camlost

Members
  • Content Count

    514
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

78 Excellent

About camlost

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. AJE uses a steady-state model not a transient model. That means we don't have RPM at all. Feel free to look at https://github.com/camlost2/AJEsolverTester for acronyms and everything.
  2. The AoA option is here to simulate a stability-augmentation system, and succeeds in making certain unstable planes fly. @bartekkru99, You asked if anyone else thought FAR is broken, the answer seems not. If you want to know why your plane don't fly as you like, there's nothing to do without specific info.
  3. That is called ram drag and calculated of course. There's a nozzle efficiency coefficient.
  4. A little request: always use @MODULE[ModuleEngines*] { //... } So that other mods can save some trouble
  5. Then how do you propose the engines would work? What evidence do you have to defend that? IRL, planes don't get hypersonic because of a number of reasons, not necessarily lack of thrust. I get many reports about how planes fly unrealistically, but how a plane flies is not something I can work on, only thrust and Isp. I find that very hard to believe. Either you don't have correct mods installed, or you're not flying a real replica.
  6. What gigantic turbofan? You cannot argue against AJE's realism solely based on how your vehicle flies, you know?
  7. nuFAR determines the voxel profile of an aircraft to determine drag. For some reason, adjustable landing gears always show up with a bulky cube, bringing huge amount of drag in nuFAR. Stock gears are fine.
  8. ferram @ co, you might want to play-test nuFAR with AJE to figure out drag constant. A test version of AJE is in my repo. While there's no such problem with stock engines because they're still OP, I find breaking sound barrier quite difficult.
  9. A test version is out. I hope you guys can test this with nuFAR together.
  10. In that case hybrid engines like RAPIER cannot switch mod, and engineering plugins would ignore the module
  11. Although Xplane has been out for long, it used to be one man's project for a great many years. AFAIK, its aerodynamic algorithm has been there for almost a decade. Similar to FAR, XP also applies some kind of classic aerodynamic calculation instead of CFD, so I wouldn't call it 'super accurate air simulator'. Up to now, no one has tried to incorporate CFD into a flight simulator. So I think XP and FAR are actually comparable. - - - Updated - - - In XP aerodynamic forces are calculated dynamically based on geometry. Other sims like FSX uses lookup table.
  12. Sounds good. Isp should vary with speed, and those numbers are about 4x stronger than reality
  13. Anything about their Isp? Why is there nothing about jet engines in the changelog...
  14. From what's described above, what 1.0 is fixing is the Isp-scaling bug. However that alone will not make jet engine (or any air-breathing engine) performance more realistic. They need to fix two things 1) IntakeAir as a resource counts as fuel 2) Isp instead of thrust does not change with altitude. We're yet to know where the dev stands on this topic.