[1.4.x-1.8.x] Airplane Plus - R26.4 (Fixed issues/Github is up to date) (Dec 21, 2019)

neistridlar · June 17, 2018

@blackheart612 Great update! I went through most of the new parts I think. Almost all of them surface attach at wired angles. Check your surface attach vectors. I checked many of your older parts, and they seem to have the same issue.

The 1.875m liquid fuselage does not have a collider, but has two identical visual models, causing Z-fighting. I suspect one of them was supposed to be the collider, though if that is the case, you should consider 16 sided colliders (rotated 11.25 degrees) so that you have flat sides to attach stuff to, and a flat bottom, so that the part sits nicely on the ground.

MK3s1.5 structural fuselage has collider issues. It appears there is a non hollow collider in addition to the collider segments as parts can be surface attached to its end faces, where there is no wall. Though clipping the camera inside it, it works as expected.

The windows in the MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay model does not have inside faces, and thus are transparent from the inside. Possibly intentional?

MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay and Structural fuselage has bad drag cubes .

MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay does not function as cargo bay ( does not shield parts inside it). (same for the structural fuselage, but the stock one also behaves this way, so I suppose that is ok)

That is all for now .

mechanicH · June 18, 2018

@blackheart612 hey man first thing , just wanted to thank you for putting in more toys for us to play with , second is a question, was wondering if the tweak scale @TMasterson5 was updated to the current patch, If not, let me know and ill gladly do it and post it here. thanks once again

Daniel Prates · June 18, 2018

@blackheart612 congrats again, the new part size was a great idea. The adapters do help to integrate a bit with other part sizes - with tweakscale, its even easier to make them coherent with other parts.

I think the new size deserves a passenger part, though! Something sitting maybe 6 or so kerbals.

Edited June 18, 2018 by Daniel Prates

Drew Kerman · June 18, 2018

@blackheart612 I've taken the Predator engine and flipped it around in the editor and just reversed the thrust in flight and everything seems to be working fine but would I be getting less power since the model has the air intakes pointing the wrong way in this instance? Or does this not matter?

Beetlecat · June 18, 2018

2 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

@blackheart612 I've taken the Predator engine and flipped it around in the editor and just reversed the thrust in flight and everything seems to be working fine but would I be getting less power since the model has the air intakes pointing the wrong way in this instance? Or does this not matter?

Intake orientation does make a difference in general, particularly for jet engines. A good guess that's happening, unless "reverse" is a less powerful mode

Tahvohck · June 19, 2018

Am I doing something wrong? All of the 1.25m engines seem to hit almost zero thrust at mach 0.2 (~68 m/s) at sea level, making it so I can't even take off on a moderate-sized plane. Meanwhile the KT6A "Kitty" has enough thrust that I can fly reasonably well with 4 at 8000 meters. In fact, while all the others hit zero at 0.2, the kitty hits its stride at 65kN at mach 0.3. What gives?

blackheart612 · June 20, 2018

On 6/18/2018 at 6:01 AM, neistridlar said:

@blackheart612 Great update! I went through most of the new parts I think. Almost all of them surface attach at wired angles. Check your surface attach vectors. I checked many of your older parts, and they seem to have the same issue.

The 1.875m liquid fuselage does not have a collider, but has two identical visual models, causing Z-fighting. I suspect one of them was supposed to be the collider, though if that is the case, you should consider 16 sided colliders (rotated 11.25 degrees) so that you have flat sides to attach stuff to, and a flat bottom, so that the part sits nicely on the ground.

MK3s1.5 structural fuselage has collider issues. It appears there is a non hollow collider in addition to the collider segments as parts can be surface attached to its end faces, where there is no wall. Though clipping the camera inside it, it works as expected.

The windows in the MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay model does not have inside faces, and thus are transparent from the inside. Possibly intentional?

MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay and Structural fuselage has bad drag cubes .

MK3s1.5 Cargo Bay does not function as cargo bay ( does not shield parts inside it). (same for the structural fuselage, but the stock one also behaves this way, so I suppose that is ok)

That is all for now .

