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

[blackheart612]

 

I've tried adding an intake today... Only one but meshswitchable from two-way (early mig intake) and oneway (F-86 intake)

 

[SkyKaptn]

My ASET/RPM upgrade of the Falcon Cockpit (F16) is more or less done and I am considering to release this as a separate add-on for AirplanePlus if people will use it.
Click "Like this"-button or drop me a PM to let me know if it is release-worthy.

 

 

[mechanicH]

5 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

mig intake

Funny you should say this, because i just posted a MiG 15 and Saber Jet craft to KerbalX,  The MiG one i got from Stryker, but the Saber Jet one i had to be creative and build it from various parts.  Happy to see these will be in your mod soon, Will make my jets look cleaner.  Thank you sir.

[VenomousRequiem]

7 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

 

I've tried adding an intake today... Only one but meshswitchable from two-way (early mig intake) and oneway (F-86 intake)

Woo, looks very good! I'll have to add it to my MiG-17 when it comes out...

(I'll attatch a picture later)

[fourfa]

Question re part balance.  I'm new to this mod, read back about 10 pages but didn't see anything on this, so apologies if it's old news.  I'm a career player, mostly vanilla stock as far as part mods.

The stock Mk1 inline cockpit weighs 1.03t, Mk1 cockpit weighs 1.28.  Mk1 Business cockpit from this mod 1.22t but with less monoprop, so OK (though strangely it costs about 70% more). 

The four versions of 2-kerbal cockpits all weigh less than the stock 1-kerbal cockpits. Inline Non-Commercial 0.83, Mk1 Non-Commercial 0.92, Caged 0.93t, Inline Caged 1.03.  Same temps and pressure tolerances as the stock parts, they even have a buff to crash tolerance.  Costs are all over the place - some are less than the stock Mk1 cockpit, all are less than the 1-seat Mk1 Business.

Similar with the Mk1 Drone Core - same mass as the stock RC-001S, but with a huge buff to reaction wheel (10/3/3 vs 0.5/0.5/0.5) and crash tolerance, slight buff to EC, yet costs about half as much.

Wing segments of 0.025t mass and various shapes, same specs as stock - yet cost 100 instead of the 125 of the single stock 0.025t part.

Mk1 Junior LF fuselage mass and cost are slightly buffed relative to stock Mk1 LF fuselage.  All the stock LF/O tanks are exactly proportional in mass, and get progressively cheaper per ton of fuel as they get bigger.

Are these meant to fit into a stock-alike part progression, or just be fun OP parts for dogfights?  I'm happy to edit these into balance if this isn't meant to be within the scope of the mod.  Thanks

[blackheart612]

@fourfa I think you didn't use the dry mass to compare the weight... I refer to the configs. Anyway, hmmm, where to start. I've not left the prices stagnant, for starters, I've regulated them while referring to stock parts as well.

Time for advertisement.

--

The Mk1 Business is pricey, yes, it's very compact - same size as the Mk1 but fits two kerbals. It's like a crew cabin already, but you can pilot with it. It's also inline, inlines are a bit more expensive than non-inlines. Though, they are lighter because of the cut off parts where you yourself can fill up when you make your craft.

Market Price Range:

Mk1 Stock - 1250
Mk1 Inline - 1600
Mk1 Crew Cabin - 550
Mk1 Business - 2000

It's an inline, with two, not one kerbal. It's a very expensive crossover of a cockpit and a crew cabin, but the key there is how compact it is.
--

Caged cockpits vs. Non-commercials

Caged cockpits are relatively old, hence, they have lower prices. They're also quite heavy because of this, because look at all the cages around the cockpit (these were a placebo in real life, iirc, you'll still die  )

Non-commercials are the modern lightweight go-to for maneuverable aircraft of course. The Mk1 non-inline is way more expensive than the Mk1 stock but the inline follows closely, although a little bit more expensive with closely the same features.

Market Price Range:

Mk1 Stock - 1250
Mk1/0 - 1550
Mk1 Inline - 1600
Mk1/1 - 1650
Mk1 NC - 1650
Mk1 NC Inline - 1750

Of course if the prices are affected by amount of kerbals carried as well aside from the design age. Also note the visibility in IVA.
Yep, design age doesn't matter in game, I didn't nerf them at all. Just that they are carrying one kerbal alone.

--

Mk1-Drone Core

This is a bit of an issue, there are no 2.5m drones on stock KSP, you would think you can compare it to a Probe Core but it's totally different.
Let me take for example the RC-L01. It's huge and bulky, quite expensive and has a small amount of torque. Let's then compare it to the sleeker and smaller Mk2 Drone Core.
It's cheaper, weights lighter and has way better torque. This is where the issue lies, for some reason, drone cores are more powerful than probe cores (and cheaper) even when referring to stock stats.

