Come back old ASAS - all is forgiven!

[CptNuts]

I just threw a really quick plane together, tried to make it a ssto spaceplane (which i still cannot design XD) reached 23000 Meters and i have to say, none ( like ZERO!) of my designs worked out so perfectly (well except for that ssto spaceplane thing, i seam to be incompetent in that matter XD ) in the first iteration

this one flew like a charm, it flew level on the horizon line with the new asas and sas, i had one ASAS Unit and two SAS Units and as many control surfaces as i could cram on the back of wings in the plane, maybe that helped. I have to admit though that the nose pitched down when i roled or yawed, but i have not enough knowledge and experience in aerodynamics to say if just my design is flawed, or this is just normal with ksps aerodynamics simulation. i could even set it down on the runway without any problems. After that 30 minutes of really calm airflight i can only say, I like the new system, never had so less trouble with a plane on its maiden flight

On the other hand, i haven't flown many plane before, and i really haven't bothered with planes so much, i guess people who are used to the behaviour of the old asas in their plane designs have to pretty much learn everything anew, wich can be pretty frustrating

[Giggleplex777]

It's even worse on probes. You have constantly fix roll, yaw, and pitch during the gravity turn.

[giltirn]

Why does my symmetrical spaceplane constantly turn while under thrust (in vacuum)? It's virtually impossible to do precision maneuvers when you are constantly fighting to hold a course. I thought the improved SAS was supposed to be better!?

[tssn1611]

It's even worse on probes. You have constantly fix roll, yaw, and pitch during the gravity turn.

Do you think continuing to complain is going to get it changed any quicker? If this is bothering you that much, maybe do something not KSP-related for the evening?

My guess is that the issue is a combination of some sort of phantom torque (a bug) and peoples' expectations of what SAS should do. If there is a bug, I'm sure Squad will get it sorted out, and there will be a patch in the next couple days. Peoples' expectations ... well that's more of a philosophical question that I'm not going to pretend there's a correct answer to.

I should note that I haven't played 0.21 myself yet. I'll attempt to post a video, per Ted's request if I see any issues.

Edited July 25, 2013 by tssn1611

[RocketPilot573]

I'll put this into a simple before-after review of my experiences:

Gravity Turns:

Before: lean over slowly and then activate SAS: ship stops leaning, achieves spaceflight.

After: leave SAS on, lean over, ship continues leaning way more than needed, begins to roll. Fight it into appropriate place, and it leans over again. Fight it back, cycle SAS, ship begins to move in complete wrong direction (towards vertical). Continue fighting all the way up to orbit.

That is worse. I am expending more effort on more pointless busywork. Constantly pressing A and D where I should really be focusing on other things is not an upgrade. At all.

Maneuvering in space:

Before: slowly point onto node, activate SAS, wait five seconds for full adjustment then warp to burn, where I do absolutely nothing because the ship remains pointed along the node.

After: slowly point onto node, activate SAS. Ship continues to drift, and comes to a stop several degrees off the node. Activate fine tune controls and make tiny taps until I am on the node, then activate Time acceleration to stop SAS messing it up. Come out of warp at burn point. During burn, must repeatedly correct for SAS doing naff-all to stay pointed.

This.Is.Worse. I should be able to make my ship be pointed in the right direction without drifiting, and not have to exploit the fact that time warp puts physics on rails to do that.

Stations.

Before: SAS is useless, and just creates constant vibrations. RCS would just be wasted. Exploit time warp to orientate stations.

After: move station into correct position, activate SAS, station comes to a stop about 30 degrees off of where SAS was activated, where it should be facing. Huh. Better just use time warp.

Conclusion: SAS is now avionics package in disguise, but is also heavier and requires electricity. Manila input is constantly required to maintain heading. Fun fun fun!

I'm not coming back to .21 till this changes, or till mechjeb is back. Snazzy new parts are not worth this nonsense.

EXACTLY!! You got it spot on.

[RoboRay]

I like the new SAS, although it behaves more like the old Avionics Package on steroids than the old ASAS. But I often used Avionics on my craft instead of ASAS anyway, as it makes landing a lot easier.

In some 0.21 test rocket flights, I found that I can more or less fly a real gravity-turn now (no, not the regular manual-controlled turn that 99% of the people around here inaccurately call gravity-turns, but a real one where you make a slight nudge to start the motion, then gravity pulls the rocket gracefully through the rest of the turn during your ascent). It's almost one-touch of the controls to orbit, but I found myself adjusting pitch a bit, chasing apoapsis to achieve a continuous burn to circular orbit without needing a separate circularization-burn.

Translating on RCS, even with imperfect balance, SAS does snap the orientation back to the locked heading and doesn't waste monoprop doing it.

