Center of mass of engines.

[CaseRU]

The center of mass of some engines look strange. It not in engine but outside. Is it bug or not?

p.s. Sorry for my English.

[pellinor]

Nice! I didn't notice this yet.

Not a bug. The CoM of a real jet engine is in that position. Since KSP only models the nozzle part, planes with a jet nozzle at the end always had the problem of being tail-heavy. The new engines should make plane building much more comfortable.

[KatzOhki]

If you mate this with one of the intake fuselage parts then it makes perfect sense I guess.

[sal_vager]

The "engine" is just the nozzle, mass was moved to improve accuracy, to better simulate the position of the actual engine.

[Brotoro]

The CoM of jet engines got moved forward? Ooooo, niiiiice.

Thank you, Squad.

[Deutherius]

The "engine" is just the nozzle, mass was moved to improve accuracy, to better simulate the position of the actual engine.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/J85_ge_17a_turbojet_engine.jpg

Ooh, that's a cute little jet engine

Anyway, on topic... Is that a good decision? For larger crafts, sure, awesome, but if you build really small, it might become pretty hard to not build a complete lawn dart and/or weird crafts with wings too far forward.

[CaseRU]

The CoM of a real jet engine is in that position.

But not outside of engine. At first let's do full model of engine with real place of mass.

always had the problem of being tail-heavy.

Is not reason to breaking physics, i think.

The new engines should make plane building much more comfortable.

The new engines not allow to create light VTOL like VTOL Scott Manley

[Brotoro]

The CoM is not outside the jet engine...the rest of the jet engine is just invisible. I can see it if I squint real hard

[Renegrade]

But not outside of engine. At first let's do full model of engine with real place of mass.

Well, you'll still not be able to create Manley's VTOL. It will then have a long body attached to it and you'll still have to deal with a raised CoM.

If they really want to fix it, they'll have to have a multi-part engine system (someone made a cool suggestion about having the actual turbine separate from the exhaust nozzle, and requiring both for flight. That would let you place the nozzle like in a real life VTOL, while having the turbine in it's proper place)...

For most normal jets though, the invisijet should work fine and is a welcome change. I'd still like to see that multi-part engine, of course, but this is better than nothing.

[CaseRU]

The "engine" is just the nozzle, mass was moved to improve accuracy, to better simulate the position of the actual engine.

Yes but is seems no physicality.

Is same?

In game we can divide the engine:

Is it normal?

[CaseRU]

Well, you'll still not be able to create Manley's VTOL. It will then have a long body attached to it and you'll still have to deal with a raised CoM.

Sorry, i don't understand this. I repeat Manley's VTOL in previous versions and it normally flight. In version 1.0 this craft can't be horizontal flight. CoM not coaxially CoF unlike previous versions.

p.s. Sorry for my English.

[sal_vager]

Aero got changed, pre 1.0 craft can break for lots of reasons, but so far no one has had any issues with their planes yet that are related to this change.

The only issue so far is that it looks odd

[CaseRU]

Aero got changed, pre 1.0 craft can break for lots of reasons, but so far no one has had any issues with their planes yet that are related to this change.

My heavy VTOL flying normally but no light.

[Renegrade]

Sorry, i don't understand this. I repeat Manley's VTOL in previous versions and it normally flight. In version 1.0 this craft can't be horizontal flight. CoM not coaxially CoF unlike previous versions.

p.s. Sorry for my English.

Don't worry, your English is good.

What I was saying, if they make it a realistic engine design (a long shape, like a real turbine), you couldn't put that long shape into the cargo bay - it would stick out of the top.

They would have to change the game so that the turbine and nozzle were two different parts..

[arq]

Oh man I didn't notice they did this! This makes design so much nicer! Good find.

[T-Bouw]

I tried getting the best of both worlds by applying the heatshield PhysicsSignificance-fix from Flowerchild in reverse to the airbreathing engines.

That way I hoped that the mass of the engine got added to the parent-part it was affixed to. COM should then still be were it belongs, whether the plane is big or small, engine mounted horizontally or vertically.

I got buggy results though, so I'll have to work on this.

[CaseRU]

What I was saying, if they make it a realistic engine design (a long shape, like a real turbine), you couldn't put that long shape into the cargo bay - it would stick out of the top.

Thank you, i understand now.

You are underestimate my engineering abilities .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Pegasus

[zarakon]

I like the idea of this, but it does look like it moved a bit too far forward