Difference between revisions of "Talk:Aeris 4A"

From Kerbal Space Program Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Improved canards: new section)
 
(Improved canards: Reply)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
Hi, I tried to create a screenshot with all modifications including the [[Advanced Canard]]s, but I was barely able to lift up, and unable to maintain ascend. Reverted the canards and got back to the [[AV-R8 Winglet]]s I did it in the first try. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>&#91;[[User talk:XZise|talk]]&#93;</small> 14:30, 16 November 2013 (CST)
 
Hi, I tried to create a screenshot with all modifications including the [[Advanced Canard]]s, but I was barely able to lift up, and unable to maintain ascend. Reverted the canards and got back to the [[AV-R8 Winglet]]s I did it in the first try. — [[User:XZise|xZise]] <small>&#91;[[User talk:XZise|talk]]&#93;</small> 14:30, 16 November 2013 (CST)
 +
 +
: There will be an element of personal taste over what should be considered improved handling, but I find the [[Advanced Canard]]s work well for me, with the plane almost wanting to leap off the runway at 80–100m/s, with just a quick touch of pitch up control.  When I go much further with my modifications, to my increased fuel capacity version, the change to the Advanced Canards becomes pretty much essential.  My canards are attached at their default rotation, unlike the supplied tilted/inclined attachment of the AV-R8s.
 +
: The increased lift provided by them does mean that you need to move the main wings back fairly significantly.  I moved my entire tank+engine+wing subassembly back, such that the [[FL-T400 Fuel Tank|FL-T400s]] are approx level with the [[Mk1 Fuselage - Jet Fuel|Mk1 Fuselage]].  Both of my large and small wing sections are in the same relative position to the FL-T400s.  I feel that the handling is much more like the high power to weight ratio, slightly unstable, delta-wing fighter-type aircraft that's visually represented by the Aeris 4.  Here's the list of changes in my design shown in the screenshot:
 +
: [[File:Murph's Aeris 4B.png|thumb|Murph's Aeris 4B]]
 +
: * Rocket engine changed to the Aerospike.
 +
: * Inline Advanced Stabilized removed.
 +
: * Nose wheel relocated under the docking port.
 +
: * 1k battery added in front of the RCS tank.
 +
: * Single flat solar panel on top of RCS tank.
 +
: * Engine+wing subassembly moved significantly backwards.
 +
: * Nose and tail canards swapped in.
 +
: * Struts from the slight bulge in the cockpit where the canards are attached, back to the front of the wings.
 +
: My CoL is very slightly forward of my CoM when fully loaded with fuel, which I think helps just a little once the tanks are closer to empty, on re-entry, approach, and landing.
 +
: It does require a fairly careful use of the controls, as it can quite easily go into a spin if you allow the nose to stray too far from the prograde vector.  That is quite realistic for the aircraft style, in my opinion.  With care and skill, however, it's both very responsive, and very controllable.  It is stable on both SAS and MechJeb autopilot, as long as you are stable and close to prograde when you engage the autopilot.
 +
: --[[User:Murph|Murph]] ([[User talk:Murph|talk]]) 22:20, 16 November 2013 (CST)

Revision as of 04:20, 17 November 2013

Improved canards

Hi, I tried to create a screenshot with all modifications including the Advanced Canards, but I was barely able to lift up, and unable to maintain ascend. Reverted the canards and got back to the AV-R8 Winglets I did it in the first try. — xZise [talk] 14:30, 16 November 2013 (CST)

There will be an element of personal taste over what should be considered improved handling, but I find the Advanced Canards work well for me, with the plane almost wanting to leap off the runway at 80–100m/s, with just a quick touch of pitch up control. When I go much further with my modifications, to my increased fuel capacity version, the change to the Advanced Canards becomes pretty much essential. My canards are attached at their default rotation, unlike the supplied tilted/inclined attachment of the AV-R8s.
The increased lift provided by them does mean that you need to move the main wings back fairly significantly. I moved my entire tank+engine+wing subassembly back, such that the FL-T400s are approx level with the Mk1 Fuselage. Both of my large and small wing sections are in the same relative position to the FL-T400s. I feel that the handling is much more like the high power to weight ratio, slightly unstable, delta-wing fighter-type aircraft that's visually represented by the Aeris 4. Here's the list of changes in my design shown in the screenshot:
Murph's Aeris 4B
* Rocket engine changed to the Aerospike.
* Inline Advanced Stabilized removed.
* Nose wheel relocated under the docking port.
* 1k battery added in front of the RCS tank.
* Single flat solar panel on top of RCS tank.
* Engine+wing subassembly moved significantly backwards.
* Nose and tail canards swapped in.
* Struts from the slight bulge in the cockpit where the canards are attached, back to the front of the wings.
My CoL is very slightly forward of my CoM when fully loaded with fuel, which I think helps just a little once the tanks are closer to empty, on re-entry, approach, and landing.
It does require a fairly careful use of the controls, as it can quite easily go into a spin if you allow the nose to stray too far from the prograde vector. That is quite realistic for the aircraft style, in my opinion. With care and skill, however, it's both very responsive, and very controllable. It is stable on both SAS and MechJeb autopilot, as long as you are stable and close to prograde when you engage the autopilot.
--Murph (talk) 22:20, 16 November 2013 (CST)