Jump to content

[0.22] B9 Aerospace Pack / R4.0c / New pods, IVAs, engines, fuselages & structures


bac9
 Share

Recommended Posts

just wondering here the s2 adapter fits with the hl adapture but the textures dont really fit is there a way or a peice im missing that can make it look better its great just wondering if there was another adapter i was missing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "B" variant has closing doors; the "A" variant doesn't. To put something inside, you have to enable part clipping. The easiest way to do it is to build your payload outside the M2 cargo bay, then attach a docking port to the attachment node inside the first cargo bay, and finally attaching your payload to that docking port.

After hours and hours of trying, I still I dont have a clue how to use it.

First I wanna to put the cargo bay in the middle of my ship.

I use an cargo adapt, then I use 2 tiype B, then I use the cargo separator, then i place the cargo looking for forward, then i go back using another type b section and then I keep building my airplane from there.

But thats not work. I thought that the cargo separator or adapter how they had a flat side, that side was to go back with another type A or type B part, but not.

So we have the child-father attach system that we can only go in one direction, this is mean that if we want place the cargo section it has to be always in the tail of the ship, and nothing can go after that (only the cargo), and one side (the open side) it will be always flat...

Is that correct?

CAN PLEASE SOMEONE explain step by step how to do it?

something like: cargo separator-docking port, (cargo), type a, type a, type b, cargo adapter, etc.... in order.

Or send me a craft please.

------------------------EDIT-----------------------

I just saw the image that was posted just a moment before I post.

And then I understand.. it was no so hard xd, the problem was the flat side, I have the idea that I need to keep the curve line of the ship somehow...

Edited by AngelLestat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't get the Heinlein to nose up, it seems the wings really need to come forward or something, even using SAS the pitch just falls back to a few degrees after setting it at 45 or more.

Edit: I moved all the wings back along with engines, almost as far as I could, and it helps immensely, it climbs much better now.

Edited by cascinova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahaha nice images.

I notice one thing, i dint cant understand why the cargo planes that I made with b9 was so hard to take off (empty) in compare with the one that I already had.

cargo_shuttle_ksp.jpg

Forget the 3 docking port, that was a mistake that I found that day XD

So I realized that all structures who does not carry any fuel like adapters, cargo bay, etc. weights a lot!

The cargo bay for example weights 3,4 tons and is just a structure. How can the biggers wings weight 0,08 tons and something of similar size with no fuel 3,4t?

And that is with all the structure parts less the ones than carry fuel.

Fuel parts are in balance with the ksp tanks.

Edited by AngelLestat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, a B9 plane will weigh way more than a stock one unfortunately. I found 1/4 weight savings changing from all B9 parts to stock parts - and it actually flew. Also, I had a wide body plane built in R2.2 grow from 25 tons to 55 in R2.5 and I had to scrap it when I realized the one tank went from 500 to 4700 fuel.. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cargo bay for example weights 3,4 tons and is just a structure. How can the biggers wings weight 0,08 tons and something of similar size with no fuel 3,4t?

All structural parts weigh as much as necessary for KSP physics to work properly with them. Lowering their mass will severely compromise the strength of their connection to other parts, don't do that.

A fuselage can hold a certain amount of fuel depending on it's cross-section and length of the fuel tank. We are calculating fuel tank capacity from true volume of our fuselage sections, nothing to tune here. The resulting total mass of fuel tanks is not determined by us, we are only determining empty tank mass and KSP adds the rest depending on amount of fuel. Naturally, large tanks would be heavy, and our fuselages are very large. S2 is almost 2.5m in diameter, same as orange tanks. HL fuselage system is 3.75m sans side cuts. You can't realistically expect these parts to weigh as little as puny stock spaceplane parts do. To be able to support the fuel tanks from those fuselage systems, structural parts have to be of proper weight, otherwise connections will be very, very prone to breaking. You saw how low mass worked out in the 2.0 release, it's not the proper way to do things and it's not fun to have your planes falling apart from the slightest stress.

