[1.0.5] FASA 5.44

[Pappystein]

I tried the S-IB out yesterday, and it's amazing. It looks fantastically and is easy to assemble. One problem, though, it wants to fly straight with FAR... really, really straight. I can't even do a gravity turn with it. I'll try without the fins, might work better with FAR.

First before anyone asks, I USE FAR. Now, I have not been able to replicate your issue with either the stock S1B or my S2 analog I built. That being said, FAR has soo many physics breaking issues that it is almost not worth using. It is a SLIGHT improvement over the default engine in terms of aircraft in horizontal flight (G Limited, assumes Control surface stall is entire wing stall etc.) It fixes a control surface bug that caused gliders to fly for ever and gain speed and altitude. It however has serious issues with same control surfaces when attached to wings. It would be real nice if FAR had a button to disable it. Even aircraft do not fly the way FAR says they do. Yet FAR is the best solution for Aerospace planes ATM.

[hieywiey]

I can't wait for the F-1 engines. A big reason I like the SI-C so much is because my Great Uncle worked on it and He even met Von Braun!

[frizzank]

So the new radial Auxiliary Propulsion System engines have a liquid fueled rocket and 3 mono-fueled RCS thrusters. These are nice for probes and other self contained parts that you just need a little bit more push from. The only thing that bugs me is radial attached motors do not draw from the tank they are attached to without a fuel line. So I wanted to ask if everyone else thought they should just be a mono propellent only system or keep it how it is now.

Please try it out first before suggesting changes. Even I was surprised by how well it worked in-game and I made the thing....

http://www./download/f7a28pt8u0484b9/FASA3.84.zip

3.84

Added Proper LEM Structural ring, Should now let the flower unfold.

Added Rocket/RCS pack

Added Kerbal slots to launch tower, now at 16

Added forward RCS thrust to Gemini Realistic Utility pack took it away from rcs unit, moved rcs direction to real life directions

Added extra attach node to bottom of utility pack

[Camacha]

It however has serious issues with same control surfaces when attached to wings. It would be real nice if FAR had a button to disable it. Even aircraft do not fly the way FAR says they do. Yet FAR is the best solution for Aerospace planes ATM.

Of course the model is not a 100% correct, as that would take a sizeable amount of calculative power (as in super computer territory) to even attempt such a thing in real time - and it still would not be perfect. It does, however, provide a model that does a really good job of looking, feeling and working like the real thing. Without it, KSP aerodynamics just do not make sense. With it, people with any experience in that area know what they are doing.

Have you posted in the FAR thread with your trouble regarding the control surfaces? Ferram tends to fix these things rather quickly if possible.

[Wahgineer]

I can't wait for the F-1 engines. A big reason I like the SI-C so much is because my Great Uncle worked on it and He even met Von Braun!

My great grandmother actually wired the computers together that went into the CM for the Apollo 11 mission.

[frizzank]

flight sims do a pretty good job of simulating aerodynamic forces. I dont think it is outside the realm of possibilities to think something similar could be done for KSP.

The dev team has stated several times that they know the aero has problems and the current model is just temporary. A new proper one will replace it, eventually....

Back to the APS pods. Anyone try them out yet?

[K3-Chris]

FAR is pretty good, why not just roll FAR into stock?

[Pappystein]

flight sims do a pretty good job of simulating aerodynamic forces. I dont think it is outside the realm of possibilities to think something similar could be done for KSP.

<SNIP>

Back to the APS pods. Anyone try them out yet?

Downloading now. Will try in sandbox after it is down

[MOARdV]

Back to the APS pods. Anyone try them out yet?

I slapped them on the S-IVB to see what they did. The RCS steering was nice for pointing the craft in orbit. I messed up staging, so the engines on them fired along with the J-2. Without a fuel crossfeed, they burn a long time. I think my only beef with them for other applications is that they seem huge. I originally was going to put them on the Gemini Descent Stage (not the tiny lander, but the cylindrical 2.5m fuel/engine part), but they looked way too big. OTOH, maybe I could use them as combo RCS / thrusters on a different service module part. That'll have to wait until after work, though.

I do like the way you set up the LEM ring.

[K3-Chris]

I like the pods, though would be nice if they could take fuel from the ship they're attached to, though that might be intensional? To avoid draining their fuel while some other engine is burning? Not sure you can do one way fuel flow in KSP.