So the least tested parts show up Though in reality, those are victims of testing (moving files around so the dev parts replace the finished ones).
The Cargo Bay windows instentionally have no inside faces.
The drag cubes are automatically generated for the Structural Fuselage and copied for Cargo Bay. Will do for now, I'm studying drag cubes.

@mechanicH Unfortunately, TMasterson stopped updating a while back. Go ahead if you have your own patch.

@Daniel Prates I've explained a few posts back that the 1.875m will be expanded. In fact, they're not even a priority right now, just a "teaser" for what's to come.

@Drew Kerman It might be just as Beetlecat said. I've never really tested the efficiency of the intakes in all honesty, I just thought they worked fine...

@Tahvohck It's well known here that the speed of my engines have a "speed governor" so as to not take off right off the bat. And it's been accepted so far. You just need to pick up speed before pulling up. That, or you're just using a fairly heavy plane. This was a common "issue" before. Nothing's wrong.

Tahvohck · June 20, 2018

No worries. I wasn't aware that that was designed in.

Daniel Prates · June 20, 2018

9 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

I've explained a few posts back that the 1.875m will be expanded. In fact, they're not even a priority right now, just a "teaser" for what's to come

Just trying to show some support.

fitemesquirrel · June 20, 2018

Hello.

First, thank you for this mod. I was looking for some way to make a very basic prop plane and this mod enabled that!

One question, I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong or if this is intended, but I am noticing some weird behaviour with the prop engines. I've been searching and haven't found this mentioned yet, so I created an account to ask.

The prop engines seem to have a reversed thrust curve, such that they actually stall when in a dive, and restart when climbing. They also seem to gain thrust when climbing, and lose it when diving, which seems opposite of what I'd expect. I noticed it by the sounds seeming backwards, but then I watched the thrust and noticed this. I "fixed" the sound by negating the thrustAddedToPitch value in the property file, but this only fixed the sounds and not the actual thrust issue. I couldn't find any other obvious value to change in the file to try fixing this since I'm a noob at this. Thus far this is in effect for several of the propeller engines I tested.

Is this expected behaviour? Is anyone else having this happen? The only mods I have installed are Fly By Wire, Grounded, NanoGauges, and AirplanePlus, so I don't think it's caused by another mod.

Any suggestions to modifying the properties files to correct this?

neistridlar · June 20, 2018

59 minutes ago, fitemesquirrel said:

Is this expected behaviour?

Welcome to the forums! Yes this is the expected behavior. I believe it is to simulate how the propeller is like a screw that drags the plane through the air, and the engine can only spin it so fast, so when a certain speed is reached, it just can not provide thrust anymore. And If you had read the last two pages of this thread you would have seen that this very question was answered just hours ago .

fitemesquirrel · June 20, 2018

6 minutes ago, neistridlar said:

Welcome to the forums! Yes this is the expected behavior. I believe it is to simulate how the propeller is like a screw that drags the plane through the air, and the engine can only spin it so fast, so when a certain speed is reached, it just can not provide thrust anymore. And If you had read the last two pages of this thread you would have seen that this very question was answered just hours ago .

I'm not sure I understand. The engine should be losing thrust at a climb, not gaining it. It should stall in a steep climb, not a steep dive. I did read the last few pages and I'm not seeing this talked about.

If I can ask it differently then, what property to I need to flip to change this to stall in a climb?

DrMuffinz · June 20, 2018

Issue, I believe that the MK2-3 stock extension packs are messing with Airplane Plus's air intakes and KSP will refuse to load them.

Anyone else experiencing this issue as I have not.

EDIT: I think it may be some confliction with MK2 and MK3 stock extension packs's CFG files for the modded resource "IntakeAtm".