Besides, look at example crafts, they are never using any sort of wing spam or intake spam and take off perfectly fine utilizing up to half of the runway. I honestly don't understand why the hell would you want to lower the mass of the parts if there isn't a problem with taking off in the first place. No one seems to complain about structural parts from KW Rocketry weighting up to six tons for precisely the same reasons.

Also, the mass of wings and intakes should NEVER be used as reference, because KSP is using faulty mass-dependent drag model and these part types always have their mass set depending on the required drag levels, completely irregardless of their size or volume.

I had to scrap it when I realized the one tank went from 500 to 4700 fuel.

That was a placeholder value that had nothing to do with true volume of the fuel tank and it was rightly changed.

Edited by bac9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I really sorry if am talking trash, I will put something in clear, I dont understand how this game works, and for sure you know a lot more than me.

I am just comparing numbers with the ksp structures.

How it was hard to take off in my 4 or 5 test, I take a look at the numbers and I thought that maybe was something bad.

Lowering their mass will severely compromise the strength of their connection to other parts, don't do that.

I already did XD

Dont worry, no kerbals will be damage in these tests.

I reduce the mass in a 70% of all structures like adapters, fuselages, etc (only structures without fuel) and then I reduce also the breakingForce / breakingTorque in a 20%

I know, I dont know what I am doing, if is wrong, I will install B9 again and thats it.

Until now, I just noted that is a little more light, the planes take a little more speed, but i dont see any big change.

what do you said about the strength i dont get it.. Someone post this formule that said: bf = Mass * Gees * Gravity * 50

then if you reduce the mass, and you keep the bf number is mean that part will be stronger.. But you are saying the opposite.. so idk.

All this values and weird formules makes me feel like KSP is based in some very weird physsics. From the point of someone who does´nt know a **** about this game.

(about all other that you are mention, i give you the right, big planes works fine) i will test with these numbers and then i will reset to your numbers again and i will keep testing until i find a way to make an efficient shuttle.

Edited by AngelLestat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loving this mod. Some random creations so far:

4vq1M0W.pngMy favourite ship so far. Not overly useful but I think it looks great!
O1ToFMD.jpgApproaching minmus
3w0fuPN.jpgTransport ship and tug carrying off the cargo
UJdo0W1.jpgCraft using the VTOL landing engines

Just waiting on the SABRE engines so I can hopefully get a reusable SSTO to orbit and back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only originally saw the R1 release with the awesome-as-pie 2.5m Cockpit. Your parts are absolute sex for the eyes. Keep up this amazing work and I will continue to not pay you anything for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a way to view the center of thrust on the VTOL engines in their vertical mode? I really really really want to use them, but I just can't balance anything unless I resort to absolute perfect symmetry, which drastically limits my design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to say to all the people who cant get there planes to take off it has to depend on engine placement, wing placement, and wing angle, my first plane i had to take it to the end of the runway to even try to get it in the air after the little fall/jump on the end of the runway about 75% it succeeded but after fiddling around with the wing angle i got it to take off 35 meters before the end of the runway. So anyone who is having trouble with there planes look at your design and using the wings he supplied you with helps alot better then the stock i tried stock and the plane wont even take off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a way to view the center of thrust on the VTOL engines in their vertical mode? I really really really want to use them, but I just can't balance anything unless I resort to absolute perfect symmetry, which drastically limits my design.

Uh, why would you not read the description of that engine or take a closer look at it? It was specifically designed to the keep the center of thrust precisely in the same point for both orientations, so stock CoT marker from SPH/VAB is correct.

Edited by bac9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently having a couple of weird problems, and I'm wondering if anyone might have some sort of idea what's going on, maybe seen this before, or has an idea how to fix them. These problems are both occurring on my first B9 ship:

1) On the M2 Cargo Hold Type B, I don't seem to be able to open the doors. I tried right-clicking on it and clicking Toggle, and nothing happens. It shows Status: Locked. Not sure if I'm doing something wrong or if it's bugged or what the deal is.

