Split control surfaces on wings (ailerons and elevators on same wing surface)

[FlazeTheDragon]

Would be really cool if we could add multiple control surfaces to a single wing, so we could have separate smol ailerons and big chonker elevators on the same wing piece.

Now, that can be by-passed if we simply add an additional wing piece to the tip, but that leads to a lot more hassle, and i think this would be a nice quality of life improvement some time down the road, especially for new players that want to make dorito wings.

[Exorcet]

Agreed, I was about to suggest this myself. It is very common on real aircraft, and obviously very useful.

[Vl3d]

Yeah, adding an extra control surface to the wing would be useful.

[Rpatto92]

Given the wing/control surfaces are all in one, this was a given that this would be suggested. However, I have a longer list of my own to add. Start by adding every bit of functionality that the b9 p-wings mod has, including CarnationRED's contribution of manipulation handles and Pivot offsetting.

List

Wing fuel (add and remove tanks)

Wing nodes (central node both at the root and tip)

Wing Shapes: wing profiles (as in B9) (rounded, curved, sharp and cut off/squared for easy wing connections), root to tip adjustable wing-cord TWIST rate, straight wing, delta wing, etc (all of the wings shapes) 

Procedural adjustments: handles, enterable numbered inputs, greater off-set limits (wing angle, tip angle, etc), leading/trail-edge tip/root length adjustment (b9), anhedral/dihedral curve, pivot offsetting CarnationRED), wing flexibility (bendy wings) 

Aero model: aero occlusion (clipped wings don't produce lift/drag), more advanced multi-point lift/drag calculations (instead of single point) (or even FAR style sim aero)  (include lift/drag for all physical parts in all orientations)

Control Surfaces: multi-surfaces, integrated and entirely separate surfaces, integrated control surface shape, surface types (wing slats, leading edge, trailing edge, mid-wig, split surfaces), air brakes

Speaking of OCCLUSION I'd love clipped parts to occlude other parts from both physics and internal resources. So if you have a fuel tank with a great big wing through it, it would hold less fuel than it would otherwise. Also pod/cockpits, it would  be nice if I could not see (occlude) parts poking through the now visible cockpit internals.

MORE ADVANCED BASICALLY...

If I've missed something obvious PLEASE comment.

On 3/7/2023 at 4:16 PM, Vl3d said:

Yeah, adding an extra control surface to the wing would be useful.

I've posted a list of suggestion in this thread... Would you be so kind as to add it to your Grand Unified Wishlist please.

[kicka55]

This all sounds very out of scope for a space oriented game. I would more tend towards a spin off like "Kerbal Planes". Kerbals have colonized Laythe and it's your job to connect the colonies using airborne vehicles. You could build a cargo and passenger air plane business. Start small and work your way up. Death Stranding but with planes you build yourself. How this is not a game yet is beyond me tbh. There is so much potential for the franchise. Harvest Mun, Kerbals & Krakens, Kerbal Soccer...

Edited March 12, 2023 by kicka55

[Rpatto92]

7 hours ago, kicka55 said:

This all sounds very out of scope for a space oriented game. I would more tend towards a spin off like "Kerbal Planes". Kerbals have colonized Laythe and it's your job to connect the colonies using airborne vehicles. You could build a cargo and passenger air plane business. Start small and work your way up. Death Stranding but with planes you build yourself. How this is not a game yet is beyond me tbh. There is so much potential for the franchise. Harvest Mun, Kerbals & Krakens, Kerbal Soccer...

I did actually forget two other important missing parts, grid fins, & flapping control surfaces; which are more applicable to reusable rockets.

Aero is important to rocket design also; as well as any places were rockets and planes blur the boundaries. As for this being "very out of scope" Kerbal has embraced aircraft from pretty much the moment the first fin stabilisers were added to early alpha KSP. There's now also a dock launch site at the KSC, so it would seem the dev's have plans to expand beyond even planes and I'd very much like to see a similar amount of attention afforded to hydrodynamics in the near future, not to mention rovers.  

You might be forgetting, Kerbal isn't just about the journey through space to other worlds, it's about what you can do to explore when you get there. Planes, rovers and boat/ships are all means of exploration on the varied planets/moons in the Kerbol system and as the dev's goal is to add other star systems with more varied planet and moons, this can only expand. 

[kicka55]

2 hours ago, Rpatto92 said:

I did actually forget two other important missing parts, grid fins, & flapping control surfaces; which are more applicable to reusable rockets.