Edited June 21, 2018 by DrMuffinz
New info

mechanicH · June 20, 2018

@blackheart612 ok so here is the TweakScale CFG... just copy paste into a a notepad and change the file extension to CFG and put it in the AP folder ...its all the parts.. i hope it works

Spoiler

@PART[bigwing]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hlfSrf]
{
? %MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing2]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing3]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing4]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing5]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fatwing6]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnectortip]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[migfin]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[warhawkfin]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[doublefowlerflap]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fowlerflap]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[kruegerflap]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[spoilerflap]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[straightslat]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1intake]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[noseconemk1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[roundwinglet]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[elevon2b]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector2]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector3]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector4]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector5]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnector6]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[smallwingConnectortip]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[stubbytinynose]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[144cockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[airbuscockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[b29cockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[bellcockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[citationcockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[concordecockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[falconcockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fightercockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fighterinlinecockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3galaxy]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hipcockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hueycockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1DroneCore]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1SasModule]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[oh6cockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[oldfightercockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[x1cockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[zerocockpit]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[51prop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[chaikaprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fokkerprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hawkerprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[spadprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[609prop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[cfm56]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[f5jet]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[herculesprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[KP12]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[predatorprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[raptorjet]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[tbmProp]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[109Prop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[corsairprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[duplexcyclone]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fighterProp]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[merlin]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[spitfiremerlin]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[yakprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[zeroprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[bellprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[belltail]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[blackhawkprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[chinookprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[coaxialprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hipprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hiptail]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hueyprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[hueytail]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[powerprop]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[powertail]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[airramp]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1cargodoor]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1cargodoorjr]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk1dronedoor]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[passengeroor]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[miniboom]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[halfmini]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[minishortboom]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[JuniorFuselage]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[Mk1JuniorStructural]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[Mk1SlantStructural]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk2hAdapter]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk2hLiquid]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk2hboom]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk2mk2h]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s0]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s0booma]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s0boomb]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s0jr]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s0-s0]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1booma]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1boomb]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[tbmProp]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1jr]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5doorbase]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5hull]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5jr]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5-mk3s1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1p5-s1p5]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[mk3s1-s1]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[s1p5]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[s1p5jr]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[shortboom]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[shortboomb]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2taila]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2tailashort]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2tailb]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2tailbshort]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[S2Hull]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[s2CargoRamp]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[s2cargobayS]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2CrewCabin]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2Fuselage]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[size2under]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[S2Structural]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[navlight]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[landingskid]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[biplanegear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[blackhawkgear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[miggear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[airbusreargear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[b29gear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[fightergear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[herculesfrontgear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[herculesgear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[sidegear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[x1gear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

@PART[x1sidegear]
{
%MODULE[TweakScale]
{
type = free
}
}

neistridlar · June 20, 2018

4 hours ago, fitemesquirrel said:

I'm not sure I understand. The engine should be losing thrust at a climb, not gaining it. It should stall in a steep climb, not a steep dive. I did read the last few pages and I'm not seeing this talked about.

If I can ask it differently then, what property to I need to flip to change this to stall in a climb?

I don't know how the firespitter config stuff works, so I can not answer this. But I also don't understand why the engine should stall in a climb. I mean the engine is perfectly capable of running when the plane is stationary on the ground. The reason planes slow down in a climb is because it has to fight gravity, you still get more thrust at lower speeds, and you simply can not get the engine to produce thrust once you pass the speed at which the propeller is "screwing" it self through the air, at speeds exceeding that it should be producing reverse thrust in fact.

And I realize now that your question is very slightly different from this, but this is what I was referring to:

Here is the question:

On 6/19/2018 at 12:29 PM, Tahvohck said:

Am I doing something wrong? All of the 1.25m engines seem to hit almost zero thrust at mach 0.2 (~68 m/s) at sea level, making it so I can't even take off on a moderate-sized plane. Meanwhile the KT6A "Kitty" has enough thrust that I can fly reasonably well with 4 at 8000 meters. In fact, while all the others hit zero at 0.2, the kitty hits its stride at 65kN at mach 0.3. What gives?

And here is the answer:

19 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

@Tahvohck It's well known here that the speed of my engines have a "speed governor" so as to not take off right off the bat. And it's been accepted so far. You just need to pick up speed before pulling up. That, or you're just using a fairly heavy plane. This was a common "issue" before. Nothing's wrong.

