Porkjet

[0.24] Spaceplane Plus 1.3

Recommended Posts

One thing I wish the spaceplane parts in KSP did a little more accurately is account for fuel - specifically, real aircraft store the vast majority of their fuel inside wing tanks. If aircraft parts in KSP were also fuel-bearing, it would really help deal with the issue of moving CG during flight. Heck, even making the parts crossfeed-enabled (or tweakable in the VAB) would eliminate the need to run ugly yellow external fuel pipes across our wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing I wish the spaceplane parts in KSP did a little more accurately is account for fuel - specifically, real aircraft store the vast majority of their fuel inside wing tanks. If aircraft parts in KSP were also fuel-bearing, it would really help deal with the issue of moving CG during flight. Heck, even making the parts crossfeed-enabled (or tweakable in the VAB) would eliminate the need to run ugly yellow external fuel pipes across our wings.

I second this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I second this!

it's posible to do this however if you look in your squad folder the fuel has weight so even if we had wings to store fuel our crafts may be harder to fly/ control due to weight or lack of it (like tipping to the right because it decides to use the right wing tank first rather than both)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, drag depends on mass. This pretty much kills "wet wings". Well, that and fuel flow issues. Squad needs to fix it's drag model and ​fuel logic before this can be modded in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wing tanks with FAR is a thing, I've read. I have a wing tank aircraft right now, haven't had time to fully test but seems okay so far

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, drag depends on mass. This pretty much kills "wet wings". Well, that and fuel flow issues. Squad needs to fix it's drag model and ​fuel logic before this can be modded in.

No it doesn't

80UEY3nl.pngXWgKqRVl.png

Got your so-called 'wet wings' right here. Works just fine. Got that baby to orbit and back. Multiple times. Has flown with both stock and FAR drag.

Also has code to make them Modular Tank / Real Fuel compatible.


@PART[B9_Aero_Wing_HW21]:Final
{
RESOURCE
{
name = LiquidFuel
amount = 1440
maxAmount = 1440
}

RESOURCE
{
name = Oxidizer
amount = 1760
maxAmount = 1760
}
MODULE
{
name = ModuleFuelTanks
volume = 32000
type = Structural
}
}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it doesn't

Drag directly depends on mass in Squad standard model, this is common knowledge. FAR obviously fixes that. While it does not make "wet wings" impossible, it makes them lot less useful.

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Drag#Drag

Anyway, wet wings are not something which used for spaceplanes anyway. While its easy to put jet fuel in them, wing fuel tanks become very impractical for cryogenic fuels (not to mention that amount of fuel that wing carry is very minor compared to which even efficient spaceplane would require).

Edited by RidingTheFlow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drag directly depends on mass in Squad standard model, this is common knowledge. FAR obviously fixes that. While it does not make "wet wings" impossible, it makes them lot less useful.

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Drag#Drag

Anyway, wet wings are not something which used for spaceplanes anyway. While its easy to put jet fuel in them, wing fuel tanks become very impractical for cryogenic fuels (not to mention that amount of fuel that wing carry is very minor compared to which even efficient spaceplane would require).

It's not as straightforward as most people seem to think. In the Squad "aerodynamic" model, drag is determined from velocity, drag coefficient and mass. Therefore, increasing mass increases drag... but mass also increases, so terminal velocity stays the same. When one part has a higher drag coefficient than others, though, it will affect the terminal velocity of the craft when that part gets heavier. Another problem with wet wings is that lift is also dependent on mass, so you'll actually have an easier time staying airborne with full tanks than with empty ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, wet wings are not something which used for spaceplanes anyway. While its easy to put jet fuel in them, wing fuel tanks become very impractical for cryogenic fuels (not to mention that amount of fuel that wing carry is very minor compared to which even efficient spaceplane would require).

