A heat shield with a nosecone attached on both end and rotated at 45°, offset the heat shield out as the wings and with the nosecones clipped into the fairing.
This video was defenetly a break through for Vaos, I wander how ksp 2 parts will act with each and I wander how much will the arrodynamics change and improve. Anyways awesome video 😁😁😁🚀❤❤
Best they can easily do is just put most of FAR in, which is realistic to about mach 3, after that it does not model the ever increasing shock lift. Compared to stock KSP its still going to have a slightly better L/D ratio at those speeds, but its still not as good as a good design in real life.
This is some awesome R&D you're achieving here. If we were to imagine some kind of KSP Olympiad, with categories falling (meh, roughly) into 1, Pure build/stock, 2, pure build/mods and 3, kraken build, I see this getting binned with kraken builds (along with Stratzenblitz's super-sonic heat-sheild propeller), even if a case can be made for it not to be.
Nowadays I regard stock aerodynamics as cheating. Everytime someone posts a cool SSTO, I keep thinking "nice, but can it achieve an efficient trajectory with FAR?"
Loophole? Definitely. But it's everyone's choice. I would definitely not feel good using this design but it's not like anyone's forcing me. And it might be extremely useful e.g. for an Eve SSTO. Now I wonder what nested fairings would do. Make some large part with nodes all over the place, put it inside a fairing, then put this fairing inside a small fairing covering just its two nodes. Will this remove drag of the large part too?
Okay, my compliments, I did comment about the weight issue on your last video, and you have thoroughly addressed it. This is very cool, I really like that workaround you came up with.
What people seem to be ignoring is induced drag. The lift vector isn't perfectly vertical, the more lift you generate the more drag you generate. And you need more drag for lift as you climb. If you're heavier you will need more lift and produce more drag.
Could you do your version of assembling a craft on orbit to go to Eve, Moho or somewhere far away like Eeloo ? Would be NOICE from Brazil, i love your vids keep it up.
The reason the fairing thing came around was because of Bradley Whistance. He used fairings extensively in low mass craft, where the wheesly jet engine has to stay low in the atmosphere to work, and for propeller SSTOs for the same reason.
Well the entire stock aerodynamics model is unrealistic, that’s why you can make a cylinder with a turbofan at the back and two tiny rectangles on the sides and apparently it’s capable of flight and is also super maneuverable
I wouldn’t say it’s cheating as you are perfecting a broken aerodynamic model that calculates drag on a part by part basis even if it’s node is “stowed”. I’ve been close to trying FAR to see how that works but haven’t. I like the 5 degree wing pitch, once I get up to 250-300 m/s I set sas to prograde and that reduces “skin” drag as the fuselage is directly into the wind while the wings lift. Awesome Video it’s always a treat to wake up with a new video from Vaos
U will still have skin friction drag. The drag reduction is from reducing the effective cross section and improving the shape so the coefficient of drag reduces.
So your previous videos made me try something. Long story short, with the kOS mod I can use a program to fly an SSTO into orbit, note down the deltaV, and revert to launchpad and fly again, changing some of the ascent characteristics each time. And then I went to bed. Obviously it broke almost immediately, but I was able to build and fly the SSTO you had in the 'how to build an ssto' video on at least 90 different trajectories. Here's the 5 best flights: A B C D DV 10 1000 15 30000 389.48 10 700 15 40000 360.29 15 800 15 30000 340.86 10 900 15 40000 339.79 15 600 15 30000 338.32 This should be read as liftoff -> pitch up to A -> Accelerate to B m/s -> Pitch up to C -> at D meters lock to prograde. Then just let the RAPIERs auto switch and cut throttle when you get into space. I need to do more tests since it was picking values for A, B, C & D at random and ~80% of them didn't make it. I also flew some control flights with the same values, and got an error bar of +/- 8%
Good stuff there! Actually using scientific method for a simulation about aerospace sciences. I miss this type of thread from the early days. So if I read the extract correctly, the lowest and fastest flights had the best performance. Sounds like you should narrow the parameters to pick values closer to those good runs. Please let me know whatever you do next.
@@DistracticusPrime Thanks! Yes you read it right. A and C were picked in the range 10-30, 20 and higher all stalled out. The random selection didn't get round to a 10 B 10 D flight, so I'll refine the ranges down for the next batch
Amazing that kOS can do that. Also, the more efficient way in your chart doesnt change pitch. It basically just accelerates right? Since its not changing pitch from A to C
@@pebegou It pitches up a little, from 10 to 15. However there wasn't any test where it was just 10 degrees the whole way (poor test design on my part) so I'll incorporate that for the next lot
That was the best video on fairings I have seen in along time! The logic behind fairings and drag was sometimes elusive to me as well. Covering up the nodes makes so much sense in-game. Thanks!