[frizzank]

Looking back the APS pods are way too big. I keep forgetting that the Saturn rockets are Giant!

They do draw fuel from the attached fuel tank. I think I can make them not do that by disabling the fuel cross feed but I think it's one direction only. I will have to check...

[wasmic]

FAR is pretty good, why not just roll FAR into stock?

Well, for efficiency and compatibility and all that stuff, they'd have to code it into the core game instead of just including FAR as it is. And then it'd take just as long time as making something new from scratch. That's the explanation that I've heard, anyway.

[DennyTX]

engine

engines

just few version of one prototype.

which must be in game? all are heavy enuff...

Edited March 5, 2014 by DennyTX

[Venturi962]

Frizzank, love the mod.

One request, can we get bigger Gimbal Ranges on the engines?

It is fun to play without reaction wheels but I always end up modifying the Gimbal Range on the engines so it is a little easier.

From some research I found:

S-IC/S-IB: 5 Degree Gimbal Range

S-II: 7 Degree Gimbal Range

S-IVB: 7 Degree Gimbal Range

Lots of good information here: Saturn V Flight Manual

[Cdodders]

engine

http://i.imgur.com/8BbAuGT.jpg

engines

http://i.imgur.com/YFfgZvF.png

just few version of one prototype.

which must be in game? all are heavy enuff...

So much things happening today I keep losing my jaw it keeps falling off....

[MOARdV]

Looking back the APS pods are way too big. I keep forgetting that the Saturn rockets are Giant!

They do draw fuel from the attached fuel tank. I think I can make them not do that by disabling the fuel cross feed but I think it's one direction only. I will have to check...

A little bit smaller would be nice for this sort of application:

I found I had to use fuel conduits to feed the engines. However, if I edit the APS config to remove the on-board liquid fuel and oxidizer, then the engines would feed from the central tank. I'm guessing it's because KSP doesn't allow surface-attached fuel tanks to crossfeed?

[Woopert]

About to download the new beta, will report back soon.

[Cdodders]

Tried to use the conical wall panels and fairings in a Apollo CSM launch but when used with its decoupler the panels dont reach the CSM and if I use the fairings with their floating nodes it reaches the CSM but has a large gap between the bottom of the fairings and the decoupler

[Camacha]

Looking back the APS pods are way too big. I keep forgetting that the Saturn rockets are Giant!

I am not sure how they do proportionally, but the pods are pretty big in real life too. I have seen one in person not long ago and they are a bit bigger than a man. Not the little bits on the side of a rocket you would expect.

[ferram4]

engine

http://i.imgur.com/8BbAuGT.jpg

engines

http://i.imgur.com/StssZef.png

just few version of one prototype.

which must be in game? all are heavy enuff...

I like the one on the right, but I'd say to make the main section of the nozzle a little less dark and to try to make the section of the diverging nozzle section just after the throat look more like the one on the left, though using textures rather than polys. They all look quite good.

Since you're doing this, would you consider making a modified F-1B version of it? The center version already seems to be pretty close to that actually, though I don't know how easy it would be to remove the ribbing and the complicated turbine exhaust ring.

[CaptRobau]

Using 3.84 the LEM (and other FASA command pods) now mess up my game. In-game it makes the UI look different and staging no longer works and neither does moving the throttle, once engines are activated by right-clicking.

[NathanKell]

Sounds like a missing internal, maybe?

[frizzank]

I have confirmed on multiple sub par, 5 year old computers that turning down the settings in KSP helps out tremendously with memory crashes and performance with FASA and KSP in general.

Particularly the Texture Quality option under Graphics Settings.

[frizzank]

New Instrument Unit. It is using the same texture sheet as the S1B first stage so lots of ram savings as well.

It functions as a probe core so you can crash your J2 fuel tank into the Moon just like in real life...

As promised the Saturn V parts are going to get a little extra love from me....

[Mustangrande]

New Instrument Unit. It is using the same texture sheet as the S1B first stage so lots of ram savings as well.

It functions as a probe core so you can crash your J2 fuel tank into the Moon just like in real life...

As promised the Saturn V parts are going to get a little extra love from me....

http://i.imgur.com/djIHFks.jpg

I have to say, I'm eager to see what constitutes "extra love," given how much love the rest of the pack has gotten!