Jump to content

Why are people turning aerobrakes the wrong way?


Sokar408

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Foxster said:

They work the same either way, so whose to say which is the "right" way in a single-player game?

Wrong from a realistic perspective obviously. Shouldn't need to be said, for the exact reason you just invoked :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When a rocket is built, the parts all default to a forward mode of operation.  Nosecones point up, engines point down, pods/cockpits point up etc.  Airbrakes default to working in the direction of travel.  Most rockets reenter engine first or bottom first with decoupled parts and a heatshield, so the airbrakes end up the wrong way.  Add a bunch of people who are not pilots, aerospace engineers, etc and they don't know the difference.

Since most planes reenter flying forward, they tend to have airbrakes mounted correctly by default.

Edited by overkill13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to be a tad wary of "wrong" and "right" in KSP.

In our universe, something may not work efficiently or at all if not aligned in a particular way and so is "wrong". If that restriction or requirement does not apply in the KSP universe then it can be ignored and is not "wrong". 

Unless, of course, you personally choose to apply such a restriction to make your own gameplay experience "better" but you have no grounds to suggest others should comply with this. 

Edited by Foxster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best is not to worry about it. There's no wrong or right way to play the game, and when you start fretting over people doing things “wrong,” well, KSP is the right place to be!

You'll see all kinds of things people get wrong, like counter-rotating rings on ships (if you understand mechanics you'll understand why a rotating ring doesn't require a counter rotating part), or for instance mounting a 10m heatshield to the tip of a Mk-I cockpit and expect it to stay in place by using a few struts. As if that would be the right way of mounting it in reality! I don't have a picture of it at hand, but I'm sure you know what I mean.

People make the ships the way they like it, and hey, it works in the game. So why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D. I agree with the OP. For some of us even the small things can be really annoying. I personally went through my friends crafts and fixed all of his vessels with airbrakes. And also the ones missing adaptors lol really grinds my gears when I see a ship transitioning diff sizes without an adaptor or fairing.i know its petty and like my friend said "it still works"

:o:mad:yeah but still.with airbrakes in particular IMHO it really would not make sense (esp if used at speeds generating substantial heat ) to have the airbrake mechanism exposed to damage / being melted. Rendering them inoperable.

At the same time though it is a game and different folks different strikes,lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kerbart said:

if you understand mechanics you'll understand why a rotating ring doesn't require a counter rotating part

Well, now I have to ask... why doesn't it require a counter rotating part? Wouldn't it cause the rest of the craft to rotate in the opposite direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, GluttonyReaper said:

Well, now I have to ask... why doesn't it require a counter rotating part? Wouldn't it cause the rest of the craft to rotate in the opposite direction?

It's a closed system. Yes, you need to provide torque to keep them rotating. But that torque gets absorbed by friction, which introduces the same amount of torque, but in the opposite direction, to the system; the two cancel each other out. It's the starting/stopping that requires countering, but you can use RCS for that, as that's only a short amount of time (unless you start/stop your rings all the time).

This is why on the ISS the solar panels track the sun 24/7, even on the night side--it's easier for the station to let them turn continuously then to start/stop them every orbit, because that does introduce torque to the system. But keeping them rotating in a constant fashion doesn't, as stated earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends. If you are aerobraking at Duna, you dont need a heatshield, but if you are anywhere else, you better use a heatshield, because the atmosphere is extra thicc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because KSP doesn't model airflow around parts. If KSP modeled aerodynamics more realistically, people would break things and learn to mount them the other way.
In that sense, it's not "wrong"; it works just fine.

Best,
-Slashy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, White Owl said:

In that "wrong way" shot, I'd be bothered more by the placement of the parachutes. Ain't no way that should actually work.

Hmm I see engineering here at work.

My guess is that after the burn is completed the main chutes open and flip the craft around so it can put that kerbal containing container on the now top and then on the bottom directly onto the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Sokar408 said:

Wrong from a realistic perspective obviously. Shouldn't need to be said, for the exact reason you just invoked :P

Just because you think it's wrong, doesn't make it so in kerbal reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sokar408 said:

I keep seeing this in screenshots and videos, and my question is; Why are people turning the aerobrakes the wrong way around? 

Example of aerobrakes turned the right way:

http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/805684screenshot6.png

Example of aerobrakes the wrong way around:

xNWr15V.png

To my eye this arrangement of airbrakes is a sound one if the craft is to be used for ascent too. IRL, the airbrakes would fail open on descent and fail closed during ascent due to aerodynamic forces, which is a desirable outcome both from a reliability perspective and for requiring a weaker, lighter actuator.

Airbrakes can certainly work in this configuration:

640px-Mk._81_250-lb_and_Mk._82_Snakeye_I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Red Iron Crown While your example is neat, it has a pair of flaws. First being those "air brakes" are designed to work in a sub sonic environment, to which brings flaw two: they have holes in them to allow for a lower pressure in their operational environment.

The air brakes we have look as if they are designed for a super or even hyper sonic environment. They also lack the holes to afford a setup like in the picture in the OP. To my eye at least they should fail in such a configuration. But thats my 2¢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mikegarrison said:

Airbrakes can also be used as control surfaces during ascent. Or during reentry of a spaceplane. So which is the "right" way to put them?

I put them 90o from the way they're supposed to be used. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

they have holes in them to allow for a lower pressure in their operational environment.

what holes? I only see small cutouts on the side, presumably for some reason not related to aerodynamics.

Also, about the supersonic/hypersonic design - it looks as if these airbrakes are modeled vaguely after the ones sen on the F-15, with the panel that sticks out pushing forwards. If you google it, the airbrakes are deployed at low speeds for things like landing. I don't think its reasonable to assume that the in game ones are necessarily designed for high speed applications

Edited by qzgy
Link to comment
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...