Official FAR Craft Repository

[Deizelpunk]

The latest from 'Scarburough Avionics and Weapon Systems' - Scarburough UAV-1b Ghost! 

A highly capable unmanned stealth ordinance delivery system. It is also capable of many other tasks, such as reconnaissance and experimental testing. This variant comes equipped with a radar jammer to fully conceal any radar signature it may show, 6 hellfire missiles and a FLIR ball. 

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

Edited September 12, 2016 by Deizelpunk
Wanted to add pics.

[Van Disaster]

Pretty old, but this give you some ideas? the bay doors open downwards. Uses yaw brakes for steering, the little fins are just for a bit of directional stability & help reduce yawing in turns.

Building something like an actual B-2 also works:

just not the best thing you could build.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Van Disaster

[Deizelpunk]

3 hours ago, Van Disaster said:

Pretty old, but this give you some ideas? the bay doors open downwards. Uses yaw brakes for steering, the little fins are just for a bit of directional stability & help reduce yawing in turns.

Building something like an actual B-2 also works:

just not the best thing you could build.

Im still not 100% sure how to make them stable, the lack of inspiration isn't the problem. If you look at my last comment I made a lil flying wing drone, but when I scale that design (the wing twist included) its just so unstable. An explanation on how to make them work better would be helpful. Cool planes tho.

[Deizelpunk]

Actually I found this really useful page here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1297516

[Van Disaster]

You haven't explained *how* your craft are unstable, so we can't really help directly.

[Deizelpunk]

21 minutes ago, Van Disaster said:

You haven't explained *how* your craft are unstable, so we can't really help directly.

Well the same problem everyone has with flying wings, no yaw stability. Im just trying to figure out how the real life ones work. So far from what i can tell its a combo of differential thrust, wing sweep and wing twist. Not exactly sure still tho.

[blowfish]

1 hour ago, Deizelpunk said:

Well the same problem everyone has with flying wings, no yaw stability. Im just trying to figure out how the real life ones work. So far from what i can tell its a combo of differential thrust, wing sweep and wing twist. Not exactly sure still tho.

Some tailless planes use split airbrakes on each wingtip for yaw control, see this image.  You need a pretty good flight control system to deal with that though, and I'm not sure SAS or any other system in KSP is up to the task.

[Deizelpunk]

Just now, blowfish said:

Some tailless planes use split airbrakes on each wingtip for yaw control, see this image.  You need a pretty good flight control system to deal with that though, and I'm not sure SAS or any other system in KSP is up to the task.

Yeah, FAR yaw doesn't really cut it either.

[Van Disaster]

FAR yaw brakes work fine, they just take a lot of setting up. You can see the near brakes active on that b-2ish thing. Might want to use Pilot Assistant instead of stock SAS though.

The only way I could have made this more unstable was give it anhedral; it's under full autopilot in this shot, it's only problem was lack of drag! extremely hard to land.

What I've never got to work satisfactorily in FAR is mixing inputs other than adding AoA to primary controls.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Van Disaster

[Calvin_Maclure]

New to this post. Glad I found it!

Here's a few of mine:

KAC -130 (WIP) - http://imgur.com/a/fymxo
B-52 - http://imgur.com/a/ZX0A7
F - 16 - http://imgur.com/gallery/yd8Ok
F - 15 - http://imgur.com/a/JMhgB

Edited September 14, 2016 by Calvin_Maclure

[Calvin_Maclure]

Here's another:



http://imgur.com/a/rPonZ

[Rodhern]

Earlier I expressed concern that the FAR Zq derivative is displayed with the opposite sign of my expectation.

Spoiler

 

On 2/22/2016 at 3:25 AM, Rodhern said:

As you can probably tell I am still new to FAR.

I have this simple craft. It is a command pod, three girder boxes and four wing parts.

From looking at the picture I would guess that a positive pitch up rotation will induce a upward acceleration (negative Z-direction acceleration) as the wing surfaces are forced downwards.

On the FAR stability derivatives tab however the Zq derivative is positive. Can someone explain that to me?

 

Now I have a new craft that also seems to display an opposite Zq derivative.

Do you have any good ideas how I can test/debug a craft to check if the pitch-up induced acceleration points upwards or downwards?

[FourGreenFields]

I hope I'm not too late for the flying-wing-party... date-volume limit prevented downloading stuff (playing on another PC now) before Deizel made his bomber himself, so I decided to build a cargo plane based on Mk 3 fuselages (as he said that increasing size was the problem).

Spoiler

Testing isn't done yet, and there'll probably be some adjustments. Relies on FAR stability assists for stability (yes, pitch too. And any landing attempts without roll assist failed as well).

Edited September 15, 2016 by FourGreenFields

[raxo2222]

What about plane full of fuel that can takeoff at 0.3 mach (90 m/s) and fly at speeds up to 6 mach before engine meltdown?

This plane uses Tweak Scale, FAR and AJE.

Also I have Kerbalism on realism mode and 40 other mods.

RAPIERS doesn't have generators apparently @blowfish

http://imgur.com/a/5qLML

It can barely start flying without afterburners on.

Here is craft file:

http://www14.zippyshare.com/v/lqYcBDQZ/file.html

http://www14.zippyshare.com/v/iOYtrMYA/file.html Here is nuclear jet - KSPI mod plane.

