How do people handle mechanization of aircraft in KSP?

[Incarnation of Chaos]

Not really sure about this section being the proper place for this query, but i figured that if it wasn't then someone would point me the right way.

So currently I'm taking a forced break from KSP (I'm trapped in trigonometry hell pls help!!!!). But i figured as this isn't really something that requires me firing up the game, and has a number of different approaches which would likely keep the thread going for a while . That makes it perfect for something to sit here and simmer while i slog thru graphs, functions and derivations of arcane formulas for the next few weeks.

Anyway; to the actual blasted point.

I rather enjoy building aircraft in my heavily modded install of KSP, and iv'e always had some difficulty figuring out how to replicate how actual planes use control surfaces. Note we're not excluding stock, but i personally always use Procedural Wings & Control Surfaces along with FAR in my installs. So anything specific to those is worth mentioning alongside other advice if you know of it.

For instance flaps; iv'e never once built a plane in KSP with actual flaps. Not because i don't want to, but because i couldn't ever figure out how. Inverting the deployment direction doesn't seem to be enough since then they just become awkward airbreaks sticking up perpendicular to the edge of the wing, and actual flaps can usually deploy in multiple angles (For instance you almost always have settings for "Landing" which create a wack ton more lift so you can go below stalling speeds on approach).

Things like Split Flaps, Elevons and Spoilerons i can't even conceptualize how to do in KSP, and it doesn't seem that any tutorials go beyond very basic aircraft design.

So i ask of this wonderful community; please vanquish my ignorance and replace it with the knowledge i seek.

[AHHans]

I don't know how FAR does things, but the way the stock engine works flaps or spoilers just don't make any sense. Any aero-surface will always cause lift, even if you completely hide (clip) it into another part. So you cannot change you wing area by moving parts into or out-of each other. Similar for spoilers: you cannot disrupt the lift of an aero-surface by putting another part into the airstream around that surface. (Because there is no airstream...)

You can make airbrakes, as you already found out. You can also increase the pitch of some aero-surfaces to generate more lift without pitching the whole craft up, but as you say that's not the same as actual flaps. And, well, elevons are just control surfaces with both pitch and roll control active. (But in my experience it is better to have some control surfaces dedicated to only pitch, because otherwise you'll loose pitch trim as soon as you enter roll commands...)

[Atlessa]

It is my understanding that in the stock aero system, each elevon is basically it's own tiny wing that generates a force according to it's orientation vs. direction of travel (aka angle of attack);  so to generate a flap-like effect they have to be angled down.

I've seen stock craft simulate the 'multiple flaps settings' by having several seperate ailerons and strategically grouping them together to toggle via different action groups.

 

That said, I don't think the stock physics model is strict enough to really warrant the effort to design planes with any more than the bare minimum of control surfaces, and then deploying them for takeoff and landing, if at all.

[XLjedi]

18 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Things like Split Flaps, Elevons and Spoilerons i can't even conceptualize how to do in KSP, and it doesn't seem that any tutorials go beyond very basic aircraft design.

I almost always include flaps and very specific landing/takeoff configurations in all of my designs.  I prefer to manage it all when the landing gear are extended/retracted.  So I don't have to think about it, the gear go up/down and the planes configure themselves accordingly.  I've incorporated all of the above in several of my designs, as well as a few you didn't even mention.  My designs are in my signature, you can take a look if you like.  I don't always put the control surfaces where you might expect, and often times I'll put stuff on backwards if it makes it fly better!

The jet shown in my signature for instance includes forward splitflaps and 4 spoilers in the rear, as well as a backwards elevator (I dubbed it the "Inversavator") and forward swept wings and a pair of airbrakes.

https://kerbalx.com/XLjedi/FE-03-Scepter

I include a "Design Notes" section with a number of my aircraft.  So they might not be tutorials, but I often will point out items of interest or certain ideas that were going through my head while trying to solve some unique flight dynamic with a particular design. 

Edited February 23, 2020 by XLjedi

[Incarnation of Chaos]

11 hours ago, AHHans said:

I don't know how FAR does things, but the way the stock engine works flaps or spoilers just don't make any sense. Any aero-surface will always cause lift, even if you completely hide (clip) it into another part. So you cannot change you wing area by moving parts into or out-of each other. Similar for spoilers: you cannot disrupt the lift of an aero-surface by putting another part into the airstream around that surface. (Because there is no airstream...)

You can make airbrakes, as you already found out. You can also increase the pitch of some aero-surfaces to generate more lift without pitching the whole craft up, but as you say that's not the same as actual flaps. And, well, elevons are just control surfaces with both pitch and roll control active. (But in my experience it is better to have some control surfaces dedicated to only pitch, because otherwise you'll loose pitch trim as soon as you enter roll commands...)

Yeah i always have dedicated pitch controls; elevons i only use for additional stability when needed. FAR doesn't do full fluid modeling, so i am curious about the "Disrupt lift by interrupting the airstream" as that isn't something i ever considered. But FAR does calculate the wing area, so it would be possible in theory. Thanks for the information!

4 hours ago, Atlessa said:

It is my understanding that in the stock aero system, each elevon is basically it's own tiny wing that generates a force according to it's orientation vs. direction of travel (aka angle of attack);  so to generate a flap-like effect they have to be angled down.

I've seen stock craft simulate the 'multiple flaps settings' by having several seperate ailerons and strategically grouping them together to toggle via different action groups.

 

That said, I don't think the stock physics model is strict enough to really warrant the effort to design planes with any more than the bare minimum of control surfaces, and then deploying them for takeoff and landing, if at all.

Honestly much of this i don't want for take-off; it's more landing and while in flight.

3 hours ago, XLjedi said:

I almost always include flaps and very specific landing/takeoff configurations in all of my designs.  I prefer to manage it all when the landing gear are extended/retracted.  So I don't have to think about it, the gear go up/down and the planes configure themselves accordingly.  I've incorporated all of the above in several of my designs, as well as a few you didn't even mention.  My designs are in my signature, you can take a look if you like.  I don't always put the control surfaces where you might expect, and often times I'll put stuff on backwards if it makes it fly better!

The jet shown in my signature for instance includes forward splitflaps and 4 spoilers in the rear, as well as a backwards elevator (I dubbed it the "Inversavator") and forward swept wings and a pair of airbrakes.

https://kerbalx.com/XLjedi/FE-03-Scepter

I include a "Design Notes" section with a number of my aircraft.  So they might not be tutorials, but I often will point out items of interest or certain ideas that were going through my head while trying to solve some unique flight dynamic with a particular design. 

Deploying the Landing Gear would force FAR to recalculate the aero model, so that'll work out rather well for me actually. Also thank you and everyone else for contributing; really didn't expect this much information this soon!