Flying Wing SSTO

[Ultrop]

Ok, so you have built your 37th space station and keep needing larger stations. You have built monstrous craft to try and find a way to lift most of the station in one go. By the time the craft is done, it contains hundreds of parts. You launch it, and your system starts laughing uncontrollably,  and finally manages to say “You want to go where?” That is without any payload yet.

If that describes you, then this is for you. You have proved you can do what it takes, you now just want to move on and colonize the universe.

This is a single part SSTO cargo hauler. It started out as a Delta Wing, I swear. Don't even ask how it ended up this shape. Any way. It attempts to be all things to all men at all times. It contains most of what you need to get to orbit. I was tired of long thin transport vehicles, so it has a large squarish cargo bay. Still on the flat side, the craft does have to be at least wingish in shape. The top opens up either as 2 gull wings, or as a whole. Some form of mod, like FS hangar Extender, which allows you to build outside the VAB or SPH is highly recommended.

 It has a large number of attachment nodes on the back to try and satisfy almost any engine configuration you please. Yes I know near the middle, there are 4 pairs of nodes very close together, the reason is so you can either have a circle round the center engine, or the first row in line vertically like the rest.

Inside the bay I provided quite a few nodes as well on the front, back, sides and floor. If you have trouble using the nodes inside, I have found, that bringing the camera very close to the node, helps. This can especially be necessary when trying to detach parts once placed. The camera has to be at least inside the bay. Kerbals can enter the bay through the airlock in the bay.

There are a set of nodes on the side, but they will most probably not see much use, it is merely as a reference for the one flat area on the center rim, but use it as you please.

On the front the nose folds down to reveal more nodes for things like sensors and folded up dish antennas. The center is large enough to fit a standard clamp-o-tron.

The front space is cabin and control space, and can hold 20 Kerbals. The sides are for fuel. The built in tanks can be configured with Interstellar Fuel Switch (in fact it is required.) Mono Propellant is always available. Battery’s are built in, as are Solar panels. Reaction Wheel built in, full SAS, and some transmission capability. The plane Body is obviously also a lifting surface. At the moment there are two versions, one that has no control surfaces, the area around the engines provides lots of space to attach such. The second model has the back protrusions removed,  and are provided as as control surfaces that can be re-attached. There is only pitch control enabled. Enabling Roll control as well tends to cause problems. Yaw control is envisioned as being attached on the side. (reference .craft file included). Bearing in mind this is a cargo hauler and not a fighter jet, the flywheel does a reasonable job of handling roll control.

I decided not to build the RCS into the craft, large payloads, could seriously change the center of mass, and it was better to provide separate RCS blisters. Also I provided rather large Air brakes.

I Included wheels, designed for the craft, that can carry the weight. With wheels wells, that smoothly merge with the body, and have a low profile. Two types are provided, the back ones attach to the flat surface at the back. The front ones have their angle and height designed to optimally  attachment on the angled surface just a little  forward from  the flat section which should give you a reasonably level craft.  Depending on the weight of you payload, you may have to increase the strength of the brakes in the right click menu, and even maybe play with the friction control.

The top and bottom have air scoops that open and close, it is just cosmetic, the air intake is available whether they are open or closed. (have not looked at programing) The Windows have covers to close them for re-entry or retract them, once again just cosmetic.

Being one part only, has the draw back that you are very much at the mercy of the system to configure dry and wet Center of Mass and Center of Lift despite config settings. This is where the 3 strange blue blocks come in. They are purely for moving the CoM to a more appropriate point if your payload does not. For that reason I have made the craft lighter than it should be, so don't be shy add some weight if needed.

What else? So the craft has pretty decent temperature resistance, because of the nice black coating on the underside and around the leading edge. In fact most of the values in the config files have been boosted quite a bit above the standard.  This is a monster after all. That said, this is a Beta. I need feed back, Most chosen values are an attempt at best guess for what would be needed or is appropriate. Please be kind, this is my first attempt at any thing like this.

In case it is not monster enough, all the config files have tweak scale statements included, so if you have tweak scale installed, you can scale it up to 400%. It wont fit on the runway, but have at it any way.

No ITS yet, I have made the cabin, but that is it.

Top View

Back View

Side View

More Images on Imgur

Download from Spacedock

Download from CurseForge

Also available on CKAN now.

***********************************

I have recently added support for TAC life support. Unfortunately this ends up filling your resource list with unused clutter if you are not using TAC, so the default config files does not contain the resource statements.

