I knew that the aerodynamics code of KSP was quite broken thanks to Bradley Whistance's content, but I did not realize just how busted it really is. Thank you for opening my eyes!
Bro you are gonna be huge since this game is at the last update and mods are going to go crazy now since every update isn't breaking everything. This is going to bring a ton of players back and these videos are going to be huge please keep it up. Subscribed instantly.
As a matter of fact, that is exactly how "magic wings" work! As it turns out, heatshields have two nodes on the windward side. The farther node creates a shroud, and when occupied, it removes the lifting component. But the closer node does not create a shroud, or remove the lifting component, but it still occludes that face of the drag cube! So the lift component does not get removed, but most of the heatshields drag does get removed! They have less lift per mass at low speed than a regular wing, but at very high speeds they have more, and more importantly, the ratio of lift to drag can get very very high when you properly occlude the drag cube faces, as high as 600 when supersonic! That is more than 100 times better lift to drag ratio than a standard wing!
@@lt_duckweed and stratzenblitz75 have already made a video of how well the heatshilds work as wings and propellers ruclips.net/video/wOlMlRf9qvo/видео.html
I completely understand where you are coming from. Im not the average player, but Im at the stage where I need the nuances of the mechanics to push my designs further. I only design jets, so drag means a lot to me.
You already have a lot of comments saying that this is a really helpful video for them and I can only agree. I tried finding a video like this for around 500h of ksp and was ready to still not find something like this, but here I am! I really loved this Video, I wish you the best of luck with the algorithm ( I am trying to help out there) and a nice day!
This has helped me troubleshoot some designs I had, explaining why they were stalling out around mach 1 due to drag. Thanks for the tutorial, SSTOs are gonna be a lot easier now!
I wish I had this video years ago when I was attaching 6 different orientations of surface mounted parts on a test bed and flying them up to different altitudes at different speeds and checking their drags. Would have saved me so much time!
I don't know how many time I watch this video. This time, it made me understand that fairing are slightly larger than fuel tank. Seriously, the 2,5m fairing get a 0.33 WDrg on a 2,5m fuel tank !
While watching this excellent video, I couldn't stop wondering why no one has made any tutorials like this before. I thought I had a decent understanding of how drag cubes worked, but you proved my ego wrong ;-) Hopefully you'll continue making some more technical videos like this, because I'm gonna be using all this precious wisdom for my future crafts.
Great video! (Even if my monkey brain only understood about half of it.) I have a question though, why rotate the nose cone that occludes the front of the heatshield 180 degrees? Doesn't it produce more drag then? Or doesn't it because the nosecone node is already occluded?
You last statement is correct, because it was node attached, and WArea of the heatshields rear face is larger than the OccA of the nosecones face, that face of the nosecone is occluded, and doesn't produce any drag. The left, right, top, and bottom faces are at a 90 degree angle, so they don't produce much drag at all, so the major source of drag is that front, pointed face of the airstream. By rotating it 180 degrees, we make that front face into the rear face, so it now takes rear drag, which is going to be much smaller than frontal drag. Now, of course. A nosecone doesn't take much drag in the first place since it is nicely streamlined, so most of the drag savings comes from using a nosecone at all, but if you are trying to squeeze out that last little bit of performance rotating 180 degrees helps.
This video has been getting so much more traction than I expected, including really rapid subscriber growth. I guess my next video needs to be my 500 subscriber special lol! Much love
1. The OccA and Wdrg values for the fairing are calculated procedurally based on the shape of the fairing. 2. Parts inside the fairing do not interact with the aero model at all (what counts as "inside" is complicated and I plan to make a whole video on fairings). 3. If a fairing is the root part of a vessel, then the fairing panels still occlude parts from the aero model, but only the fairing base gets considered for the fairings lift and drag (meaning it has much less surface area).
@@lt_duckweed #3=oof! Does it really mean that if I have a fairing as the root part of my plane and it's on the front, it'll be like having a bare fairing plate on the front? (I'm going to have to change the root of one of my designs.)
Unfortunately KSP2 does not have nearly as much debug information available to players, but as far as various technical players have been able to find, it does work in a similar enough manner that most of the broad takeaways will still hold true.
Just a tip for the future: don’t speak like you’re Ben Stein reading from a script. Ya know you don’t have to sound like fuckin Pewdiepie, ya know? but christ, you’re voice makes me wanna shut the video off. Don’t speak monotone, like an even more unenthusiastic Alan Rickman.
