FAKOOM Advanced SAS pack

[foamyesque]

I see Tiberion beat me to the punch, but I thought I\'d put out my own set of modified ASAS units. They range from one for light rockets to one for flying brickpiles. Let me know of any issues with their performance.

[Tiberion]

I waited, you never said anything

I even have you in the creator line on them

[feanor]

Downloaded, then deleted; texture has ponies on it. Perhaps you could release a version without them?

[Volt]

Yeah, please, less of the ponies. We don\'t want them. You\'re pretty much the only one interested.

[foamyesque]

Downloaded, then deleted; texture has ponies on it. Perhaps you could release a version without them?

I could, I suppose, if they bother you that much. I\'ve got things to do for the next bit, so, in the interim, you could always copy the original ASAS texture over them.

[Tiberion]

Testing yours now.

If your numbers are in a better place than mine (very likely) I could just use those - mine are just color-banded default ASAS modules like the tunedSAS pack.

[Tim_Barrett]

Ponies, Nice!

[Winston]

Ponies, Nice!

[comradephil]

Who cares if there\'s ponies on it? If foamy wishes to release them with ponies on them, that\'s his prerogative, he doesn\'t owe you anything.

[feanor]

Who cares if there\'s ponies on it? If foamy wishes to release them with ponies on them, that\'s his prerogative, he doesn\'t owe you anything.

I could go on a rant about how you have a target audience and how you cater the product towards that audience ( and yes, mod packs are a product and have an audience ) and how you make decisions about design. Also how there is competition, texture swaps and factors which would stop some people from using, buying or installing the product, and how this counteracts your market penetration and costumer response. This certainly applies for design choices that are either highly polarizing, totally unnecessary and without any benefit.

But i won\'t. I\'ll settle for a reskin, or use some other guys advanced SAS. Especially if that guy actually implements ASAS as it should be, ie smaller and lighter then normal SAS.

[foamyesque]

I could go on a rant about how you have a target audience and how you cater the product towards that audience ( and yes, mod packs are a product and have an audience ) and how you make decisions about design. Also how there is competition, texture swaps and factors which would stop some people from using, buying or installing the product, and how this counteracts your market penetration and costumer response. This certainly applies for design choices that are either highly polarizing, totally unnecessary and without any benefit.

But i won\'t. I\'ll settle for a reskin, or use some other guys advanced SAS. Especially if that guy actually implements ASAS as it should be, ie smaller and lighter then normal SAS.

If you check, I did change the masses of the ASASes (the ones for small ships are lighter). I might look into doing a full-up remodel, but that\'s quite a bit more work.

As for the ponies, well, I like \'em. But, since you asked so nicely, the ponies are now gone.

Yeesh, such a fuss over a decal.

[comradephil]

Hah, catering to a target audience. Modding is not a popularity contest, or shouldn\'t be at any rate.

Where have people got this sense of entitlement from? The target audience is whoever the person providing the free service feels like catering to. It\'s free, as long as nobody is paying for the service, there is no obligation to provide it, nor any obligation to partake of it.

[derhp]

Wow, when I joined this forum was a nice and happy bunch of chaps. Now it seems every thread I click on has been derailed by people arguing over irrelevant details, or just outright being insulting. How about we all take a deep breath, step away from the computer, and ask ourselves what\'s really important. Is it ponies on an ASAS unit, or is it alpha testing a game we all enjoy?

[Tiberion]

Yikes, hug it out peeps.

Anyway, I updated my set to something closer to foamy\'s - I scale Kd a little slower so the control over-ride works a little better at all levels. But his ratios for solving the control flapping get all the credit, they work pretty nice - just make sure you use the appropriate size for your rocket.

[comradephil]

Sorry, I am an angry dude under a happy, carefree exterior.

INTERNALISE, PHIL, INTERNALISE. (This would be much easier if Nova would just release those payload shrouds)

[foamyesque]

Everybody chill.

Also, thanks for the credit, Tib. There\'s probably room for more between the middle, low, and micro ASAS settings; I jumped them in scale factors of 10 to cover a wide range, but if you\'re in the middle of one of those ranges, you could get either flutter or too soft control.

[feanor]

Sorry if I sound grumpy; I don\'t mean it like that all; merely what happened when i downloaded it, and what I then did - and I asked for a fix for me. No entitlement at all, but I can\'t help to disagree when I hear someone say 'if you don\'t like it you can\'t ask for a change' or something in that direction. And well, foamy can just as easily release a version without ponies and give 2 links; that\'d make a lot of people happy, and I think everyone can understand why.

I thank each and every mod maker for parts, but if I don\'t like something I\'ll ask (!) for a fix for sure, or atleast give a suggestion - and that has nothing to do with entitlement.

so, basically ; I don\'t like a part. I don\'t use it. Fine, right? I also make a post about the part; feedback. Nothing wrong there I think.

Still love all of you, but all you pony guys are just heresy worshipping xeno scum, and I think you all need a good visit from a battalion of space marines. That\'s all.

[socket7]

I put the pony textures back on. They make my space plane fly better then non pony textures. ???