To enable it, go to your KSP installation/GamesData/FlyingWing/Parts in there rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg to something like FlyingWingNC.cfg.noTAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.noTAC. Then rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg.TAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.TAC
to FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg. Restart the game.

**********************************

 

Edited January 28, 2017 by Ultrop

[Starslinger999]

Holy..... Crap.

This is all I can say about this thing.

[linuxgurugamer]

Very....interesting???

anyway, the file is badly laid out, somewhat confusing.

I'd like to suggest that you use the following directory layout, this is pretty much what most mods use:

Top level directory:

GameData->
          FlyingWing->
                      Parts/
                      ReadMe
                      License (missing in current file)
                      Screen 4.png (is this necessary in the download?)
                      Screen 3.png (also, is this necessary?)
Ships->
       SPH->
            FlyingWingRef.craft

 

[Ultrop]

Yes sorry, was 2:00 am in the morning trying to figure out the quirks of 3 different sites to post it on and the absolutely absurd CKAN. After weeks of trying to piece together all the info i needed to know to make the mods, I just got fed up and zipped up everything including screen shots and posted it.

[linuxgurugamer]

45 minutes ago, Ultrop said:

Yes sorry, was 2:00 am in the morning trying to figure out the quirks of 3 different sites to post it on and the absolutely absurd CKAN. After weeks of trying to piece together all the info i needed to know to make the mods, I just got fed up and zipped up everything including screen shots and posted it.

Understood.

Let me know when you've repackaged it in the layout I suggested.  One thing I didn't mention, if you could add a .version file in the FlyingWing directory, that would be great.

[InsaneDruid]

This here is the Modelling and Texturing Discussion subforum. I can't see the question and/or answer to something related.

So it's clearly posted in the wrong forum. But now as we are here: just a tip for further modelling: never use pure white (or black) in a texture. Instead, use something like 80 or 90% black or white. So that the surface can catch shadows and highlights better. Believe me, it will look so much better.

Edited January 22, 2017 by InsaneDruid

[Ultrop]

27 minutes ago, InsaneDruid said:

This here is the Modelling and Texturing Discussion subforum. I can't see the question and/or answer to something related.

So it's clearly posted in the wrong forum. But now as we are here: just a tip for further modelling: never use pure white (or black) in a texture. Instead, use something like 80 or 90% black or white. So that the surface can catch shadows and highlights better. Believe me, it will look so much better.

Thanks I will do that

[Ultrop]

12 hours ago, InsaneDruid said:

This here is the Modelling and Texturing Discussion subforum. I can't see the question and/or answer to something related.

So it's clearly posted in the wrong forum. But now as we are here: just a tip for further modelling: never use pure white (or black) in a texture. Instead, use something like 80 or 90% black or white. So that the surface can catch shadows and highlights better. Believe me, it will look so much better.

Actually I am not an artist. I can model, I can figure out, I can imagine. In the process I  manage to approach something art like. That said, my textures turned out better than anticipated. However it was my intention from the beginning to ask if any one is interested to make better textures. I am prepared to e-mail the UV layouts or even the whole Photoshop file to any one who is interested in trying. I am not big on the copyright thing, so feel free to ask.

[Ultrop]

15 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Very....interesting???

anyway, the file is badly laid out, somewhat confusing.

I'd like to suggest that you use the following directory layout, this is pretty much what most mods use:

Top level directory:

GameData->
          FlyingWing->
                      Parts/
                      ReadMe
                      License (missing in current file)
                      Screen 4.png (is this necessary in the download?)
                      Screen 3.png (also, is this necessary?)
Ships->
       SPH->
            FlyingWingRef.craft

 

I have uploaded a new file with altered textures and file structure. I included a .version file, i hope i understand it correctly.

[TheCardinal]

On 22-1-2017 at 2:29 PM, Starslinger999 said:

Holy..... Crap.

This is all I can say about this thing.

My sentiments exactly!

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

On 22/01/2017 at 5:01 AM, Ultrop said:

Being one part only, has the draw back that you are very much at the mercy of the system to configure dry and wet Center of Mass and Center of Lift despite config settings. This is where the 3 strange blue blocks come in. They are purely for moving the CoM to a more appropriate point if your payload does not. For that reason I have made the craft lighter than it should be, so don't be shy add some weight if needed.

