neistridlar Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 On 8/13/2019 at 2:16 PM, Jognt said: Yup, when attached they look like they would IRL. I noticed they are by default added to the ‘brakes’ action group though, so maybe it’s just due to KSP aero working differently. I’ll get some screenshots later to make sure I attached them properly just in case though. Edit: the way they work as I placed them means they do increase lift at an AoA of 30°+, but before that point they actually create downforce. Expand Yeah, KSP aero does not allow them to work like in IRL. IRL they help the airflow "stick" to the upper surface of the wing at higher angle of attack, allowing them to generate more lift at low speeds. But in KSP wing parts does not interact with each other aerodynamically, so they really don't help much in slow flight at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRedTom Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 On 8/14/2019 at 8:55 AM, neistridlar said: Yeah, KSP aero does not allow them to work like in IRL. IRL they help the airflow "stick" to the upper surface of the wing at higher angle of attack, allowing them to generate more lift at low speeds. But in KSP wing parts does not interact with each other aerodynamically, so they really don't help much in slow flight at all. Expand Does FAR make them work more realistically? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted August 15, 2019 Author Share Posted August 15, 2019 On 8/12/2019 at 8:36 AM, Manul said: Do you use TextureReplacer or Textures Unlimited? I have a 'texture not found' error with b-29 cockpit but it doesn't prevent the part from being compiled and everything seems to work. Expand Actually, I forgot to ask if the error is made by APP, it's true. Make sure you only have APP when you test again @RobertaME Usually the case is it's not APP's fault. On 8/13/2019 at 2:16 PM, Jognt said: Yup, when attached they look like they would IRL. I noticed they are by default added to the ‘brakes’ action group though, so maybe it’s just due to KSP aero working differently. I’ll get some screenshots later to make sure I attached them properly just in case though. Edit: the way they work as I placed them means they do increase lift at an AoA of 30°+, but before that point they actually create downforce. Expand What everybody said is right. It's just how KSP works. And it's not made for far. It helps you slow down a lot by deploying it and increasing engine thrust. I found it to be the optimal way to use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sturmhauke Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 In FAR you use a normal elevon on the leading edge, and it gives you setting options to make it work realistically. The Procedural Wings mod works well with FAR too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theonegalen Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 Hey @blackheart612, neither dead nor gone, just even busier in my summer off than I was while teaching in the school year. How does that happen? Not quite sure. Except I moved twice, traveled for an entire month, and began and ended the summer with extended travel for band performances. Whee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jognt Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 (edited) On 8/15/2019 at 2:26 AM, blackheart612 said: What everybody said is right. It's just how KSP works. And it's not made for far. It helps you slow down a lot by deploying it and increasing engine thrust. I found it to be the optimal way to use it. Expand Yeah I figured that may have been what was up (since they’re added to the brakes AG). If they’re in front of the CoM they also induce a strong pitch-down moment though. (Nice to keep your plane on the ground for braking admittedly) Unrelated to the slats themselves: would you consider uploading the mod (mostly the cfgs) to GitHub? That way I could submit PRs for fixes like cargobay occlusion checks, the slats center of rotation, and some others I’ve collected local fixes for. Edited September 3, 2019 by Jognt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted August 17, 2019 Author Share Posted August 17, 2019 On 8/16/2019 at 12:15 AM, theonegalen said: Hey @blackheart612, neither dead nor gone, just even busier in my summer off than I was while teaching in the school year. How does that happen? Not quite sure. Except I moved twice, traveled for an entire month, and began and ended the summer with extended travel for band performances. Whee. Expand Well, nobody is required to be active. Some things are just more important! On 8/16/2019 at 1:09 PM, Jognt said: Yeah I figured that may have been what was up (since they’re added to the brakes AG). If they’re in front of the CoM they also induce a strong pitch-down moment though. (Nice to keep your plane on the ground for braking admittedly) Unrelated to the slats themselves: would you consider uploading the mod (mostly the cfgs) to GitHub? That way I could submit PRs for fixes like cargobay occlusion checks, the slats center of rotation (node_attach was missing the -0.18 Y offset as defined for CoL/CoM), and some others I’ve collected local fixes for. Expand Honestly too lazy to put it on