First off, who said anything about cryogenic fuels? Given the ISP of RAPIER-type engines, it's almost certainly RP1 or the Kerbal equivalent that's used - RP1 is close enough for government work equivalent to Jet-A for jet engines (as in, RAPIERs used in open-cycle mode with atmospheric air for the oxidizer). I'm an aerospace engineer and I know what I'm talking about here. So yeah, maybe we need modded configs to allow "LiquidFuel" resources to be carried in wing parts and "Oxidizer" resources to be carried in fuselage sections, if you want to pretend to be serious about the structure of tanks (LOX tanks are usually oblong spheroids or cylinders with spherical-section domes at the ends). But since the stock game aircraft fuselages are "fuel-only" anyway, why not reverse that? Make them "LOX-only" or configurable in the VAB, and make wet wings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He just did it by himself. I was quite amazed when I saw it on reddit just the day after release. And he literally praised it to the skies. WOW!!! That's just awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drag directly depends on mass in Squad standard model, this is common knowledge. FAR obviously fixes that. While it does not make "wet wings" impossible, it makes them lot less useful.

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Drag#Drag

Anyway, wet wings are not something which used for spaceplanes anyway. While its easy to put jet fuel in them, wing fuel tanks become very impractical for cryogenic fuels (not to mention that amount of fuel that wing carry is very minor compared to which even efficient spaceplane would require).

'No it doesn't' directly responds to 'This pretty much kills "wet wings"'

NO. It does not. It works just fine in the game. In stock drag or FAR drag.

People need to actually try things before making unsubstantiated claims about what does or doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First off, who said anything about cryogenic fuels?

Possibly it was Reaction Engines. The RAPIER is modeled on their SABRE engine, after all, which is LH/LOX, held in the vehicle hull. The LH is also used as part of the engine precooler for high-velocity performance. Of course, the SABRE isn't a jet engine that turns into a rocket, per se - rather it's a rocket that can use atmospheric air for oxidizer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its pretty obvious that RAPIER is Kerbin analog to SABRE (its even in tongue-in-cheek acronym). And this is using LH as fuel, LOX as oxidiser. Skylon will not hold any fuel in wings...

I guess wings could be made to hold some small amount of fuel, but this have to be carefully balanced (for reasons people already pointed out above, as having more lift with more mass without FAR) - or it will cause "strange" behaviour (not necessary "impossible to use", but could be "too easy" instead).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Added support for Deadly Reentry and Connected Living Space.

It seems like IVA's are the most requested feature, so that will be my top priority for the next update, but mind that this will take at least 2 weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can wait, Porkjet. You're mod already includes so much awesome stuff so we can definitely keep ourselves busy for the time being. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideas about the IVAs:


Mk2 Cockpit:

1. Seats next to each other, not one behind the other

2. don't cramp it up in there.


Mk2 Inline Cockpit:

1. Same as above


and ideas for a new cockpit, the Mk 4 Cockpit. (For TouhouTorpedo's Mk 4 fuselage system)

6 seater with a large IVA and RPM support.

Just a suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1.1 (05.26.2014)

- reworked tech tree entries

May I ask what changes were made? I don't want to load up KSP only to not be able to fly my beautiful spaceplane... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spread them across the late spaceplane related nodes. I had actually forgotten to do this before and they were mostly in the supersonicFlight node.

I'm sorry if your plane won't load now. You'll have to collect some more science and rebuild it.

In other news, I just tried to give CurseForge a chance and upload SP+ there, which failed everytime due to some upload error. Thanks Curse, for stealing half an hour of my life trying to make that post pretty, just to make it vanish beyond recall. Doesn't really cast a very positive light on the whole thing for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I spread them across the late spaceplane related nodes. I had actually forgotten to do this before and they were mostly in the supersonicFlight node.

I'm sorry if your plane won't load now. You'll have to collect some more science and rebuild it.

In other news, I just tried to give CurseForge a chance and upload SP+ there, which failed everytime due to some upload error. Thanks Curse, for stealing half an hour of my life trying to make that post pretty, just to make it vanish beyond recall. Doesn't really cast a very positive light on the whole thing for me.

Didn't the old spaceport have similar issues? Maybe you should try MediaFire or something like that. Mega? Dropbox?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's already using Dropbox. Dropbox has the cleanest interface (in my opinion) and is easy to use, the only problem is that if your download becomes popular they'll take it down due to bandwidth limitations.

Box is a pretty good alternative as well, don't know if they have bandwidth limitations though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.