Come back old ASAS - all is forgiven!

[alaskafish]

At first, hate hate hate, but I got used to it. This is a more realistic SAS. I like it because of the challenge, makes it harder = longer fun time.

A little weak, but I don't care. Just gotta learn to add more wings.

My problem is the BUGS! Decouplers don't decouple, certain engines don't provide thrust, parachutes deploy broken, command pods flail if parachute works, etc.

[Merinsan]

I have a hypothesis.

I believe the new SAS is pretty dependent on the physics delta set in the settings. If this is accurate, then every single person having jet SAS trouble has altered those sliders.

Therefore, I ask each of you with SAS trouble to try setting your physics delta slider to center and see if this issue persists. Additionally, those of you without trouble, I ask you slide that slider all the way to the right and left and attempt to replicate.

#EDIT: I'd chip in, but given I didn't touch the jets pre-patch, my opinion of the results will be baseless.

Because that's what people do when they get a new version, adjust settings of the physics?

I know I haven't. And I'd guess upwards of 90% of the people complaining have not.

[ComradeGoat]

You can't, the new SAS is the Avionics Package in disguise. It will only kill rotation, not hold your ship to a certain heading. Maybe sticky keys will help...

How are we supposed to do long interplanetary transfer burns if there is no-longer any heading lock functionality?

[SpaceSylvester]

Have you guys just been hitting the T key to lock in place? That will only dampen control forces - look in the control list. You have to now hit F to have the SAS lock on a certain bearing. Its been working perfectly for me. You hit F to lock the bearing with SAS on, then if you turn, the lock disengages, but SAS still keeps the other axis neutral if you're moving just one. Once you have a new heading, hit F again.

[alaskafish]

Maybe the Dev's can add the old ASAS and keep the new ones. So everyone is happy. Just quickly remake a new texture, and if possible new model.

[Giggleplex777]

Maybe the Dev's can add the old ASAS and keep the new ones. So everyone is happy. Just quickly remake a new texture, and if possible new model.

That was what I said like 5 pages along. -.-

Okay nevermind, that was in a different thread:

I think they should keep the old ASAS and the new one and give us a choice of which one we want to use while building or flying.

Edited July 25, 2013 by Giggleplex777

[Aragosnat]

Have you guys just been hitting the T key to lock in place? That will only dampen control forces - look in the control list. You have to now hit F to have the SAS lock on a certain bearing. Its been working perfectly for me. You hit F to lock the bearing with SAS on, then if you turn, the lock disengages, but SAS still keeps the other axis neutral if you're moving just one. Once you have a new heading, hit F again.

Might have to try that then tosee if it truly works or not.

Edit: Did not work in the least bit. Still went spinning out of control with only one S.A.S. and one A.S.A.S. Looks like I still need 8 more S.A.S. Just to get it to fly stright.

Edited July 25, 2013 by Aragosnat

[Giggleplex777]

Might have to try that then tosee if it truly works or not.

No, F is just: hold to activate SAS or deactivate SAS

[SpaceSylvester]

I swear - hit the F key. It will lock heading. You hit T to engage the system, if you hit F the SAS light blinks. I've done liftoffs without doing that, and it doesn't maintain heading even if I have pressed T.

[Beachernaut]

Note: These are my results, I have no idea what is happening for some of stranger behavior described in this thread. Especially with planes as I've only tested rockets.

I've done a bunch of test flights and observed how ASAS was behaving. I need to correct myself, it is using control surfaces, gimbal, and RCS. The problem is as was brought up before, it's not reacting strong enough or fast enough. The exact opposite of what it was doing before.

Where before when it saw any kind of deviation from the course, it would apply all control in the opposite direction resulting in an over-correction. Which of course it repeated when it passed the heading that it was locked to. Result: Wobble.

ASAS: I've noticed we're a little right of our heading, better correct that.

FULL LEFT!!!!!!

ASAS: I've now noticed we're a little left of our heading, better correct that.

