Hodo

I actually have not run into issues with .15 FAR and this. What does your craft look like? Actually the only issue I have found with this and .15FAR is the TOGGLE GEAR option in FAR doesn't work on these gear, but that is minor.

I think it is a level 3 tracking station issue. I figured it was user errror. LOL!

I dont ever worry about the turrets, because I dont use them. Didnt think to test them. I build fighters, bombers and attack craft along with SSTO cargo planes and science aircraft.

No worries Nertea, I am patient. But I have a small request. Can you add a two 2.5m attachment rear section? Like an enlarged version of the twin 1.25 mk2 section.

I can tell you exactly why it isn't getting off the ground. You have the VTOL attitude adjustment mod, which is for VTOLs in flight. It kills the engine power of the craft in Vertical mode to keep it level. So if you looked at each engine you would find that it actually cutting the available power back a good bit keeping the available power below the 410kn to get the craft off the ground. I know because I had the same problem last version with a VTOL I was working on with that TCA mod.

Will NuFAR entries be accepted?

Oh it will take me that long before I have a complete grasp on what changed in the NuFAR so no worries here.

Truth is they were never really balanced for stock aero anyway. They were designed for use in FAR. And seeing that has even changed, a lot, they may not work at all now. I will miss the massive SABRE-M engine though.

Now that FAR has been updated I am going to REALLY want this.

Ok I will hold off on those designs for a bit.

Oh BahamutoD I have a NuFAR compatibility report for you. In the dev version before the FAR 15 came out, I was testing all of the weapons. And the bomb predictor indicator is spot on in NuFAR, and the missiles work JUST like real life. So you dont have to worry about any issues there.

So yeah.... Ferram4. I think I speak for everyone here. - - - Updated - - - Oh and by the Ferram4, thanks to your advice I did get a delta-wing that works quite well, I decided to go with a "cranked" delta design that works surprisingly well, I know it has a lot of wing area but it is a test craft for now. Now I am working on other things to expand from this and to improve. I have been doing a lot of reading on real delta wing designs, the hows and whys of some designs and trying to integrate them into the NuFAR. And will the NuFAR take into account changing the sweep angle of the wing in flight? Like the Su-17 or the F-14?

You know it worked in .90?

Is it bad I am more excited about that then KSP updating to 1.0?

I am having an issue with KER in KSP1.0.2 with NuFAR installed in career mode. None of the KER displays are showing up in career mode but they show up in sandbox. Is there something I am missing, I have the tech tree fully done. I know this isn't a bug more of a user error I am sure of it.

I am looking at your design, and seeing as I have already given up on the new stock aero and am using the NuFAR dev build I can't offer much advice. The problem is the air up higher gets much thinner now, so airhogging just doesnt work as well as it once did. So once you lost your jets to provide gimble force to keep the nose down you are now relying on very thin canards to try and keep the nose under control. I would suggest using RCS thrusters to help with that in stock. Also I would stay lower till you get your speed up then use that to transition to a higher altitude. Oh and as a long time FAR user you will LOVE the NuFAR!

Howdy back. And to answer your question. In short KSP stock doesnt do a whole lot of the real world stuff. But it does do a lot of real world stuff in a way that works for the scale of the environment. Mind you Kerbin is roughly 1/3rd the size of the real Moon. Which makes it quite small but it still has the gravitation pull of Earth. There are mods that change the scale of everything and make KSP into a pretty good simulation of the Real Earth Solar System including Earths atmosphere. But a great many here dont care for it because of the shear number of additional mods needed to get it to work with in 90% accuracy of the real world. But if realism is what you are looking for then check on the Realism Overhaul thread. If you just want something close but dont want deal with having to build a rocket with over 9.8km/s of Delta-Velocity to get to orbit then you may want to avoid it. I personally have both versions of KSP installed on my computer a RO install and a regular install.

And yes the NuFAR does take all of that into account to some degree. I flew this nearly finale version of the craft I posted before. It is amazingly stable now and easy to fly. NuFAR is amazing so far, cant wait till it is finally released.

Well it started here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wing Where I was reading about real life problems with the delta wing design, and how some engineers overcame it. Then I went to several different resources and looked over how they came up with solutions and why. Like why the Su-17 uses a cranked delta design in its tailed delta wing craft. It is really exciting and interesting stuff, that with NuFAR works.

This design has some problems I am working out, but I think I am close to getting this craft to working exactly the way I want it to. Been doing some research on real life delta-wing aircraft and finding some design flaws that have been corrected with real world solutions that would work in NuFAR. This makes me very happy. Down sides of the delta currently in NuFAR is it is a bit twitchy and unstable at low speeds, but a dream at supersonic speeds. So it maybe the thing to have for SSTOs but it is by far not the only choice. I think as I experiment more I may go back to my cranked arrow delta wing designs.

So... the only bad thing about the new KSP version and the new BDArmory is.... JUST as I was starting to do things in the real world, NOW I have to start all over with new ideas, new challenges, and new parts....

Nothing anyone said was rude, you are just trying to be a victim here, so step down off that cross because your name isn't J-C. All he said was if you don't have the latest version they can't help you. Ferram is not a developer he is a player just like you and eye, he just made a mod in his free time for us to use because he thought others would like a more realistic aerodynamic model. Not because he has to but because he wants to. So dont come over here thinking you are entitled to anything because you chose to download his mod. - - - Updated - - - Yet you called someone else rude for telling you how to fix the problem?

NuFAR isn't that bad right now. It isn't 100% but it isn't that bad. The thing is now old designs that we got away with before just DONT work well in a more realistic aero environment. While something like this was stable and easy to fly previously, it is a handful now.

Crzyrndm, I was testing last night in NuFAR with B9Pwings and your patch. There is one minor issue that crops up this is more of a warning to anyone else using this and NuFAR dev build. The Voxel aero blue arrows does not always display the correct information for wings attached to another set of wings. They work just fine, but the display doesnt correctly show them with the Voxel aeroflow diagrams. I have one minor request. Can we get a curved end piece for the wings so we can have a smoother look to our wing designs. Because this version I think I am going to go without the original Pwings and some designs just look better with a rounded wing tip. Like this Cessna.

Fascinating. I have been testing this design, and I found that it works at supersonic speeds just fine. As long as I am going mach 1+ it is quite stable. But the Voxel diagram doesn't read the outter wing sections when set to display the blue arrows. So this maybe part of the problem I will test against another design made with the stock wing bits. I have another simple training aircraft that I built to give my pilots the basic flight skill in career mode. It uses the B9Pwing and fuel in the wings, it works just fine. Granted I need to put airbrakes on it to slow down to landing speed, which is 65m/s but that is a minor design oversight.