@@vaos3712 well,I have. I've also been trying to tell my friends to give ya a sub. I also enjoy your pictures from work,the lil mini Krakens and ducks. Take care bud.
in the engineering we have a saying A good engineered part looks like a work of art !!! yet a work of art may not be a good engineered part!!! basically if u start as art u wont get a good part where if u start making a part it will become a work of art priorities are super important so choose wisely and it may surprise u in the end
hello I have been watching you for a few months now, I especally been loving the duna colony series, in you last vid there you mentioned having power issues, leading you to increase your solar farm. so I built a "nuclear reactor" out of rtgs and fairings, not much clipping, only parts through the fairing to allow kerbals to "work" in the reactor building. let me know if you would like to see the reactor, it can easily power four drills and a ore to fuel converter.
It's not kraken drive level, but i do feel it falls somewhere within the realm of airhogging. It's one of those things where it's an interesting and fun technical feat, but i wouldn't use it during normal gameplay.
I sware I was doing this for last week every free time happens. Glad we're on the same shoes! Gonna comment further while I watch now.. Cheers & One love VAOS and fly safe ;)
Yo can also lower the height of the craft and hide the calculation point of the landing gears inside the fairing. I do that, saves only about ~2ish drag but hey, we're all students of Scorr Manley here so it counts.
That doesn't count as Kraken-casing. Since it's applicable irl, hiding landing gears inside the fairing is common as bubblegums. But to your built, making small fairing and using only green points is kinda cheaty. I'd rather go with full fairing than non. But your idea is unique, it's probably Kraken-casing. but normal fairing is ok.
Great work here! This videos clearly explains the practice of correctly hiding parts in a faring (Something I struggle with but now have the knowledge and means to tackle)! This might be a niche request but here it is anyway; @VAOS can you make a non-air breathing SSTO strong enough to orbit Eve from Eve's sea level and get to Gilly? We'll say propellers and faring magic are acceptable building practices. With your laser like focus and obsessive approach you'd definitely shine light on this topic! Otherwise, I'll continue to watch most of what you put out with interest- Thank you!!
Getting to orbit is definetly possible from Eve on a single stage, have done it myself as well. The margins are pretty tight, but with the right combination of propellers, vector engines and Nervs, you can do this. Best for me was about 400 m/s dV in low Eve orbit, not enough for the trip to Gilly.
Weight actually plays into two roles when it comes to delta-V and aero optimisations. A basic rule of thumb is a lighter craft is gonna suffer far more from drag than a heavier craft. 5 kilonewtons of drag for a craft with only 10kn of thrust cuts your thrust in half, whereas the same drag on a craft weighing 500kn is only a percentage of your thrust. Things like fairing clipping make a lot of sense for very minimalist missions, where a little bit of drag has a huge effect, but on large crafts like these mid tier SSTOs their weight makes it very difficult for a little drag to slow them down. So you likely don't need an setup with fairing clipping and all that for anything of a reasonable mass c:
Lift = weight. Assume a constant lift:drag ratio of the lifting surfaces. A lighter plane has less drag . 20Tonne plane with L/D of 20 it will have 1Tonne of drag. But a 10tonne plane will have 0.5tonnes
Hahahaha! What is it about KSP that it can't tell when cargo containers (of any kind) are closed? This game, sometimes! XD Wouldn't want to be without it, though. I'm dying to talk about my 0-drag fairing too, but it's tiny and I need to test if it's merely transferred the drag to the part behind. If it has, well, I was already thinking of putting a nose cone inside. Good to know it works. EDIT: Oh you're using it here. :D Huh, 4 tons... I know, I can make my next Kerbin explorer with a dragless fairing. I got bored with waiting for the solar prop plane to get anywhere. It needs to be big enough to carry a rover, a submarine, and maybe a rotorcraft, hypersonic, and I want to land it in small spaces without a knot in my stomach. Bit of a tricky thing to design. :) I guess I'll use 2 fairings so I can deploy the rover from one end and the sub from the other, and maybe add rotors to the rover. Edit #2: Wait, that's chump change drag? I have nothing to worry about! lol Edit #3: It feels a little cheaty, but nothing like the kraken drive. TBH, I think the game makes ridiculous drag sometimes, so this is fair compensation. lol (And I'm failing at keeping my comments short again lol)
The editing on this video (up until orbit, anyway) is fantastic. I find it sad when I get more out of a video's presentation than its content (see below). But still, super nice Camtasia work, dood. Camtasia devs should hire you for inspiration. (Lord knows they need inspiration.) Per your request for feedback, I personally would probably not use this technique. I don't like working with fairings to begin with (it's a clumsy interface) and I dislike surgery stitching parts inside of each other. (RIP, pre-robotics electric engines.) The main reason I wouldn't use this fairing TRICK is it feels like "a hack too far". Everything about this game's community is so gawd awfully competitive. If you're not using every possible exploit loophole that exists, then your creations can't achieve the same feats as others, which means your craft don't even register on community radar, which means no one cares what you do. It's a very unhealthy competitive atmosphere, imo, and a big reason for why I've stopped doing public content on this game. I'd rather just slap some more Rapiers and fuel tanks onto my non-fairing SSTO and enjoy playing the game than stress myself with a convoluted construction procedure so I can pretend to be proud of myself for exploiting like a boss. PS. "Lick forward" -- Vaos 2022
Amen brudduh! I wonder if FAR has bugs like this or the "excess drag" issues like the stock game. I would much rather focus on something halfway realistic, and build things that make sense and should work.
