Jump to content

blowfish

Members
  • Posts

    4,559
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by blowfish

  1. What about static thrust never reaching the specification? I think this has to do with the parameters being tuned with TPR=100% rather than what you get with real inlets, which is more like 85%.
  2. I'm curious as to why though - is the stock bi-coupler just longer than what you wanted? Do the engines have a non-standard diameter? It's certainly more versatile to have independent parts...
  3. Yes. In fact the additions that Kerbinside puts around the KSC are designed around the KSC++
  4. @Honeybadga: This is likely a FAR issue. You should ask ferram about it.
  5. @Wolf_rt: You are using AJE, in which thrust is completely different, so this question belongs in that thread. In the mean time here are a few things to take note about it: 1) I belive that static thrust is tuned using TPR=1.0, rather than the more realistic TPR=~85%, resulting in real thrust being lower than it should be. I've asked camlost about this but haven't gotten a response. 2) Thrust drops off with altitude (really static pressure) in AJE, so keep that in mind as you climb. The best indicator I've found is FAR's dynamic pressure indicator - if I'm trying to initiate supersonic flight, I try to keep it at about 40 kPa through the whole climb, though I don't think this is the only strategy which works.
  6. Nice. Is that a single part of just two engines on a bi-coupler? Also any plan to have the ejector flaps move? I know it's a PITA to rig the animation but the results are very satisfying to see in-game
  7. Something the shape of a rocket tends to be somewhat unstable aerodynamically. If you enable the CoM and CoL markers in the VAB, you will notice that the CoL is probably above the CoM. This means that deviations from prograde will tend to flip you. Small deviations can be corrected with thrust vectoring and a good PID (which SAS is not). I've managed to launch some short rockets without fins but they're very difficult to fly and usually it's easier to just put them on.
  8. The equations governing their operation are less well studied and most of the test data thus far has not been released.
  9. That should be fixed. Make sure you have the latest version of KerbalKonstructs.
  10. I suspect that particular config node will cause conflicts with NearFuture too so it might be a good idea to change it.
  11. The Firespitter plugin has in fact been updated. The updated version is included in the B9 5.2.8 download.
  12. There's a config node in AJE/zFinal/zzWildcards.cfg: @PART[*]:NEEDS[!RealFuels]:FINAL { @MODULE[ModuleEngin*],* { @PROPELLANT[LiquidOxygen] { @name = Oxidizer } @PROPELLANT[LiquidH2] { @name = LiquidFuel } @PROPELLANT[Kerosene] { @name = LiquidFuel } } } Which is causing the problem. I don't _think_ anything will mess up if you remove it but keep a backup just in case.
  13. Firespitter rotating VTOLs don't use animations. They rely on choosing an object in the part and setting it's rotation (rotating propellers are a different module). In this case, there's an animation which actually deforms the mesh as well as moving the thrust transform. Unity does use transforms as bones, so in some cases it might be able to have a firespitter VTOL which was able to deform a mesh, but in this case it's a lot more complicated, (a) because the animation cannot be reduced to rotating something about a single axis and ( because of the doors on the bottom.
  14. The FAR team is mostly ferram4 with random contributions from others. What Squad has said thus far about the aero update leads us to believe that the new aerodynamics will be an improvement over current stock but nowhere near as detailed as FAR. Furthermore they have said that it will still be possible to mod the aerodynamics. So FAR will continue.
  15. I don't know the answers to all of these, but I do know a few: As far as loosing control at high speeds, you need to adjust the DCA constant - I find 200 or even 300 works better than the default 100, though of course this will make it easier to break your wings. In general, the default values for all of these things aren't guaranteed to work well. Dynamic pressure is almost zero in the high velocity/thin atmosphere phase, which means that control surfaces will be almost useless but aerodynamic stability doesn't matter as much. The fact that RCS thrusters aren't working is odd though - have you confirmed that they start working again once you disable FAR's flight assistants (and in particular which ones). Same question about nosing up after takeoff - does disabling the pitch assistant make easier?
  16. You'll need to provide more information, but most likely you have an outdated firespitter.dll
  17. Based on the information we have, the 1.0 aero update will be nowhere near as detailed or realistic as FAR. Furthermore the devs have committed to maintaining moddability, so FAR will continue.
  18. Hey camlost, should static thrust be calculated with an ideal TPR=1, or with more realistic values?
  19. Given that no one else has reported this, you're going to have to provide more information.
  20. Nice parts Minor issue, the thrust transform of the K35-B doesn't line up with the nozzle in VTOL mode. Haven't checked the Razor yet EDIT: Looks like it's just an issue with RCS Build aid.
  21. You should know, because you should have read this. But anyway it's KSP_Data/output_log.txt
  22. It has an optional fuel tank. Also IVAs with more than 12 kerbals don't work very well.
  23. With the aerodynamic overhaul planned for 1.0 it might not make sense to put effort into stock aero right now.
  24. You will need to provide more information. Please read this. Start by posting an output log.
×
×
  • Create New...