FULL RIGHT!!!!

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Now when it detects that it's off course, it applies opposite control a little bit at a time, and I mean a littttllleeee bit. It will apply stronger force, but by that time, you're pretty much in an uncontrolled spin.

ASAS: I've noticed that we're a little right of our heading, better correct that.

Input Left at .00000001 of available force

ASAS: We're just a bit more right of our heading, better correct that.

Input Left at .00000002 of available force

ASAS: We're now about 45 degrees off our heading, better correct that.

Input Left at .00000005 of available force.

Wash, rinse, repeat

This explains why smaller rockets are just fine, it doesn't take as much force to correct. However, when you get into bigger rockets with bigger payloads, the force required to keep it on course is exponentially more. To the point (as I experienced earlier) that when you get to a couple hundred tons (payload and launch stages), having ASAS is moot because it doesn't apply near the control force needed to stay on course. It's literally the same as not having it at all. Although this is not a big deal for small 1 Kerbal operations to Mun, it has a huge impact on station/base building, and most notably interplanetary missions.

Edited July 25, 2013 by Beachernaut
spelling

[RepoRogue]

How are we supposed to do long interplanetary transfer burns if there is no-longer any heading lock functionality?

I hate to say this but I think Mech Jeb is our only choice now. Which is really unfortunate, because I personally feel Mech Jeb takes the fun out of flying.

[Murmur]

No, the F key works just like it did before, only toggling the ASAS while the key is held, as opposed to the T key which toggles it when it is pressed.

The problems is that the ASAS is barely using any force. If you watch your pitch, yaw and roll indicators with ASAS on, you'll see they hardly ever move. They do move ever so slightly. If you have a rocket that can fly steady while only using a very small percent of your available force, be it RCS, Gimbals, torque etc. etc, then you wont have any issues. However, if your rocket/plane needs more than a few percent of your available force then you will drift and be unable to hold a heading.

This isn't a case of needing more control surfaces, reaction wheels, rcs thrusters or anything like that. It's that the ASAS will not use those things to their fullest capacity.

[Merinsan]

There may also be the issue that the inline reaction wheel (the old ASAS) doesn't have ASAS functionality, only the Advanced S.A.S part does. I think THIS is really what is tripping everyone up. The new SAS does counter forces but it doesn't control surfaces anymore.

Put an ASAS module on your ship (the large one, which is now the only one) and watch it perform normally again.

I just tested that one. It seems it's been pimped. Not only is it an ASAS, but it also has torque. Made a very simple rocket for a sub-orbital flight and it kept it completely stable.

[ComradeGoat]

I swear - hit the F key. It will lock heading. You hit T to engage the system, if you hit F the SAS light blinks. I've done liftoffs without doing that, and it doesn't maintain heading even if I have pressed T.

Tried it. Doesn't work.

[giltirn]

That might mean that your original design was not suited for the new ASAS. You should try to build a new one from scratch like I did which worked perfectly.

The old ASAS was way overkill when it comes to torque so I guess it just cannot keep up with your design.

Will you people PLEASE stop spreading this misconception. ASAS did not ever in the history of the universe add torque to anything!!. Torque only ever came from command pods (and in a much older update, apparently, SAS modules -- read; not ASAS). ASAS was a computer with software that controlled aerodynamic surfaces and RCS as well as command pod torque to maintain the heading of your ship. That's it. In 0.21, command pods and reaction wheels add torque. What is now called SAS does not add torque, it merely uses the command pod/reaction wheel torque, along with RCS and aerodynamic control surfaces to cancel rotation around axes other than the axis upon which the player is trying to turn the vehicle.

[KWilkiePJ]

Loving the new ASAS, took a bit a readjustment, but its much more controllable now, and ship design is key, you got to get that right

[ComradeGoat]

Note: These are my results, I have no idea what is happening for some of stranger behavior described in this thread. Especially with planes as I've only tested rockets.