Just catching up on the last few vids. Interesting results... I'm with you when it comes to the look of things. It has to look as good as it flies. I think the little bit of weight the fairing is negligible compared to the gain in aerodynamics and deltaV. I mean you cut down to half your original engine load loosing quite a few tons and engine drag.
I don't think it's quite on the level of kraken drive? It does feel a lot like airhogging but in a way that can't really be compared to anything irl. It's a bit cheaty, but you also have to put in the effort to engineer around it? So, gray area I guess?
At first I felt it was massively cheatey, until I remembered some of the "excessive drag" bugs that this could mitigate. Using one bug to cancel out another is ok by me! But, taking it too far and making something that shouldn't be able to work seems just like airhogging.
Attach 2 service bays in the same location with neither of the, being the root part and they will occlude each other; I made some weird stuff with that
OST for the SSTO at 5:30: th-cam.com/video/SwB0ZJbwmpw/w-d-xo.html Joking aside, it's a neat little trick and it hurts the optics of the SSTO way less than covering it entirely inside a faring. It also allows to use some stuff like cargo bays a bit more easily than being inside a giant shell. And I just realized that this might be a really powerful method to make an Eve lander. Doesn't have to be a winged craft either. On a sidenote, I wonder how much drag do you save when closing down the air intakes? I always bind the air intakes to toggle open/close with the air-breathing/closed-cycle mode of the rapiers. Gotta test out if it actually makes much of a difference, but since I use it mainly when outside the thickest parts of the atmosphere, it most likely has barely any impact...
Use heat shields rotated at 45 degrees with cones on each node. Oh and its lift increases the faster you go, so it may end up being problematic because of the huge amount of lift it'll produce
To deal with the weight problem of a fairing, you could always just stage the fairing when you get past the area where drag is a problem. That way you reduce drag where it is needed and then reduce weight when it becomes useless. I mean, its a exploit to do it the way you are doing it, but it does seem to help you min/max your SSTO.. Though staging off the extra weight might technically make it not a SSTO.. but it would min/max it to make it more efficient, so the choice is yours, it was just a idea.
This is very good information. I agree it feels cheatie as a career mode player. But for those players who do the min/max game play and can't get off their high horse sometimes I can see how exploiting a game bug to make something work is fair play. Vaos get some rest. I'm north of you and I know all about the dullness of driving a plow. And how much it can exhaust you.. the temperature is a bigger deal for me. It was -20 this morning when I had to go to work and it is supposed to get down past -40 tonight with windchill. It's maybe 32 degrees in here right now and I really am not looking forward to getting out from the blankets 🙃 rest is good and you need some. Especially with those outtakes lol 😆 but that's a great thing about your videos. Your humor. Almost makes it seems like you Are, the crazy 🤪 space cult leader lol.
It might be a smidge "cheatsy doodle" as Seananners might call it. But if it is, it's on the same moral side as using legit loopholes in any country's tax code to save on your taxes. "Look - if you didn't WANT me to use that loophole, you wouldn't have PUT It there, RIGHT?" Vaos - only using the "cheats" that KSP provides themselves. Or - to put it another way - if it's stupid, but it WORKS. It's NOT STUPID. :D
Good point! I think it depends on your interest for playing KSP. If you see it as just a game, then get good at the game and compete. If you want to use it as a simplified aerospace simulator to try out design ideas, bugs and exploits are just distracting.
I wouldn't say its on par with a kraken drive or some other cheat. Maybe if you found a way to get literally 0 drag from the engine nacelles and wings, it would be.
