Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'far'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 27 results

  1. This is an unofficial continuation of Ferram Aerospace Research by @ferram4 updated to latest KSP version. The original thread can be found here. New source code repository: https://github.com/dkavolis/Ferram-Aerospace-Research All content now licensed under GPL v3. From the original thread: Update to version 0.15.9.5 "Lighthill" ALL USERS: NO LOGS OR REPRODUCTION STEPS = NO SUPPORT Original Review: Aerodynamic Failures: Building a spaceplane and talking about editor GUI stuff: Features Shape-Based, Vessel-Centered, Aerodynamics - Long, thin shapes drag less than wide, flat shapes, and smooth changes in body width reduce drag. The shape of the vessel as a whole, not individual parts, controls drag, so shape the vessel as you see fit. Emergent Fairings and Cargo Bays - The voxel model method FAR uses allows for the actual shape of the vehicle to play a role in how lift and drag are applied. Build a hollow shell, and close it up, and everything inside it will be protected from the airflow as it should. Wing Effects - Realistically adjusts lift based on wing position and configuration: wingtips lift less and drag more than wing roots. Stall - Passing the critical angle of attack suddenly reduces lift and greatly increases drag. Can put planes into tailspins, flat spins, and cause crashes. Mach Effects and Area Ruling - Lift and drag will vary as expected with Mach number. Supersonic planes will need to properly area rule themselves for optimum flight characteristics. Body lift - All parts lift: a fast enough brick will fly, if not that well. Download: Get v0.15.9.5 "Lighthill" from Github! Official FAR Craft Sharing Thread Post your crafts there, not here, please. Violators will have their posts moved by moderators, and will have everyone very annoyed with the additional workload for both moderators and me. The FAR wiki at GitHub The source at GitHub Everything licensed under GNU GPL v3 Part.cfg changes powered by sarbian & ialdabaoth's ModuleManager plugin. Interface with stock heating system and other mods interacting with the physics system powered by sarbian, Starwaster and ferram4 ModularFlightIntegrator Toolbar powered by blizzy78's Toolbar plugin. Installation: Copy the GameData and Ships folders into the KSP root directory and merge them with the existing GameData and Ships folders. Make sure that you copy over everything in the GameData folder. Serious issues will occur unless this is done. Changelog: FAQ - Common Questions and Solutions to Common Problems What does this mod do that stock KSP doesn't? Stock KSP calculates drag as a linear combination of the drag properties of a vehicle's parts, with some interaction changes to handle some of the most obvious aerodynamic interaction effects. FAR instead calculates the drag from the vessel shape as a whole, resulting in a more realistic model of aerodynamic drag and body lift. In addition, FAR accounts for wing shape, rather than just overall area like stock KSP. Finally, thanks to the overall vessel model, FAR can account for things like area ruling, where the vehicle's area cross-section must vary properly in order to fly at supersonic speeds (well, without MOAR BOOSTERS, in any case). I don't like my rocket coming apart under heavy aerodynamic loads; how can I turn it off? In the Space Center scene FAR has a debug menu that can be accessed to mess with a large number of the parameters. Under the "cheats" section of the first tab there is an option to disable aerodynamic failure. Does this plugin work properly with other mods / part packs? Sure; FAR figures out what the properties of the part should be based on its dimensions and some basic aerodynamic assumptions. If you use a mod and suspect that it causes unrealistic behavior, search the thread to see if it has been brought up / addressed by the latest release; if it hasn't, feel free to bring it to my attention. The only exception is with wing parts, which are more complicated and currently must have their properties specified manually. Does this plugin make payload fairings and cargo bays work properly? Yes, it will support any and all fairings and cargo bays. Even those that you make out of completely unrelated parts, so long as you close up the shape. In fact, to FAR, there is little difference between the inside of a closed fairing and the inside of a fuel tank part; they're both just as internal to it. I can't seem to turn off the Flight Assistance Systems... what's going on? In the Flight Assistance GUI every button that is pressed activates a control system; when none are pushed down no control systems are active. I suspect that you've actually created a poorly designed craft and that you're attributing aerodynamic forces that you're not used to dealing with to non-existent control inputs. Do I need ModuleManager and/or ModularFlightIntegrator? Yes; they are used to properly apply aerodynamic properties to stock wing parts and to interface properly with the game's physics system. Not using them will cause FAR to not function. I'm using the win64 KSP build and I am still too outraged to read the topic title or changelog, please mock me. Very well, I shall. Haha, silly person. Anyway, win64 is now unlocked for the foreseeable future. If it turns back into the crashtastic support-heavy nightmare it was, the lock may return, but I do not anticipate the need to do that.