Edited June 20, 2018 by neistridlar

fitemesquirrel · June 21, 2018

3 hours ago, neistridlar said:

I don't know how the firespitter config stuff works, so I can not answer this. But I also don't understand why the engine should stall in a climb. I mean the engine is perfectly capable of running when the plane is stationary on the ground. The reason planes slow down in a climb is because it has to fight gravity, you still get more thrust at lower speeds, and you simply can not get the engine to produce thrust once you pass the speed at which the propeller is "screwing" it self through the air, at speeds exceeding that it should be producing reverse thrust in fact.

It is pulling itself through the air, as you say. When in a dive, it is getting air pushed over it, making it easier to turn. IE, the engine has to work less against the forces of gravity, and also has the benefit of the air below it assisting the turning of the propeller.The reverse is the case when it climbs. Like how you blow on the top of a computer fan and it turns faster.

The mod already implements this behaviour, but in reverse. It makes no sense for a dive to remove thrust from the engine. There's literally gravity and the weight of the plane assisting the engine in moving, the thrust should go up in a dive. Not drop until the engine stalls out in a dive, which is currently what happens. I'm just asking if anyone familiar with the engine properties knows which bit I have to flip to correct this.

EDIT: I just tested one of the jet engines to confirm, they indeed lose thrust when in a climb as expected, while they gain it in a dive. The jet engines work correctly, the prop planes got something backwards.

Edited June 21, 2018 by fitemesquirrel

blackheart612 · June 21, 2018

13 hours ago, Daniel Prates said:

Just trying to show some support.

No problem, I just restated my previous post

@mechanicH Thanks, I've linked your post in the OP!

@fitemesquirrel Hmmm, in a very simple explanation, there are two factors for the thrust in the config. Thrust, being different things (mostly RPM/engine power output, and forced induction) combined in a stock module (only my rotors are ).
Speed and Altitude. It's not the dive or the climb, it's your speed. If you stall high above and dive, your gain power and eventually lose it. And it's true that the method is crude and very abrupt.

On having a more detailed look, let's go back to speed. Majority of the props in the mod are old, they have fixed blade settings. That means they only have a peak band where that blade angle is efficient. That means if you're going too fast, you're not blowing a fan anymore, the speed causes the angle of the blade to actually cause drag.
One more thing, propeller blades lose performance as the blades themselves approach the speed of sound, not the craft. That's one more thing to consider.
Altitude is self explanatory, it's all air and stuff. It gets a bit of a kick on high altitude due to forced induction on certain engines on the mod.

Regarding the jet engines, here's a generalistic comparison as to why it loses a lot of air speed on high speed dives:

1*W74C3m7pSrPWOWlXV07feA.jpeg

fitemesquirrel · June 21, 2018

Okay. I'm not really here to argue this. I just want to know how to flip it. I'm not talking about air speed, the speed is behaving as expected. I am talking about thrust generated by the engines. Like, right-click on an engine and monitor the thrust being output. They are backwards on the prop engines. The prop should speed up when pointed downwards, not slow down. I've done several tests with the jet engines backwards and reverse thrusted, they do not lose all thrust when in a mild dive like these prop engines do. I've tried several altitudes and airspeeds, it doesn't matter if it's 10km or 2km alt, they lose all thrust and die at mild amounts of dive.

Is anyone else actually using these prop engines? Front facing, like old WW2 Zero style? You cannot even go into a 25 deg dive without the engine cutting out. You cannot kamikaze with these engines, despite the "Divine Wind" name on them...

If it's simply a technical issue with the engine itself, I'll accept that. I'm just not understanding how anyone is using these prop engines in a WW2 style plane due to how they are behaving.

Tahvohck · June 21, 2018

@fitemesquirrel I think part of the problem is that you're treating "thrust" as "blade speed" which is not actually tracked. If you wanted to modify it, you'd want to edit the PART/MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]/velCurve floatCurve node (I think).

Edited June 21, 2018 by Tahvohck

fitemesquirrel · June 21, 2018

4 minutes ago, Tahvohck said:

@fitemesquirrel I think part of the problem is that you're treating "thrust" as "blade speed" which is not actually tracked. If you wanted to modify it, you'd want to edit the PART/MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]/velCurve floatCurve node (I think).