Could somebody tell me how do you see the interior of cockpits and crew modules from third person view like in the video? I´ve seen it on many videos now and I looked around on the internet but can´t figure out how to do it :/
If your talking about what I think your talking about, There is a little button next to the kerbal pilot portraits on the left hand side. Its small so look closely.
Its not cheating. This isnt some Kraken drive or somehing. Its building a better ship. KSP has weird aerodynamics that shouldnt exist. Like drag coming from INSIDE the vessel. Like when you have a Gyrothingy inside your plane to help stable the ship. There is no way that thing should create any drag cause its INSIDE the freakin plane. SOOOOOO....... you just have to improvise. AND THIS...... is what you call advanced KSP engineering. I WILL USE THIS TRI... errrr ... uhhh.... ENGINEERING METHOD on my Ramjet. I can certainly cut some drag on that thing. IF I pull it off? I dont think I will be able to fly it at full speed cause its going to burn up in the atmosphere. BUT THAT SHOULD allow me to fly it higher up maybe? Improving its fuel efficiency.
Well, I think you can go for workarounds. For instance, the cargo bay itself doesn't benefit from this method apparently anyway, so you could use two fairing-parts (one in front of the cargobay up to the nosecone and another that goes from the tailend all the way up to the rear end of the cargobay. Would still cover all nodes, and the weight increase for two faring parts (inseatd of one) would be negligible I guess.
@@h.a.9880 ik i'm late, but the issue with that is that you now have one non-root occlusion fairing, which is bad. having a fairing as the root part makes the game calculate aerodynamics for it as if the fairing panels don't exist, only the base part. this leads to *f a r* less drag if utilized properly
Ideally, center of mass is the same for the craft fully loaded and empty. If you put the engines at the back, the center of mass changes and moves backwards. Your center of lift should be slightly behind the center of mass. If your center of mass is moving backwards, it can get to close or behind the center of lift, making your plane harder to fly and control and much easier to stall. The mod RCS build aid can display both full and empty center of mass at the same time in the hangar, so you don't have to empty and refuel the craft manualy all the time. As I like some of the engines at the back for aesthetic reasons, I put all other heavy non-fuel tank parts at the front. Passenger cabins, command pods, ISRU, drills and similar parts are used to balance out the mass of the engines at the back.
Is it an exploit? Yes. Does the stock aerodynamic system deserve being exploited? Yes. Is this kraken drive level? No.
A very interesting distinction.
You can clip Heat Shields in fairings and have them be on the outside completely, they will produce lift with 0 drag
A heat shield with a nosecone attached on both end and rotated at 45°, offset the heat shield out as the wings and with the nosecones clipped into the fairing.
stratenblitz
wait they never fixed that bug .. eek thats been in the game for a long time
@@casualytcommenter908 stratzenblitz*
This video was defenetly a break through for Vaos, I wander how ksp 2 parts will act with each and I wander how much will the arrodynamics change and improve. Anyways awesome video 😁😁😁🚀❤❤
INB4 it's perfectly accurate and there's no exploits and all the abominations we create become impossible.
Best they can easily do is just put most of FAR in, which is realistic to about mach 3, after that it does not model the ever increasing shock lift.
Compared to stock KSP its still going to have a slightly better L/D ratio at those speeds, but its still not as good as a good design in real life.
This is some awesome R&D you're achieving here. If we were to imagine some kind of KSP Olympiad, with categories falling (meh, roughly) into 1, Pure build/stock, 2, pure build/mods and 3, kraken build, I see this getting binned with kraken builds (along with Stratzenblitz's super-sonic heat-sheild propeller), even if a case can be made for it not to be.
Perfect. Now put a Kraken Drive in it.
I like the manner in which you explained your process, with the funny bits as well.
I thoroughly believe that this game would only be half as fun with correctly working physics models.
It would be more fun if the model were correct BUT we could procedurally generate some shapes (:
God bless FAR for letting us free of this "aerodynamics model"
Nowadays I regard stock aerodynamics as cheating. Everytime someone posts a cool SSTO, I keep thinking "nice, but can it achieve an efficient trajectory with FAR?"
Loophole? Definitely. But it's everyone's choice. I would definitely not feel good using this design but it's not like anyone's forcing me. And it might be extremely useful e.g. for an Eve SSTO.
Now I wonder what nested fairings would do. Make some large part with nodes all over the place, put it inside a fairing, then put this fairing inside a small fairing covering just its two nodes. Will this remove drag of the large part too?
Okay, my compliments, I did comment about the weight issue on your last video, and you have thoroughly addressed it. This is very cool, I really like that workaround you came up with.