  2. The Tournament It's that time of year once again, which means time for a new BAD-T. Like the last three BAD-T tournaments, this will consist of 2v2 dogfights featuring WWII-era aircraft battling around and above sites scattered all over Kerbin. Contestants will submit a craft, which will then be pitted against other submitted craft in a standard tournament ladder format, with fights recorded and posted to YouTube. Defeat means a craft is out of the running, success means it moves up to the next bracket. Depending on the number of entries, a second-tier ladder may also be run, featuring craft that lost during the first round of fights. To enter, simply create a WWII themed aircraft. Replicas of real-world craft are permitted, but not required. Craft design, AI configuration and armament are entirely up to you. As long as it follows the rules and looks like it could have been a real WWII-era fighter, it's a valid entry. The following mods are required: FAR 1.5.9.1 Liepmann with ExtremeTrader's KSP 1.4.5 patch. Aviator Arsenal with the KSP 1.4.5 patch. BDAc 1.2.2.2, with DMG_MULTIPLIER = 750 in the GameData/BDArmory/Settings.cfg. BAD-T Props pack ,which requires the FireSpitter .dll Additionally, the following mods are permitted, but optional: B9 Proc wings Procedural parts Take Command (for planes using constructed open cockpits) Adjustable landing Gear Tournament Brackets Aircraft Classes: Entries will fall into one of two categories, Fighters and Heavy Fighters. Fighters are single engine monoplanes. They have one engine. They must have a dry mass of at least 2.5 tons*. They can use up to 100 points worth of engine and armament. Heavy fighters are heavy twin engine monoplanes. They have 2 engines. They must have a dry mass of at least 5 tons*. They can use up to 150 points worth of engines and armament. *Dry mass is the empty weight of the craft, wet mass is the loaded weight of the craft with fuel and ammunition. Resources like Oxidizer and Ore which aren't used as fuel or ammo can be used as ballast and count towards dry mass. Points: Weapons cost their diameter in mm. *This includes decimals – 12.7mm MGs cost 12.7 points each, etc. Engine cost is indicated by the number in their part name. *'B27-D Brutus' costs 27 points, 'B32-D Gazelle' costs 32, etc. Ammo is free, carry as much or as little as desired. Rules: - Craft must have no more than 60 parts. -Only Aviator Arsenal weapons permitted, with the exception of the Ball Turret. -No more than six of any one type of weapon. Multiple different weapons is allowed. -Only BADT engines allowed (Widshed, Brutus, Gazelle, Wizard, Buzzer, Foxhound, & Falcon). -No aerospace grade parts (radiators/heatshields/airbrakes/etc) allowed; (Ore/RCS tanks allowed as ballast, but not as structural components). -No reaction wheels. Cockpit reaction wheels must be disabled. -Craft must have at least 1 Kerbal, either in a cockpit, or a constructed open cockpit using a command seat. -No BDAc armor panels. Intrinsic part armor thickness is to remain at 10. -Constructed cockpits must be safe, something that a sane (you, not Jeb) pilot would want to sit in. -Part clipping is allowed, within reason. No clipping resource containing parts into other resource containing parts please. Clipping ballast parts into ballast parts is permitted. -If using P wings, keep wing thickness for main wing pieces at least 0.120. -Craft must include a visible Communications Antenna – this is AA's combination AI pilot and weapon manager. -AI min altitude must be at least 300m. -Craft should have at least 15 minutes of fuel. -If both craft on a team run out of ammo, they forfeit the match, as they can no longer shoot down the opposing team. -All entrants will be required to shoot down a Test Dummy craft to certify flight-worthiness in FAR – this is basically to ensure your craft can take off and do maneuvers without a RUD. -No text editing of craft files. -The Eidahill Clause: While cheesy Min-Maxed designs that take advantage of loopholes or game exploits may be technically legal, I ask that contestants respect the spirit of the competition, not just Rules As Written, when