Hodo

Camlost, about the Pratt& Whitney F100, I think I found a minor flaw in its heat range. It is overheating at a bit to low of speed at a decent altitude. I did a dozen tests before the new RO broke my install. I posted the pictures of a few of those tests back in post #553. The F100 is overheating at over 30kft at Mach 2.06 when it is rated to push the F-15A Eagle over Mach 2.5 at the same altitude. My test aircraft is lighter than the F-15A and should match the top speed but the engines are overheating long before it can get there. It isn't a drag related issue, it is a turbine overheat issue. Perhaps the engines are 5-10% to low on the heat scale?

So the latest RO, kind of broke my RO install. I now have a stock Kerbin system with RO configs.... nothing is right.. like the planet scales are all stock with all the stock planets.

So you want an "EZ" mode aerodynamic model, but not the stock one? What?! Do you want to know how I learned to understand FAR. I ate lunch for a solid year at Pope Army Airfield on Fort Bragg and watched C-130s and C-17s land and take off. I then looked at how they were responding to the inputs given at different stages of take off and landing. I then looked up videos on Youtube to see how aerodynamic forces affect wings at different speeds, yes they exist. And finally I flew a few dozen missions in Falcon 4.0 just to refresh myself on how aircraft "feel". You know what, now I can build some amazingly stable aircraft that almost fly themselves. All it takes is to use a bit of the ol' grey matter between your ears and you can figure it out.

Just make them with Infernal Robotics (IR).

Great, I know what I am adding to my stock sized Kerbin install.

Is .24 due out soon? I keep seeing everyone getting ready for it, but I haven't bothered to read the development thread in a while.

I am still tracking down that bug that is causing all my errors in the log. I am tempted to do another clean install and see if that fixes it, but not looking forward to it. Not exactly the easiest thing now that I have RO in a seperate install on my computer so Steam doesn't auto update it.

So looking at this mod and liking it, I have one question. Does it require Kerbtown? Wasn't exactly sure in the OP.

While a bit harsh I agree with jrandom here. I find Procedural/stretchy tanks to be more of a parts count saver then anything else. Nothing worse then taking time to build a beautiful rocket, and all of its glory and spend 2 or 3 hours on the construction part of it only to have it fail because of the parts count causing the physics engine to do stupid things, or lag your computer so much that it just wont work. Do you honestly think that NASA said, well the largest fuel tank we have is 150 liters of capacity. Well lets not build a larger one, lets just use a bunch of the smaller ones. I don't think so.

As in real life it is generally better to bank turn then yaw turn. This is mainly for the reasons someone else listed, fuel flow issues, aerodynamic drag forces, and crew and passenger comfirt. But it is also more effecient to roll and turn. This is because your wings are the largest lift generating force on the aircraft, so why not use them to change direction.

Easiest way to check, is to check your output log. But the other way is to load up the game and hit ALT-F2. This will show the log as it happens.

You are right Q is the air pressure on the craft. But more importantly for aircraft and rocket design is the CL and CD numbers. Those are what I pay attention to when designing my rockets and planes. Expecially in RO.

That is what I call overkill for satellite coverage. But it works, and I like it! Mine is a 5 satellite version of this, just polar and equitorial orbits.

Are you running any mods? Because it sounds like you are having a string of errors that is causing a memory issue that is killing your performance. Also how many parts are you puting on your ships, is it all the time is it part of the time. Just saying the performance is bad, is like saying you dont like food when you just don't like onions. You have to be a bit more specific than that.

I own every FASA Battletech/Aerotech/Citytech box, and source book. All of my Battletech stuff takes up half of a 12x10 shed outside. Aerotech was my first boxset I ever bought of the Battletech universe. And I don't even like to think about MW:O. All I say is bring back Multiplayer Battletech : 3025!

They did, the Wright Flyer had its rudders in front of the pilot. There was a couple of designs that were like that prior to WWI. They were as Roblamb pointed out, poor for seeing.

I have sent a few probes to the Moon in RSS RO with a 2 stage rocket. But it was a VERY light cargo load, less than 5 tons. The key is to see how much mass you can shave off of the cargo. I had to start thinking about how LITTLE I can get away with in space and survive.

Looks a bit like the Aerotech Corsair aerospace fighter.

LOL, I don't find it a pain at all. If the craft is designed right you won't run into problems.

I made a "rocket" SSTO, granted it uses SABREs and a rocket engine. This was built a long time ago.

Still never had this issue.

If it makes you feel any better, I am still on top of the FAR catagory.

To post an imgur album use this.... [ imgur ] p1OVP [ / imgur ] -----------------------------------^^^^No Spaces^^^^ So it will look like this.

Really I would love to have a second runway that is set 0-18. So I can taxi and take off north south if I want.

Ok you can turn on the L/D readings on parts in the FAR menu in options menu for FAR. And the dynamic pressure issue is becuase you are coming in WAY to fast and your wings are not securely attached. Try strutting them a bit more.