Pog!
What people seem to be ignoring is induced drag. The lift vector isn't perfectly vertical, the more lift you generate the more drag you generate. And you need more drag for lift as you climb. If you're heavier you will need more lift and produce more drag.
8:12
Maybe that’s why my precooler setup works. Usually I need a build up and can’t go full throttle until about 30m/s once there I could go top speed
Could you do your version of assembling a craft on orbit to go to Eve, Moho or somewhere far away like Eeloo ? Would be NOICE
from Brazil, i love your vids keep it up.
The reason the fairing thing came around was because of Bradley Whistance. He used fairings extensively in low mass craft, where the wheesly jet engine has to stay low in the atmosphere to work, and for propeller SSTOs for the same reason.
That fairing looks like a Thor-Able with a very looooong Able Stage
This isn't a kraken drive level cheat but it certainly is unrealistic.
Yeah, since this adds weight its not going to drastically increase the capabilities of your ship. It's barely an exploit.
Well the entire stock aerodynamics model is unrealistic, that’s why you can make a cylinder with a turbofan at the back and two tiny rectangles on the sides and apparently it’s capable of flight and is also super maneuverable
Amazing man!! Thanks for summing up all those comments and explaining on this neat vid! Keep posting :D
I wouldn’t say it’s cheating as you are perfecting a broken aerodynamic model that calculates drag on a part by part basis even if it’s node is “stowed”.
I’ve been close to trying FAR to see how that works but haven’t.
I like the 5 degree wing pitch, once I get up to 250-300 m/s I set sas to prograde and that reduces “skin” drag as the fuselage is directly into the wind while the wings lift.
Awesome Video it’s always a treat to wake up with a new video from Vaos
U will still have skin friction drag. The drag reduction is from reducing the effective cross section and improving the shape so the coefficient of drag reduces.
@@currentcommentor8745 I like you’re funny words, magic man.
So your previous videos made me try something.
Long story short, with the kOS mod I can use a program to fly an SSTO into orbit, note down the deltaV, and revert to launchpad and fly again, changing some of the ascent characteristics each time. And then I went to bed. Obviously it broke almost immediately, but I was able to build and fly the SSTO you had in the 'how to build an ssto' video on at least 90 different trajectories.
Here's the 5 best flights:
A B C D DV
10 1000 15 30000 389.48
10 700 15 40000 360.29
15 800 15 30000 340.86
10 900 15 40000 339.79
15 600 15 30000 338.32
This should be read as
liftoff -> pitch up to A -> Accelerate to B m/s -> Pitch up to C -> at D meters lock to prograde.
Then just let the RAPIERs auto switch and cut throttle when you get into space.
I need to do more tests since it was picking values for A, B, C & D at random and ~80% of them didn't make it.
I also flew some control flights with the same values, and got an error bar of +/- 8%
Good stuff there! Actually using scientific method for a simulation about aerospace sciences. I miss this type of thread from the early days. So if I read the extract correctly, the lowest and fastest flights had the best performance. Sounds like you should narrow the parameters to pick values closer to those good runs. Please let me know whatever you do next.
@@DistracticusPrime Thanks! Yes you read it right. A and C were picked in the range 10-30, 20 and higher all stalled out. The random selection didn't get round to a 10 B 10 D flight, so I'll refine the ranges down for the next batch
I was always wondering about the error margins of VAOS tests. :)
Amazing that kOS can do that. Also, the more efficient way in your chart doesnt change pitch. It basically just accelerates right? Since its not changing pitch from A to C
@@pebegou It pitches up a little, from 10 to 15. However there wasn't any test where it was just 10 degrees the whole way (poor test design on my part) so I'll incorporate that for the next lot
They hate this trick.
The Drag trick the millionaires don't want you to know!
That was the best video on fairings I have seen in along time! The logic behind fairings and drag was sometimes elusive to me as well. Covering up the nodes makes so much sense in-game.
Thanks!
good job on the editing, the style is very entertaining
One problem I see is that cargo will be weird with a fairing Clipinfo through it, but that not much of a problem if you creative.
Honestly some of the best KSP content on TH-cam. How do you have so few subs?!