Hit there are much neater ways to manage this problem ( I've built several one part monsters)  There are cfg values that allow you to move col com cop cob where ever you want them  for example

CoMOffset = 0, -0.9, 0 center of mass
CoLOffset = 0, 0.5, 0  center of lift
CoPOffset = 0, 0.5, 0 center of pressure/ lift force 

I use the above on the craft below to very good results, if you can get it flying nicely  by using the offsets , it should fly ok when loaded properly

Spoiler

 

[Ultrop]

2 hours ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said:

Hit there are much neater ways to manage this problem ( I've built several one part monsters)  There are cfg values that allow you to move col com cop cob where ever you want them  for example

CoMOffset = 0, -0.9, 0 center of mass
CoLOffset = 0, 0.5, 0  center of lift
CoPOffset = 0, 0.5, 0 center of pressure/ lift force 

I use the above on the craft below to very good results, if you can get it flying nicely  by using the offsets , it should fly ok when loaded properly

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The Config file actually does contain CoM and CoL statements, not CoP though. Yes they do alter the points as needed, but if for instance you ad additional fuel tanks, the dry CoM and the wet CoM starts separating rather drastically and trying to rectify it in the config, makes the craft un-usable without additional fuel tanks. I spent a lot of time trying to come up with good average values, more time than the average person is going to spend trying to solve it. In the end I decided for the craft to be as versatile as possible, there just had to be a simple user mechanism for manipulating the CoM. I pondered the problem for a long time, and experimented for days. In the real use situation, you are going to lose a lot of weight in used fuel, and most of the weight in cargo before you return. the craft that goes up, is nothing like the one that comes down. Also a space station for instance is not necessarily build for balance. It is going to hang in space, not fly through the air. In the past my space station design was always hampered by needing to be launch able. My whole reason for making this craft, is to no longer have to worry about such tings in my design. If i could count on my payload being sensible, i agree the config file could be made optimal. I am sure I will fiddle with the values again in the future, but for now this will work.

Actually I did not even see CoP in any of the config files I used to try and piece this mess together. Obviously this is worth trying out. The one thing that was clear very quickly, is that Squad did not want one to know how to make mods. They provide all the parameters that you could ever want, but no idea what they are or what they really do. Trying to piece it together from small hints here and there is no joke. Most is gleaned form guesswork of others, or their hard earned experience, and then the information is often contradictory. Don't even talk about different game versions. This mod is actually far from perfect. I hate having to put something like this up for use. In the end I decided to just post it and see what others like SpannerMonkey(smce) can suggest or reveal to me.

So I am not ungrateful for suggestions, this is what i want, but a month of Maya, Unity, KSP, Maya, Unity, KSP............  gets to you. I must have reloaded the KSP database a thousand times or more in the past month. With proper info I could have been done in less than a week. I have gained great respect for the other modders out there in the process. I don't think people realize just what they put in to provide these mods, and I have not even looked at programming yet. It is a shame modders can not make money from their effort, but i guess one does it for the love of the game.

Edited January 24, 2017 by Ultrop

[Ultrop]

The file is now available on CKAN as well.

[Ultrop]

It might be worth expanding a little on the dry and wet CoM, CoL thing. As the craft is now, the wet CoM and CoL is pretty well placed when empty of cargo. Unfortunately the dry CoM is quite far back and can not be moved indipendant of the wet CoM in the config file. This will make the craft un-flyable upon reentry when all the flue is burned. Using the config file to move the wet CoM and CoL to align with the dry CoM wil place the CoL almost inside the engines, this is not a good situation. The only way to move the dry CoM forward, is to increase the mass of the craft. by the time it coincides with the current wet CoM, the craft is far to heavy when empty of cargo. Pretty much moving the dry CoM forward is accomplished by making the fuel weight insignificant compared to the craft weight. Not good either. As there is no actual tanks in the craft for fuel, there is no way of controlling its location or effect. KSP must assume the whole craft is a fuel tank. So in the end the mass distribution will depend on the payload, as it should be. How ever then your design of the payload will suffer. In the end the best way i could think to handle this, is make the craft light and provide small objects with significant weight that can just be placed to balance it all after the fact. Usually in my previous crafts, at-least i could move the wings to control the CoL. This is the wing, and there is nothing to move.

I will be experimenting with the CoP today, and maybe see if I can not improve the situation, and so we learn. This is the scientific method, the only method.

Edited January 25, 2017 by Ultrop

[Ultrop]

I have Uploaded a new version:

1. There was a strange problem in the Flying Wing Ref.craft. The new file is a better representation of what is needed to make it fly.
2. Some minor adjustments made to the wheel well graphics
3. Some tweaks made to the config files. Added CoP statement which seams to improve the craft handling in the atmosphere.

 

[Ultrop]

Updated the Air brakes to case deceleration instead of acceleration

Added Liquid hydrogen / Oxidizer and Lithium to fuel configuration

I have added support for TAC life support. Unfortunately this ends up filling your resource list with unused clutter if you are not using TAC, so the default config files does not contain the resource statements.