Honestly the blade speed, airspeed, ground speed, any speed completely doesn't matter to me at this point. I've just dealt with the wackiness of the engine by "fluttering" my Zero build back and forth to keep the thrust and therefore airspeed up.

What is really, really annoying me is the fact that the engine quits running completely when the thrust value in the engine reaches zero. Which is constantly happening any time I'm going in for a landing or any -30 deg maneuver. That creates some complications for flying as you might expect, especially when max airspeed is 150m/s with this engine.

Thank you for the pointer, though. I was looking at those values earlier and comparing it to other engines to try to get some idea of what they do. I'll toy with those and see where I get with that.

neistridlar · June 21, 2018

3 hours ago, fitemesquirrel said:

Okay. I'm not really here to argue this. I just want to know how to flip it. I'm not talking about air speed, the speed is behaving as expected. I am talking about thrust generated by the engines. Like, right-click on an engine and monitor the thrust being output. They are backwards on the prop engines. The prop should speed up when pointed downwards, not slow down. I've done several tests with the jet engines backwards and reverse thrusted, they do not lose all thrust when in a mild dive like these prop engines do. I've tried several altitudes and airspeeds, it doesn't matter if it's 10km or 2km alt, they lose all thrust and die at mild amounts of dive.

Is anyone else actually using these prop engines? Front facing, like old WW2 Zero style? You cannot even go into a 25 deg dive without the engine cutting out. You cannot kamikaze with these engines, despite the "Divine Wind" name on them...

If it's simply a technical issue with the engine itself, I'll accept that. I'm just not understanding how anyone is using these prop engines in a WW2 style plane due to how they are behaving.

Ok, so there is two issues I am smelling here. One, the propeller should indeed spin faster when in a dive, and slower in a climb. This is true. Spinning faster or slower is not the same as having more or less thrust though, it is the combination of how fast the prop is spinning, and how fast you go that determines the thrust. The slower you go the more thrust you produce, and also the faster the prop spins the more thrust you produce, but there is a limit to how fast the prop can spin. I don't think this mod models the prop speed, so it appears as if the engine is slowing down, when it should speed up, and that is an issue indeed.

The second issue is that you expect the prop engines to go unrealistically fast. If you compare the speed that they stop providing thrust at, you will probably find that it is fairly close to the top speeds of the aircraft that they were based on.

blackheart612 · June 21, 2018

@fitemesquirrel what @neistridlar said is as best it can be simplified, I bet.

----

But anyway, you're asking about the velCurve:

   velCurve
   {
       key = 0 0.25 0 0
  key = 0.05 0.9 22.87248 13.95933
       key = 0.1 0.8 -6.936495 -1.322969
       key = 0.46 0.5 -3.774271 -4.494582
  key = 0.5 0.1 -17.76467 -1.024392
       key = 0.9 0
   }

----

As I said, the performance values are affected by SPEED and ALTITUDE, not to argue with you.
So you want it to not cut off on a dive, usually, when diving, you pick up a lot of speed so that's the reason it cuts off or loses thrust, NOT the diving, but the SPEED.

It's specified here at key = 0.5 0.1 that at Mach 0.5, the thrust of the prop would be at 10%
On key = 0.9 0, it says it will have 0% power at Mach 0.9. KSP does NOT accept values lower than 0.1 so it cuts off key = 0.5 0.1.

Let's say you made a zero, you dived down and reach Mach 0.5 - 617.4 kph, the zero has a top speed of 565 kph.
BUT you just cut off throttle there, you're going well over Mach 0.5, and can reach close to 1000 kph with engines flamed out (This is tested)

----

TO "FIX":

Now you want it to NOT cut off or lose thrust - that means you want to increase the thrust multiplier from 0.1 to whatever number above it will be.

Actually, the number is going down from Mach 0.05 so from 0.9 to 0.1, you can instead set it reverse, 0.1 to 0.9, BUT the consequence is even though you're mach 0.5, and diving down, you're still gaining power and speed, who knows, you might even reach Mach 1 in a World War 2 prop!

