[1.4.x-1.8.x] Airplane Plus - R26.4 (Fixed issues/Github is up to date) (Dec 21, 2019)

[blackheart612]

Just now, tetryds said:

I will remember you to add FAR settings when it updates

Now I'm reluctant.

Noted. I'll increase the stationary thrust as soon as I can.

[tetryds]

No worries, it's not complicated.

You are not obligated to do it either.

Btw, it would be cool if you could make few more wing parts.

[gsc]

 

Left side AP+ engines - all flame-out

 

Right side SXT engines - running fine

 

Dunno whats causing it atm - which mod etc esp since the AP+ engines run fine when i copy / paste one of the SXT engines velcurve keys over the default ones coming w the AP+ engines

[blackheart612]

@tetryds I just have to figure out the design of the wings I'm gonna make. I do want to make wing parts though.

@gsc I have a feeling it's AP+ fault but I don't know why it's only on your side. If you want to test if it's velCurve alone, change the velCurve of any engine with key = 0 (number here, most likely 0.1) then change it to key = 0 1 I'll have to at least double the stationary thrust next release to avoid very weak engines though.

[gsc]

2 minutes ago, blackheart612 said:

@gsc I have a feeling it's AP+ fault but I don't know why it's only on your side. If you want to test if it's velCurve alone, change the velCurve of any engine with key = 0 (number here, most likely 0.1) then change it to key = 0 1 I'll have to at least double the stationary thrust next release to avoid very weak engines though.

I'll fiddle around w it some more later & let you know

[Eskandare]

5 hours ago, tetryds said:

Well, anyway the engines should have some considerable stationary thrust, as they do in real life.

The wing looks great, I will remind you to add FAR settings when it updates

They won't if they are auto-feathering props.

Actually, pilots feather the props to generate as little thrust in idle.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Eskandare

[tetryds]

7 minutes ago, Eskandare said:

They won't if they are auto-feathering props.

Actually, pilots feather the props to generate as little thrust in idle.

Not when they are trying to take off

[Beetlecat]

20 minutes ago, Eskandare said:

They won't if they are auto-feathering props.

Actually, pilots feather the props to generate as little thrust in idle.

Well, yes -- but the engines won't stall/provide zero thrust when desired, just because the aircraft/intake isn't moving forward.

[Eskandare]

14 minutes ago, tetryds said:

Not when they are trying to take off

 

1 minute ago, Beetlecat said:

Well, yes -- but the engines won't stall/provide zero thrust when desired, just because the aircraft/intake isn't moving forward.

Check the thrust limiter of the engine. I'm not sure which mod is causing the glitch, but sometimes the thrust limiter is at 0.

[blackheart612]

I never set the thrust to 0 at idle, it's 0.1. I'm gonna make it 0.2 if it's too weak. Then work its way up if it's really weak, I'll test and see. I wouldn't have done this if people knew how to wait for engine to start up then throttle up slowly. But they'd most likely just throttle max and off you go.  So with technology, the engine now limits your max throttle to "aid" you in take off.

[blackheart612]

Little bit of update, I got sidetracked today but working, still. I've redone my existing model of the C-130 wing so I had to remap and re-texture it. As close as I could get to the FAT-455 and is named FAT-T3R. I'm also addicted to Decal Stickers so that's the reason why I was sidetracked. It's just so cool for me  I think I've got the next update wrapped up. Visually at least. I'll have to do some background checks and performance changes from test to release.

I figured that MM's latest 1.2.1 version as well as firespitter's work for 1.2.2 so mod should work as well.

Oh and by the way, the wing angle is now changed to 10 degrees so that no fine rotation is needed to achieve its angle. Collider is also fixed for free radial attachment, no more funny rotations unlike when I tested it.

[Drew Kerman]

will be awesome to have these wings, really miss the ones from CoffeeSE's pack a while ago that I used to build this:

[DownHereInChile]

On 5 de diciembre de 2016 at 0:39 PM, blackheart612 said:

@tetryds I like firespitter, but if there's something else out there that works just as well and hopefully has a modder-friendly module usage, I'd switch to it. It'd also be preferable if it all handles the features FS does. Because sure, IFS can do fuel switch and I don't know if mesh switch as well and AA could also handle prop spin, it's hard to tell if the other would be updated as soon as the release or as soon as the other does. Even if FS is on life support, at least it's up to date and only one plugin to rule them all.

--

Anyway, update. I'll probably fix NREs after the next release, I don't know if I'm up for reconfiguring all rotors yet. Because I've added two more. In any case, here's the second rotor for this next update.

But that's not all. Look at that hull.

INSIDE GIF ANIMATION

I'll probably add cockpits on next release too. I'd like to release continuously if I can. Though I'd work when I feel like it. And I feel like it atm so I may update a couple more in succession. Hopefully.

Some more details about the Mk1 Bay Door:

  Hide contents

It's almost the same looking as an Mk1 Structural Fuselage but the ribs are closer to each other "for structural integrity"

 

P.S. It functions as a cargo bay so how far it's opened is also adjustable  

This is amazing! Do you think you could make a 2.5m and Mk 3 versions of this (windows optional)? I really want to build a Mi-24 Hind!

 

P.S: a Hind cockpit would be marvelous *-*

[blackheart612]

@Drew Kerman I don't know its exact shape  

@DownHereInChile Isn't Mk1 gonna cut it? By the size of a kerbal, Satan's Chariot should be about the size of an Mk1. A lil bit bigger though.