To enable it, go to your KSP installation/GamesData/FlyingWing/Parts in there rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg to something like FlyingWingNC.cfg.noTAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.noTAC. Then rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg.TAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.TAC
to FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg. Restart the game

[Raptor22]

While this looks cool, and is an interesting concept, it's quite broken right now.

Hopefully this will work its way through the twists and turns of development hell to be a glorious final product.

[Ultrop]

1 hour ago, Raptor22 said:

While this looks cool, and is an interesting concept, it's quite broken right now.

Hopefully this will work its way through the twists and turns of development hell to be a glorious final product.

Saying it is broken, is unfortunately not very helpful. I was hoping for some constructive criticism. Pointing out what is not as good as it can be and suggesting changes. It can not be all that bad, i have taken several payloads in to space already and returned safely. Granted, I am a horrible pilot, but the fact that i could still land safely, just proves it can not be all that bad. The fact that the air brakes was producing acceleration rather than deceleration, was not helping, and it just shows how bad i am at landing, if i have only now figured that out. However it is now fixed. I welcome criticism, but this is not helping.

[TK421d]

On 1/22/2017 at 7:29 AM, Starslinger999 said:

Holy..... Crap.

This is all I can say about this thing.

my precise response (when i saw the engines) was Holy Moley dats a lotta guacamole!

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

Hi after reading the last somewhat unhelpful comment I decided to give it a go. 

Firstly all the parts load which is a good start, but whats the point in the NC and the C ?   The craft file wouldn't load in my game . missing multi mode? which i presume is an engine type?   There doesn't seem to be a defined location for the two supplied control surfaces and nowhere that they fit nicely.     I don't have the fuel switch so had to add tanks, seems a bit silly to supply all monoprop and nothing else.  I'd just give a fuel cap and let the user decide what they want to put in there, (in LargeBoatParts I allow for different propulsion by just cfg'd empty tanks that can be filled emptied to suit user) 

The big problem is the flying of the thing, i see from the cfg it should have plenty of lift but I couldn't get it off the runway,  and it's not that I don't know how to fly these one part things as I've built and made fly load of mad stuff, it just wouldn't climb, with a 150ms take off roll a brick will fly but not this. In the end I cheated by doing something that shouldn't be possible, and adding airliner wings to the fuel tanks I added to the cargo bay, there's a clue here as to why i couldn't get it to fly with the tanks in the bay . Adding the wings, some tailfins a load of ctrl srf's I got it airborne, yay,  switched on the aero overlay and tada the cargo bay isn't occluded, so anything put in the bay, like the giant orbistore tanks have a huge amount of drag ( pics below )

Spoiler

Huge drag from internal tanks

Lift from wings in cargo bay, all cargo should be occluded using the cargo bay module

 So yeah, i got it into orbit circularised and landed, so it's not all bad.

Right now as I mentioned previously I'd be concerned with one thing only and that is getting it to want to fly.  Not to be bullied into the air by obscene amounts of thrust, but really want to fly,  even with the nose up attitude given by the supplied gear (nice work on that btw   animations too slow though) she did not really want to lift off and she only just cleared the KSC harbor lighthouse which is 1 km off shore.   The supplied ctrl srf's, apart from not fitting anywhere, don't seem to be functional, in that they don't move and do not appear to affect the aero at all. 

I think you need to forget all about the fancy fuel switch and  life support nonsense, the simple fact is the players that use those mods tend to favor more realism and or stock alike, and those self same users don't generally like stuff like this, and in my recollection never have, but it's your call of course.  Stick at it though, it's got potential , but if it's all things to all men, do the decent thing and make it functional without extra mods like fuel switches and life support, make it simple stupid and it'll be a winner, make it have dependencies and i think far fewer players will use it

 

 

[Ultrop]

10 hours ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said:

Hi after reading the last somewhat unhelpful comment I decided to give it a go. 

Firstly all the parts load which is a good start, but whats the point in the NC and the C ?   The craft file wouldn't load in my game . missing multi mode? which i presume is an engine type?   There doesn't seem to be a defined location for the two supplied control surfaces and nowhere that they fit nicely.

 

Firstly I want to thank you for bothering to try and make this work, and to bother reporting back. 54 years have taught me this is the only way to find problems. I really apologize to you and every one else for messing up even the simple part, twice, there is no excuse for the fact that the reference craft contained non stock parts. This would already have made every ones life easier. I am busy uploading a new version with a reference craft that should load. The part with NC in it's name (No Control) does not allow for my control surfaces to be attached. The Part wit just C in the name (Control) does allow my Control surfaces to be attached. Hopefully this time the reference craft will load an one can see how i envisioned this.

