Jump to content

[0.22] B9 Aerospace Pack / R4.0c / New pods, IVAs, engines, fuselages & structures


bac9

Recommended Posts

So here's an idea- I've been fiddling about with my Mogul designs and I find it rather... irritating that for the K-3350L and the standard K-3350, I need to put-in extra winglets at the front to balance out the Centre of Lift with the Centre of Mass when the plane is carrying anything in it's payload bay. That's not problem in itself, but a problem does arise when you've already ditched the payload into orbit and are returning to Kerbin. Without the extra mass of the cargo the CoL ends up being way in front of the CoM, making the craft less stable and an overall *itch to fly properly.

So I got to thinking. Wouldn't it be sweet if we had deployable/extendible winglets? You can have them out during take-off and ascent and pull them back in once you start your return. Or the opposite, if you're returning something from orbit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I got to thinking. Wouldn't it be sweet if we had deployable/extendible winglets? You can have them out during take-off and ascent and pull them back in once you start your return. Or the opposite, if you're returning something from orbit...

Get Infernal Robotics and go crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here's an idea- I've been fiddling about with my Mogul designs and I find it rather... irritating that for the K-3350L and the standard K-3350, I need to put-in extra winglets at the front to balance out the Centre of Lift with the Centre of Mass when the plane is carrying anything in it's payload bay. That's not problem in itself, but a problem does arise when you've already ditched the payload into orbit and are returning to Kerbin. Without the extra mass of the cargo the CoL ends up being way in front of the CoM, making the craft less stable and an overall *itch to fly properly.

So I got to thinking. Wouldn't it be sweet if we had deployable/extendible winglets? You can have them out during take-off and ascent and pull them back in once you start your return. Or the opposite, if you're returning something from orbit...

Couldn't you just include detachable ballast? Once you've dropped the payload, drop the ballast.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OR

You could redesign the craft to maintain its proper flight trim loaded or unloaded, ya know, like every other flying transport vehicle in the world does. Putting the cargo area as close to the CoM as possible will go a long way with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OR

You could redesign the craft to maintain its proper flight trim loaded or unloaded, ya know, like every other flying transport vehicle in the world does. Putting the cargo area as close to the CoM as possible will go a long way with this.

Isn't the entire point of KSP to do amazing things with ridiculously badly designed vessels? Maybe I'm doing it wrong. :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get Infernal Robotics and go crazy.

I'm talking about an expandable/retractable winglet, not a folding one. One that goes inside the fuselage.

And I'm trying to design something that's streamlined and doesn't have much sticking out place. Ballast tanks are one way to go but I'm trying to avoid having to bring up anything I'm not necessarily bringing back down... Is this making sense?

Also it needs to be something that can fly well out of the box, both loaded and unloaded, without the need to add/remove things in the SPH pre-flight.

Edited by BananaDealer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking about an expandable/retractable winglet, not a folding one. One that goes inside the fuselage.

And I'm trying to design something that's streamlined and doesn't have much sticking out place. Ballast tanks are one way to go but I'm trying to avoid having to bring up anything I'm not necessarily bringing back down... Is this making sense?

Also it needs to be something that can fly well out of the box, both loaded and unloaded, without the need to add/remove things in the SPH pre-flight.

Not doable without an additional plugin as it will continue to provide the lift no matter the animation, and we are unwilling to add any more plugins to the mod. And as KhaosCorp said above, proper designs don't need stuff like that anyway.

Isn't the entire point of KSP to do amazing things with ridiculously badly designed vessels? Maybe I'm doing it wrong. :P

I'm afraid you are.

Is there a chance of you adding S2 tail section with ramp?? Because that would be awesome

No, S2 is too small to make the ramp useful, even pretty tiny rovers will hit the ceiling there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not doable without an additional plugin as it will continue to provide the lift no matter the animation, and we are unwilling to add any more plugins to the mod. And as KhaosCorp said above, proper designs don't need stuff like that anyway.

I'm afraid you are.