--

Anyway, I've been experimenting on something. It took the whole day but mostly because of trying to make it look close to stock. I've halved the Mk2 parts right in the middle and here's what I got:

only four parts but they work well with existing Mk2 parts as well as Mk1. The one separated from the line is an adapter to Mk2. The last one in line is a boom which just tapers down. Here they are in game. The second picture uses the Mk2H to Mk2 adapter which is why it was able to mount the bicoupler of Mk2 but at the same time able to attach the intakes under the flat bottom of the Mk2h.

[DownHereInChile]

37 minutes ago, blackheart612 said:

@Drew Kerman I don't know its exact shape  

@DownHereInChile Isn't Mk1 gonna cut it? By the size of a kerbal, Satan's Chariot should be about the size of an Mk1. A lil bit bigger though.

--

Anyway, I've been experimenting on something. It took the whole day but mostly because of trying to make it look close to stock. I've halved the Mk2 parts right in the middle and here's what I got:

only four parts but they work well with existing Mk2 parts as well as Mk1. The one separated from the line is an adapter to Mk2. The last one in line is a boom which just tapers down. Here they are in game. The second picture uses the Mk2H to Mk2 adapter which is why it was able to mount the bicoupler of Mk2 but at the same time able to attach the intakes under the flat bottom of the Mk2h.

Need more space to carry more kerbals and KIS/KAS boxes! Also to use it as a weapons platform

--

Loving the halved Mk2's. Looks kinda like a Su-34. Maybe make a Half Mk2 to full Mk2 form adapter?

[GDJ]

45 minutes ago, blackheart612 said:

Anyway, I've been experimenting on something. It took the whole day but mostly because of trying to make it look close to stock. I've halved the Mk2 parts right in the middle and here's what I got: (snip)

I like it. 
I really like it.

[blackheart612]

5 minutes ago, DownHereInChile said:

Maybe make a Half Mk2 to full Mk2 form adapter?

That is precisely the thing out of line in the image. It's used on the second picture to adapt to Mk2, making it able to attach the bicoupler of Mk2 but still have the flat space on the Mk2/H Adapter to Mk1.

Here's the anatomy - the intakes are simple attached below, the engines are on the bicoupler, inline with Mk2/H. the various adaptions make unique plane shapes and  the flat bottom make easy free-radial attachment points on the bottom.

[gsc]

On 6.12.2016 at 7:02 PM, blackheart612 said:

@gsc I have a feeling it's AP+ fault but I don't know why it's only on your side. If you want to test if it's velCurve alone, change the velCurve of any engine with key = 0 (number here, most likely 0.1) then change it to key = 0 1 I'll have to at least double the stationary thrust next release to avoid very weak engines though.

Btw. changing velcurve "key = 0.0 0.1" to "key = 0.0 1" fixes the flame-out while stationary

[blackheart612]

6 hours ago, gsc said:

Btw. changing velcurve "key = 0.0 0.1" to "key = 0.0 1" fixes the flame-out while stationary

This is because 1 is basically default thrust. If anything below that doesn't work, I don't know why having  a thrust below x1 asl doesnt work for you, There must be something different on your side.

[Squishydoo]

YAY

[gsc]

8 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

This is because 1 is basically default thrust. If anything below that doesn't work, I don't know why having  a thrust below x1 asl doesnt work for you, There must be something different on your side.

The difference on my side was / is RealSolarSystem incl dependencies

 

Just tested w completely fresh, vanilla, boring 1.2.2 install:

- just AP+ in GameData aside from Squad folder = engine works fine

- AP+ & RealSolarSystem (incl dependencies) = flame-out on runway

 

setting the velcurve "key = 0.0 0.1" to "key = 0.0 0.2" works fine tho - engine producing max thrust of 3.7kn at 100%, stationary, if thats what youre going for.

 

On a side note - w 1.2.2 your props are not spinning anymore, it just gives you the "feathered" windmill graphic without actually spinning - editor and runway

[tetryds]

@gsc using plugin mods like real solar system is extremely important information that you should always communicate when reporting a bug.

The best practice is to always tell your full mod list, and not simply guess that one or another should not affect something that causes your issue.

This is a huge time saver for the modder and makes everything much simpler.

[qromodynmc]

Hello! i was wondering if you have any plans to do twin seat mk1 cockpit in the future, I was feeling the need of this for a while and decided to ask you since you're really active with these business.

Super hornet has really nice and universal looking cockpit, im pretty sure it'd be really useful in ksp. (Putting two mk1 cockpit together looks absurdly ugly, i dont even want to mention..)

[blackheart612]

1 hour ago, tetryds said:

@gsc using plugin mods like real solar system is extremely important information that you should always communicate when reporting a bug.

The best practice is to always tell your full mod list, and not simply guess that one or another should not affect something that causes your issue.

This is a huge time saver for the modder and makes everything much simpler.

This is true, though no harm done. Real Solar System is almost like a different version of KSP. Firespitter props probably don't work for 1.2.2 then. Some FS modules still work but I guess we gotta wait for the update itself.

@qromodynmc With enough time and interest in my part, requests can be done. And I'm interested. For now, I've done something else

[qromodynmc]

@blackheart612 That's why i asked you, Because you're making amazing things! hope to receive good news from you soon.. Btw when we'll get this new fancy parts?