The new SAS isn't a perfect upgrade, but it's a serious improvement. I saw none of the random rotation that other people are reporting, other than some very minor shifts that were easily corrected with a little nudge of the stick. You have to actually fly the ascent, not set an attitude and forget it about anymore, but I use a joystick and that makes the tiny adjustments easy. Once I departed the atmosphere, they flew perfectly straight.

With a keyboard, I concede that it might be harder. But if you're using on/off buttons to steer, you're doing things the hard way anyway.

Edited July 25, 2013 by RoboRay

[Whackjob]

EXACTLY!! You got it spot on.

Except it isn't affecting everyone like that. I'm wondering if there wasn't a mod everyone was using pre-patch that boogered things up. Have you guys tried a fresh reinstall, see if that fixes it?

[Guest]

Except it isn't affecting everyone like that. I'm wondering if there wasn't a mod everyone was using pre-patch that boogered things up. Have you guys tried a fresh reinstall, see if that fixes it?

I removed my old Steam folder after uninstalling, then pulled the update. I'm running bone stock right now.

[Levelord]

I love the new SAS, although it behaves more like the old Avionics Package on steroids than the old ASAS. In some test rocket flights, I found that I can more or less fly a real gravity-turn now (no, not the regular manual-controlled turn that 99% of the people around here call gravity-turns, but a real one where you make a slight nudge to start the motion, then gravity pulls the rocket gracefully through the rest of the turn during your ascent).

Can't you already fly a real gravity-turn by simply not putting an SAS package on your rocket?

Manually fly upwards, nudge the controls and let the rocket tilt under it's own weight. The point that the rocket still does this even with SAS on just shows that the SAS works as if you didn't install it in the first place. It can't even hold a heading while in a stable orbit.

Also you're using an avionics package. :I

[Giggleplex777]

Do you think continuing to complain is going to get it changed any quicker? If this is bothering you that much, maybe do something not KSP-related for the evening?

My guess is that the issue is a combination of some sort of phantom torque (a bug) and peoples' expectations of what SAS should do. If there is a bug, I'm sure Squad will get it sorted out, and there will be a patch in the next couple days. Peoples' expectations ... well that's more of a philosophical question that I'm not going to pretend there's a correct answer to.

I should note that I haven't played 0.21 myself yet. I'll attempt to post a video, per Ted's request if I see any issues.

I was just adding to PwnedDuck's post.

[Sapphire]

Okay, now I'm starting to have troubles too. Out in deep space for the first time since the patch, and I can't make my longer maneuvering burns without the ship sliding slowly out of alignment. Very annoying.

EDIT: It's an OCTO probe with an Inline Reaction Wheel and an Inline Advanced Stabilizer.

[mtsp]

Tried again, but I'm having nothing but trouble with new ASAS. It doesn't hold a heading my planes seem to enjoy doing flips. IMO this is a game breaking change and squad should address it sooner rather than later.

[mdogfizzle]

Is anyone having trouble with the RCS? For me it just doesn't use the RCS ports I have.

[FleetAdmiralJ]

I don't know if this will help or if it's already been mentioned, but I found on the rocket that the "medium reaction wheels" didn't do much to actively keep my rocket in line, but the medium advanced stabilizer DID. Much like how before SAS didn't keep my rocket in line but the ASAS did. Perhaps make sure you're using the right one? I never could figure out the difference between SAS and ASAS. Looks like the difference between reaction wheels and "advanced stabilizer" might be the same.

[Guest]

I was watching the video I made for ASAS troubleshooting and I realized something: Where the old ASAS did all the over-correcting, it is now the pilot that must do all the over-correcting in order to work with the new system. That's pretty damn annoying.

Toggling the ASAS on and off helps reduce the tendency to drift, as other have said; it was my impression from videos that we wouldn't have to toggle the controls anymore.

I'm off to record the video again, this time I'll leave the ASAS on the entire trip, stage separation and all.

[Nodrak]

My plane's doing back flips with SAS.

And this is the Aeris 3A

All the posts in this thread about planes not flying properly have poorly designed planes... That is all.

I just took the 3A out for a spin, works wonders. The plane itself flys very forward, and it almost impossible to make unstable unless you are mashing the controls to 100% for over a second. The SAS system keeps the heading fine, and keeps the non controlled axis where it can, depending on what control surfaces are not being used. The Aeris 3A for example is missing the ability to pitch and roll at the same time because of of the lack of proper surface controls. This is not an issue normally, because you aim to design a balanced craft where you do not need 2 or 3 axis corrections at the same time. If your craft is imbalanced in a way that it is not able to be corrected by the available control surfaces (either by bad design, or by inducing instability for testing), then SAS won't help it.

I forced the Areis 3A into the position it is in in your shot, going 200 m/s, and ASAS pitched right around and back to where it took over control from me.