[blowfish]

5 minutes ago, raxo2222 said:

RAPIERS doesn't have generators apparently @blowfish

 

It's that way in stock.  AJE doesn't really touch the alternator modules.

[raxo2222]

14 minutes ago, blowfish said:

It's that way in stock.  AJE doesn't really touch the alternator modules.

Ah then how do I add alternator module to all engines at once?

Here is RAPIER jet at its limits:

 

[Rodhern]

Hi @ferram4

I asked this question a while ago. The main thread is these three questions.

Picture of craft
Z-direction answer
continued confusion

Now I have downloaded the source code so that can maybe ask the question in a more detailed way.

I believe Zu and Xu are calculated this way

pertOutput.Cl *= -q * area / (mass * u0);
pertOutput.Cd *= -q * area / (mass * u0);

and that Zq and Xq are calculated this way

pertOutput.Cl *= q * area * MAC / (2 * u0 * mass);
pertOutput.Cd *= q * area * MAC / (2 * u0 * mass);

Is it a conscious decision that the first uses "-q" whereas the last uses "q" without the reversed sign ?

Best regards, Rodhern

[Van Disaster]

@Rodherntech questions about FAR-the-mod should be asked in the main FAR thread; this one is for questions about craft design.

[Drew Kerman]

I have an aircraft that I'm working on that could use a bit of help from experienced plane builders. Spoilers ahead for KSA followers!

Spoiler

So I'm starting my plane building simple with a Cessna 180-type prop aircraft. It's experiencing some yaw or roll issues on the ground during takeoff and I want to find out if it's just the crappy 1.1.3 wheels or something actually wrong with the design. I'm currently doing my due diligence and working through videos, starting with @Wanderfound's KerboDyne Flight Engineering, then moving on to some others (wasn't @tetryds.working on some?). But in the meantime figured I'd seek some help here.

Here is the problem in action (all wheels are locked, also tried with the normal trike gear and it was worse, but I hear those gear are really bad in 1.1.3):

And here is the Data+Stability Derivatives window for the speed range where things start to get all wobbly:

everything goes green at Mach 0.16 - 53.7 m/s. Craft was positioned on the floor of the SPH in the tail-drag position that it would be while on the ground normally.

I'm wondering if maybe it's the weight of the aircraft that could be having an effect from the red pitch values? I didn't touch the wing mass tweakable since I wanted them to be heavy before they learn how to make lighter wings

This plane is intentionally built just barely functional since it is the KSA kerbal's first fixed-wing aircraft in over 200 years after only basic glider flights and maybe a handful of Wright-brothers-esque powered flights were performed way back when. So this isn't meant to be perfect. But it should at least leave the ground!

 

Edited October 5, 2016 by Drew Kerman

[Rodhern]

1 hour ago, Drew Kerman said:

I have an aircraft that I'm working on that could use a bit of help from experienced plane builders. Spoilers ahead for KSA followers!

Maybe you could improve the lift-to-weight somehow. Adding more wing or reducing the mass. At the moment I guess the plane is a bit strained that it must roll quite fast to take off.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Rodhern
my answer hid inside the quote

[Van Disaster]

I'm 95% sure it's because your wheels are angled - just fix them upright & you'll probably find some other issue. The fixed gear is just terrible regardless.

I had some issues with light aircraft & the small gear used as nosegear - it'd usually bounce hard & whack the tail into the ground, so I ended up installing tweakscale & using a scaled-down medium gear. TBH I'd have thought that would have been just as bad but it does seem to work better.

[Rodhern]

I don't know if you use hangar grid mod; it is a great help for aligning stuff straight.

Edit: Ahh, sorry, never mind, just now saw that you are well aware of the mod.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Rodhern

[Calvin_Maclure]

On 9/13/2016 at 5:30 AM, Van Disaster said:

Pretty old, but this give you some ideas? the bay doors open downwards. Uses yaw brakes for steering, the little fins are just for a bit of directional stability & help reduce yawing in turns.

 

Rather like this one! Kind of reminds me of the British Vulcans, only nicer

[Drew Kerman]

3 hours ago, Rodhern said:

Maybe you could improve the lift-to-weight somehow. Adding more wing or reducing the mass. At the moment I guess the plane is a bit strained that it must roll quite fast to take off.

I didn't tweak the wing strength at all, so I could lower that a lot to save mass. I don't want to though if I don't have to. It's their first time making aircraft parts. They should be heavy. Will give it a try tho

1 hour ago, Van Disaster said:

 using a scaled-down medium gear. TBH I'd have thought that would have been just as bad but it does seem to work better.

I scaled the nose gear and it went whacko so I didn't bother trying to scale any of the other wheels. Will give it a go, thx

But we can all agree it shouldn't be an aerodynamics issue?

[Van Disaster]

1 hour ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

Rather like this one! Kind of reminds me of the British Vulcans, only nicer

Hey now, I've experienced attempted hearing loss by Vulcan several times! those things were amazing and very alien to see.

7 minutes ago, Drew Kerman said:

But we can all agree it shouldn't be an aerodynamics issue?

Yes - most of your derivative panels show the wing stalled, the one which isn't stalled shows some possible lateral stability issues but I'm not sure you're even getting up to that speed.