----

If you've understood that there is no "diving" or "climbing" specifiers on the config and why it loses thrust, this is where my explanation earlier comes in. Of course it's not supposed to die out or lose thrust, that's why I said it's crude and abrupt. But the supposed efficiency will be close to it due to the speeds you're going. There is no "we're at full thrust but the blade efficiency is this low so we're not going any faster" in KSP, only thrust reduction. Because if not, you'll just be going faster and faster.

Star-Eagle · June 21, 2018

Hi blackheart

I've really enjoyed messing around with the parts in your mod, they seem to go very well with NESD's streamlined engines mod for retro style space planes.

I was wondering if you had any plans to make some kind of fuselage extension (perhaps radial attached) to replicate the gondala on some of the ww2 bombers?

Edited June 21, 2018 by Star-Eagle

Daniel Prates · June 21, 2018

17 minutes ago, Star-Eagle said:

I was wondering if you had any plans to make some kind of fuselage extension (perhaps radial attached) to replicate the gondala on some of the ww2 bombers?

Boy, do we need this. Glazed noses, oservation cuppolas etc. Crewed parts, but not command seats, just a windowed place we coul place navigators, bombardiers, gunners etc. Theu could have standard rectangular attachment points where you could place the basic BdA .50 twin machineguns.

Edited June 21, 2018 by Daniel Prates

fitemesquirrel · June 21, 2018

6 hours ago, neistridlar said:

The second issue is that you expect the prop engines to go unrealistically fast. If you compare the speed that they stop providing thrust at, you will probably find that it is fairly close to the top speeds of the aircraft that they were based on.

5 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

@fitemesquirrel what @neistridlar said is as best it can be simplified, I bet.

----

But anyway, you're asking about the velCurve:

   velCurve
   {
       key = 0 0.25 0 0
  key = 0.05 0.9 22.87248 13.95933
       key = 0.1 0.8 -6.936495 -1.322969
       key = 0.46 0.5 -3.774271 -4.494582
  key = 0.5 0.1 -17.76467 -1.024392
       key = 0.9 0
   }

----

As I said, the performance values are affected by SPEED and ALTITUDE, not to argue with you.
So you want it to not cut off on a dive, usually, when diving, you pick up a lot of speed so that's the reason it cuts off or loses thrust, NOT the diving, but the SPEED.

It's specified here at key = 0.5 0.1 that at Mach 0.5, the thrust of the prop would be at 10%
On key = 0.9 0, it says it will have 0% power at Mach 0.9. KSP does NOT accept values lower than 0.1 so it cuts off key = 0.5 0.1.

Let's say you made a zero, you dived down and reach Mach 0.5 - 617.4 kph, the zero has a top speed of 565 kph.
BUT you just cut off throttle there, you're going well over Mach 0.5, and can reach close to 1000 kph with engines flamed out (This is tested)

----

TO "FIX":

Now you want it to NOT cut off or lose thrust - that means you want to increase the thrust multiplier from 0.1 to whatever number above it will be.

Actually, the number is going down from Mach 0.05 so from 0.9 to 0.1, you can instead set it reverse, 0.1 to 0.9, BUT the consequence is even though you're mach 0.5, and diving down, you're still gaining power and speed, who knows, you might even reach Mach 1 in a World War 2 prop!

----

If you've understood that there is no "diving" or "climbing" specifiers on the config and why it loses thrust, this is where my explanation earlier comes in. Of course it's not supposed to die out or lose thrust, that's why I said it's crude and abrupt. But the supposed efficiency will be close to it due to the speeds you're going. There is no "we're at full thrust but the blade efficiency is this low so we're not going any faster" in KSP, only thrust reduction. Because if not, you'll just be going faster and faster.

Okay, I think we are all talking about the same things here. I'm not wanting them to go any faster than they do, I just don't want the engine's to cut off. I observed that they did that when the thrust value dropped to zero, so I assumed that was the cause. However, this explanation makes perfect sense to me, being a limitation of the game engine. It would be nice if the rotation of the props, and thus the state of the engine, could be decoupled from the amount of thrust being generated, and instead was coupled to airspeed.

Thank you for the explanation. My apologies for being difficult.

[1.4.x-1.8.x] Airplane Plus - R26.4 (Fixed issues/Github is up to date) (Dec 21, 2019)

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation