Azimech

Nice video! The Wright Flyer would've even better with a model representing the centrally mounted 4 cylinder engine.

I'm going to continue some other KSP projects for a while but want to share it anyway. The engine has problems, the airframe is a pretty good replica in size and detail. Read the picture descriptions in the album for more info. Download link.

Daytime pictures are so much easier ;-)

All stock. Made the Apache today. Next up: Mil Mi-24.

Took a break from building the Hind. Haven't solved the engine problem yet and looking at the fact this Apache is heavier, I need to also uprate it. First flight and needs much more work.

That won't work! It's too d@&$ dark! Seriously though, nice!

I think T2 will move to increase activity on all bodies. It may surprise some but an increasing number of the userbase is bored with space. Interesting fact: the dominant craft type on KerbalX.com is not rockets nor landers. It's fighter jets.

Just how many rocket parts can a person have? I remember someone saying that if you can't make a beautiful painting with 4 colours, you won't do it with 16.7 million. And what is interesting to the one might be boring to the other. To push the longevity of the game Squad could invest in the whole space thing ... but what if everyone's bored one day? Either people quit playing because they can't think outside the confinement of rockets and space ... or they start to explore what else this game can do. I'll tell you this: T2 knows exactly what they did when they bought Squad. I'll make a prediction: in the future T2 expects more resources assigned for the development of things to do on the ground.

Thanks for the explanation. I was wondering about this for years.

Okay, joints physics on a single thread per craft, that's how it is. But since thermal calculations have no effect on materials or joints in any way except destruction, couldn't we have those in a separate thread? And if there's not much to gain with low part count, maybe with high part count or multiple vessels? Imagine three vessels on a quad core, one core does all the thermals.

Gives me an itch every time.

Thanks @klond! I have my screenshot with the 5000 rep mark

The devs know about it, I've issued a bug report. The intention was to improve performance during timewarp. They didn't expect it to happen during normal time and thus it will be fixed.

Here we can talk about all the parts and functions without specific action groups. Some where lost during the updates, others don't exist yet. Here's my little list, I could add your choices to the OP if you like. Something I really miss since 1.1 is the toggle for rover wheel motors. I'd love a toggle of the claw pivot. "Control from here" for every docking port, probe core, chair, command module.

You can build docking guides with only a few parts to force docking in the right orientation. Also displayed in the album is how to use autostruts after docking. So personally I feel we don't need docking parts for this particular scenario because the stock game gives us the tools to solve these problems.

That's what I always do, clip multiple together, then use the thrust limiter on one if you feel you have too much power. So you're adding mass, the need for more air intakes and a higher fuel consumption but all of that in the same shape. Part clipping is one of the best things in the editor. Tip to reduce drag: use the 0.625 nose cone, radially attach to let's say a fuel tank, then add the Juno's and offset them all in until it looks like one. And this way you won't have a problem with fuel flow (like when using the part clipping cheat, double stacking always blocks the first engine from getting fuel).

Stock turboshaft Mil Mi-24 Hind. There's lots of work to be done. One of problems is the terrible engine vibrations and low reliability. But ... it flies!

@qzgy I'm going to continue on my own designs now and leave this one as it is. Your Hind is a lot more controllable now. There's a lot that can be improved from here and this was done quick & dirty. Anyway, hope you like it :-) List of modifications: removed the reaction wheels in the rear and placed larger ones in front, replaced the engine with one of my own, reduced amount of blowers from 60 to 40, engine speed increased from 10 rad/s to 27 rad/s, placed three Juno's on the tail to replace the vernors, replaced the structural fuselages with fuel tanks, replaced the parachutes with probe cores (personal preference ;-)), rerouted fuel lines, reduced the amount of rotor segments from 50 to 15, Increased the amount of air intakes, reduced part count from 448 to 206, reduced the mass from 63.7t to 61.3t while increasing fuel amount with 2400 units. By the way ... I really like the fact you chose a Hind as your first helo. It's my favourite! Download link.

I have to be honest, I always have problems with the antennae-solar panel bearings. Without changing anything to the bearing, I now have this problem every time as shown in this two-pic album I've changed the blower assembly to a quick & dirty 40 using a narrow setup, 10 blowers per cubic strut. While I was the first to choose for a radial setup using 20 blowers, I feel the construction is a little bit too wide. I'll have to do more testing which setup creates more vibrations, I always had the idea a radial setup provides a more smooth torque delivery. Next thing I'm going to try is to replace the original bearing with my newest.

First thing I notice: for someone just starting to be a turbohead, this is a remarkable design. You're a good student! Analysis: After starting the engine the first thing I got was a massive RUD in the rotor assembly. Then I saw something interesting: floating rotor blades bent from there normal angle and a large amount of blades on the ground. I also saw a bearings made of solar panels and antennae. Suggestions so far: Interesting fact: more rotor blades than three doesn't necessarily improve things in stock aero. Often the opposite is true. You've got 170kg per blade segment providing lift & drag but also gyroscopic precession. Stacking blade segments is doing the same as having more rotor blades. To give you a figure, I use a three blade rotor with two blade segments for a 10 blower engine and a 2.5m. turbine wheel. I use a three blade rotor with four blade segments for a 50 blower engine with 8 short I-beams for the turbine. When attaching blade segments, attach them to their direct parent. Don't attach all of them to a central point. You'll increase the risk of a kraken attack. Rotors only become efficient above a certain RPM or as we use in KSP: angular velocity in rad/s. Rotors are efficient above ~ 24 rad/s. Adjust the amount of blade segments and/or blade angle to match this. When flying forward, the more blade angle you have, the more you'll experience "retreating blade stall". There are multiple ways to cope with this but this is a topic for later (it would take up a quarter of a page). Helicopters benefit greatly from having the CoM in front of the turbine shaft. Suggested mods: V.O.I.D. for reading engine/rotor speed (switch focus to the shaft), Part Angle Display for finetuning rotor blade angle, Editor Extensions for various building reasons and Collide -o- Scope for building bearings, especially bearings based on landing gear for the turbine shaft. A bearing should be able to cope with the forces it has to endure. Collider integrity seems to depend partly on part mass. You've used a very light bearing with a very heavy rotor. Download the Azi27 and Azi30 from KerbalX to compare. A larger radius for the turbine wheel increases efficiency. In case the turbine wheel is segmented, those segments tend to expand from the shaft at higher engine speeds (typically above 25 rad/s). The more distance from the center of the shaft, the more effect. Maybe a better choice than vernors can be found. Every J-20 has its own air intake. Maybe it's an idea to reduce the amount and have them all facing forward to reduce drag during forward flight. This is what happens in KSP 1.3. Pictures 2-4 are with "unbreakable joints" and "no crash damage" enabled. I'll load it up in 1.2.2 and see what happens. It works allright in 1.2.2. Something else I noticed but best shown with a picture: Here you see the exhaust thrust vector hitting the vernor nearly center. Engine efficiency improves dramatically when you make sure it hits the outer edge of the turbine element(s). You can hit "t" to enable surface attach when using EEX, then you can attach blowers directly to the parent part. In your case with 60 blowers, it means 60 parts less. It improves even more when you replace all those air intakes with a few 1.25m engine nacelles or engine pre-coolers.

77I-Azi30 Taranis Read the picture descriptions in the album for more info. Download link

What do you guys think of my newest design? First flight, not yet finished.

I'm flying it now and I have to say ... what a wonderful job! One of the most unique and beautiful designs I've seen in a long time!

PAD works on my install :-)

Guys, use a private channel will ya ;-)