Why doesn't this rotor blade design fly?

[sledgeweb]

This thing spins crazy fast, but it doesn't even try to take off. When the fuel runs out, it just winds down and stays perfectly in place. I know Scott Manley was able to get a copter design working in vanilla KSP, so I'm just wondering what kind of aerodynamics worked for him that isn't work in this style of design? I've tried with wing parts and structural parts.

[LostElement]

First, I do not believe those create lift.

Check the lift Icon, is it even there? Try using wings instead.

[OtherDalfite]

Yeah, for whatever reason the devs chose to only give certain parts lift aspects rather than all of them. If you want lift, I'm afraid you'll have to use the wings from the wings tab in the VAB.

[Liowen]

Well I am not sure if KSP has true to life physics or not in this regard, but since the engine are only on their side it would only spin in that direction from my best guess. If you put them at a 45 degree angle it might work, but that is a mighty big might. Interesting concept though!

[kiwi1960]

Inertia is a silly beast....

In order to make that fly, even with new wings, you would have to keep the centre part steady, rather like a helicopter with its main engine giving lift, but the tail rotor stopping it from spinning....

I'm pretty sure Scott Manley did a video on this.....

[sledgeweb]

Inertia is a silly beast....

In order to make that fly, even with new wings, you would have to keep the centre part steady, rather like a helicopter with its main engine giving lift, but the tail rotor stopping it from spinning....

I'm pretty sure Scott Manley did a video on this.....

Ahhh. Interesting, hadn't thought of it that way. Thank you. So, in real life, this wouldn't fly either because the body is rotation with it? I'll try some modifications. I was thinking of those toys you spin in your hand that have a propeller at the top, on top of basically a stick, and when you let go they fly up even though the whole thing is rotating.

[Killerdude8]

Those parts do not generate lift, You need to use actual wing pieces.

[Whackjob]

Why wouldn't the whole thing fly if it were spinning? Lift doesn't care. Lift likes lift. If there's lift, lift will lift.

[r4pt0r]

The problem is that ksp doesnt recognize aerodynamics yet.even if you built an airfoil out of those panels "since its not a wing part" it wont generate lift.

[Galacticruler]

as many have said, you'll want to use something like wing connectors; nice, flat and rectangular.

[CalculusWarrior]

Why wouldn't the whole thing fly if it were spinning? Lift doesn't care. Lift likes lift. If there's lift, lift will lift.

Well said, noble Whackjob. I was thinking of maple tree seeds; they spin and while they don't actually increase their height, they do fall slower than if they were not spinning.

[Traches]

I think that FAR would make it work. Can't say it would work well, but it would probably work.

[pantner]

but flat rectangular objects don't create lift in real life, so it wouldn't work in KSP.

Unless those are angled, hard to tell from the pic.

[r4pt0r]

but you should get lift if its moving forward at an angle. stick your hand out a car window and tilt it

[Anuanu]

This thing spins crazy fast, but it doesn't even try to take off. When the fuel runs out, it just winds down and stays perfectly in place. I know Scott Manley was able to get a copter design working in vanilla KSP, so I'm just wondering what kind of aerodynamics worked for him that isn't work in this style of design? I've tried with wing parts and structural parts.

Simple question, simple answer, Its a game. Have a wonderful day!

[MrUberGr]

Works perfectly! Will go up to 155m!

[pantner]

but you should get lift if its moving forward at an angle. stick your hand out a car window and tilt it

if you are talking to me, I point you to the last sentence of my post...

Unless those are angled, hard to tell from the pic.

[Traches]

but flat rectangular objects don't create lift in real life, so it wouldn't work in KSP.

Unless those are angled, hard to tell from the pic.

You didn't look at the pic that close then-- they're angled.

[allmhuran]

The rotor definitely does not need to spin independently of the craft to generate lift, but as others have said, you do need lifting surfaces (wings).

[sledgeweb]

Thanks for the feedback, got it working!

[DrMonte]

You definitely need FAR mod installed. I saw planes build from structural plates. Default aerodynamics physics are awful.

[rpayne88]

but flat rectangular objects don't create lift in real life, so it wouldn't work in KSP.

Unless those are angled, hard to tell from the pic.

Yes they do. Planes generate lift two ways. The first is burnolli's (I can never spell his name) principle. The other is Newton's third law: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The "rotor" are forcing air down an inclined plane. This force produces and equal and opposite reaction, which should, in theory, produce lift. The thing is, Newton's third law doesn't produce enough lift to overcome the force of gravity.

[Umlüx]

1. use wings
2. spin it really fast
3. ???
4. Profit!!

[DrMonte]

1. use wings

2. spin it really fast

3. ???

4. Profit!!

Poor Kerbal.

Are you sure that engines are not rotated and are not producing vertical trust? The same question might go for the sledgeweb for his last design.

[DexterBelgium]

The fact that you made that contraption manned is awful! Though the fact that we still don't know what kerbalbarf looks like amuses me...