[1.0.2] B9 Aerospace | Procedural Parts 0.40 | Updated 09.06.15

[Grease1991]

And the Kraken bows it head to your knowledge. that solved the issue.

[mechanicH]

@blowfish Dude!!!!  My mind is blown away, Your like a Wizard or something. Amazing fix/Find.

[blowfish]

The answer is usually in the logs.  It may take a bit of experience to know what to look for... 

[Bit Fiddler]

can we get the adjustments like length and thickness etc. to accept text input?  so in addition to clicking the slider along we can just enter the exact value we want?

 

and secondly when ever I hit "J" on a control surface to edit the properties the control surface reverts all rotation I have done to it.  so I have to adjust the size a bit, then re-rotate to see if it is correct, then hit "J" and dump rotation to adjust it a bit more, then re-rotate it to check size...

[AtomicIrishman]

On 7/12/2017 at 2:25 PM, blowfish said:

Yeah, in AoATech/Parts/Aero/TestFin/TESTFin.cfg, you should see a node:

@PART[AoAero.TESTFin]:FOR[FerramAerospaceResearch] { ... }

Change it to

@PART[AoAero.TESTFin]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch] { ... }

 

I seem to be having the same J menu issue where I hit j and nothing happens, but I do not have AoA tech intsalled, im using the latest possible version of B9Procedural on 1.3, I could add my log but Its a mountain of mods and its probably one or more causing that issue.

[blowfish]

7 hours ago, AtomicIrishman said:

I seem to be having the same J menu issue where I hit j and nothing happens, but I do not have AoA tech intsalled, im using the latest possible version of B9Procedural on 1.3, I could add my log but Its a mountain of mods and its probably one or more causing that issue.

Well I really have no clue what typically causes this mod to break, I'm just good at reading logs

[DarkOwl57]

Is there a 1.3 edition? Or at least 1.2.2?

[zeineizoku]

On 7/26/2017 at 3:19 PM, DarkOwl57 said:

Is there a 1.3 edition? Or at least 1.2.2?

CKAN Seems to have a 1.3 of this and it is functional I can attest to that.

 

As for my question from an experienced user. I am starting a Career Series, and I have dug around and I cannot find the Proc wing by bac9 or Crzyrndm in the Stock Tech Tree or in the CTT. Am I just missing it or will I need to add the parts with a patch?

[ShiningNeedle]

so any fix on the ui not popping up with 2.8.1?

[kcs123]

6 hours ago, ShiningNeedle said:

so any fix on the ui not popping up with 2.8.1?

You will have more luck asking in new thread:

 

[mindseyemodels]

do they come in black? if not you should look into that because some of us love building stealth looking planes I should also tell this to the other dude who made procedural wings just to let him know that stealth is an option

 

[mindseyemodels]

oh one thing I never realized this needs is procedural structural plates just remove the lift values because I hate going through the hassle of aligning center of lift to center of mass because it usually makes my ship a million times heavier than it was supposed to be(and as a result a hell of a lot slower) and usually has more greebling than the millennium falcon(that is like 98% greebling) if you don't know what greebling is its parts with no purpose other than breaking up a smooth surface again see: millennium falcon https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MDGeWU_Pb2hIh0OZENqDaUOP2Oc=/0x0:8094x5587/1200x800/filters:focal(3335x1699:4629x2993)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/56460377/75192_Front_Comp_1_.0.jpg you can see how much of it the falcon has

[7thGalaxy]

Hi,

Can anyone think of a reason why this wouldn't work with MSI Infernal Robotics?  I've got autostrut turned off, but the wings don't want to swing (it works fine with stock wings too, but not if I tweakscale them).

 

Thanks

 

 

[NIBARR]

Hello, I've been having issues with my planes lifting off the ground when I use the Procedural wings. I'm not talking just about lift, but direction change as well. For example, I made a relatively large surface area of a fighter jet plane. I am on the runway well over 100 m/s and I rotate the stick yet it seems to lift off the ground as if it is lifting a building. I checked with my stock wings to see if it is related wit my FAR mod or my BDArmory mod, yet it lifts and changes direction really quickly. I could Pull more than 15 Gs in less than a second vs with my Procedural wings.

At over 100m/s and this guy seems to struggle at a moderately high angle of attack. Note the navball and the direction on the plane in relation to the angle of attack.

At an extremely high AOA.

I tried to change direction only to get into a spin. I recovered from the spin, but I didn't stop falling.

In comparison with stock parts

Traveling at a lower speed yet still pulls more gs than the above at takeoff.

Seems to maneuver beautifully, pulling +15 gs. Very high alpha, but definitely changes direction.

Is this a FAR issue or a value change I have to do on the Procedural wings? The wing seems pretty big compared to the plane.

Edited November 29, 2017 by NIBARR

[kcs123]

have you checked weight of whole craft with and without B9PW ?

You need to adjust rear wheel position because COM and COL were shifted in comparison to stock wings.

[NIBARR]

8 hours ago, kcs123 said:

have you checked weight of whole craft with and without B9PW ?

You need to adjust rear wheel position because COM and COL were shifted in comparison to stock wings.

That seems to be the issue. It is a whopping 39 tonnes. My stock is incredibly lighter than the B9PW. I managed to reduce the weight by dropping fuel and reducing the density of the wings. However it breaks apart like a dandelion upon takeoff. It lifts off, then the wings break off, or really just explodes. Is there a way to make the wings stronger but still retain its weight reduction?

[kcs123]

12 hours ago, NIBARR said:

Is there a way to make the wings stronger but still retain its weight reduction?