Aero is important to rocket design also; as well as any places were rockets and planes blur the boundaries. As for this being "very out of scope" Kerbal has embraced aircraft from pretty much the moment the first fin stabilisers were added to early alpha KSP. There's now also a dock launch site at the KSC, so it would seem the dev's have plans to expand beyond even planes and I'd very much like to see a similar amount of attention afforded to hydrodynamics in the near future, not to mention rovers.  

You might be forgetting, Kerbal isn't just about the journey through space to other worlds, it's about what you can do to explore when you get there. Planes, rovers and boat/ships are all means of exploration on the varied planets/moons in the Kerbol system and as the dev's goal is to add other star systems with more varied planet and moons, this can only expand. 

I'm not saying planes are out of scope. I'm saying adding 100 more detail features to wings are out of scope when these details don't really provide any gameplay benefit. I'd be happy to get boat parts as well. Just keep the same level of abstraction across all the parts.

[Rpatto92]

2 hours ago, kicka55 said:

I'm not saying planes are out of scope. I'm saying adding 100 more detail features to wings are out of scope when these details don't really provide any gameplay benefit. I'd be happy to get boat parts as well. Just keep the same level of abstraction across all the parts.

Players have been creating ways of doing things like split wings for ages but the current implementation of the new P-wings actually has some draw backs. So adding a couple of extra features is only gonna bring KSP2 inline with KSP1 but maybe this time with some more purpose.

As for the gameplay benefit they do to players like myself. It's sometimes really difficult to control a shuttle re-entering for example, improving the aero, making things like a split wing airbrake as a stock part or p-wings option, means maybe my craft can have less parts and slow reliable for a controlled landing.

Also, supposedly the dev's plan on adding automated resupply missions, a well built reusable rocket, plane or shuttle is gonna need to be reliable if it's going to simulate the whole process. (assuming there simulated not just faked) 

[Vl3d]

20 hours ago, Rpatto92 said:

root to tip adjustable wing-cord TWIST rate, straight wing, delta wing, etc (all of the wings shapes) 

You can already twist the tip and root. You can also build those shapes and save them as subassemblies in the workspace.

20 hours ago, Rpatto92 said:

aero occlusion (clipped wings don't produce lift/drag), more advanced multi-point lift/drag calculations

This i think is already implemented, can't confirm how the calculation is done, maybe as averages.

20 hours ago, Rpatto92 said:

Control Surfaces: multi-surfaces, integrated and entirely separate surfaces, integrated control surface shape, surface types (wing slats, leading edge, trailing edge, mid-wig, split surfaces), air brakes

There are wings which are entire control surfaces. Air brakes will be added soon.

I agree with at least 2 control surface areas on wings and the "fuel tank, leading edge and grid fins" ideas i will also add to the big list.

Good feedback!

[Rpatto92]

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

You can already twist the tip and root. You can also build those shapes and save them as subassemblies in the workspace.

I don't think I've adequately explained what I meant by twist rate. Here's a Scot Manley video were he demonstrates the effects of "wing twist" I believe is the correct name for it. 

Basically AoA changes along the span of the wing, which has useful lift characteristics. In the video he use lots of smaller wing parts to achieve the desired affect but obviously this can't be easily done with procedural wings, at-least not without making lots of smaller segments that clearly could not be aligned. What's needed is a twist rate option under p-wings for this to be done seamlessly without using half a dozen or more smaller p-wings and ending up with a janky wing. 

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

This i think is already implemented, can't confirm how the calculation is done, maybe as averages.

Gonna have to look into this myself, it would be excellent if so but I haven't seen much to suggest this personally. 

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

There are wings which are entire control surfaces. Air brakes will be added soon.

I agree with at least 2 control surface areas on wings and the "fuel tank, leading edge and grid fins" ideas i will also add to the big list.

Good feedback!

Unfortunately those particular surfaces are so called all-moving "wings" they pivot from a central point at the root, which means they can't be used like a regular separate control surface.

If the dev's were to allows us to adjust the pivot point to an off centre position and also change the axis of pivot by up-to 90' degrees, changing from the root axis to the edge axis. Then that would effectively allow players to create a great number of varied types of surfaces, eliminating the need for most other types of surface because players could create split-wing surfaces, air-brakes, leading edge, even mid wing and flapping surfaces like those on Starship.

The only wing parts not covered by this would be slatted surfaces and grid fins.


Even two integrated surfaces would be great as you suggest but perhaps having this scale with wing span would be a great solution to the number of allowed surfaces. 

Thank you for taking the time to read my posts.

[Vl3d]

5 hours ago, Rpatto92 said:

Unfortunately those particular surfaces are so called all-moving "wings" they pivot from a central point at the root, which means they can't be used like a regular separate control surface.

I understand what you're referring to now. Yes.. having a control surface that attaches like the ones in KSP1 would be useful.