and learn github, I did want it before but now is just, not impossible but a very distant possibility. Well, the biggest problem really is that I dont know its ins and outs. Pros and cons of how powerful it is I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sturmhauke Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 On 8/17/2019 at 2:13 AM, blackheart612 said: Pros and cons of how powerful it is I guess. Expand git (and by extension GitHub, BitBucket, etc.) is a swiss army chainsaw - powerful, versatile, and capable of cutting both your legs off and then sewing them back on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jognt Posted August 17, 2019 Share Posted August 17, 2019 On 8/17/2019 at 2:13 AM, blackheart612 said: Well, nobody is required to be active. Some things are just more important! Honestly too lazy to put it on and learn github, I did want it before but now is just, not impossible but a very distant possibility. Well, the biggest problem really is that I dont know its ins and outs. Pros and cons of how powerful it is I guess. Expand I know the feeling my first use of github was a few weeks back maybe, and there’s a lot I don’t understand, but the PR thing is quite nice. (I did a grand total of three of them ) I understand how daunting it is though, so it’s fine either way. But if you’d ever like to do some git poking, I’m willing to share what little I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownHereInChile Posted August 18, 2019 Share Posted August 18, 2019 You may have gotten this before, but will the inclusion of turboshaft engines into "stock" (expansion needed) KSP affect this mod at all? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qromodynmc Posted August 19, 2019 Share Posted August 19, 2019 Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted August 20, 2019 Author Share Posted August 20, 2019 On 8/18/2019 at 11:51 PM, DownHereInChile said: You may have gotten this before, but will the inclusion of turboshaft engines into "stock" (expansion needed) KSP affect this mod at all? Thanks! Expand On 8/19/2019 at 10:11 AM, qromodynmc said: Nope. Expand But KSP 2 though. Oh god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qromodynmc Posted August 20, 2019 Share Posted August 20, 2019 On 8/20/2019 at 2:20 AM, blackheart612 said: But KSP 2 though. Oh god. Expand It got me quite excited but as always I have my doubts with it. Still they said it'll be even more mod friendly than ksp 1 so we'll see about that!. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashan Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 Anyone made a FAR config? Those spoilers look awesome but they don't work on my install because I use FAR... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcs123 Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 On 8/25/2019 at 7:52 AM, sashan said: Anyone made a FAR config? Those spoilers look awesome but they don't work on my install because I use FAR... Expand Don't know how much those configs are up to date for latest APP release, some of wing parts might not work. You can use MM patch in spoiler section to detect parts that are not compatible with FAR. Reveal hidden contents // Change Part title to make it visible in VAB/SPH if part is not compatible with FAR @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface],!@MODULE[FARWingAerodynamicModel]]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]:FINAL { @title ^= :$: *Non FAR*: } @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleControlSurface],!@MODULE[FARControllableSurface]]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]:FINAL { @title ^= :$: *Non FAR*: } You can create your own file with "*.cfg" extension and save it under KSP gamedata folder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashan Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 Thanks a lot! I did quite a lot of MM configs couple years ago. As of now I detect if the part is FAR compatible by the presence (or lack thereof) of stoch lifting surface part module. Another issue. May be FAR related. KSP 1.7.3. Helicopter engines dont work. Helis either won't takeoff at all despite being light enough or spin in one place as if the tail rotor failed. VTOL made using those osprey-style engines has right engine thrusting in reverse be default despite being set to "normal". If I manually reverse it it works but there's no working controls and if I try to takeoff (vertically) it again spins around yaw axis and is virtually uncontrollable. Plz halp! I need to recover Bob from where he's swimming 50km out in the ocean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcs123 Posted August 25, 2019 Share Posted August 25, 2019 On 8/25/2019 at 6:43 PM, sashan said: Thanks a lot! I did quite a lot of MM configs couple years ago. As of now I detect if the part is FAR compatible by the presence (or lack thereof) of stoch lifting surface part module. Another issue. May be FAR related. KSP 1.7.3. Helicopter engines dont work. Helis either won't takeoff at all despite being light enough or spin in one place as if the tail rotor failed. VTOL made using those osprey-style engines has right engine thrusting in reverse be default despite being set to "normal". If