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

[ColDelta]

@martinezfg11 I've seen it once already Tbh.  I believe  some person used it on a UH-60 Blackhawk Build. 

[EVA_Reentry]

Ok, thanks!

[mechanicH]

31 minutes ago, EVA_Reentry said:

where's that cockpit from?

That cockpit is in retro future mod. It's just retextured to look stock ( looks very nice ). I have built UH-60 and a Huey with it. 

https://kerbalx.com/mechanicH/Sikorsky-UH-60-Black-Hawk

https://kerbalx.com/mechanicH/Bell-UH-1H-Iroquois-Huey

35 minutes ago, martinezfg11 said:

Secret project...

Looks like your slowly recreating the Retro Future mod in stock fashion. I remember you did the dome cockpit. Now this.  I can't wait to see what comes next. Very exciting. Keep up the good work. 

[Akira_R]

18 hours ago, Murican_Jeb said:

Exactly?

I think you got the one I was talking about confused with this:

mmmmm.... no definitely not confused there.

This is what you are looking for no? Sorry for the kinda derpy plane just threw it together real quick like.

And I don't think KF-C has any gear that operate like that gif.

[XOC2008]

The gear he's talking about actually has a version in Retrofuture, but obviously doesn't work considering all the new rules for wheels. I think it worked last in 1.0.5.

[Guest]

Thanks guys!

Sorry for not actually installing Kerbal Foundries, I should've checked. At least you guys are kind

[Citizen247]

4 hours ago, martinezfg11 said:

A project that is Secret (As in not currently publicly available).

 

This is not the thread for that, lets just say keep an eye on the forums within the next couple weeks...

I'm sorry to be completely off topic for a minute, but this exchange made me laugh to the point of almost swallowing my tongue. I recently wrote a play that has the same exchange and is being put on somewhere in England in a couple of weeks (shameless plug).
"It's top secret"
"What's that then sir"
"It's a mission I can't tell anyone about."
"I mean what's the mission sir."
"Oh, Well [explains mission], but don't tell anyone, it's top secret!"
"'Ere ol' nobby 'ere is only going on a secret suicide mission, don't tell anyone though, its top secret."

[kiwinanday]

Ok, after doing some actual testing as opposed to hypothetical number runs, I can get a range of at least 1100km cruising at 154.3ms (300kts). Disregard the turboprop request, I'm good with the Bumblebee.

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by kiwinanday

[MangoScout]

Are we allowed to do some requests?

If so, I'd really love to see the flat-bottomed CFM56 (either the -3 or the -7) in the game.  (CFM56-3)

 

 (CFM56-7)

 

[blackheart612]

@kiwinanday I didn't see your post, but nothing happened with the old engines, they are the same configs tanner made.

@MangoScout Everybody's free to post requests of course. Doesn't mean that it will be implemented of course. Especially... I don't know why I'll be making the same engine with a few variations from the original I made. You should know the reason why I made CFM56-5 is because... it looks cool. A reason why I would make an engine in the same family is like the "Kitty" Family (PT6). There's the turboprop version I made based from the TBM-900 (PT6A) but the coming release will also have PT6C, the turboshaft engine of the tilt-rotor.

Anyways, everybody settle down on the landing gears. I'll tackle them after the upcoming release. Hopefully, we'll have them by then. Yep, landing gears after this coming release.

[kiwinanday]

@blackheart612 hmmm, in that case, I blame either the update, or the lack of FAR.

[MangoScout]

6 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

@kiwinanday I didn't see your post, but nothing happened with the old engines, they are the same configs tanner made.

@MangoScout Everybody's free to post requests of course. Doesn't mean that it will be implemented of course. Especially... I don't know why I'll be making the same engine with a few variations from the original I made. You should know the reason why I made CFM56-5 is because... it looks cool. A reason why I would make an engine in the same family is like the "Kitty" Family (PT6). There's the turboprop version I made based from the TBM-900 (PT6A) but the coming release will also have PT6C, the turboshaft engine of the tilt-rotor.

Anyways, everybody settle down on the landing gears. I'll tackle them after the upcoming release. Hopefully, we'll have them by then. Yep, landing gears after this coming release.

Ah I see. Thanks for the reply!

[StahnAileron]

Okay, dumb question about the leading edge flaps/slats: Are they supposed to generated lift in the opposite direct when deployed? I used them a couple of times and my aircraft just wants to pitch down, even with a high AoA. I tested the same craft with Aero, uh, Arrows turned on (F12) and during normal flight, they produce lift like a normal wing/control surface. When deployed, the aero arrow shrinks and then inverts, pitching my nose down. Applying high AoA (this is at low-ish speeds as well, around 75m/s or less) has me fighting a still stronger than normal tendency to pitch downward until the lift arrow disappears. It never points upward when these flaps are deployed.

I could just be stupid and am using them wrong, though. Am I?

[kiwinanday]

Try reducing the deployment amount, but yeah, that sounds like how they're supposed to function. In theory, they let you descend at a flatter angle than the otherwise nose-down attitude your glideslope would require.