designing their airplane. Submissions: Craft must be submitted by the deadline, 11:59 PM, Friday, October 26th. One entry per person. If something goes wrong during submission, or you realize your craft is not rules compliant and needs some changes, contact me via PM. Otherwise, all submissions are final. To submit, upload your craft to KerbalX or similar, and sent me the download link via PM. Sharing links to your crafts in the thread is fine, but only craft I've been sent via PM will count as entries. F.A.Q. Can I submit more than one craft? -No. Entering more than one craft runs the possibility of your entries fighting another of your entries, and the purpose if this tournament is to see how your craft do against other people's designs, not your own. However, if there are not enough entries to fill a roster, secondary entries may be accepted at my discretion. I submitted my craft already, but it (accidentally) breaks the rules, what happens now? -If your craft is an illegal design, I will PM you, and give you the chance to correct the design and re-submit. I've updated my craft after submitting it, can I resubmit? -No, simply to keep the logistics of managing entries simple, one submission per person. You can edit your submission's KerbalX upload or similar as long as it retains the same name before the deadline, but no submitting multiple craft. Can I submit a biplane? -No. Biplanes were mostly obsolete by 1940, and the spirit of the tournament is modern WWII era designs. Can I submit a jet? No. While WWII saw the emergence of first generation jet powered aircraft, for balance reasons all craft should be propeller powered. I'm bad at building craft in FAR, should I still submit something? -Yes. Sure, there will be some entries that are hyper-competitive, but for the most part, this tournament is aimed at having fun, watching submitted craft fight bravely and die gloriously. For the most part FAR is fairly simple to use, but don't be afraid to ask for advice. The rules said something about constructed cockpits? - Take an External Command Seat and use parts to build an open cockpit around the Kerbal (proc parts are good for this). Just make sure it's a cockpit someone other than Jebediah would be comfortable sitting in. Tips & Tricks -Manually fly your craft at least one before handing it off to the AI. This lets you make sure it flies as you expect, and is capable of hard turns/coming out of a dive with out ripping a wing off. -Determine what the minimum altitude your aircraft needs to pull out of a dive from is, and set the AI accordingly. Last thing you want is for the AI to lithobrake your plane during a battle. -Test your craft against the Dummy. The dummy is an aggressively sub-optimal design; if your craft cannot shoot down the Dummy, it is unlikely to perform well against tuned competition aircraft. -Check your wing strength/mass settings. Right click on a wing part to see a slider to adjust the wing's mass and strength. Be careful not to increase or decrease it too much, though. Too little strength and the wing will snap off during maneuvers, too much mass and the plane becomes unnecessarily heavy. -Ammunition is heavy, so consider how much you need. Having a single box of ammo per cannon is generally enough, while machineguns can usually get away with one box per 2 guns. That said, remember that running out of ammo essentially counts as being shot down by the opposing side. -The AI is not by any means a proficient marksman. It may be a good idea to lower max gun range down to something in the 800-1250m range. True, the AI might hit something at 2.5km out, but chances are all it will be doing is wasting all of your ammo at that range. -FAR changes how the CoL indicator in the SPH works; it now shows the center of aerodynamic pressure of the aircraft, rather than the sum output of all lift generating parts. Instead of trying to line up the CoL and CoM indicators, try to align the main wing with the CoM. -Pressing F2 in the editor brings up aim vectors for all guns on a craft, useful for gun calibration if you i.e. want weapons to converge at a certain distance.