Maket Price Comparison:

RC-L01 - 3400
Mk2 Drone - 2700
RC-001S - 2250
Mk1 Drone - 1250

--

Wing Segments
Wing segments aren't price regulated yet, tbh, they're relatively newly added a few patches ago. Though, the wing segments of Airplane Plus is infact, more expensive than stock ones. Considering that Kerbal Standard is a company that sells parts for cheaper prices, this is shameful! If we're referring to weight here, the 0.05t wing segments of stock are 100 in costs while ours is 0.025t for 100 as well. Not to mention there's also a stat that you should look at on wings called lifting surface (which we are lower on as well, since the surfaces are smaller.)

--

Mk1 Junior was priced like that because it was priced before the recalculation of the volume. It was 800 per ton before. So that's true, it hasn't been changed since.

--

Have I missed anything?  

[fourfa]

What am I missing on the cockpit mass?  Take for instance Mk1 Non-Commercial.  In its info pane in the part selector, it says 0.92t mass.  Place it in SPH, Vessel Mass is 1.22t.  Remove the monoprop, it's 1.2t.  Go to the config, it's 0.9.  Stock Mk1 cockpit same stats: 1.28t, 1.48t, 1.45t, 1.25t.  Not one of those is the same, so I guess I'm officially confused.  It does seem that at all times, the stock 1-seat Mk1 cockpit is heavier than the 2-seat Mk1 Non-Commercial, which I guess you're saying is by design?

If the caged cockpits are meant to be antique style, maybe decreasing their heat tolerance to 1200K would convey that?  As is, they are exactly as good spaceplane / SSTO cockpits as the stock parts (better in fact, due to lower mass per seat) which doesn't seem like the intent.  Same goes with the Viewer's Cockpits - I had no trouble taking those to space.

Also, the Mk1 Non-Commercial comes on the 45-tech Aviation Node - the caged and inline Non-Commercial are all on the 90-tech Aerodynamics. If you asked me (you didn't, and tech balance ain't trivial) I'd have 1-seat cockpits on Aviation, caged on Aerodynamics, Non-Commercials on Supersonic Flight for 160 along with the F-16. Droop-nose on High Altitude Flight.  Then 2.5m cockpits on Advanced Aerodynamics? Again, not trivial

Wing segments - there's one stock 0.025t part (Type D), it's 150.  That just seemed like the appropriate match for the Type F-K.  Sure, there are the square E and D for 100, but also the more interesting shaped Wing Strake at 0.05t and 400 funds. I'd say the F-K and Wingtip are more interesting shaped.

Mk1 Junior should be 1.125t and 300 funds probably

I don't follow your logic on the drone core vs probe core.  Your Mk1 Drone Core is simply superior in every stat to the 1.25m probe core and cheaper, making the stock part utterly obsolete at the same 550 tech level. Maybe at 2500 funds (just slightly less than the stock Mk2 Drone Core, slightly more than the probe core) and 0.15t (same as the probe core plus a small reaction wheel) there'd be some balance.  The 2.5m probe core is one of the more useless and unbalanced parts in the stock game, so I don't think it's a useful reference here.

Thanks for taking the time to debate.  I know that by the time most players get to more specific mods like this, they've moved past career into a more sandbox-y creative mode, so career and tech balance can be a little optional.  This one is much better balanced than most IMHO - I get really frustrated with most parts packs that have every part tweaked to science fiction levels; there's just no challenge after you get a screenshot of your cool ship.

Edited February 10, 2017 by fourfa

[blackheart612]

@fourfa Yup, I meant dry mass as without monoprop because I decreased one or two of the cockpit's monoprops there. I have no idea why your game is like that but my mass are all correct in panel and out-panel. As well as in the config. Also, yes, I put the weight of Non-commercials lighter than most Mk1s, if not all.

Like I said, I didn't nerf them (the older cockpits). The reason is I don't really want to restrict its usage that much. Only the engine performances, I'm a bit strict. There's also the fact that if you build a plane correctly, you can go to space with an external command seat...

Regarding the tech-tree, aside from the fact that I'm lazy to distribute the parts around the tech tree, and that I don't like the way the tech tree is set up (and yet I don't want to modify it). The reason why it's like that is it's made to work just like how stock works. Non-inlines to be unlocked first, inlines second. The thing is, cockpits don't really matter that much anyway (for me). They function just as much as a regular cockpit would. Except you would need the other aerodynamic parts to make it fly. If I scattered the cockpits everywhere and all other aerodynamic parts were everywhere as well, you'd have to dedicate your research to planes which is, I think, not the way to get more science. I just want to make exploration of Kerbin easy in a semi-balanced way. If it's harder to get planes, it'd just be better to invest in rockets and go off get science from anywhere outside Kerbin.