[blackheart612]

@StahnAileron It's not wrong and not a stupid question at all. It's how they work. In KSP Aerodynamics, that's the closest you can get with Flaps, a hybrid of an Airbrake and an Aileron. A good way to not nosedive is throttle your engine up. It will keep your nose up and the flaps will maintain the slow speed. If you watch the video, I'm actually likely at full throttle in trying to land but the plane is very slow due to the amount of flaps and spoilers there.

[StahnAileron]

5 hours ago, blackheart612 said:

@StahnAileron It's not wrong and not a stupid question at all. It's how they work. In KSP Aerodynamics, that's the closest you can get with Flaps, a hybrid of an Airbrake and an Aileron. A good way to not nosedive is throttle your engine up. It will keep your nose up and the flaps will maintain the slow speed. If you watch the video, I'm actually likely at full throttle in trying to land but the plane is very slow due to the amount of flaps and spoilers there.

I did throttle up, since my AoA required that of me. Granted, I was in a fairly overpowered aircraft (TWR > 1), so I wasn't maxing the throttle. Still, I was high enough to go slow (about 75m/s) with like a 30-45 degree AoA. It still felt like it wanted to pitch down harder than the same aircraft without the leading edge flaps. (And KSP was indicating they weren't generating any noticeable lift at that AoA either.) I understood the generated lift pushing the nose down when my AoA was lower (especially near zero), but I figure I should have positive lift past a high enough AoA.

Then again, I realize some things in life work counter-intuitively compared to our expectations. (Like speeding up an orbit actually means applying thrust in the opposing direction.) I'll probably have to screw around with them a bit more to figure what I'm doing wrong, then. I don't recall how spaced apart the CoL and CoM were in that design, so that may have something to do with it. (I have a feeling they might work better if the primary lift component from the main wings was closer to the CoM. I've been experimenting a little with how I set-up my CoM/CoL relationships. This was a by-product of both attempting to design a shuttle and figuring out why some of my designs were more agile than others despite being fairly similar in terms of CoL-CoM placement.)

[kiwinanday]

@StahnAileron I made a post for aerospaceplane design support, if you want help figuring things out.

Edited March 26, 2017 by kiwinanday

[GhostboyDB]

Is there a chance for like a helicopter tail, Like instead of the ones already in KSP

[fourfa]

Could someone state the purpose of the leading edge flaps? Because I've experienced the same thing (negative lift when deployed), the tooltips are no help, and apparently I just don't get what these are meant to do. Aside from aesthetics.

I've definitely used flaps to gain low speed lift in stock KSP, you just have to put them on the leading edge deployed up and trailing edge deployed down.  Which we all get doesn't look right. I thought these were supposed to make that right

[kiwinanday]

You gotta balance the flaps and slats. Try reducing the max deployment, or alternatively, angling the entire wing so that the leading edge is higher than the trailing edge.

[fourfa]

yeah, of course.  I'm usually at 6-8 degrees AoI for peak L/D ratio (more when forward of CoL, less when aft of CoL) then adjusting wing area for the lift I need.  Using CorrectCoL also.  Flaps to increase takeoff and landing lift if I need high loading to limit hypersonic drag or for water.

[StahnAileron]

@blackheart612 So I was building an SSTO to launch a small comsat. (Really, I'm just screwing around.) I realized I should probably throw some airbrakes on, just in case.

Then it hit me (eventually): is it possible to make a control surface that splits when deploys to make it into an airbrake, but still work (and animate) like a normal control surface otherwise? Technically you can do it now, but that entails clipping control surfaces. I try to avoid clipping animated functional parts. I know KSP has some limitations, so I was wondering if this was possible. If yes, consider this a request ^_~

I was mainly thinking of the split stabilizer of the shuttle, but really, I'm wanting split versions of the stock MK2 wing control surfaces. (Since you did expand on those parts already.)

[AccidentalDisassembly]

1 hour ago, StahnAileron said:

@blackheart612 So I was building an SSTO to launch a small comsat. (Really, I'm just screwing around.) I realized I should probably throw some airbrakes on, just in case.

Then it hit me (eventually): is it possible to make a control surface that splits when deploys to make it into an airbrake, but still work (and animate) like a normal control surface otherwise? Technically you can do it now, but that entails clipping control surfaces. I try to avoid clipping animated functional parts. I know KSP has some limitations, so I was wondering if this was possible. If yes, consider this a request ^_~

I was mainly thinking of the split stabilizer of the shuttle, but really, I'm wanting split versions of the stock MK2 wing control surfaces. (Since you did expand on those parts already.)

RetroFuture used to have this kind of control surface, I think...

[mechanicH]

48 minutes ago, AccidentalDisassembly said:

RetroFuture used to have this kind of control surface

Yes  it did...it also had its own PWings and Landing gear as well...but they got broken throughout the updates and were never fixed, so they were removed in 1.2 update.

[Citizen247]

@blackheart612 Messing around with the settings for your Mig/Sabre intake to get it to work properly with AJE I think I've uncovered a bug. The intakes quickly stop providing air to the engines as the craft speeds up, unless you put them on the craft backwards. I think the intake transform is therefore reversed.