Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ferram4

[0.90]NEAR: A Simpler Aerodynamics Model v1.3.1 12/16/14

711 posts in this topic

Want a better aerodynamics model, but think that FAR is too much?

Dislike having to deal with Mach number effects, strange wing interactions and aerodynamic dis-assemblies?

Ain't got time for aerodynamic analysis, just got time to build and fly?

Then you should try:

Neophyte's Elementary Aerodynamics Replacement

A simpler aerodynamics model

Features:

What it does that is similar to FAR:

--Drag is based on shape and orientation

--Body lift from parts

--Infiniglide wings are gone, and now follow a velocity2 proportionality like they should.

--Payload fairings and cargo bays function properly

--Vehicle stability does need to be considered when building rockets and planes

What it doesn't do, that FAR does:

--Changes in physics with Mach number

--Complicated changes in wing lift and drag due to other parts around them

--Aerodynamic dis-assembly (though they can still be broken off if they overload the stock joints)

--Complicated aerodynamic analysis tools in the editor

This mod is intended as a simpler aerodynamics model for people who want to get into FAR but are discouraged by the learning curve or for users that aren't interested in all that FAR has. It is built on the same code as FAR, and so any mods that are compatible with FAR should be compatible with NEAR.

Note: To avoid possibly exacerbating any of the win64 KSP build's instability inherent issues, this mod will disable itself if run on a win64 build of KSP.

As with FAR, licensed GPL v3.

FAQ

I'm using the win64 KSP build and NEAR doesn't seem to be functioning. What gives?

Due to the instability of the win64 KSP build, NEAR will disable itself on that build. This is to ensure that any issues caused by the win64 build can be definitively traced back to it. NEAR is not supported on the win64 build, and you are encouraged to use either the win32 build or to switch over to linux, as both of those builds are much more stable.

Edited by ferram4
26 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will handle MJ just as well as FAR will: if you give it the right input parameters it will fly perfectly fine. If you tell it to fly like stock it will not.

Edit: To elaborate, this is a consequence of disconnecting the CoM and CoD. FAR has this "issue," the Stock Drag Fix has this "issue," NEAR has this "issue." The fact is, the only way around instability problems during launches is to simply accept the brokenness of "drag must be proportional to mass at all times, and no dependence on orientation or shape" and argue for no aerodynamic improvements ever.

Edited by ferram4
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using FAR, but mainly for rockets, and will give this a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what my problems with FAR were but I hated stock aerodynamics after trying FAR.

I cannot thank you enough!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exciting! Last week I uninstalled FAR because it was "too much" as you say. But the stock aerodynamics really leave you wanting.

I am really excited to give this a try!!! Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me a while to understand and get used to FAR. I just don't have a need for all of the features. This fits the bill perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I'll continue to use far, +rep for spreading the aerodynamics love.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that means you'd be adding more hardcore features to FAR? :) It's a nice idea, I'll rather use FAR myself, but this will allow more people to use a reasonable aerodynamic model (also one from which you can actually learn something...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting! Anything that is made by ferram4 is awesome, it seems like. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great! I'll also continue to use FAR but I love the name and the fact of trying to bring a simpler aerodynamics to people. Maybe squad will choose to use NEAR as the basis for their own aerodynamics overhaul in the future. We can only hope!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is great! I'll also continue to use FAR but I love the name and the fact of trying to bring a simpler aerodynamics to people. Maybe squad will choose to use NEAR as the basis for their own aerodynamics overhaul in the future. We can only hope!

Yup, same sentiments here. I'll keep using FAR but this seems like a great compromise solution for those who don't want to go too far down the rabbit hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything to get people off the stock drag model is a win in my book. :) I'm sticking with FAR, but the availability of this just might help more people shake some of the broken physics assumptions they've learned from stock behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for coming up with this! I have been using FAR as it is basically the only game in town and has made a world of difference. I'll be trying this as soon as the update installs :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool; will give this a try (my PC struggles a bit with FAR).

Question: Does NEAR reduce the dv requirements in the same manner as FAR does, or does it keep stock-levels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is great! I'll also continue to use FAR but I love the name and the fact of trying to bring a simpler aerodynamics to people. Maybe squad will choose to use NEAR as the basis for their own aerodynamics overhaul in the future. We can only hope!

My feelings exactly. This is what stock should be and then FAR is a good mod for those who want more.

Question: Does NEAR reduce the dv requirements in the same manner as FAR does, or does it keep stock-levels?

If I understand it, yes as long as your craft is aerodynmically designed, and not a flying box. I think the reduced dV is the result of using the craft shape for aerodynamics instead of all things on the craft regardless of placement.

Edited by Alshain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as I start using Stock Drag Fix...

I suppose my real requirement is if I can get KSO to play nice with this...if I can, I'm sold!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ferram, does this work in the same way as FAR with regards to making rocket launches easier than stock with stock sized Kerbin? I.e. Would it still require something like KIDS to balance ISPs and such for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, excellent ferram! Thank you. Although I am an aerospace engineer by education, that degree is nearly a quarter century in the past and fading more each year. This looks like an excellent "FAR-lite".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AngusJimiKeith: I dunno if the KSO can be made to work with this. Even though NEAR isn't as much of a deviation from stock as FAR is, it's still enough to make a lot of stock designs completely unworkable.

@FlowerChild: Yep. Unfortunately, I haven't worked towards making KIDS 0.24 compatible yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@FlowerChild: Yep. Unfortunately, I haven't worked towards making KIDS 0.24 compatible yet.

That's cool man, was more out of curiosity that I was asking as I have my hands too full at present to give it a whirl anyways ;)

Was checking to see if this was an "install and forget" kinda package where a new player could drop this mod into KSP and get a stock-a-like experience with improved aerodynamics, but without the difficulty-reducing side-effects of FAR for rocket launches. I thought you may have integrated KIDS-style changes into the package to simplify installation and configuration in order to be more noob-friendly :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: I installed this (thanks for making this by the way, used FAR, but like many here, found it just a BIT too much)

And I dont see any type of interface, (similar to FAR) Not sure if its just install and forgot.. or If i installed something incorrectly.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no interface or GUI for NEAR. User feedback suggested that it was unnecessary and confusing, so it is not available for NEAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really, really continue to not understand why "have to build a somewhat bigger rocket" = difficulty. It's not like clicking on an extra part is hard, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no interface or GUI for NEAR. User feedback suggested that it was unnecessary and confusing, so it is not available for NEAR.

Huh...that's really interesting actually. The GUI (and toolbar in particular) was definitely one of my hesitations with FAR.

I really, really continue to not understand why "have to build a somewhat bigger rocket" = difficulty. It's not like clicking on an extra part is hard, right?

Well, if getting weight into orbit and beyond isn't the base challenge in KSP, I'm really not certain what is :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0