Jump to content

TronX33

Members
  • Posts

    199
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TronX33

  1. Also, any constructive criticism is welcome.

    There are a few issues that I see myself, but I'm unsure as to how to solve them. I would appreciate any insight that more experienced craft builders could offer.

    First is the landing gear. I would prefer to have had the large landing gear for the rear, but that causes the plane to not take off, even when the center of lift and mass seemed to be in the correct location. Offsetting it into engine didn't seem to be enough, sometimes it showed through the top of the wing.

    Secondly, even though I rebuilt the front portion of the plane with structural fuselages instead of empty fuel tanks, its still so heavy that I needed to use cubic octagonal struts to clip another engine into the two existing ones.

    Another major problem is my method of blending the wing into the cockpit tail thing. As you can see from this picture of the SU-27, the wing and the fuselage blends together smoothly: Su27sk_b.jpg

    My implementation to meel feels sloppy, but the lengths involved were too small for two wing sections to be placed.

     

    And of course the wing shape is off and the cockpit hump is too long, but those I can just tinker with and solve. The previous issues are ones that I'm not sure how to fix.

  2. So after not playing KSP, I came back, and somehow got the motivation to actually make something. I've always liked the sleek looks of the SU-27 and its maneuverability. Now, I call what I've created a "semi-replica" because I didn't go over measurements and scale them, and the wings are a bit off, the top slope thing is a bit long, the landing gear configuration is wrong, but I think it looks close enough to warrant having the same name. It, just like its real life counterpart, is highly maneuverable with thrust vectoring engines ( I may or may not have abused cubic octagonal struts to put two on each side). However, sharp turns under 90 m/s can stall the plane. Stall recovery is simply, simply don't touch the controls, turn on the afterburners, and you'll be good. As the root part is actually a probe core as the cockpit is slanted, crew will not be automatically assigned. To have a cockpit view of the front, your pilot will need to be placed in the second cockpit appearing on the list. If you have two kerbals in the place, click IVA on the second kerbal from the left in the bottom right corner of the screen.

    Action group 1 for the afterburners.

    DL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ldduz6ydu02h9l8/Su-27.craft?dl=0

  3. Is there a way for the dual purpose guns to function as AA, and as normal guns? I ask because I'm trying to recreate the Atlanta-Oakland class. It was designed to be a destroyer flotilla leader, but was used as an AA platform due to its 16 dual purpose 5 inch guns along with 20mm Oerlikons and 40mm Bofors on the Atlanta class, and 12 dual purpose 5 inch guns with significantly more 40mm Bofors. The existing AA guns are functional enoug, but I want to make it so that it is the AA behemoth it historically was.

  4. 3 hours ago, ChemicalMonkey said:

    I got a question/issue, is the Hydra-70 Rocket Turret not supposed to have an action group to turn enable/disable it? It's rather tedious having to click it to enable it and then make sure i don't shoot myself with it when i go to shut it off lol. I've ran through the config to try and figure out what it is missing (comparing whats missing in it with the what the Goalkeeper has as an example) but for the life of me can't figure it out.

    Any help?

    Use the weapon manager. I set AG1 to be fire missile, AG2 to be next weapon, and AG3 to be previous weapon.

  5. If you don't know what the Mistel was, they were a series of composite planes, some of whcih actually saw use, consisting of a massive plane-bomb, with a small fighter atop it. Model 3B was one of the few that went into production. I consisted of a Focke Wulf 190 F8, atop a Ju 88 A4, modified so the crew compartment contained a ton of explosives. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistel

    Anyway, the reason this is "inspired" rather than "replica" is because It is slightly different from the original. Instead of two props, it has 4 whiplashes powering the larger section. It's wingspan is larger, and the cockpit looks different.

    EVA Jeb or Valentina (they're the only one crazy enough to fly this thing), walk them down the pylon, clip the camera below the solar panel cockpit, and get into the command chair. While flying, take care to constantly quicksave. Get to your intended target, point the pane at it, and release. Pitch up and fly the smaller plane with your kerbal in it away before switching to the bomber. It should fly itself, as long as you pointed it in the right direction, but if you need to make adjustments, do to KSP quirk, it controls from a sideways cockpit, you have have to move the camera into the tail and hunt for the small 1.25m probe core, and control from it.

     

    DL:https://www.dropbox.com/s/pzeokl1a3xetsmm/Mistel%203B%20Fuhrungsmaschine.craft?dl=0

  6. 2 hours ago, Andem said:

    Actually, Jool should have a solid location to land on. all Gas Giants do, the only issue is that the winds rip ships apart before you land, like Cassini (Cassini wasn't landing. I think it was Cassini  :P). It would be cool if we had parts that would let us land on Jool though... but realistically it wouldn't happen.

    No, Cassini-Huygens went to Saturn. It was Galileo that carried a atmospheric probe that was dropped into Jupiter. Although  believe it was the pressure that killed the probe, not winds? Can someone confirm or deny? BTW, Huygens dropped onto Titan.

  7. 46 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

    Writing from the top of my head, so I don't know exact menu button name for this. I think it is "match shape" or "match ratio" or something like that.
    That will create root wing part to match length/width with part it is attached to. Once parts matches sizes it is easier to attach second wing piece to first one. There is no "snap" button for it, but fortunately when you attach wings close enough it is easier to fine adjust them with offset gizmos.

    Usual placing wing scenario is like this:

    1. attach and shape first PW wing part to craft hull
    2. attach second part to the first part as continuation of large wing
    3. open PW menu (default "J" key)
    4. choose "match shape" option (I hope that I recall correctly button name)
    5. reattach reshaped wing once again to first part, so length of second wing "root" part is aligned with first wing "tip"

     

    Ah, thanks. Now I can finally reinstall this mod and get rid of pWings

  8. On 11/18/2015, 2:52:49, VaughanHiggins said:

    every time I get to 250m/s on launch they burn up and turn "unsafe" for deployment. This is on the way up

    Are they physically blowing up? If not, as long as you are not trying to deploy them, you are fine. The indicator only tells you that if you try to deploy the it's unsafe, not that they are broken. If they are blowing up, then its probably a problem with your heat.

  9. I felt, lost, adrift, without my forums. I agree. Don't do that ever again.

    2 minutes ago, theonegalen said:

    I'm having trouble finding my subscribed threads. Anyone know where those are?

    I believe that those were wiped in the update. It says in the official announcement thread for the new forums.

  10. [quote name='Bubbadevlin']I have had this issue ALOT, and i found its actually caused when you click out of KSP (when you have 2 screens) during the loading process of the save, so you either have to click out right after you load the save, or keep KSP as your window until it's loaded in. It happens a lot more in modded/higher flight saves, as there is more load time[/QUOTE]
    This. This is exactly what happens in my experience.
×
×
  • Create New...