And your off-thrust rocket is not flying straight because of the Probe Core on it having low torque, engine trust vectoring range is too small for that stuff in ksp.

The only problem I currently see with the SAS system, is that it should expect high torque requirement corrections after you make a high torque manual change.

[boxman]

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.

I was only SPECULATING not claiming anything at all. And I know the torque is in the pod, but that torque has now been lowered according to what i have heard. I should have been more clear and said SAS/reaction wheels. But again this was only speculation and no claims from me. I just find it odd how this is only a problem for some people which is why I asked that question.

[Jason_25]

I was hoping to get some clarification on whether ASAS/SAS is able to manipulate control surfaces like it used to? I have tried every available one including the SAS/ASAS from the previous version and the control surfaces are not turning.

[Giggleplex777]

All the posts in this thread about planes not flying properly have poorly designed planes... That is all.

I just took the 3A out for a spin, works wonders. The plane itself flys very forward, and it almost impossible to make unstable unless you are mashing the controls to 100% for over a second. The SAS system keeps the heading fine, and keeps the non controlled axis where it can, depending on what control surfaces are not being used. The Aeris 3A for example is missing the ability to pitch and roll at the same time because of of the lack of proper surface controls. This is not an issue normally, because you aim to design a balanced craft where you do not need 2 or 3 axis corrections at the same time. If your craft is imbalanced in a way that it is not able to be corrected by the available control surfaces (either by bad design, or by inducing instability for testing), then SAS won't help it.

I forced the Areis 3A into the position it is in in your shot, going 200 m/s, and ASAS pitched right around and back to where it took over control from me.

And your off-thrust rocket is not flying straight because of the Probe Core on it having low torque, engine trust vectoring range is too small for that stuff in ksp.

The only problem I currently see with the SAS system, is that it should expect high torque requirement corrections after you make a high torque manual change.

It flips when apply a small amount of pitch. It mainly happens away from KSC.

[boxman]

This.

What is the point of SAS if not to hold heading? If it won't use the tools available what is the point of even turning it on?

And here is the odd thing.. It does hold heading for some of us like me. I was able to complete let go of controls and it would stay on that exact heading with hardly any wobble at all. Whatever is causing this issue seems to only be affecting some people/ships.

[Shadoworgon]

And here is the odd thing.. It does hold heading for some of us like me. I was able to complete let go of controls and it would stay on that exact heading with hardly any wobble at all. Whatever is causing this issue seems to only be affecting some people/ships.

yeah same SAS (not sure about ASAS yet havent touched it) is completely perfect for me, i love everything about it

[FleetAdmiralJ]

It's even worse on probes. You have constantly fix roll, yaw, and pitch during the gravity turn.

Just launched a basic probe with the advanced stabalizer. I had very few problems. It would float some during the gravity turn, but only in the direction I was trying to turn. It clearly doesn't "stick" as fast, at least during gravity turns, than the last one, but it settles fast enough.

[Eric S]

It's even worse on probes. You have constantly fix roll, yaw, and pitch during the gravity turn.

Be aware that unlike command pods, probe cores don't have a flight computer. If you don't have a flight computer, then turning on SAS does nothing but kill most of your manual control.

[carazvan]

Ok after much testing for me at least I think I have identified the 3 key issues that current 0.21 ASAS has:

Problems

1) After setting a course ASAS doesn't always hold it if it's not level flight -it seems like the ASAS is just a little too slow to react

2) Manually inputing direction to ASAS turn both other control directions to 0* - this is likely a bug since it was stated that new ASAS shouldn't interfere with the other axes you were not touching

3) After manual input to a direction in ASAS control moves it to 0 then slowly tries to move it back to a direction to counter - this is especially bad for trying to do gravity turns or pitch adjustments to precise locations

Solutions

1) After looking at the inputs I think a 2x adjustment to the input it provides should be enough to stop this from showing up and it shouldn't make for a huge change to fuel use

2) Do what was said where only the axis you touch get changed others keep under ASAS control

3) The 0.20 system isn't great here either to where the needle moves like crazy around the direction once you let go (wobble cause most likely) but maybe instead of starting with 0* as the default search for the ASAS start with the last position of the control input.

And an album to show off how problems can arise ... didn't mean for it to be night/day between 0.21 and 0.20 but it does work nicely ... look at the bottom left control surfaces input and at the bottom center for the navball:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited July 25, 2013 by carazvan

[Death Engineering]

I'm totally feelin' the love for the new update. I just did an Apollo style Mun mission and my craft developed in 0.20 flew perfectly.. even better in 0.21 than it did in 0.20. I also flew a monster asparagus lifter and had absolutely zero problems.

Not saying I'm doing anything better or I'm a better pilot, just saying it feels a lot more realistic and was even more fun to fly. (Never mechjebbed, for what its worth).