disable lift option for wings

[eorin]

Hi! 99% of the time I build planes, i really enjoy do it but with 1.0 building fuselage with wings became almost impossible due to the drag effect, so we can't for example create a custom nosecone made of small wings or we cant build strange angled fuselage with wings.

So i was thinking about an option in the editor for disable lift from wings, so we can choose wich wing should act like a proper lifting surface or a structural panel.

What do you think about it?

Sorry for my bad english

[Hcube]

But realistically how could a wing have no lift ?

[eorin]

You will find a lot of peoples using wings as structural panels, so I will not bother to much about it be or not be realistic. It's just an usefull tool for making more cool planes.

[Starwaster]

As feedback to this idea, I don't think it is a sensible thing to do. You can't just turn lift off.

I am however a big believer that people should be allowed to play in their sandboxes as they choose so here is a suggestion that you may (or may not) find an acceptable alternative:

Use Module Manager and write a config that duplicates wing parts but removes their lift.

something like

+PART[wing1] // assumes the part name = wing1
{
	@name = wing1.nolift // rename your duplicated part to avoid conflict.

	@title = Wing with no lift // or whatever you want the name to look like inside the game.
	@description = This looks like a wing but it has no lift. Enjoy

	!MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface]{} // Remove the lift.

	// Done.
}

Naturally you'll need to know the names of the wings, which you can get from their config files.

There's also the issue of procedurally generated drag that will be a result of removing the lift module. (lift modules handle their own drag internally, I think)

So you may not actually be able to create acceptable nose cones even with lift removed; I really don't know.

[SebLavK]

Well, 1.0.X models aerodynamics more correctly, so even structural panels should generate lift if used correctly. Some real aircraft us wings that have symmetric airfoil, like a small cessna, so to generate lift they need some angle of attack. Those wings at an angle of zero won't produce lift.

If you look closely, wings in KSP appear to have symmetrical airfoil, but are instead coded to generate more lift, as if they were cambered... Only that they generate the same when your plane is upside down. You can check the effect here (Wikipedia)

I don't know if it's possible to tweak lift and drag effects in the debug menu?

[sumghai]

The latest version of Ferram Aerospace Research uses voxel-based aerodynamics, which can automatically tell whether you're using a wing on a vessel as an actual wing or as a structural panel for a lifting body.

[clivman]

The latest version of Ferram Aerospace Research uses voxel-based aerodynamics, which can automatically tell whether you're using a wing on a vessel as an actual wing or as a structural panel for a lifting body.

FAR causes way to much lag for me.

[nobodyhasthis]

But realistically how could a wing have no lift ?

I like that simple question. Gets straight to grips with the original request and challenges us to clarify our thinking. The answer is of course. When it is not a wing. What the OP is driving at is he does not have wings. He has structures made out of parts. So all discussions on wing aerodynamics are irrelevant here.

As feedback to this idea, I don't think it is a sensible thing to do. You can't just turn lift off. I am however a big believer that people should be allowed to play in their sandboxes as they choose so here is a suggestion that you may (or may not) find an acceptable alternative: Use Module Manager and write a config that duplicates wing parts but removes their lift.

There's also the issue of procedurally generated drag that will be a result of removing the lift module. (lift modules handle their own drag internally, I think) So you may not actually be able to create acceptable nose cones even with lift removed; I really don't know.

Which is pretty much a good explanation of why it is a bad idea. So although it might be possible. It is kind of an ugly way to get the finished result. Which is a fancy nose cone that does not create lift. A better idea would be to create a brand new part instead of modding existing ones. It is cleaner and less prone to introducing bugs.

Edited June 30, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Azimech]

It IS a sensible thing to do. In real life, a wing is not a flat panel like in KSP, it's got a certain shape. A flat panel does not really provide lift, just a lot of drag so it's mistaken for lift i.e. lift/drag ratio. Or do you think sticking your hand out the window while driving in a car an following the air stream means your hand is a wing?

I've built tens of huge airplanes using wings as structural panels for building the fuselage. During Errordynamics it was a bit better, 1.0.x may be a step forward but in some cases the lift/drag ratio's go banana's.

Yes, an option to remove (or add) lift through a context menu is a VERY intelligent thing to do. But it should be like with procedural parts: airfoil shape means lift, flat panel means no lift.

But the FAR method really is the future, until fluid dynamics comes along. AFAIK it still doesn't detect real shaped wings correctly.

[FishInferno]

In real life, a wing is not a flat panel like in KSP, it's got a certain shape.

