this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
14 points (100.0% liked)

KSP

180 readers
1 users here now

All things KSP.

Screenshots and stories of your space endeavours are most welcome. Please do share your creations!

THAT'S ONE SMALL STEP FOR MAN, ONE GIANT LEAP FOR KERBALKIND!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
14
Vibe engineering (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by notanapple@lemm.ee to c/ksp@lemmy.world
 

First time playing ksp, doing a science playthrough

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

with that amount of control surfaces you could probably flap your way to orbit lmao

[–] notanapple@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The aerodynamics are really annoying me, I dont understand them at all. I just make the aero/mass center the same. It wobbles like crazy but at least it stays straight.

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah, the aerodynamics were pretty confusing for me when I started as well, iirc there was a pretty old scott manley video that explained it well.

Essentially you want to keep the aero centre behind the centre of mass (COM), because this gives you passive stability (it stays straight). You don't need control surfaces for this.

If you need maneuverability (like in an aeroplane) you want to keep them as close as possible, but keep in mind the COM will move over time because you use up fuel.

The optimal position for control surfaces are as far away from the COM as possible, because this gives you the most torque. Control surfaces close to the COM will just translate the aircraft instead of rotating it (like flaps on a plane)

Modern fly by wire jets like the f16 and su27 are aerodynamically unstable (aero centre in front of COM) but this isn't really feasible in KSP unfortunately