2) During the ascent into orbit, the focus of my camera begins slowly drifting off the rear of the craft. By the time I reach orbit, it's centered at least 2km behind it, which makes it impossible to properly operate the thing.

Any thoughts?

i have the second problem too, and made a thread about it

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/27763-center-of-mass-moves-outside-of-ship

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is, without a doubt, the best parts expansion that I have downloaded for KSP. But, can I make some suggestions? Some things I've found myself wanting after building with B9 are: a smaller hypersonic cockpit that can fit onto the Mk 2 body, smaller Mk2 - 1.25m adapters (the originals are just too long for my tastes, I often just go without), inline intakes for the Mk2 body, and monopropellent tanks for the Mk2 fuselage system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bac9.. You was right "of course" about the structure strenght, I leave all the parts with its original parameters.

One question, What's the firespitter plugin point?

Is only to include the FAR parameters if this is installed? Or it has other uses in B9?

I am trying to make the fancy S2 structures fly (just becoz they look awesome). But is hard.. well "I can", but not with the effiency and control than I am looking for.

Also there is no example airplane for those shapes.

I will post all my test design later so maybe someone can give me a hint. Until now what I notice, if loose control of an airplane, then is impossible to control it again.

Other thing, and this is a ksp problem. If you want to lift for example 2 orange tanks, you need less engines to do it in vertical way than in horizontal way with wings.

On the contrary as the reality.

And one question or suggestion: Why the crew structures carry so few kerbals? For example the 6m crew structure only carry 6 kerbals, a normal airplane in the same structure size may carry like 20 people, and people is a lot more big than kerbals. Also, it will be great if you can give another utility to the S2 intake air structure, maybe some windows to carry crew?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The firespitter plugin is there for the fancy computer in the EVA. And for the crew structure, we're talking of space travel, not commercial space journey. You can't fit as much as kerbonaut with their whole space suit than random people with only regular clothes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The firespitter plugin is there for the fancy computer in the EVA. And for the crew structure, we're talking of space travel, not commercial space journey. You can't fit as much as kerbonaut with their whole space suit than random people with only regular clothes.

Thanks for the plugin data.

About the crew.. The modules Soyuz than carry people to the space station are super small, only 6m*2m, and they have fuel, propulsion, solar panels, instruments, shields, food and oxigen for the space station, 3 astronauts etc.

The S2 cockpit is one thing, but the crew section it does not need to carry all the other things.

If bac9 said that is for keep kerbals alive with bed, food, etc for long periods, is ok.

But if is for crew trasport for a space station is a waste of space :)

And I never see an astronaunt with space suit inside a ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, why would you not read the description of that engine or take a closer look at it? It was specifically designed to the keep the center of thrust precisely in the same point for both orientations, so stock CoT marker from SPH/VAB is correct.

As it happens, I did. I think I see what you're saying, now. I hadn't realized the sphere at the base of the CoT marker would be the pivotal center. I guess what I need is something to hide other engines' thrust while maintaining their effect on the CoM.

Edited by loppnessmonsta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it happens, I did. I think I see what you're saying, now. I hadn't realized the sphere at the base of the CoT marker would be the pivotal center. I guess what I need is something to hide other engines' thrust while maintaining their effect on the CoM.

What I do is find a roughly equivalent size and weight structure as the engine and use that in place while I balance. Some of the RCS tanks are close enough to match the engines. Once I'm done I simply swap out the part and I'm good to go. That is until I realise I forgot to account for fuel redistribution as I burn :(

It would be awesome if the VTOL engines thrust was also linked into ASAS similar to RCS controls. There is the VTOL Auto Engine Output controller mod but it goes nuts with tilting thrust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...