[1.0.2] B9 Aerospace | Procedural Parts 0.40 | Updated 09.06.15

[Ashigaru9]

Here's my problem!

Part of the options are missing. I am using FAR by the way.

Could anyone please guide me through a proper solution?

[kcs123]

Just opened a new thread, still need to update it with better pictures, but at least one craft made with B9 Procedural wings is available to try it.

Link for thread is in my signature.

[01010101lzy]

http://s3.postimg.org/ahpwrl0b3/Problem.jpg

Here's my problem!

Part of the options are missing. I am using FAR by the way.

Could anyone please guide me through a proper solution?

Is it compatible with your KSP?

Try re-installing the latest version, this might solve the problem.

Then, if nothing changed, try re-installing FAR.

If it still can't solve your problem, then I'm out of ideas...

Hope it solves your problem!

- - - Updated - - -

Could it be possible to have one panel, with the same size and colour options as the wings, that FAR treats as a structural panel and not a wing? I was able to easily make a custom Mk2 size bomb bay for example with just six pieces of wing in the mid-section of the hull but it's its, um, a bit distressing that they're treated as exposed lifting surfaces.

Just simply copy a config of wing type A and delete the "deflectionLiftCoeff=" sentence and the "FARWingAerodynamicModel" module and it will work fine.

[blowfish]

http://s3.postimg.org/ahpwrl0b3/Problem.jpg

Here's my problem!

Part of the options are missing. I am using FAR by the way.

Could anyone please guide me through a proper solution?

What's missing? Everything appears to be in-place. All of the tweakables have been moved to the custom window and the various options (Base, Leading Edge, various materials) can be expanded by clicking on them.

[Tidus Klein]

I fixed my far graph problem. For some reason my vertical stabilizer was the culprit, odd seemed to be throwing a null ref.

[Van Disaster]

I fixed my far graph problem. For some reason my vertical stabilizer was the culprit, odd seemed to be throwing a null ref.

That's the sort of thing you want to take pics/save logs for, in case it's an issue with the mod & not your own install.

[Svm420]

@01010101lzy

To make the wing not count as a wing I would change those two things in the copy of the config for wing a. Do I need to rename the file or any parts in it somehow for it to show up in game? Haven't tried doing this yet, but i wanted to know for when i do. Thanks!

[Tidus Klein]

That's the sort of thing you want to take pics/save logs for, in case it's an issue with the mod & not your own install.

ya whats funny was, it wouldn't let me edit the wing...or right click on it to bring up the GUI, im just guessing it was a null ref, I dident open the console to check, but as soon as i took it off and deleted the part graph worked fine, slapped another stabilizer on, edited to shape, and took to the skys, with graph in for help...no idea what may have caused it.

[Darren9]

@01010101lzy

To make the wing not count as a wing I would change those two things in the copy of the config for wing a. Do I need to rename the file or any parts in it somehow for it to show up in game? Haven't tried doing this yet, but i wanted to know for when i do. Thanks!

You need to give it a new name, that's give the .cfg a new name (such as "Structural_Procedural_TypeA.cfg") and the part a new name ("name = B9_Aero_Structure_Procedural_TypeA") and also whatever new name you choose scroll down to the bottom and change it in the "@PART[B9_Aero_Structure_Procedural_TypeA]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch|NEAR]" line, so your new part name is there as well.

I'd still like to see one included in the pack though, it'll be the best (and only?) procedural panel.

[bac9]

Version 0.31

• Fixed a bizarre issue with font type randomly swapped by KSP, breaking layouts in the custom menu. Font reference used by all styles is now independent from KSP.
  
• Added a part size interface to feed the career editor info about the wing dimensions (why it's incapable of doing it by itself is another question). Axis order is undocumented so I don't know whether values I output go into the right directions, needs testing.
  
• Fixed some smaller UI issues
  
• Added a DRE module with uniform reflectivity of 0.25 until DRE implements per-axis shielding to allow protection to be dependent on how you configure the surfaces
  
• Fixed the part descriptions

- - - Updated - - -

Is it compatible with your KSP? Just simply copy a config of wing type A and delete the "deflectionLiftCoeff=" sentence and the "FARWingAerodynamicModel" module and it will work fine.

