Do you SAS your Aircraft?

[katateochi]

When you build aircraft, do you put reaction wheels in them?

I don't play with FAR, but I'm interested to hear from both FAR and non-FAR (close?) players.

I do, actually quite a few in large or very fast aircraft. Generally its about 1 reaction wheel per jet engine but on some of my really big SSTOs I've used more.

I find it helps in a number of ways;

- Reducing the impact of flame-out spins, or at least enabling faster correction if you spin out of control.

- It helps compensate for a shift in COM in large aircraft as the fuel is used or when carrying different payloads. This has helped quite a lot with keeping large SSTO's steady during re-entry to the lower atmo and stopping them from tumbling.

- On very high speed craft I've found it helps with maneuverability and just keeping them steady. This is with craft that are so fast (200ms+ at sea level) that large control surfaces cause them to vibrate and judder, with a couple of reaction wheels I can use small control surfaces (and get rid of juddering) and still have control.

But I do feel this is perhaps not strictly plane! I mean real aircraft don't have gyroscopes do they?

What do you think?

[Brotoro]

I've never added reaction wheels to an aircraft, but I certainly use the torque from and cockpits or crew pods it has. I know some people like to disable that torque to just fly with aerodynamic controls.

[NASAFanboy]

Do I sass my aircraft?

Of course I do.

Now do I actually SAS my aircraft?

I do on the initial accleration into orbit, but not on the runway and below 5K meters.

Edited February 24, 2014 by NASAFanboy

[sal_vager]

I've never really thought of using reaction wheels on aircraft, I can see how there would be advantages though, but then my planes don't tend to be very large.

Most real aircraft use gyros for instruments, and some like SOFIA use gyros for stability.

[WhiteKnuckle]

For space planes it's a must for me. Lets you rotate the craft quickly without wasting RCS fuel (so you don't have to carry much of it) or if you run out of RCS you could even pull off a docking maneuver with the main engines if you're good.

[Tank Buddy]

I always just throw one on without thought of how it will affect my plane/SSTO.

[Cakeofruit]

i use it a lot because i play with a keyboard and the sas make softer correction to the flap and stuff.

It's less mess and less imput control from me witch lead to a better flight.

I just speak of rocket and space shuttle.

Under FAR and with plane, SAS is bad ( i'm new to FAR) it tends to wooble like hell !

[FITorion]

Yes. and even then they're almost uncontrollable.

I pretty much don't do airplanes anymore.

[_Aramchek_]

Yes, most real planes have the equivalent of something similar anyway.

[SpaceGremlin]

I find the extra reaction torque to be useful in FAR. Particularly in the upper atmo where control surfaces are less effective.

In FAR I've also found procedural wings/control surfaces to be much more stable under SAS control than stock or B9 wings. They don't flap as much, and I can fine tune them for even better stability.

[regex]

I do, under FAR and stock. It's just a little extra control authority, which can be helpful.

[Silverchain]

I use them sparingly on spaceplanes and rarely on ordinary atmospheric planes.

It can be nice to just wrench the plane around to point where I want it to go, but I try to rely on control surfaces as they're lighter and can provide lift.

[Anton P. Nym]

I usually put a reaction wheel on my spaceplanes, to save on RCS propellant and help with stability in the upper atmosphere when the air's too thin to let the flaps bite in properly.

I very rarely put a reaction wheel on my low-altitude aircraft, though; aerodynamics tend to be enough down in the soup.

I always fly with SAS enabled, however. I'm not a terrible pilot, but I'm not quite good enough an engineer to build a good bird that's both maneuverable and dynamically stable without some fly-by-wire assistance.

-- Steve

[problemecium]

Out the wazoo. Because I like to turn via yaw. And I'm probably also bad at planes.

[Cydonian Monk]

Reaction wheels? No. I also disable them on aircraft cockpits while in the atmosphere. If I don't have enough control authority without them I consider the aircraft design to be fundamentally flawed.

SAS? Yes, I use SAS while flying aircraft, but without the overly strong (and borderline cheatingly so) reaction wheels it can only use thrust vectoring and the control surfaces to maintain a heading.

[SpaceSphereOfDeath]

I don't use SAS on aircraft very often, if it is a SSTO or a airship (I play non-stock) I will use reactionwheels (unless it is a SSTO airship, don't ask.)

[Torham234]

I use FAR.

Generally, I find it a bad idea to actually engage the SAS system in the atmosphere, since it tends to freak out a lot. For SSTO's however, its very useful once you leave the atmosphere. You just have to balance your craft well so that you don't need the sas switched on. Joystick helps a lot.

[RSwordsman]

Below a certain altitude in FAR, I find SAS to conflict with the control surfaces in an unwanted harmonic fashion which makes the plane flap itself to pieces. Once I get into the thinner air around 15-20 kilometers, however, it does come in very handy.

[LethalDose]

Yep, I add SAS modules to all of my aircraft. I will admit that I started the practice before I realized that the command pods had their own reaction wheels, but I've continued to use them.

I use them to strongarm my aircraft into behaving. Heck, I put like 5 of them on my Stock-game VTOL to make landing even remotely feasible after traveling at speed.

Also, I started the practice before I loaded up FAR. I haven't spent a LOT of time with aircraft in FAR, but I think I'll be sticking with it. The few that I have made in FAR shake like crazy, and the SAS modules somewhat mitigates the problem.

[DocMoriarty]

I add them as needed and fly with SAS when needed. There is no real rule. But for example space- and aircraft with VTOL abilities usually get more SAS power. Basically it's a question of the aircrafts total weight and role. Yet i always create my airplanes with CoG sitting right in the geometric center of the tank configuration, so that the aircraft is flyable without SAS throughout it's whole mission if needed. When i fly just for fun a little bit around i usually fly without SAS. When i launch a spaceplane to go into orbit at least the heavy ones (around 14t/rapier) i use SAS during ascend and go do other stuff.

[Vanamonde]

I used to use SAS to smooth out the response to controls. It was like a fly-by-wire system that prevented jerkiness. However, since they revised SAS a few versions back, I can not abide the way SAS turns completely off every time you make the tiniest control input, causing the plane to lurch violently. I REALLY wish they would re-include the old avionics nosecone, which made planes a breeze to fly.

[Lazro]

I used to use SAS to smooth out the response to controls. It was like a fly-by-wire system that prevented jerkiness. However, since they revised SAS a few versions back, I can not abide the way SAS turns completely off every time you make the tiniest control input, causing the plane to lurch violently. I REALLY wish they would re-include the old avionics nosecone, which made planes a breeze to fly.

I believe that they still have the old SAS module included in the game, you just need to edit the config file for the avionics nosecone.

[Vanamonde]

Thanks Lazro, but you are underestimating my incompetence with things like that. I once broke my PC while trying to install a super-easy-do-it-yourself soundcard. If it's not stock, I don't want to mess with it.

[EuSouONumero345]

I don't usually build aircrafts, but most of my rockets have ASAS, some uses the reaction wheel, E.g small orbit-capable rockets, small "go-anywhere" probes(Ion engines).

[Whatshtisthis]

Don't really use reaction wheels on planes unless it's VTOL or really large.

I do fly with SAS activated.