Actually, a lot of what you say makes sense. The plane I'm having most trouble with is powered in orbit by 2 LV 24-77s. The plane is tiny, but so is the TWR (because the jets do the heavy work). Perhaps it's tuned down so much that it won't gimbal the engines to the extent needed to stabilise the comparatively larger mass of the spaceplane.

Doesn't explain why the thing flies in atmosphere with phantom forces all over the place, but seems plausible for the problems I'm having in space.

[Beachernaut]

Loving the new ASAS, took a bit a readjustment, but its much more controllable now, and ship design is key, you got to get that right

I do partly agree. With smaller rockets it seems to work great after getting used to it, but as you add mass to your rocket, the ASAS is becomes less and less useful.

[RepoRogue]

Will you people PLEASE stop spreading this misconception. ASAS did not ever in the history of the universe add torque to anything!!. Torque only ever came from command pods (and in a much older update, apparently, SAS modules -- read; not ASAS). ASAS was a computer with software that controlled aerodynamic surfaces and RCS as well as command pod torque to maintain the heading of your ship. That's it. In 0.21, command pods and reaction wheels add torque. What is now called SAS does not add torque, it merely uses the command pod/reaction wheel torque, along with RCS and aerodynamic control surfaces to cancel rotation around axes other than the axis upon which the player is trying to turn the vehicle.

Most of your post is correct, except for the last few sentence. The new piece that uses the skin of the old small ASAS module gives both SAS and torque. However, the large ASAS module and Avionics Package still do not provide any torque, and instead just provide SAS.

I'm also pretty sure that when most people in this thread say; "ASAS is not applying enough torque." what they mean is that it's not using enough of the torque provided by reaction wheels and command pods to actually keep the vessel on course.

[ComradeGoat]

Loving the new ASAS, took a bit a readjustment, but its much more controllable now, and ship design is key, you got to get that right

Where "getting that right" appears to mean, "with full rotational symmetry".

Good luck designing a plane with that property.

[Captain Sierra]

Guys, the SAS systems have gotten a massive rollback on aggressiveness, mainly because it was burning through RCS fuel and snapping ships in half. But this means it doesn't bite like it used to. It can holld a heading (if enough control surfaces and/or torque) but it won't snap to a point and rigidly not move whether you fight it or not. For lack of a better description, the new SAS is lazier than yall are used to. This is great for preventing rotation in orbit but in atmosphere, it does need to be more aggressive with the initial application of force.

[Beachernaut]

Actually, a lot of what you say makes sense. The plane I'm having most trouble with is powered in orbit by 2 LV 24-77s. The plane is tiny, but so is the TWR (because the jets do the heavy work). Perhaps it's tuned down so much that it won't gimbal the engines to the extent needed to stabilise the comparatively larger mass of the spaceplane.

Doesn't explain why the thing flies in atmosphere with phantom forces all over the place, but seems plausible for the problems I'm having in space.

I think you may be on to something there. I'm very limited with planes though. I flew a couple.... badly.... then went back to rockets.

It makes sense, more thrust gimbaled is going to have more effect than less thrust when applied to the same mass.

[ComradeGoat]

Guys, the SAS systems have gotten a massive rollback on aggressiveness, mainly because it was burning through RCS fuel and snapping ships in half. But this means it doesn't bite like it used to. It can holld a heading (if enough control surfaces and/or torque)

For the umpteenth time, there is plenty of torque available (gimbals, reaction wheels, even RCS is I turn it on). It takes the tiniest manual adjustment to hold a heading. SAS simply isn't using it.

[Beachernaut]

I'm also pretty sure that when most people in this thread say; "ASAS is not applying enough torque." what they mean is that it's not using enough of the torque provided by reaction wheels and command pods to actually keep the vessel on course.

Pretty much exactly what I mean if you add in gimbaling, flight surfaces, and RCS.

[Cashen]

I might catch some flak for this but...