Algorithm hasn’t picked me up yet
@@vaos3712 well,I have. I've also been trying to tell my friends to give ya a sub. I also enjoy your pictures from work,the lil mini Krakens and ducks. Take care bud.
in the engineering we have a saying
A good engineered part looks like a work of art !!!
yet a work of art may not be a good engineered part!!!
basically if u start as art u wont get a good part
where if u start making a part it will become a work of art
priorities are super important so choose wisely and it may surprise u in the end
* cries in angle of incidence *
Not in the atmosphere. Yes in outer space
hello I have been watching you for a few months now, I especally been loving the duna colony series, in you last vid there you mentioned having power issues, leading you to increase your solar farm. so I built a "nuclear reactor" out of rtgs and fairings, not much clipping, only parts through the fairing to allow kerbals to "work" in the reactor building. let me know if you would like to see the reactor, it can easily power four drills and a ore to fuel converter.
7:57 Kerbal Engineer/Artist has a stroke
It's not kraken drive level, but i do feel it falls somewhere within the realm of airhogging. It's one of those things where it's an interesting and fun technical feat, but i wouldn't use it during normal gameplay.
I sware I was doing this for last week every free time happens. Glad we're on the same shoes!
Gonna comment further while I watch now..
Cheers & One love VAOS and fly safe ;)
Yo can also lower the height of the craft and hide the calculation point of the landing gears inside the fairing. I do that, saves only about ~2ish drag but hey, we're all students of Scorr Manley here so it counts.
That doesn't count as Kraken-casing. Since it's applicable irl, hiding landing gears inside the fairing is common as bubblegums. But to your built, making small fairing and using only green points is kinda cheaty. I'd rather go with full fairing than non. But your idea is unique, it's probably Kraken-casing. but normal fairing is ok.
Just detach the fairing when u get into orbit. Problem solved
😂
Great work here! This videos clearly explains the practice of correctly hiding parts in a faring (Something I struggle with but now have the knowledge and means to tackle)! This might be a niche request but here it is anyway;
@VAOS can you make a non-air breathing SSTO strong enough to orbit Eve from Eve's sea level and get to Gilly? We'll say propellers and faring magic are acceptable building practices.
With your laser like focus and obsessive approach you'd definitely shine light on this topic! Otherwise, I'll continue to watch most of what you put out with interest- Thank you!!
Getting to orbit is definetly possible from Eve on a single stage, have done it myself as well. The margins are pretty tight, but with the right combination of propellers, vector engines and Nervs, you can do this. Best for me was about 400 m/s dV in low Eve orbit, not enough for the trip to Gilly.
Weight actually plays into two roles when it comes to delta-V and aero optimisations. A basic rule of thumb is a lighter craft is gonna suffer far more from drag than a heavier craft. 5 kilonewtons of drag for a craft with only 10kn of thrust cuts your thrust in half, whereas the same drag on a craft weighing 500kn is only a percentage of your thrust. Things like fairing clipping make a lot of sense for very minimalist missions, where a little bit of drag has a huge effect, but on large crafts like these mid tier SSTOs their weight makes it very difficult for a little drag to slow them down. So you likely don't need an setup with fairing clipping and all that for anything of a reasonable mass c:
Lift = weight. Assume a constant lift:drag ratio of the lifting surfaces. A lighter plane has less drag . 20Tonne plane with L/D of 20 it will have 1Tonne of drag. But a 10tonne plane will have 0.5tonnes
Hmm… never had that problem. The lighter the SSTO , the easier and faster it is to get it into orbit.
Looks like ssto is the way to go
You did it bro!! At least on my feed
Hahahaha! What is it about KSP that it can't tell when cargo containers (of any kind) are closed? This game, sometimes! XD Wouldn't want to be without it, though.
I'm dying to talk about my 0-drag fairing too, but it's tiny and I need to test if it's merely transferred the drag to the part behind. If it has, well, I was already thinking of putting a nose cone inside. Good to know it works. EDIT: Oh you're using it here. :D
Huh, 4 tons... I know, I can make my next Kerbin explorer with a dragless fairing. I got bored with waiting for the solar prop plane to get anywhere. It needs to be big enough to carry a rover, a submarine, and maybe a rotorcraft, hypersonic, and I want to land it in small spaces without a knot in my stomach. Bit of a tricky thing to design. :) I guess I'll use 2 fairings so I can deploy the rover from one end and the sub from the other, and maybe add rotors to the rover.
Edit #2: Wait, that's chump change drag? I have nothing to worry about! lol
Edit #3: It feels a little cheaty, but nothing like the kraken drive. TBH, I think the game makes ridiculous drag sometimes, so this is fair compensation. lol (And I'm failing at keeping my comments short again lol)
I just want a dragless craft to go really fast without worrying about heating, if that's possible.
The editing on this video (up until orbit, anyway) is fantastic. I find it sad when I get more out of a video's presentation than its content (see below). But still, super nice Camtasia work, dood. Camtasia devs should hire you for inspiration. (Lord knows they need inspiration.)