I manually reverse it it works but there's no working controls and if I try to takeoff (vertically) it again spins around yaw axis and is virtually uncontrollable. Plz halp! I need to recover Bob from where he's swimming 50km out in the ocean. Expand That is a bit off topic for APP thread. Better to ask for help in FAR thread, but I think that new propelers need extra config info for FAR, same or similar as other wing surfaces. Without that I don't think that it work properly. I'm not experct when comes to FAR code, so, can't help with that, sorry. There was some attempts to make those working if you read posts in FAR thread: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sashan Posted August 26, 2019 Share Posted August 26, 2019 Thanks. I'd post that link under a spolier into OP. Lots of people use FAR. Sorry, I'm a bit out of loop when it comes to KSP modding as of late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcs123 Posted August 26, 2019 Share Posted August 26, 2019 On 8/26/2019 at 8:18 PM, sashan said: Thanks. I'd post that link under a spolier into OP. Lots of people use FAR. Sorry, I'm a bit out of loop when it comes to KSP modding as of late. Expand No worries, and just recently MOPC posted updated config files for APP FAR compatibility as well as config files for new propelers. Heven't tried either though, but might be good to put link here as well, if someone else also ask for this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N3N Posted August 31, 2019 Share Posted August 31, 2019 Hey, I'm getting this Errors in my logs: Quote 190831T164654.887 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/airbuscockpit/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! 190831T164654.914 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/b29cockpit/placeholder' not found! 190831T164654.917 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/b29cockpit/airbuscockpittex' not found! 190831T164655.031 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/fighterinlinecockpit/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! 190831T164655.520 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/oh6cockpit/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! 190831T164655.534 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/oldfightercockpit/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! 190831T164655.567 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Command/x1cockpit/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! 190831T164656.345 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Engine/Rotorwing/powerprop/default' not found! 190831T164656.417 [ERROR] [PartReader.ReadTextures] Texture 'AirplanePlus/Parts/Payload/Mk1Door/AerojetKerbodyne' not found! Expand Are they a problem? My Logs: https://www.tancredi.nl/downloads/logs.zip Do you need more information? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N3N Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 (edited) On 8/31/2019 at 5:49 PM, N3N said: Hey, I'm getting this Errors in my logs: Are they a problem? My Logs: https://www.tancredi.nl/downloads/logs.zip Do you need more information? Expand Hello, These Errors exists, because the files aren't in the newest download-file. So others should have the same errors, too. I just wanted to help and wanted to ask, how to deal with this errors. --- Sorry for my english, it's only my third language. Edited September 2, 2019 by N3N Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobisback Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 Does this support MAS or RPM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet_Wyvern Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 (edited) Let's the viper fly!!! And yes..... I made the XL variant..... On 8/3/2019 at 3:28 PM, qromodynmc said: Is this possible? Expand Yes, It's possable (But not in this mod) Edited September 3, 2019 by Violet_Wyvern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qromodynmc Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 On 9/3/2019 at 12:03 PM, Violet_Wyvern said: Yes, It's possable (But not in this mod) Expand concept looks similar but quite different actually, i rather ap+ version. Nice f16XL btw, thanks for reminding me that i should make one too, i had it in mind but forgot it later. Currently i got two f16 variant; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted September 5, 2019 Author Share Posted September 5, 2019 On 8/31/2019 at 5:49 PM, N3N said: Hey, I'm getting this Errors in my logs: Are they a problem? My Logs: https://www.tancredi.nl/downloads/logs.zip Do you need more information? Expand It's normal, but not intended. I still haven't fixed it. It's an mu problem and been asked here before for a long long while now. If you need info it's basically the placeholder I used for the flag decal on cockpits which I unintentionally exported, resulting in the game trying to find them. But they aren't really needed. On 9/3/2019 at 6:43 AM, bobisback said: Does this support MAS or RPM? Expand Nope. But there were patches which are outdated now. I'm not quite sure if people have patches somewhere for it. Try asking in their respective threads perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.