O... Oh... Welp... Back to the drawing board then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get Infernal Robotics and go crazy.

Wouldn't work, winglets have the same amount of lift and drag even if they are clipping inside of another part, so a winglet that was retracted by a robotics mod would have no effect.

You'd need to mod in a winglet that retracts on it's own and has reduced lift/drag when retracted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mk2 Cargo bays do not seem to be working properly for me. When in the VAB they play through their animation to the "Closed" position. In addition, the animations on the runway seem to be reversed, with "Open" corresponding to the bay closing animation. All other cargo bays and parts appear to function normally.

Aside from B9, my KSP .22 is Vanilla

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mk2 Cargo bays do not seem to be working properly for me. When in the VAB they play through their animation to the "Closed" position. In addition, the animations on the runway seem to be reversed, with "Open" corresponding to the bay closing animation. All other cargo bays and parts appear to function normally.

Aside from B9, my KSP .22 is Vanilla

Cargo bays display in VAB/SPH the way they're gonna get loaded on the runway but their default is to be "open". So "deployed" in the action group menu means they'll load "closed"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cargo bays display in VAB/SPH the way they're gonna get loaded on the runway but their default is to be "open". So "deployed" in the action group menu means they'll load "closed"...

He's saying that the names are messed up, and that "deployed" makes it start open.

EDIT: And that it's only messed up for the S2 cargo bay.

Edited by wasmic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's saying that the names are messed up, and that "deployed" makes it start open.

EDIT: And that it's only messed up for the S2 cargo bay.

Ok... Then have the "Start Deployed?" set to "No"...? I don't see a problem, if anything "deployed" meaning "open" is more logical...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did I complain about performance??

Okay, then it wasn't you who did. But that's where that whole line of conversation started - with someone saying their ship did not perform right. Well, the answer to that obviously is to redesign until it does.

Bac9's opinions are his own. He may work for Squad, and may have good reasons for them (IMO he does, and I agree a lot with him), but neither he nor Squad as a whole are the final arbiters of what anyone gets to enjoy about the game. If you like to build things by throwing random parts together and pressing launch, who's to gainsay you? As long as you don't expect it to actually work (for a suitable definition thereof).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, then it wasn't you who did. But that's where that whole line of conversation started - with someone saying their ship did not perform right. Well, the answer to that obviously is to redesign until it does.

Bac9's opinions are his own. He may work for Squad, and may have good reasons for them (IMO he does, and I agree a lot with him), but neither he nor Squad as a whole are the final arbiters of what anyone gets to enjoy about the game. If you like to build things by throwing random parts together and pressing launch, who's to gainsay you? As long as you don't expect it to actually work (for a suitable definition thereof).

I think you mean me... And I didn't complain, I just suggested a neat part which can actually see use... I know my SSTOs aren't well designed (but who's are anyways?) and I'm working to re-design them, even to a point where I'm stalling my manned mission to Duna! I've already re-designed the larger Mogul variant where it's no-longer such a pain to fly with no cargo. Though it still gets a bit fidgety once fuel drops below 1/4 (which is during your atmospheric flight back to KSC after reentry), but that can't be helped I think... Flying it using MechJeb's SURF and Smart S.A.S helps...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't work, winglets have the same amount of lift and drag even if they are clipping inside of another part, so a winglet that was retracted by a robotics mod would have no effect.

Worrying about aerodynamics to the extent of having variable geometry, without installing FAR, is putting the cart before the horse :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok... Then have the "Start Deployed?" set to "No"...? I don't see a problem, if anything "deployed" meaning "open" is more logical...

What I'm saying is, in relation to all other cargo bays (both in VAB and in flight), the Mk2 bays are the opposite of their counterparts. When right-clicking the bay, the "Open Bay" command corresponds to the doors actually closing. Similarly, action group setup in VAB is reversed. The bay functions normally, but it seems a bit quirky to tell the doors to close to open the bay... parhaps I'm the only one with the issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...