This is only half the truth. Most wings are also build slightly angled to deflect air downward, which we know by Newton's third law, will produce a force pushing the plane up. so you could have completely flat wings as long as they are angled to deflect air down. The Wright Flier's wings were not nearly as "teardrop" shaped as modern wings

[Claw]

I feel I should clear up a few things about how aero works within the game, and how it compares to reality.

So i was thinking about an option in the editor for disable lift from wings, so we can choose wich wing should act like a proper lifting surface or a structural panel.

Yes. It's totally possible and actually incredibly easy to do.

But realistically how could a wing have no lift ?

Because of multiple reasons, but the one that's relevant is that the OP doesn't want to use the piece as a wing, but as a structural element. This is still a video game, so that logic is in the realm of the possible.

Also, if I took a wing in real life and attached it flat against a fuselage, it would function wholly differently than when it's attached as a classical wing.

snip...

There's also the issue of procedurally generated drag that will be a result of removing the lift module. (lift modules handle their own drag internally, I think)

Well, drag from lift is produced internal to the lift module (and based on the lift rating vice the part shape like everything else). However, there is also a drag model setting which needs to be flipped if you're going to turn off (delete) the lift module.

Beware that a wing acting as a "flat plate" structural element will generate more drag than a wing acting as a wing (in KSP), because of the shape (the wing models are fairly thick). Also, a nose cone made out of wings will NOT occlude parts behind it in the same way as a nose cone piece.

Well, 1.0.X models aerodynamics more correctly, so even structural panels should generate lift if used correctly. Some real aircraft us wings that have symmetric airfoil, like a small cessna, so to generate lift they need some angle of attack. Those wings at an angle of zero won't produce lift.

If you look closely, wings in KSP appear to have symmetrical airfoil, but are instead coded to generate more lift, as if they were cambered... Only that they generate the same when your plane is upside down. You can check the effect here (Wikipedia)

I don't know if it's possible to tweak lift and drag effects in the debug menu?

You are correct in some areas, but flipped in a few others.

Small Cessna aircraft (all that I know of anyway) use cambered airfoils. This means that they do produce lift at zero angle of attack.

All wing pieces in KSP are symmetric airfoils. That means they do not create lift at zero angle of attack. From a gameplay standpoint, this is primarily for practical considerations. If the wing components did create lift at zero angle of attack, that would be really bad for rocket design.

Also, cambered airfoils can also generate lift at negative angles of attack. Although there will be some negative angle of attack where lift is zero.

A flat panel does not really provide lift, just a lot of drag so it's mistaken for lift i.e. lift/drag ratio. Or do you think sticking your hand out the window while driving in a car an following the air stream means your hand is a wing

That's not entirely true. Symmetric airfoils are essentially very aerodynamic flat plates. A "wing" does not require camber to generate lift. Just because a flat body can generate lift doesn't mean that it's a wing. So no, I don't think my hand is a wing. But if I ram it at the right angle into an airflow fast enough, it's going to generate lift (and a lot of drag). That lift is the product of deflecting air downward in the same manner as for a symmetric airfoil.

Cheers,

~Claw

Edited August 26, 2015 by Claw

[Red Iron Crown]

A flat panel does not really provide lift, just a lot of drag so it's mistaken for lift i.e. lift/drag ratio. Or do you think sticking your hand out the window while driving in a car an following the air stream means your hand is a wing?

This misconception needs to die. The hand out the window is creating lift if its shape or angle of attack makes it create a force with a component perpendicular to the airflow, period.

Flat panels can absolutely create lift, how else do paper airplanes fly? Recall that drag only applies parallel to the direction of airflow.

[Stoney3K]

What we're having here is that KSP uses a part system that explicitly says 'this is a wing, so it has X lift' for wing parts. Without the ModuleLiftingSurface, you will only have a flat structural panel.

In real life, wings are generating lift because of their shape and angle of attack, which is not entirely true in KSP. In KSP, a wing performs equally well when it's mounted upside down or with the leading edge on the back, as opposed to being mounted the right way up. The only difference is made when you camber it, generating an angle of attack even with zero pitch attitude.

I see the point in wanting to use wings as structural panels or as cosmetic pieces. You can remove the ModuleLiftingSurface from the part config if you want, but I suspect a better option would be to make the lift ratio a tweakable factor between zero and the maximum value for the stock part.

That would also open opportunities for lift-enhancing and lift-inhibiting devices such as flaps and spoilers. Kick in a notch of flaps and your wings will have 1,2 times their stock lift rating, meaning more lift but also more drag.