Unnecessary for 99.9% of the players and too much technical jargon. Clickbait-y title since most of this is unusable in regular scenarios with the technical data overload. The other stuff that is useful information is barely practical for most players. If this wasn't Kerbal university it's a good video, but given the title and relevance I'm forced to dislike.
i use this information daily in ksp... at this stage in ksp's existence the "average player" will actually benefit from all of this knowledge greatly seeing as more casual players either grew their skills or stopped playing, and the influx of new players is low (with a very high retention of experienced players). I didn't even know all of the information in this video but I regularly apply most if not all of the techniques demonstrated through experience and a less thorough understanding of the same knowledge.
What? I would expect nothing less than this level of detail from anything with "university" in the title. It may be difficult to make use of, but you don't go to university for baby food.
@@eekee6034 Jup. If you were to summarise it wouldn't be too many things. 1. Occupy all attachmentpoints. 2. Present a minimal area to the oncoming air.
I knew that the aerodynamics code of KSP was quite broken thanks to Bradley Whistance's content, but I did not realize just how busted it really is. Thank you for opening my eyes!
Bro you are gonna be huge since this game is at the last update and mods are going to go crazy now since every update isn't breaking everything. This is going to bring a ton of players back and these videos are going to be huge please keep it up. Subscribed instantly.
So does that mean heatshields can be a good alternative to wings as they produce lift and can have occluded nodes, significantly reducing drag?
As a matter of fact, that is exactly how "magic wings" work! As it turns out, heatshields have two nodes on the windward side. The farther node creates a shroud, and when occupied, it removes the lifting component. But the closer node does not create a shroud, or remove the lifting component, but it still occludes that face of the drag cube! So the lift component does not get removed, but most of the heatshields drag does get removed! They have less lift per mass at low speed than a regular wing, but at very high speeds they have more, and more importantly, the ratio of lift to drag can get very very high when you properly occlude the drag cube faces, as high as 600 when supersonic! That is more than 100 times better lift to drag ratio than a standard wing!
@@lt_duckweed and stratzenblitz75 have already made a video of how well the heatshilds work as wings and propellers
ruclips.net/video/wOlMlRf9qvo/видео.html
Yes and they're incredibly overpowered.
I completely understand where you are coming from. Im not the average player, but Im at the stage where I need the nuances of the mechanics to push my designs further. I only design jets, so drag means a lot to me.
I'm glad RUclips propose me this video. Your earn my first sub ever. I wish you to become the next Scott Manley.
You already have a lot of comments saying that this is a really helpful video for them and I can only agree. I tried finding a video like this for around 500h of ksp and was ready to still not find something like this, but here I am! I really loved this Video, I wish you the best of luck with the algorithm ( I am trying to help out there) and a nice day!
This has helped me troubleshoot some designs I had, explaining why they were stalling out around mach 1 due to drag. Thanks for the tutorial, SSTOs are gonna be a lot easier now!
While usually I brute force things for my replicas, this still so interesting. Good stuff
Excellent information, thanks for the video!
Great video!! Finally someone takes their time to explain this stuff :D subscribed!
this is what i need
I wish I had this video years ago when I was attaching 6 different orientations of surface mounted parts on a test bed and flying them up to different altitudes at different speeds and checking their drags. Would have saved me so much time!
i have a feeling i'm going to love this series
This helps me make more efficient sstos.
Great vid. Lots of details but focused on details that are relevant. Well scripted too.
Kerbal university you say? I wish you the best of luck ❤️ from creator to creator
This is exactly something i was needing!
I don't know how many time I watch this video. This time, it made me understand that fairing are slightly larger than fuel tank. Seriously, the 2,5m fairing get a 0.33 WDrg on a 2,5m fuel tank !
While watching this excellent video, I couldn't stop wondering why no one has made any tutorials like this before.
I thought I had a decent understanding of how drag cubes worked, but you proved my ego wrong ;-)
Hopefully you'll continue making some more technical videos like this, because I'm gonna be using all this precious wisdom for my future crafts.
Well you are in luck ;) I found i quite enjoy these sorts of videos, so there will be more in the future.
@@lt_duckweed damn, one day in and you're at 700 views already. this one's going to do really good it seems :-)
@@knightofsaintjohn9345 lol yeah the traction on this one has been way above what I expected!
