DKnight54

Just to check, do you have Hullcam VDS installed? I'm betting that if you check the voxelization using the FAR supersonic tab, you'll see that it voxelizes the cockpit only, and that the docking port and anything attached to it will not be voxelized. Not sure what the interaction is, but because Hullcam VDS adds a camera to docking ports, this somehow breaks the voxelization to that part and anything attached to it. Please note that I've not done detailed testing, and am assuming that normal docking ports may have the same effect. I've only just caught the source last night have chucking mods one by one, and there's no errors(That I could see) in the logs. AFAIK, there was no issues with this in the previous "Johns" version.

Hmm... Just wanted to share a few things I learned about designing planes in nuFAR. When I started learning to design planes for FAR, the rule of the thumb was that as long as the Center of Pressure/Center of Lift marker is behind the center of mass, then the plane should be fine. However, it doesn't over work this way with nuFAR. Compare this two similar looking designs. You'd figure that performance be about the same right? However, the second design will actually have a tendency to pitch up. The reason? Average COL may be behind COM, with the majority of the life from the main wings in front of the COM, the lift from the main wing will cause the aircraft to pitch up. The good version The bad version Try it out for yourself. Note, you'd need SuicidalInsanity's Mk2 Expansion set's MK-1 Chines

Finally getting around to posting one of my aircrafts. Pretty basic design but neat to fly. Watch the throttle on the the turbojet though! Managed to set my plane on fire a couple of times when flying low altitudes... Craft file here Originally designed with Eskandare's Thermal Nuclear Engines and Nertea's Heat Control but revised to be completely stock and rebalanced. Mods used - Adjustable landing gear by BahamutoD Fuel amounts have been carefully calibrated to have zero COM movement.

Hi, Anyone else having problems opening the settings menu? Running KSP 1.0.2 64 on linux. Alt-B, Shift-B, Ctrl-B doesn't work...

From my own experience with flaps in front of wings, you'd need to set deploy angle to negative to get them to generate lift. Else they will deploy downwards and actually cause negative lift. Also, you need to set negative AOA else the flap will stall ( along with the rest of the wing) as soon as you pull up . On my plane, I set flap deploy to -13.5 degrees, AOA to -90% and control surface deflection to 10 degrees See if that helps. Edit: for true slats, we'd need something that pushes the leading control surface fowards.... Insane robotics might work except it'd be wobbly... Or maybe Ferram can add code to deploy slats?

Hi there, had much fun sticking this engines on planes and sending them to space. That being said, I noticed that the masamune is less efficient than the stock nuke engine. One a existing design, where I removed a nerva and replaced the stock turbojet with the masamune, I noticed a huge(close to half) reduction in delta-v. Looking into the cfg files, I realized that stock nerva engines had liquidfuel consumption of 0.9 while masamune was 1. Was this intentional for balancing reasons? I'd figure that masamune and the stock nerva have similar fuel efficiency while the masamune would weight heavier due to more complexity

Hi Ferram, first off, thanks for all the hard work you've put into FAR. That being said, I've noticed a problem with using Procedural Parts for cones with FAR, and haven't notice anyone mentioning it before I've noticed it in the last few Dev Builds of FAR, using the latest version of Procedural Parts. You can see it using voxel debugging in the editor. I tested this on a clean install of 64-bit KSP 1.0.2 on Linux with only modularflightintegrator, most recent FAR dev build, procedural parts and ModuleManager 2.6.5 and was able to recreate the issue. To recreate, just attach any of the procedural parts and select cone and set the tip to 0 or use the procedural cone directly. Log files look clear with no errors, but attached anyway. https://www.dropbox.com/s/0rdqzdac6zx9r97/KSP.log?dl=0 I don't think it's a problem directly from procedural parts because there was a dev build where the problem went away, but latter came back in a latter build. IIRC, the build without problems should have been the one before the negative scale mirrorRefAxis fix.

I've been noticing some weird interactions with ailerons that intersected with a vertical wingtips, and I've being encountering this issue since earlier build versions. That being said, being curious, I turned on the aero overlay in nuFar and discovered this: lift force for B9 control surface is calculated at the edges, while stock have it at the centre. I'm currently using the latest updated patch.