So about the wings, I've taken a look at it and what I see is, I think the delta wings are more expensive. Maybe due to the fact that they're more versatile than rectangles. Considering that I have made smaller tall delta wing connector as well, that gives me an idea on how to scale the prices on wings once I get to fiddle with it.

The Mk1 Junior will get a price hike, I'll change it when I remember (still experimenting on something at the moment, so sorry I replied a bit late). I'll most likely just take your price and get away with it since I'm lazy.  

How is it difficult to follow? Saying that a part is useless isn't an objective comparison. I merely said that Mk2 Drone Core is lighter, cheaper, and more powerful than the 2.5m probe core which is just as obsolete to the 1.25m probe core when compared to Mk1 Drone Core. I compared Mk2 to 2.5m because it's the closest thing to 2.5m. It's smaller, even. If I may use such subjective review, I guess with the Mk1 Drone Core, the 1.25m probe core would be one of the useless parts if people would like to use the Drone Core more.

I understand your take on career mode, I really do. And I'm glad you're taking the time to criticize and exchange opinions, I really appreciate it and I'm also just putting out the reasons as to why it's like that. Despite my criticisms on KSP's tech tree, I'm not letting go of supporting it since I really like career mode as well. It just feels easy but too grindy.

[SkyKaptn]

Released 

[blackheart612]

Hmmm, experiment success, I guess. Look at these slats! I've messed around on how to make these and it seems like I've found the perfect way to do it without plugins. It's locked on one direction because it functions like an airbrake. The aerodynamics is like a glorified aileron in front of the craft which only deploys downwards/upwards depending on orientation (and can respond on pitch if not set otherwise). I have little knowledge on how leading edge slats should work in KSP compared to real life. But I doubt it functions as accurate as the real thing. It does help in pitching up though, so it does help increase the AoA with the proper amount of deployment (when set to react on pitch). When it's fully deployed, it slowly bleeds speed almost like an airbrake. It has less drag when deployed though.

I couldn't really tell how well it performed, I guess it will be evaluated when it's released. I will study how to make fowler flaps as well with probably the same technique. I'm positive it's possible, as well as adding the wing carrots (anti-shock).

 

[GDJ]

You're pretty close. Leading edge slats and trailing slats/flaps increase the wings surface area to obtain more lift, but the kicker is how much they are deployed. At take-off you want more lift but low drag, so they are deployed partially. When landing you want high lift/high drag so the pilots deploy them fully. So your leading edge slats are pretty close to how they work. The trick is to tell KSP to consider them zero or low lift/drag when fully stowed and proportionally increase the lift/drag in relation to how much they are deployed.

Edited February 10, 2017 by GDJ

[mechanicH]

@blackheart612 wow  that looks nice,  Here is an idea, if you have time that is,   you could implement some Krueger Flaps (ex. 727-200, 747-400) Leading edge-inboard wing root.  They always look pretty cool.  

[qromodynmc]

Nice slats! I wonder how they'll work in far.

[blackheart612]

@GDJ Hmmm, it's more ore less like that. In fact, it helps in pitch, if pitch reaction is on. It can also be deployed and it functions like a stock flap deployed. And since it's like an airbrake, it's doesn't do anything when not deployed. So I guess, it's pretty accurate in KSP standards. 

@qromodynmc Though I don't know how they will work on FAR... It would certainly be interesting. I don't know why I only saw slats on FS and nowhere else. I thought maybe I could make one and luckily enough, it worked

@mechanicH I'd like to see it as well. Though, I wonder how to hide it properly other than hiding it completely. These slats work amazingly because they almost look like the leading edge of a wing. So they're kind of there but not really. I'm thinking the only ways so far to make it is either to hide it completely which is difficult to access or make it stick out a bit like a sore thumb...

 

[Optionalcoast]

Can you update the f-16 cockpit to work with AJE and the 0.625m turboprop seem like its very overpowerd since it out puts more thrust than engines 4x its size

[mechanicH]

@blackheart612 I would say hide it in the leading edge, users would have to action group it anyway. It would just be aesthetically pleasing. 

[Svm420]

7 hours ago, qromodynmc said:

Nice slats! I wonder how they'll work in far.

 

5 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

@GDJ

@qromodynmc Though I don't know how they will work on FAR... It would certainly be interesting. I don't know why I only saw slats on FS and nowhere else. I thought maybe I could make one and luckily enough, it worked

@mechanicH

 

They won't work in far without this 

[blackheart612]

@Optionalcoast I don't know anything about AJE, I also don't have time to study it since I don't plan to use it. Though people can always patch with custom configs. The Kitty (0.625 prop) is priced the same as a basic jet but it's weaker in power, can't go too high nor too fast. It has power to propel but has a lot of limitations. It's also unlocked later, together with the basic jet. Unless it's used in sandbox, in which case it'll be mostly building for fun, then I think I've nerfed many aspects of it. 