Per your request for feedback, I personally would probably not use this technique. I don't like working with fairings to begin with (it's a clumsy interface) and I dislike surgery stitching parts inside of each other. (RIP, pre-robotics electric engines.) The main reason I wouldn't use this fairing TRICK is it feels like "a hack too far". Everything about this game's community is so gawd awfully competitive. If you're not using every possible exploit loophole that exists, then your creations can't achieve the same feats as others, which means your craft don't even register on community radar, which means no one cares what you do. It's a very unhealthy competitive atmosphere, imo, and a big reason for why I've stopped doing public content on this game. I'd rather just slap some more Rapiers and fuel tanks onto my non-fairing SSTO and enjoy playing the game than stress myself with a convoluted construction procedure so I can pretend to be proud of myself for exploiting like a boss.
PS. "Lick forward" -- Vaos 2022
Amen brudduh! I wonder if FAR has bugs like this or the "excess drag" issues like the stock game. I would much rather focus on something halfway realistic, and build things that make sense and should work.
Why care about drag when you can just increase thrust against it? The kerbal way
Moarrr engines
Moarrr boosterzs
MOARRR FFFFUUUEEELLL!!!
MOARRRRR WWWIIIINGSSSS!!!!!
Bestest landing evar ;)
Just catching up on the last few vids. Interesting results...
I'm with you when it comes to the look of things. It has to look as good as it flies. I think the little bit of weight the fairing is negligible compared to the gain in aerodynamics and deltaV. I mean you cut down to half your original engine load loosing quite a few tons and engine drag.
try to ejected the fairings?
Make a video On how to make a large scale VTOL
It looks like making it 3 engined would be a winner. That would put more inside???.
In worst case ...reduce the fuel a bit
I don't think it's quite on the level of kraken drive? It does feel a lot like airhogging but in a way that can't really be compared to anything irl. It's a bit cheaty, but you also have to put in the effort to engineer around it? So, gray area I guess?
At first I felt it was massively cheatey, until I remembered some of the "excessive drag" bugs that this could mitigate. Using one bug to cancel out another is ok by me! But, taking it too far and making something that shouldn't be able to work seems just like airhogging.
Maybe this could be used for an Eve SSTO?
Attach 2 service bays in the same location with neither of the, being the root part and they will occlude each other; I made some weird stuff with that
OST for the SSTO at 5:30:
th-cam.com/video/SwB0ZJbwmpw/w-d-xo.html
Joking aside, it's a neat little trick and it hurts the optics of the SSTO way less than covering it entirely inside a faring. It also allows to use some stuff like cargo bays a bit more easily than being inside a giant shell. And I just realized that this might be a really powerful method to make an Eve lander. Doesn't have to be a winged craft either.
On a sidenote, I wonder how much drag do you save when closing down the air intakes? I always bind the air intakes to toggle open/close with the air-breathing/closed-cycle mode of the rapiers. Gotta test out if it actually makes much of a difference, but since I use it mainly when outside the thickest parts of the atmosphere, it most likely has barely any impact...
Ok now that's interesting
Single Stage To Orbit does not require you to get back. Just get rid of the fairings when you're out of atmosphere?
If the faring is in the cargo bay what happens when you try to undock cargo?
Oooooooooooh. Good point. Granted, in this craft, Vaos filled up the cargo bay with static parts. But very good point.
I would put a arm on the cargo and lift it out before undocking it.
Use heat shields rotated at 45 degrees with cones on each node. Oh and its lift increases the faster you go, so it may end up being problematic because of the huge amount of lift it'll produce
To deal with the weight problem of a fairing, you could always just stage the fairing when you get past the area where drag is a problem. That way you reduce drag where it is needed and then reduce weight when it becomes useless. I mean, its a exploit to do it the way you are doing it, but it does seem to help you min/max your SSTO.. Though staging off the extra weight might technically make it not a SSTO.. but it would min/max it to make it more efficient, so the choice is yours, it was just a idea.
This is very good information. I agree it feels cheatie as a career mode player. But for those players who do the min/max game play and can't get off their high horse sometimes I can see how exploiting a game bug to make something work is fair play.