That's insufficient, all non-wing parts must have attachment nodes placed on the bounds of a part in such a way that an averaged position from all nodes arrives into the center of a part, - otherwise occlusion checks would produce incorrect results. As I allow thickness adjustment, you can't just add two nodes through a config either. I'll look at it later, it must be supported from the plugin.

[Svm420]

That's insufficient, all non-wing parts must have attachment nodes placed on the bounds of a part in such a way that an averaged position from all nodes arrives into the center of a part, - otherwise occlusion checks would produce incorrect results. As I allow thickness adjustment, you can't just add two nodes through a config either. I'll look at it later, it must be supported from the plugin.

Thanks look forward to it! Love your mods.

[Einarr]

About that part size interface...there are some issues with it that I noted. I even recorded a video showing them off. Pay attention to the dimensions windows as I put together the sample plane in the SPH.

[bac9]

About that part size interface...there are some issues with it that I noted. I even recorded a video showing them off. Pay attention to the dimensions windows as I put together the sample plane in the SPH.

http://youtu.be/CDJp3BNR3c4

Welp, this looks fundamentally broken no matter what numbers you output as dimensions. Can't help with it, sorry.

[Einarr]

I've actually reverted to 0.30 to get more sane numbers for dimensions. It's a shame that Squad hasn't documented ways to feed numbers in properly...or, infact, anything about it...

[starikki]

More requests

Is it possible to put the alignment guide indicator code used in B9 landing gears for the wing parts? That would be a great help when we are using the rotate tool for install angle and dihedral angle etc.

[bac9]

More requests

Is it possible to put the alignment guide indicator code used in B9 landing gears for the wing parts? That would be a great help when we are using the rotate tool for install angle and dihedral angle etc.

I don't remember anything like that in B9 gears.

[blowfish]

Pretty sure it's a feature of FSWheel. Not sure why it would be useful for wings.

[kcs123]

Pretty sure it's a feature of FSWheel. Not sure why it would be useful for wings.

Yes, you are right. FS feature. Adjustable landing gears and B9 gears both use FS and both have that alignment guide.

For wings it is not so needed. You don't need to perfectly align canrads and elevators on tail for example. Those works just fine if are not on same level.

As the metter affact, it is quite usefull to use offset tool to move canrads or elevators up or down slightly and fine adjust main thrust torque.

RCS build aid is realy usefull for that.

[01010101lzy]

Yes, you are right. FS feature. Adjustable landing gears and B9 gears both use FS and both have that alignment guide.

For wings it is not so needed. You don't need to perfectly align canrads and elevators on tail for example. Those works just fine if are not on same level.

As the metter affact, it is quite usefull to use offset tool to move canrads or elevators up or down slightly and fine adjust main thrust torque.

RCS build aid is realy usefull for that.

Well, it's pretty useful in FAR because a little level difference can have a great effect in, for example, stalling attack angle.These things are frustrating when making a replica of a real-world plane or building some kind of special planes...

[Van Disaster]

I think the PAD ( part angle display? ) mod will show that sort of thing, and also lets you adjust angles down to 0.1 degree increments.

[Einarr]

Hopefully bac9 will revert the part size interface thing for the next version he releases, so those of us still using 0.30 can get the other fixes and such that 0.31 brought.

[MAKC]

Tweakables suck! It doesn't allow for the kind of precision adjustment that I feel is needed. Can't we get input fields instead?

Regardless, this is a total PW-killer. Thanks a lot!

[starikki]

Pretty sure it's a feature of FSWheel. Not sure why it would be useful for wings.

Root install angle and wing twist can increase cruise L/D quite a bit. Plus lower pitch angle at touch down.

Fine tweaking pitch control surfaces angle allow aircraft naturally trimmed for cruise.

Of course they are extremely useful.

Edit:

I realized that you can add the alignment guide module in .cfg file, although not working 100% perfectly.

[blowfish]

Okay, but knowing exactly what angle your wings are at doesn't tell you whether it's going to perform well aerodynamically.

[Naf5000]

Feature idea: Vertical offset to allow for smooth-looking gull wings. The joints you get from rotating the wings leave awkward little splits in the wing. Minor detail, and not really necessary, but... Pretty please?