Great video
awesome job exploring the drag calculations in the game!
Very nice guide even tho I made quite cutting edge craft for a long time I did not know a lot of these details.
Yes! Loving it!
So this guy seriously thought "what's missing on youtube is a detailed explanation of the KSP's drag mechanic"..
Well he was god damn right
Well explained. Earned a sub from me.
Great video! (Even if my monkey brain only understood about half of it.) I have a question though, why rotate the nose cone that occludes the front of the heatshield 180 degrees? Doesn't it produce more drag then? Or doesn't it because the nosecone node is already occluded?
You last statement is correct, because it was node attached, and WArea of the heatshields rear face is larger than the OccA of the nosecones face, that face of the nosecone is occluded, and doesn't produce any drag. The left, right, top, and bottom faces are at a 90 degree angle, so they don't produce much drag at all, so the major source of drag is that front, pointed face of the airstream. By rotating it 180 degrees, we make that front face into the rear face, so it now takes rear drag, which is going to be much smaller than frontal drag. Now, of course. A nosecone doesn't take much drag in the first place since it is nicely streamlined, so most of the drag savings comes from using a nosecone at all, but if you are trying to squeeze out that last little bit of performance rotating 180 degrees helps.
noice video, we need more video with updated info. Wonder how much drag are in multiple engines setup like in the video though.
looks like the algorithm got you
Thx man very useful
Thank you.
ayyyy im your 500th subscriber :D
This video has been getting so much more traction than I expected, including really rapid subscriber growth. I guess my next video needs to be my 500 subscriber special lol! Much love
Wow, I really could have used this a few years ago. Have you posted this on the KSP forums? Or...can I?
Feel free to post it!
@@lt_duckweed Ok. Sweet. Will do thanks
everything do to with offsets really just destroys the games aproximations huh
13:43 sounds like definition of cheesing. ew!
do an episode on keyboard shortcuts
how do fairings enter into this?
1. The OccA and Wdrg values for the fairing are calculated procedurally based on the shape of the fairing.
2. Parts inside the fairing do not interact with the aero model at all (what counts as "inside" is complicated and I plan to make a whole video on fairings).
3. If a fairing is the root part of a vessel, then the fairing panels still occlude parts from the aero model, but only the fairing base gets considered for the fairings lift and drag (meaning it has much less surface area).
@@lt_duckweed Thanks for the very comprehensive reply!
@@lt_duckweed #3=oof! Does it really mean that if I have a fairing as the root part of my plane and it's on the front, it'll be like having a bare fairing plate on the front? (I'm going to have to change the root of one of my designs.)
epic
The drag cube is her own thing and she is gorgeous for it.
Does KSP2 work the same way?
Unfortunately KSP2 does not have nearly as much debug information available to players, but as far as various technical players have been able to find, it does work in a similar enough manner that most of the broad takeaways will still hold true.
Wish kerbal university was real lol
If only lol!
Try making your resolution 1920x960 btw, 18:9 aspect ratio is the new wave
I would say fluid rather than a gas
Very true, I considered rerecording that section but ultimately laziness won out
@@lt_duckweedI expect more from my free content...
Just a tip for the future: don’t speak like you’re Ben Stein reading from a script. Ya know you don’t have to sound like fuckin Pewdiepie, ya know? but christ, you’re voice makes me wanna shut the video off. Don’t speak monotone, like an even more unenthusiastic Alan Rickman.
Unnecessary for 99.9% of the players and too much technical jargon. Clickbait-y title since most of this is unusable in regular scenarios with the technical data overload. The other stuff that is useful information is barely practical for most players. If this wasn't Kerbal university it's a good video, but given the title and relevance I'm forced to dislike.
i use this information daily in ksp... at this stage in ksp's existence the "average player" will actually benefit from all of this knowledge greatly seeing as more casual players either grew their skills or stopped playing, and the influx of new players is low (with a very high retention of experienced players). I didn't even know all of the information in this video but I regularly apply most if not all of the techniques demonstrated through experience and a less thorough understanding of the same knowledge.
The average KSP player probably doesn't even need to watch this video with how powerful the engines are.
What? I would expect nothing less than this level of detail from anything with "university" in the title. It may be difficult to make use of, but you don't go to university for baby food.
@@eekee6034 Jup. If you were to summarise it wouldn't be too many things.
1. Occupy all attachmentpoints.
2. Present a minimal area to the oncoming air.