rear gear placed just behind CoM, so you can lift the nose without overloading the tail?

* Were the wings placed with mirror symmetry turned on, or did you eyeball it?

* Are you flying with or without SAS engaged?

A few stability derivative screens (see post #3 in the Kerbodyne thread linked below if you're unsure how to do these) would also be handy in working out the issues. One done for 500m / Mach 0.5 for starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also noticed: Mk1 LF tanks no longer suck.

Oh yeah, nice - guess that's to help us out with LF only vehicles :) Do they still look totally out of whack with the other components though? :<

* Mk1 fuel tank: uses same dry mass fraction and resource filling compared to its LFO counterpart as Mk2 parts do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello,

I am new both to KSP and FAR.

Could someone advice me, please, on what I am doing wrong? I have read the basic concepts on stability. However, my aircraft is totally unstable and even on the runway it is dragged leftwards, despite being perfectly symmetrical. I barely lift it to the air, but it starts rolling CCW when looking from the tail.

http://i.imgbox.com/5vLDs53u.png

http://i.imgbox.com/kjrWNQwE.png

Thank you

I'm with Wanderfound; it could be any number of the things he listed. I'm also looking at the nose gear; at a glance it looks off-center. Could explain the behavior of the plane before takeoff.

I'm thinking the canards aren't helping you any either. You'd be better off lengthening the fuselage and ditching the canards in favor of a pair of stabilators aft. The Tail Fin part works well as a stabilator for this kind of low-tech bush plane design.

I may also be missing it - where are your air intakes? Obviously you have an intake - otherwise that Wheelsey would sit there and laugh at you - but I'm not seeing it. If that's an Engine Nacelle aft, you've got access to Elevon 2 and 3 - either of which make for better ailerons than Elevon 1.

Edited by capi3101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I may also be missing it - where are your air intakes? Obviously you have an intake - otherwise that Wheelsey would sit there and laugh at you - but I'm not seeing it. If that's an Engine Nacelle aft, you've got access to Elevon 2 and 3 - either of which make for better ailerons than Elevon 1.

Looks like he used that early inline intake. Look at the rear part of the fuselage - it's slightly bent, like that intake (can't be bothered to start KSP to check it's name - not until I got my mods up to date)

Hello,

I am new both to KSP and FAR.

Could someone advice me, please, on what I am doing wrong? I have read the basic concepts on stability. However, my aircraft is totally unstable and even on the runway it is dragged leftwards, despite being perfectly symmetrical. I barely lift it to the air, but it starts rolling CCW when looking from the tail.

Thank you

It doesn't start rolling counter clockwise, it starts rolling left :P

Anyway, on topic:

Is it unstable around the yaw, pitch or roll axis?

With the top(ish) mounted dihedral wings roll instability would highly surprise me.

It doesn't look yaw instable either. Not sure about pitch stability though, but you could fix that by moving wings and canards further back.

'Bout the rolling mid-flight: you sure your wings aren't flexing? They never flex symmetrically -> rolling movements and the like.

Otherwise, what Wanderfound said.

What sometimes helps me, when my plane is instable on the ground, is pulling on the elevator. That reduces the load on the nose wheel(s) and/or increases load on the rear wheel(s) which helps it go straight from my experience.

Edited by FourGreenFields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's two more things to pay attention for:

1. The quality of the runway. If you are taking off from the runway of the very first level then it has bumps and slopes that pull you right and left

2. It's not clear on the pictures where your rear wheels are. They should be slightly behind the center of mass or else you'll have a hard time taking off because your vessel won't be able to rotate to have its nose up. Just check that.

Edited by Ser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* How are your control surfaces set up? You should have the rudder set to yaw only, the canards to pitch only and the elevons for roll/pitch. Double-check; it's easy to accidentally set your rudder to respond to pitch controls etc.

* Is the steering unlocked on your nose gear?

* Is the rear gear placed just behind CoM, so you can lift the nose without overloading the tail?

* Were the wings placed with mirror symmetry turned on, or did you eyeball it?

* Are you flying with or without SAS engaged?

Check for everything. Everything was placed with symmetry turned on. I am flying with SAS, because without it it becomes even worse.

I'm with Wanderfound; it could be any number of the things he listed. I'm also looking at the nose gear; at a glance it looks off-center. Could explain the behavior of the plane before takeoff.

I'm thinking the canards aren't helping you any either. You'd be better off lengthening the fuselage and ditching the canards in favor of a pair of stabilators aft. The Tail Fin part works well as a stabilator for this kind of low-tech bush plane design.

I may also be missing it - where are your air intakes? Obviously you have an intake - otherwise that Wheelsey would sit there and laugh at you - but I'm not seeing it. If that's an Engine Nacelle aft, you've got access to Elevon 2 and 3 - either of which make for better ailerons than Elevon 1.

Gear was centered. Intake is in the fuselage, but I have no access to better ailerons yet.

So I built another plane with propeller engine and it behaves the same. Drives left on the running way, constantly tries to dive when in the air and attempts rolling leftwards.

qGn7Piid.png

- - - Updated - - -

OK, I have found the problem - I did not know that even single central parts should be put on with symmetry turned on. Now it behaves properly. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I've created the following craft for FAR and am having trouble landing it. I believe my problem largely lies with the high AoA requirement at lower velocities I think, as it basically falls like a rock below 150 m/s; which is rather high to land at for someone who's never been good at landing in the first place. Having the craft fall through the landscape glitch at high velocities doesn't help the landing experience, either :/.

http://imgbox.com/RMw8ZYYZ

http://imgbox.com/Dh8QAzQr

http://imgbox.com/7BNTkM2e

http://imgbox.com/dkh3F8PK

http://imgbox.com/cWK0cK7r

Other than that, so long as you don't exceed structural tolerances, it flies quite well. Ironically, it even flies well in stock as well except for taking off.

Would anyone have suggestions on how to improve its handling at low velocities? Or am I just a terrible pilot?

Ideally it would retain it's overall shape and ability to reach orbit; I am able to reach orbit if I remove one of the rocket fuel tanks, though it's much more difficult.

Thanks

Edited by Tipped
fix images

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you unable to maintain enough AoA to hold level flight or does doing so induce a stall? If the former, you need more pitch authority, or less pitch stability. If the latter, you need more wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey guys, if you're interested I created a challenge for FAR aerodynamics

It's called the 5th Generation Fighter Challenge and it asks you to create a state of the art fighter aircraft with similar specifications to modern fighter aircraft.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/126342-The-5th-Generation-Fighter-challenge-FAR

:D I already tried building something inspired by the Eurofighter "Typhoon". I plan to win this! Both turbojet, and basic jet part.

EDIT: As soon as B9PW has been updated... EDIT END;

@Tipped: What blowfish said. Looking at it, it just hasn't enough wing area.

Edited by FourGreenFields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.