Decoupler residue

[NoobTool]

I've built a small aircraft that I want to take to Laythe in my cargo spaceplane. I'm having issues securing it inside the cargo bay. The smaller craft doesn't have a docking port, I intend to refuel it on Laythe via Klaw. I've tried various decouplers, structural pylons etc, and I've tried different methods of attaching them (small craft first, large craft first, subassemblies etc.). It seems no matter how I attach it, when decoupled, the decoupler leaves bits attached to the smaller craft. These bits do indeed adversely affect performance. I would much prefer it if the residue were left inside the cargo bay, since the cargo vessel will be flown home and recovered after making the delivery, but the smaller craft will remain on Laythe as a long-term asset. Any ideas?

[bewing]

2 hours ago, NoobTool said:

 It seems no matter how I attach it, when decoupled, the decoupler leaves bits attached to the smaller craft. These bits do indeed adversely affect performance.

Are you absolutely sure about that? It's supposed to just be cosmetic -- no performance impact at all. Switching focus away from the craft and back again is supposed to delete all the bits, too.

Edit: Oh -- actually, I didn't notice that structural pylon in that pic. For those, you have to turn them upside down if you want them to remain attached to an upper surface.

Edited November 17, 2016 by bewing

[tg626]

I'd recommend a regular radial decoupler

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

To build upon @bewing's statement about turning it upside down -

To do this, you'll want to start with the small plane, attach the decoupler to that, and then radially attach the cargo plane to the decoupler. This may seem to be a bit of a backwards way of doing things, but it should get you what you want.

[NoobTool]

13 hours ago, bewing said:

Are you absolutely sure about that? It's supposed to just be cosmetic -- no performance impact at all. Switching focus away from the craft and back again is supposed to delete all the bits, too.

Edit: Oh -- actually, I didn't notice that structural pylon in that pic. For those, you have to turn them upside down if you want them to remain attached to an upper surface.

 

12 hours ago, tg626 said:

I'd recommend a regular radial decoupler

I've tried using the extended radial decoupler and structural pylons (clearance is needed for the aerodynamic control surfaces). The residue from both of these does seem to affect performance. I may try a regular radial decoupler attached to a girder segment or some such for clearance.

30 minutes ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

To build upon @bewing's statement about turning it upside down -

To do this, you'll want to start with the small plane, attach the decoupler to that, and then radially attach the cargo plane to the decoupler. This may seem to be a bit of a backwards way of doing things, but it should get you what you want.

I actually tried doing it this way and frustratingly, the pylon remained attached to the smaller craft. Perhaps I did something wrong. I'll have to fiddle with it some more.

Thank you for your responses!

[Zhetaan]

@NoobTool:

This is a wild guess, but if flipping the pylon around didn't fix the issue, then it may be that the pylon is coded to remain on the daughter part regardless of the orientation.  Try setting your small plane's cockpit as the root part and see whether that helps.  You may need to play with it a little to get the launch orientation right.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Zhetaan