Jump to content

[0.24.2] Taverio's Pizza and Aerospace v1.7.1 (22/09)


Recommended Posts

These mods have enhanced my kerbal aviation even further than before, in fact, larger and more varied-size swept wings were something I had been dying inside for until now.

Glad to hear that. I've got some more stuff incoming, starting with a tail plane in between the size of the existing static and the delta wing. Resizing and rebalancing bigger wings is not hard, but I don't want to pollute the parts browser.

I thought about double-size delta wing, but since the scaling is symmetrical, it would also need a double-size slab and structural wing so as to have a constant-ish thickness, so I think I won't touch that for now.

I think instead I shall try to model a symmetrical tapering wing, in increasing sizes, that can be used to get wings like that of a U-2. Chines may also be possible.

That would work and does work in some cases, but in others it doesn't turn as if the nose is moving first; rather the entire aircraft moves at 45 degrees to the runway instead of going forwards while still pointing straight along it. It might be a collider issue because it's REALLY weird behaviour.

The landing gear colliders are messed up. You can't just use the bigger gears on the wings - you must have some gears under the fuselage to support them, and I've found it necessary to have 2 gears for each side on the wings, or one pair on the wings and one pair on the outside of the fuselage, as you can see from the screenshots, to minimize strange things happening on the ground.

In any case, even with the increased connection forces on the fuselages and the aircraft parts being much lighter than rocket parts, ground operations in 0.16 are fraught with danger of spontaneous disassembly, even when using the stock gear.

I originally had the connection forces on the medium and large gear higher than the default, but this actually made it worse, as decreased gear bay flex transmitted more force to their root part. They're the same as the small ones now, but the collider issues remain, and I can't do anything about that - if I decrease the connection strengths, the gear bays will fall off far too easily.

all of the landing gear is the same size as the stock. but im using .15

0.15 does not support per-part resizing in the .cfg, hence the [0.16] in the title.

Edited by Taverius
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I personally LOVE the look of the shockwave cone. heck, I even used it for my main nosecone!

side note - there used to be a C7 wing with an integrated engine nacelle, would such be a reasonable thing to ask if your modelling skills are up to it? be REALLY handy for getting thrust balance right at high altitudes

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the one you mean - you can still use those, you just have to pull them out of the old C7 packs and rebalance the lift/drag/weight values.

As far as making some, I'd have to do versions with mount of every wing, that would be too many models - I think I'll do some for-wing mounts for sticking in front-under and behind wings the way the radial-under engine mounts in NovaPunch are done.

Should be pretty simple, so you may see something along those lines in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as a related idea, what about a through-mount nacelle 'kit' that has the topside and bottomside halves of the nacelle body such that they attach so they're clipped around the wing, or if possible, make the collision not prevent that kind of mount

Edit:

found the wings in question - they're the XR wings and can be found in C7 2.1 if you can dig up a copy. (XRW, XRW-L and XRW-L-E, -E is the With Nacelle version)

and I'd be happy with just a Wing Extender part that carries a nacelle, if you decide to make one single, the other wingtypes would be candy beyond that

Edited by Hyratel
Link to post
Share on other sites
as a related idea, what about a through-mount nacelle 'kit' that has the topside and bottomside halves of the nacelle body such that they attach so they're clipped around the wing, or if possible, make the collision not prevent that kind of mount

That's exactly what I was talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

aha. I gotcha now. and during testing, the XR wings with nacelles are CRAZY unstable as back-mounted deltawings. no matter what I tried, I had way too much noselift with canards. couldn't keep the thing under control. This merits further experimentation!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was having some issues with attaching your smallhardpoint and smallhardpointheavy to parts. It just wouldn't work. Especially with pieces from the Truss Pack. So I fooled around in the config and discovered that if you set the first number in the node_attach file to 2.00 (vs 1.90) it works a lot better and still lines up fine. Just thought I'd mention.

Love all of the additions by the way!

Do have a suggestion for another item to add. Some sort of jet engine mount. A small one for the small engines and a larger one for the regular size. Just something that can be offset from the fuselage. Sort of like your hardpoints but that would work for jet engines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do have a suggestion for another item to add. Some sort of jet engine mount. A small one for the small engines and a larger one for the regular size. Just something that can be offset from the fuselage. Sort of like your hardpoints but that would work for jet engines.

The hardpoints work for jet engines. Pretty sure that's what they're designed for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

are they? I pulled open the cfgs and they were pretty closely in-line with the surface area compared to the 0.16Vanilla delta wings


// --- general parameters ---
name = C7xrwing
module = Winglet
author = C7Aerospace

// --- asset parameters ---
mesh = xrwing.DAE
scale = 0.1
texture = xrwing.png
specPower = 0.2
rimFalloff = 3
alphaCutoff = 0.0

// --- editor parameters ---
cost = 500
category = 2
subcategory = 0
title = c7-XRW
manufacturer = C7 Aerospace division
description = Our engineers thought these wings looked "cool". We fired those engineers, but the wings are still a popular seller.

// attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
attachRules = 0,1,0,1,1

// --- node definitions ---
// definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z
node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0


// --- standard part parameters ---
mass = 0.05
dragModelType = override
maximum_drag = 0.02
minimum_drag = 0.02
angularDrag = 2
crashTolerance = 15
maxTemp = 3400
explosionPotential = 0.1
fuelCrossFeed = True
// --- winglet parameters ---
// dragCoeff will override the maximum_drag value
dragCoeff = 0.6
deflectionLiftCoeff = 1.6


// --- general parameters ---
name = deltaWing
module = Winglet
author = C. Jenkins

// --- asset parameters ---
mesh = c7deltawing.DAE
scale = 0.1

// --- editor parameters ---
cost = 500
category = 2
subcategory = 0
title = Delta Wing
manufacturer = C7 Aerospace division
description = Standard Delta configuration wings. These wings provide high lift and a stable center of gravity for your everyday lifting needs.

// attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
attachRules = 0,1,0,1,1

// --- node definitions ---
// definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z
node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0


// --- standard part parameters ---
mass = 0.07
dragModelType = override
maximum_drag = 0.02
minimum_drag = 0.02
angularDrag = 2
crashTolerance = 15
maxTemp = 3400
explosionPotential = 0.1
fuelCrossFeed = True
// --- winglet parameters ---
// dragCoeff will override the maximum_drag value
dragCoeff = 0.6
deflectionLiftCoeff = 1.9

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. The reason I set it to 1.90 is otherwise there's a big gap when sticking them to mk1 fuselages, and the collision meshes not being adjacent causes the joint to move a lot.

As for the jet mount, how would it be different from the hardpoints? They seem to work just fine as jet engine mounts, though ones in real life are more sharply raked.

are they? I pulled open the cfgs and they were pretty closely in-line with the surface area compared to the 0.16Vanilla delta wings

My point exactly. They have the lift of the swept wings, but less surface area. This is all if you care about balance, such as it is. I do, some don't.

Edited by Taverius
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

^

I don't have that problem, though I -do- have the problem with the medium size landinggear getting all clippy on the runway. In essence, I need to force through the clipping (hitting full thrust and stuff), resulting in detached gear, or a change of direction on the runway. Both cases the consequences are scary. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...