How hard is it to copy and paste a single image file for all you haters anyways. >

[Tiberion]

Everybody chill.

Also, thanks for the credit, Tib. There\'s probably room for more between the middle, low, and micro ASAS settings; I jumped them in scale factors of 10 to cover a wide range, but if you\'re in the middle of one of those ranges, you could get either flutter or too soft control.

Yep - there is also the curious problem of staging. Need a 'heavy' for a big rocket, but when you stage and have you moon lander left, the heavy sucks, and having a heavy AND a light on sure doesn\'t work too great.

I\'m not sure Harvester\'s current setup is optimal

[foamyesque]

Yep - there is also the curious problem of staging. Need a 'heavy' for a big rocket, but when you stage and have you moon lander left, the heavy sucks, and having a heavy AND a light on sure doesn\'t work too great.

I\'m not sure Harvester\'s current setup is optimal

I agree.

[Luigibro606]

MOAR PONIES

[rdfox]

Yep - there is also the curious problem of staging. Need a 'heavy' for a big rocket, but when you stage and have you moon lander left, the heavy sucks, and having a heavy AND a light on sure doesn\'t work too great.

I\'m not sure Harvester\'s current setup is optimal

I was just about to bring this up. There needs to be an advanced-advanced option that can switch between multiple PID scales to compensate for mass changes at staging. Maybe one that reads the weight of the remaining rocket after staging and switches between two or three PID parameter sets based on that total mass? (May bring this up in the Development forum, too.)

[foamyesque]

I was just about to bring this up. There needs to be an advanced-advanced option that can switch between multiple PID scales to compensate for mass changes at staging. Maybe one that reads the weight of the remaining rocket after staging and switches between two or three PID parameter sets based on that total mass? (May bring this up in the Development forum, too.)

The entire problem is caused by the ASAS caring about mass, that\'s why it overcorrects so hugely for what are very low turn rates on big rockets. If it goes to angular velocity (or better still, attitude relative to horizon!) that becomes a nil issue and all you need to do is get an ASAS tuned for the amount of control authority you\'ll have.

[Capt'n Skunky]

Would it be better if the diameter of the part increased with it\'s power?

For light control, you use a 1m SAS on your 1m stage, a 2m SAS on your 2m stage, and the big boy on the 3m stage.

That way as you lose each stage, control is reduced accordingly. Or would having that many multiple SAS units be a bad thing?

Arrr!

Capt\'n Skunky

[foamyesque]

Would it be better if the diameter of the part increased with it\'s power?

For light control, you use a 1m SAS on your 1m stage, a 2m SAS on your 2m stage, and the big boy on the 3m stage.

That way as you lose each stage, control is reduced accordingly. Or would having that many multiple SAS units be a bad thing?

Arrr!

Capt\'n Skunky

It would be. Here\'s the issue: ASAS uses angular momentum to determine the strength of its response; it effectively tries to bring it to 0. The control parameters in the .cfg are how strongly the ASAS unit responds to a given amount of angular momentum. With me so far?

Now, ASAS doesn\'t apply force directly itself, like the old SAS modules did. It uses whatever control systems you\'ve got on the rocket, ones that you have (if you\'re designing reasonably! 8) ) set up to give you control authority throughout the flight, right? That means you should be able to steer your starting stage with small taps for small corrections and larger swings for stronger control, right? A smooth, analog process, especially with a stick (or precision controls).

However, ASAS sees these big angular momentum changes due to large mass, and so, unless your gain is very small so that it ignores them, thinks the rocket is out of control and fires all your control systems full blast. Because you\'ve got enough CA to make your rocket drivable, this causes it to pass back through the plane, whereupon the ASAS fires them all full blast again in reverse. The net result is that you have a rocket that might be going in a straight line but that burns through its RCS fuel like crazy, looks like a caffeine addict, or quite possibly (in the case of spaceplanes primarily because of their much larger control forces) tears itself apart,

So, for a large and heavy rocket, for smooth control response, you want a very low gain ASAS system to avoid that. But then you have a new problem: Suppose you drop your first stage off; suddenly your rocket is both much lighter and much shorter, and so there\'s much less angular momentum for the ASAS to respond to. That means that it no longer corrects anywhere near as strongly as it did for the same gain-- but a bunch of your control systems just vanished with that stage, too. Now, the softer commands are being sent to something with, say, around the same amount of control authority; that means your rocket doesn\'t correct as quickly.

That means your ASAS control may now be too soft and unable to maintain a given attitude or even kill spin properly. It\'s the opposite problem; for a lighter, smaller rocket, you want the ASAS to respond strongly to small changes in angular momentum, hence have a higher gain.

Unfortunately, ASAS outputs seem to be additive. That means having a high-gain ASAS at the top of the rocket to control your light terminal stages will result in having far, far too much gain for your early flight, and adding multiple ASAS units lower down will only make it worse. They ain\'t magic torque machines like the old SAS.

I am looking into the possibility of creating ASAS modules that respond to angular momentum in reverse so that you CAN add extras to the machine and have gain rise as you stage, but so far progress has been minimal.