Most probably is, but I didn't inspected config files to pinpoint you to exact line in config file. My "educated" guess would be to try with wing base weight. FAR probably read that and use additional multiplier in weight/strength slider. Weight in PW is probably based on density or area, perhaps it weight more than it should with comparison to stock parts. Maybe it is done for a reason to balance out other benefits of PW and have better heat resistance. It is meant to be used for space craft after all.

[capi3101]

I use FAR and PW all the time, but as a rule I'm not making fighter replicas. I'd try KJR - another one of Ferram's mods - if you're not already. It's possible the PW are flexing a bit more than the stock, resulting in the observed behavior at high gees. I use KJR and I don't have trouble with the wings set as low as 0.3 on the mass; one of my planes pulled ten gees just yesterday. You also might want to double-check your settings on your control surfaces; make sure you've got your ailerons set to 100 roll and 0 for everything else, and so forth with your other control surfaces. Probably not the cause of the issue, but it doesn't hurt to check. Only other thing I can think to do is compare your FAR stability numbers between the two planes.

[Darkfedor]

Hello, I want to make huge wing but the max are 16m long. How can i update the plugin too increase the values ?

[capi3101]

On 12/15/2017 at 9:15 AM, Darkfedor said:

Hello, I want to make huge wing but the max are 16m long. How can i update the plugin too increase the values ?

I usually just start with a "root wing" part and make it as wide as necessary, then tack another wing part with a root edge length/width the same as the tip of the root part. Mine usually don't go out to the maximum length but there's nothing really keeping you from doing so. Worth a try anyway. Might want to make sure you've got a mod like KJR in play to keep the wing stiff enough to actually be usable at extreme lengths.

[EricSan]

https://imgur.com/a/O4XKx

So I'm trying to make an all in one spaceplane/upper stage loosely based on the x-37 and I'm confused as to how to set my control surfaces (e.g. pitch, yaw, roll, etc.) The tail fins are all moving and each delta wing has a single aileron. Should all three sliders be set to 100%? should some surfaces have certain sliders turned to 0? or even reversed?

My Issue is that when I press E to roll right my nose ends up pointing to the left which in turn makes the craft rebound and roll aggressively to the left (when I hold E it just keeps making it worse) However I CAN steer my craft fairly well just using my yaw controls (e.g. when I press D to yaw right my nose goes right slightly, which then makes the craft aggressively roll left briefly then my craft auto corrects and banks right pretty smoothly) It works but it feels awkward and gives me the feeling I have my controls set up incorrectly.

Side note: What does the AoA% slider do?

Edited January 20, 2018 by EricSan

[kcs123]

5 hours ago, EricSan said:

https://imgur.com/a/O4XKx

So I'm trying to make an all in one spaceplane/upper stage loosely based on the x-37 and I'm confused as to how to set my control surfaces (e.g. pitch, yaw, roll, etc.) The tail fins are all moving and each delta wing has a single aileron. Should all three sliders be set to 100%? should some surfaces have certain sliders turned to 0? or even reversed?

My Issue is that when I press E to roll right my nose ends up pointing to the left which in turn makes the craft rebound and roll aggressively to the left (when I hold E it just keeps making it worse) However I CAN steer my craft fairly well just using my yaw controls (e.g. when I press D to yaw right my nose goes right slightly, which then makes the craft aggressively roll left briefly then my craft auto corrects and banks right pretty smoothly) It works but it feels awkward and gives me the feeling I have my controls set up incorrectly.

Side note: What does the AoA% slider do?

You need to set slider to 0% for authority that certain control surfaces would not use. For example, vertical tail surface should have only yaw to 100%, pitch and roll should be at 0%. On elevators pitch should be 100%, other controls to 0% and so on.

AoA% is mostly for pitching on certain control surfaces. In flight, it will change angle based on current craft AoA. Purpose of those could be explained with comparison to real life aircrafts. For example, SU-27 have leading edges on wings that automatically lower down on high AoA. That helps pilot to control craft better on high AoA, raise AoA when stall would occur and when stall occur it helps to predict how craft would behave, so pilot can recover craft quickly from stall and control it, instead to get into uncontrolable spin like other crafts without that feature would do.

BTW, what version of KSP you are using ? Or you have modified stock bar placement ?

[EricSan]

6 hours ago, kcs123 said:

You need to set slider to 0% for authority that certain control surfaces would not use. For example, vertical tail surface should have only yaw to 100%, pitch and roll should be at 0%. On elevators pitch should be 100%, other controls to 0% and so on.

AoA% is mostly for pitching on certain control surfaces. In flight, it will change angle based on current craft AoA. Purpose of those could be explained with comparison to real life aircrafts. For example, SU-27 have leading edges on wings that automatically lower down on high AoA. That helps pilot to control craft better on high AoA, raise AoA when stall would occur and when stall occur it helps to predict how craft would behave, so pilot can recover craft quickly from stall and control it, instead to get into uncontrolable spin like other crafts without that feature would do.

BTW, what version of KSP you are using ? Or you have modified stock bar placement ?

I'm currently running ro on ksp 1.2.2

What if my tail fins are set on 45 degree angles? Do I set just two of the sliders to 100%?

[EricSan]

Ahh I just found out he technical term for this, it's called a ruddervator, or v tail, or butterfly tail. I'm hoping it will be a viable design as I think the X-37 looks really cool, but perhaps it needs computerized stabilization.

[AccidentalDisassembly]

Anyone else having the issue where control surfaces used as flaps and placed in mirror symmetry don't deploy in the same direction? Just wondering if I've messed something up with my install/version/something or if there's actually a problem.