For the rest of the reply, I am not going to answer right now, i will still do so, but i first need to experiment further my self. I just want the reference craft fixed so that I do not shoot my self and every one else in the foot any further.

Thanks again for the response.

[Ultrop]

I thought it might be worth trying to place this mod into context. Once i had some satellites in orbit around Kerbin, it was time for a space station. Rockets was fine, but in the end I felt SSTO was the way to go. (Tends to be more gentle). I intermediately realized the MK2 was not worth bothering with. I could hardly fit my Grandma and her rocking chair in there. The Mk3 was not that much better. So after my 3rd or 4th SSTO launch, I was looking for something better. That is where the Mark IV mod came in. Here was something actually worth bothering with. I started using it exclusively. That is where the missing multi mode engine came in. For SSTO in KSP or RL to be worth it at all, you really do need dual mode engines. Less weight, better fuel efficiency.

This is no excuse for my stupidity of including them in the reference craft.

How ever I think I can be forgiven for assuming that if you are desperate enough to search for and download a mod like mine, you have tried various other solutions and that the Mark IV may have crossed your path. If not, try it any way I highly recommenced it and feel stock KSP should have included something like that by now.

Even though KSP stock has the RAPIER dual mode engine, it is considerably smaller than the ones in the Mark IV mod. I do not know if they will do the job, that is why I want to experiment a little. With the Mark IV dual mode engines, this thing actually flew beautifully. With standard rocket engines not so much. It actually makes no sense, fuel usage aside.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Ultrop

[Ultrop]

20 hours ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said:

The big problem is the flying of the thing, i see from the cfg it should have plenty of lift but I couldn't get it off the runway,  and it's not that I don't know how to fly these one part things as I've built and made fly load of mad stuff, it just wouldn't climb, with a 150ms take off roll a brick will fly but not this. In the end I cheated by doing something that shouldn't be possible, and adding airliner wings to the fuel tanks I added to the cargo bay, there's a clue here as to why i couldn't get it to fly with the tanks in the bay . Adding the wings, some tailfins a load of ctrl srf's I got it airborne, yay,  switched on the aero overlay and tada the cargo bay isn't occluded, so anything put in the bay, like the giant orbistore tanks have a huge amount of drag
 

So the drag problem both from cargo and from plane should now be solved, but getting it of the runway is still a barely possible situation. It actually falls slightly and then starts climbing. That is with no payload at the moment. At least it is a start. The fuel configuration has been changed to be more in line with using rocket engines only. Still needs interstellar fuel switch. I will look at the empty tank thing next.

[Ultrop]

Another new version 0.7.0.0 I hope I am getting there, I am running out of numbers.

I have been getting help and suggestions from SpannerMonkey(smce)  as you can see.

Based on his recommendations, i have made the following changes

1. Trying to provide integration for TAC life support is ridicules, there are more than enough attachment points in the bay to add it if you need it. I have deleted the optional config files.

2. Not every body likes thousands of addons like me. Being forced to use Interstellar Fuel Switch may not be a plus. The standard versions, now have a set of empty tanks that you can fill as you like. Adds clutter to your recourse panel though.

3. The versions with IFS in the name, still has Interstellar Fuel Switch integrated. Forces you to use the mod, but less clutter in the recourse panel.

If you need more types of fuel than the standard versions provide, you are most probably using IFS already, or should be. There are 2 hidden resources, that will only show up if you have mods that use those. They are Liquid Hydrogen and Lithium. Any one that wants a resource added, let me know, and I will see what I can do.

Good luck and thanks once again to SpannerMonkey(smce) for his help and suggestions.

[Raptor22]

I wasn't trying to come off as being rude. It may be the design of my craft. But, I have noticed the that the control surfaces move the wrong way. They pitch down when I pull back. Now, if they were canards, then that would be expected. However, these are elevators mounted at the back.

I love the idea of a low-part count, super-heavy SSTO. I was trying to be encouraging when I said "Hopefully this will work its way through the twists and turns of development hell to be a glorious final product."

Best of luck to you. However, I wish that it looked a bit more stock-alike. Your textures are very akin to those from mods back in the early days of KSP (the good old days, in my opinion). Somewhat similar to Bobcat's style, if you look at his old HOME mods.

Perhaps you can make your own, super-large engine, that way I don't have to attach 15 billion of them to the back of the craft.