Vaos get some rest. I'm north of you and I know all about the dullness of driving a plow. And how much it can exhaust you.. the temperature is a bigger deal for me. It was -20 this morning when I had to go to work and it is supposed to get down past -40 tonight with windchill. It's maybe 32 degrees in here right now and I really am not looking forward to getting out from the blankets 🙃 rest is good and you need some. Especially with those outtakes lol 😆 but that's a great thing about your videos. Your humor. Almost makes it seems like you Are, the crazy 🤪 space cult leader lol.
i use FAR mod iv used that mod since its day 1 inception expecting it to be default for a long long time ..
can you deploy a fairing inside a ship? because if so you can get rid of the weight when the reduced drag is no longer needed
Deploy a fairing inside a ship? Please confirm… do you wish to self destruct?
enjoying this
No lift without drag
It might be a smidge "cheatsy doodle" as Seananners might call it. But if it is, it's on the same moral side as using legit loopholes in any country's tax code to save on your taxes. "Look - if you didn't WANT me to use that loophole, you wouldn't have PUT It there, RIGHT?"
Vaos - only using the "cheats" that KSP provides themselves.
Or - to put it another way - if it's stupid, but it WORKS. It's NOT STUPID. :D
Good point! I think it depends on your interest for playing KSP. If you see it as just a game, then get good at the game and compete. If you want to use it as a simplified aerospace simulator to try out design ideas, bugs and exploits are just distracting.
perfect!
8:00 someone help this man he havn’ a stroke
I wouldn't say its on par with a kraken drive or some other cheat. Maybe if you found a way to get literally 0 drag from the engine nacelles and wings, it would be.
Could somebody tell me how do you see the interior of cockpits and crew modules from third person view like in the video? I´ve seen it on many videos now and I looked around on the internet but can´t figure out how to do it :/
If your talking about what I think your talking about, There is a little button next to the kerbal pilot portraits on the left hand side. Its small so look closely.
@@vaos3712 THANK YOU SO MUCH! Also you're making some great videos, I've been learning a lot from your SSTO ones, so thanks for that too!
ur the best bro
Nice. Cool exploit.
What is lift but useful drag
Eh, I use FAR mod. From the start. No more spaghetti aerodynamics.
Yay
you know fairings have nodes right?
def not kraken drive but also def cheaty, will not be building anything with this lol but still cool to see.
Its mass not weight.
Sweetness 😎
i dont know what to comment so
nice video
Its not cheating. This isnt some Kraken drive or somehing. Its building a better ship. KSP has weird aerodynamics that shouldnt exist. Like drag coming from INSIDE the vessel. Like when you have a Gyrothingy inside your plane to help stable the ship. There is no way that thing should create any drag cause its INSIDE the freakin plane. SOOOOOO....... you just have to improvise. AND THIS...... is what you call advanced KSP engineering. I WILL USE THIS TRI... errrr ... uhhh.... ENGINEERING METHOD on my Ramjet. I can certainly cut some drag on that thing. IF I pull it off? I dont think I will be able to fly it at full speed cause its going to burn up in the atmosphere. BUT THAT SHOULD allow me to fly it higher up maybe? Improving its fuel efficiency.
I gotta quit trying to fix the camera after you mess up what I'm looking at lol
This dude puts way too much thought into drag.
I know, It’s such a drag 😎
This won't work for cargo SSTOs
Well, I think you can go for workarounds. For instance, the cargo bay itself doesn't benefit from this method apparently anyway, so you could use two fairing-parts (one in front of the cargobay up to the nosecone and another that goes from the tailend all the way up to the rear end of the cargobay. Would still cover all nodes, and the weight increase for two faring parts (inseatd of one) would be negligible I guess.
Challenge accepted😎
@@h.a.9880 ik i'm late, but the issue with that is that you now have one non-root occlusion fairing, which is bad. having a fairing as the root part makes the game calculate aerodynamics for it as if the fairing panels don't exist, only the base part. this leads to *f a r* less drag if utilized properly
Why do you have the engines on the wings? Cant they be in the back?
no, because if the fuel gets drained the Center of Mass moves backwards, which is exactly NOT what you want in anything that flies
@@deathpacito_8273 ty
Ideally, center of mass is the same for the craft fully loaded and empty. If you put the engines at the back, the center of mass changes and moves backwards. Your center of lift should be slightly behind the center of mass. If your center of mass is moving backwards, it can get to close or behind the center of lift, making your plane harder to fly and control and much easier to stall.
The mod RCS build aid can display both full and empty center of mass at the same time in the hangar, so you don't have to empty and refuel the craft manualy all the time.
As I like some of the engines at the back for aesthetic reasons, I put all other heavy non-fuel tank parts at the front. Passenger cabins, command pods, ISRU, drills and similar parts are used to balance out the mass of the engines at the back.
you want to cheat by clipping parts? Just edit files and be over it.
😱
I hate my dad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
69 likes!
nice
not to flex but im your 69 viewer
Niiiice.
403rd
1112thrd \o/
just go into the files and make drag 0 lol why bother with this
Like #1k