Hodo

So 6 crashes and it hasn't even finished with the Retro Future stuff.

I have always done parking orbits then performed a burn to my target planet. But I use SSTO spaceplanes for all of my space work even interplanetary work now. So for real distant hops outside of the Kerbin SOI, I have to do a refuel at a station at 100km orbit then perform the mission. This is honestly the most cost affective way to perform most missions.

Giving it another shot. Lets see what happens.

HARM is expanding operations to include rovers for all of your planetary scouting needs. Crew 2 Science experiments Cargobay packed with generators. Brake lights! So it is road legal!!!! Oh did we mention its STOCK PARTS! LSR-1 LSR-1 Download!!

Here is that output.log I promised earlier. Output.log

The first question is do you have the link right? I like to link albuims like this. [ imgur ] OauTs [ /imgur ] without the spaces it looks like this

I noticed one part is missing from this pack. An SAS module for the smaller 1.25 square body craft. If you don't use the nose cone you wont get an SAS module.

Sounds like you are having an SAS and CoM vs CoL issue. As Wonderfound said the SAS after .24 became REALLY twitchy and you should get the PID tuner or Pilot assitant tool, those help a great deal with cutting that issue down. Next check your CoM vs your CoL, I know .25 messed up a few of my old designs some how, but it wasnt a huge deal to fix them. It was a slight shift in the mass of some parts.

I was trying to find you the thread where someone explained all of it in simplest terms and did it with pictures but I can't remember where it was. Here is my simple take on those windows. The first window when you open FAR in the SPH is the AoA flight window, or Angle Of Attack window. This will tell you how the craft will fly at different AoAs, if it will be stable and create lift and roughly when it will stall out and fall out of the sky at a set speed and angle. The next option in that window is the test mach. Which will give you the crafts flight performance in a graph form at a set AoA through a set of speeds. I usually run mine from Mach 0-6 and have it test 25pts. This way I have a pretty good idea of how the craft will perform as an SSTO, as in KSP you will rarely go over mach 6 with FAR in atmosphere. The key lines to look for are the CL and CD lines. This with the L/D line will give you an idea of how much drag the craft is creating (CD) and how much lift the craft is creating (CL). While L/D is the Lift over Drag for the craft. You want this to be possitive as much as possible. Next one is the simulation one, this one has nothing but numbers, you want all of these numbers to be green. If you hover your curser over them it will tell you what each one means and how it affects your craft. I like to test at the key points in a flight. 0.35 at 1km alt, mach 1 at 10km, 2.5mach at 20km, and 5mach at 25km. This way I know how the craft is going to perform at each stage of the flight to space. As long as everything is green or near green I am happy. This is what a sample of what one of my craft looks like. Mind you those are old FAR pictures but that craft still performs the same. Here is a newer one for a different craft.

I have to agree with that right there.

Odd I tried the latest ATM basic and my KSP crashes about 1/4 of the way through loading. I reverted back to the previous version of ATM basic and no problems. I am running X86 version, because I am not running KSP in 64bit. I will post the output.log later when I get home near my computer.

That is cool, I use the SABRE-S also. I love that thing one of the most versitile 1.25 engines out there. A bit long but still useful. I find it odd that you dont want a craft that can actually achieve orbit just hop and return. But hey its your program and that is pretty cool.

I can say I love that site now that I use it. It is pretty cool, one of the best ideas in a long long while, if any website were to become stock this should be one of them.

That craft is so light you could get away with almost half the wing you have there, and could get away with a little bit more fuel this would give it the ability to reach orbit on its own. I know because I have a craft not to much bigger than that, that is my light cargo SSTO. It can haul about 20-25 tons into orbit.

I have sent SSTO space planes to other planets, mainly Duna and Ike way back in .21. But there was a refuel in orbit of Kerbin before it left for the trip and then it used the Kethane to refuel itself for the return trip. I have been planning on another trip out to the other planets, like hitting up Jool and Dres. But I haven't had time to do it yet.

The same is true in FAR, if you put enough thrust behind something it will fly. Or I think the statement is, "If you get anything going fast enough it will fly."-Ferram4.

Wow necro much?

You all are making me want to learn to use blender so I can create a model for my current russian knock off sidewinder the AA-11. I have been using an old model that someone else made that is no longer supported.

I can say after looking at your plane, the problem looks like your landing gear is the issue. The nose gear is set at a steep angle and sometimes they don't always go on straight when attached like that. This means the nose gear could be turned ever so slightly left or right which is causing your issue. The other problem is your main gear, the ones on your wings are probably to far back away from the point of rotation on the aircraft. This is a common problem, the easiest fix is to bump those main gear a bit further forward near the CoM marker. The nose gear you should move back to a more flat area near the nose. Also check to see if your craft is getting some wing flex on take off that is causing your landing gear to change camber.

B9 planes are simple in FAR. Same principles for regular planes using stock parts. Except for some parts are heavier and a bit more expensive. The same rules of placing your CoL just behind your CoM and your CoT inline with the CoM still holds true with the B9 parts.

With DRE I try and set my PE about 5km over KSC from the otherside of the Kerbin. This way I am flying about halfway around the world in the atmosphere on re-entry it gives me plenty of time to slow down. The problems I have been having lately is my craft will overshoot slightly and have to turn around about 100km out and land west to east.

You cant, I would use kerbalX.

Did some tests, found the Air to Ground missiles, like the Maverick and the Hellfire worked fine against static ground targets. But the A2A missiles had the turn radius of a small nation like Canada. (/sarcasm) I was easily able to turn inside of them with my F-119 Akula, which is agile but not that agile. But it was good to be able to do basic missile evasion and not launch flares and be able to defeat a missile. Guns, rockets and bombs all work fine, even when dropped at supersonic speeds.

This is what it would look like.

Ok simple answer to your first question about Flaps. Flaps are the things that go on the trailing edge of the wings. They are generally inline or near the CoL for the craft, this is to keep them from acting like a leaver and tilting the nose down, this way they create a longer wing area which generates more lift at lower speeds. The Ailerons and Elevators are different all together. Ailerons are the things at the ends of the wings that control the roll of the craft. Elevators are the things at the end of the aircraft that control pitch. The rudder controls yaw and canards control nose pitch and sometimes roll. The biggest thing to look at in FAR with designing an aircraft is to look at the CoL vs CoM. If the CoL is to far behind the CoM the craft will act nose heavy, if it is to close it will be "twitchy". And if it is infront the craft will be uncontrollable in game. Landing gear placement is the next big thing. You want your rear most gear near your CoL point this is the point of rotation for the aircraft. This way when you take off you rotate around that point. If that is to far back then you could place them just behind your CoM. The problem I see with that craft isnt you need more rudders or larger tail planes, it is you dont have enough real stability in the yaw catagory. It isn't bad the craft is otherwise pretty good. The tool you displayed is set at altitude of sea level and .35 mach which is about take off speed or landing speed. Which means your craft will have a very minor yaw issue at low speeds and low altitudes. The only otherthing I see wrong with it is your CoL is way to far behind your CoM. You should have it a fair bit closer. About like that.