@mechanicH I may have an idea, I'll probably try it soon. I have plans to make more aero parts after all. I may be able to implement it without hiding it. Maybe spoilers and similar things could be added as well should I manage.

@Svm420 That's.... a lot of things... to apply to a lot of parts  Well, I guess that can be done when there's time. Certainly the lowest priority if ever I'll patch it.

In the meantime, experiment two, success as well. I was able to make a Fowler flap. Like I said, I may be working on the idea of Krueger flap as well. I'm also interested in two slotted flaps which I might make for airliner sized wings. Spoilers are also on the plans.

The design of the anti-shock body is based on a similarly shaped part of the J-56 (That turbofan engine on the back). Though the textures still aren't final.

[Antik]

I noticed some rather disturbing "issue"- there is some sort of automatic throttle control over standart shift-ctrl one, and with it even half of stationary thrust cannot be achieved on runway. But in flight things get even worse- engine seems to loose power and partially regain it only in climb. Fuel flow fluctuates randomly, sometimes engine will go almost idle with 100% thrust set. I don't have any automatic velocity or throttle control mods, only Fierspitter Core and Airplane Plus, installed via CKAN. Is this a bug or feature?

[blackheart612]

Okay, more on flaps. Here's the Krueger Flaps made. Two-slotted flaps might be up next soon  

Krueger flaps on leading edge together with Fowler flaps on trailing edge:

Gif for different view and leading edge slat:

Spoiler

@Antik It's not entirely automatic control. I'll keep explanations simple:
The props are feathered in throttling to avoid instant take-offs, this is only noticeable when landed. So be sure to have a proper take-off spot (just like irl).
The changes in fuel flow is due to the changes in the thrust output of the engine doing some math with the specific impulse asl.
What you're talking about in-flight is performance loss due to the craft being too fast for the propellers making it have less propulsion. When you try to climb, you bleed speed and propellers kick in but notice that you're never going to get any faster than the propellers' limitations. This doesn't mean you're losing power. This means you've reached the top speed of the engines. Of course there's also the limitation of altitude as well, so you can't just point upwards to space. Considering props aren't capable of flying as high as turbofans (but modern props from APP have better fuel consumption than turbofans to make up for it).

Edit: Check out the Krueger Flap @mechanicH

Edited February 16, 2017 by blackheart612

[SkyKaptn]

@blackheart612 Is there a way to tweak or avoid the IVA (terrain and sky) getting darker and de-saturated? If you compare the screenshots in the spoiler you will notice a big difference.

Spoiler

 

[mechanicH]

@blackheart612 You have truly out done yourself sir ...BRAVO!!!!!!    looks amazing. 

[blackheart612]

@SkyKaptn That would require editing of the textures, no other way around it  

Anyway, I've made two slotted flaps now and I've thought about implementing modular airliner wings. Here you'll see that they're formed like a regular aeroplane wing but with much more control. They're unnoticeably little bit thicker than the regular wing connectors. The one in the picture isn't the final texture, infact, I've made some changes already. Though they will maintain a plain color to not mess up how their textures when built. Though, they are changed to have widthwise lines so they're meant to be placed in one direction only if texture is desired to be preserved.

Notice that it has the gray and white pattern of the aeroplane main wing. Though it also is able to fit the existing flaps of any kind implemented on my dev.
The slats are there in front and double slot fowler in the back, both deployed.

The wing parts which I have no screenshots of yet is composed of 4 shapes with two different orientations of how to attach them so they total of 7 as of now.

[Gregory TheGamer]

Hey!

I have used your mod for a while now, and I gotta admit, you have some serious skills hidden in there. However, I would like to suggest a few parts.

• RPM (RasterPropMonitor) Support. 
• Size 3 fuselage pieces. Which includes:
  • Passenger fuselage.
  • Cargo fuselage.
  • Door fuselage. (prefeably the door on both sides.)
  • Cockpit
• Size 2 door fuselage. (I know there's already one in this pack, but that one has the door only on one side.
• A few more Turbo-Fan engines. (Why not?)

Also, I have noticed a rather annoying incident with the size 2 passenger fuselage this mod adds. If you place two passenger fuselage pieces in-line with each other, the game will tell you that a hatch is obstructed. I think this is due to the hatch only being on one end of the fuselage. If you fix this, It would make my kerbals a bit happier. I wish I could make this stuff myself, but I don't have the experience necessary to make good looking models.

I wish you a lot of luck with your flaps and slats, and fly safe!

Edited February 17, 2017 by Gregory TheGamer
Typing mistake.

[SpaceBadger007]

Hey @blackheart612 just an idea for you if you ever feel like doing it, if it is even possible in the game, would you be able to make swing wings? For example like the F-14 tomcat and the B-1 Lancer? When extended the wings would have high lift/high drag, and in swept position would have low lift/low drag kinda thing, this is just a suggestion after all and you can ignore this if you choose to.