Looks like it could be a model offset issue. In blender, check to make sure that the that the centre of the model you are exporting is set to the actual centre, and not say offset to the origin of the scene.

Sorry, What do you mean by change their function? more specifically which object's function? If you're talking about sweeping the wings and whether it affects the flight characteristics, at the very least, it will change the location of the center of lift. That can have a very drastic change in a plane's performance. Also, do note that as far as I'm aware, for sweeping wings to have any effect on flight characteristics, you'd need to be using FAR or NEAR. In the plane I showed in the screenshots, the center of lift was originally quite near the center of mass, and the plane was quite acrobatic, and quick to respond to pitch control input. When I sweep the wings back, it actually became stable and sluggish in response to pitch. I also did a quick scan of the numbers in the FAR analysis, and sweeping the wings do modify the stability values. However, I have no idea of how accurate the changes match real world performance. Ferram would be a better person to ask. I suspect at that on the current version for FAR that it's not 100% accurate because part occlusion is not accounted for IIRC. In theory, one would sweep wings for supersonic flight, but my admittedly limited testing do not show any major differences in level flight aside for a drop in coefficient of lift. I do admit to playing without sudden aero dis-assembly though. Aside from that, I can only suggest that you play around with it and report back the findings Regards, DKnight54

Hi Guys, The other day, Jeb was testing some new wings from a new supplier under supersonic conditions. Apparently the wings' structural material was made from bamboo and started flexing backwards under the high dynamic pressure. To Jeb's surprise, that made the plane more stable as the center of lift shifted backwards. Upon landing, Jeb insisted on Bill making some wings that could blend on command, and Bill found the only parts manufacturer Krazy enough to do it, Dorky Krazy Wings. What this is: A infernal robotics powered wing hinge that allows attached wings to be swung backwards. Yes, you can also swing the wings forward by flipping the part backwards, but the models screw up for some reason. Required mods : Infernal Robotics plugin(Not included and found here) Download of parts here Credits: sirkut for Infernal Robotics, without which none of this would be possible ZodiusInfuser for his excellent Infernal Robotics parts which I have been dissecting to figure out how to make it all work. PolecatEZ for teasing me with the F14 swing wings in the D12 Aerotech. That was also where the initial idea of making the part with infernal robotics came about. Various Modders who have put together the various guides and tutorials. Known issues: Lousy/simple model : First time actually modelling something myself in any kind of 3d modelling software. Be kind Lousy Textures : See above:cool: The models flip out when rotated in certain directions : I have no idea myself. Advice would be much appreciated! Works with FAR? - Not too sure myself. Under a quick test, Cd did not change(Since FAR ignores part occlusion IIRC) but Cl changes(drops) and center of lift shifts backwards. Be careful with that, you can shift center of lift so much that the plane is too stable and cannot pitch up. Rotating the part under VAB/SPH causes the models to glitch out! - long noted Infernal Robotics issue. I'm not aware of any workaround that I can implement. License? I'm releasing this under Creative Commons - Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) since I'm sure there are many others that can do a much better job given this starting point and I'm unlikely to further improve the quality any time soon. To that end, I'm releasing the blender model as well. If anyone feels they can do a much better job, have fun! Regards, DKnight54

Hey guys, I need help with the colliders using this plugin. I figured out that to get working colliders, I've got to add them using the Mu Collider, but a couple of problems. For the box colliders, I can basically get them working, but I can't reshape them. or rotate them, or translate them. Is this intended behavior or am I missing something somewhere. I then tried the mesh mu colliders, and all seem well at first, but when I export and reimport back to check, the mu collider mesh has basically collapsed into a single dot. Did I do something wrong?(Should I not have applied the translation, rotation and scale using ctrl-A?) Please halp! Regards, DKnight54

I think the FAR values are messed up. For some reason, the center of lift is show as far behind the actual wings.

What I meant was that we wouldn't need to model specific wings to use with the swing wings part, that existing wing mods/parts would work fine.

Hmm... Methinks the solution to this is to add an additional frame that can rotate from horizontal to vertical position.