  3. Kerbal Wind Implements wind and a continuous-gusts model for Ferram Aerospace Research. Provides GUI with settings for wind direction, speed and turbulence magnitude. The mod was Inspired by KerbalWeatherSystem by silverfox8124 and the addition of a wind speed hook to FAR's API. Dependencies FerramAerospaceResearch is a dependency. You need it or this mod won't even load. Blizzy's Toolbar is an optional dependency. Stock toolbar is also supported now. Which toolbars to use can be set in the configuration file which you have to edit in order to make the change. Download https://github.com/DaMichel/KerbalWind/releases (Source code on GitHub) Installation: Extract the zip file content into the GameData directory. Picz Credits I took an early release of KerbalWeatherSystem as template, gave it the polishing that it deserves, and thus turned it into this fun little stand-alone mod. Proper permissions were given, and now my code is released under the MIT license. Much thanks to Ippo for writing the FAR patch that lets you add wind, and Ferram4 for making FAR and accepting all those patches. License The code is subject to the MIT license (see GitHub page). In addition, the creators of derivative work must give credit to silverfox8124 and DaMichel. The toolbar icon is subject to the WTFPL (http://www.wtfpl.net/)
  4. Update to version 0.15.9.1 "Liepmann", now with voxel-model based aerodynamics! ALL USERS: NO LOGS OR REPRODUCTION STEPS = NO SUPPORT CKAN USERS: PLEASE READ THIS FIRST Users who put issues on Github are awesome. Please consider being awesome. Original Review: Aerodynamic Failures: Building a spaceplane and talking about editor GUI stuff: Features Shape-Based, Vessel-Centered, Aerodynamics - Long, thin shapes drag less than wide, flat shapes, and smooth changes in body width reduce drag. The shape of the vessel as a whole, not individual parts, controls drag, so shape the vessel as you see fit. Emergent Fairings and Cargo Bays - The voxel model method FAR uses allows for the actual shape of the vehicle to play a role in how lift and drag are applied. Build a hollow shell, and close it up, and everything inside it will be protected from the airflow as it should. Wing Effects - Realistically adjusts lift based on wing position and configuration: wingtips lift less and drag more than wing roots. Stall - Passing the critical angle of attack suddenly reduces lift and greatly increases drag. Can put planes into tailspins, flat spins, and cause crashes. Mach Effects and Area Ruling - Lift and drag will vary as expected with Mach number. Supersonic planes will need to properly area rule themselves for optimum flight characteristics. Body lift - All parts lift: a fast enough brick will fly, if not that well. Download: Get v0.15.9.1 "Liepmann" from SpaceDock! Get v0.15.9.1 "Liepmann" from Github! Official FAR Craft Sharing Thread Post your crafts there, not here, please. Violators will have their posts moved by moderators, and will have everyone very annoyed with the additional workload for both moderators and me. The FAR wiki at GitHub The source at GitHub Shader and art assets licensed All Rights Reserved Source code and binaries licensed under GNU GPL v3 Part.cfg changes powered by sarbian & ialdabaoth's ModuleManager plugin. Interface with stock heating system and other mods interacting with the physics system powered by sarbian, Starwaster and myself's ModularFlightIntegrator Toolbar powered by blizzy78's Toolbar plugin. Installation: Copy the GameData and Ships folders into the KSP root directory and merge them with the existing GameData and Ships folders. Make sure that you copy over everything in the GameData folder. Serious issues will occur unless this is done. If you like my stuff, please consider throwing a few bucks my way, it would be awesome. Note that doing so doesn't entitle you to anything, it's just a way of saying "thanks." Changelog: FAQ - Common Questions and Solutions to Common Problems What does this mod do that stock KSP doesn't? Stock KSP calculates drag as a linear combination of the drag properties of a vehicle's parts, with some interaction changes to handle some of the most obvious aerodynamic interaction effects. FAR instead calculates the drag from the vessel shape as a whole, resulting in a more realistic model of aerodynamic drag and body lift. In addition, FAR accounts for wing shape, rather than just overall area like stock KSP. Finally, thanks to the overall vessel model, FAR can account for things like area ruling, where the vehicle's area cross-section must vary properly in order to fly at supersonic speeds (well, without MOAR BOOSTERS, in any case). I don't like my rocket coming apart under heavy aerodynamic loads; how can I turn it off? In the Space Center scene FAR has a debug menu that can be accessed to mess with a large number of the parameters. Under the "cheats" section of the first tab there is an option to disable aerodynamic failure. Does this plugin work properly with other mods / part packs? Sure; FAR figures out what the properties of the part should be based on its dimensions and some basic aerodynamic assumptions. If you use a mod and suspect that it causes unrealistic behavior, search the thread to see if it has been brought up / addressed by the latest release; if it hasn't, feel free to bring it to my attention. The only exception is with wing parts, which are more complicated and currently must have their properties specified manually. Does this plugin make payload fairings and cargo bays work properly? Yes, it will support any and all fairings and cargo bays. Even those that you make out of completely unrelated parts, so long as you close up the shape. In fact, to FAR, there is little difference between the inside of a closed fairing and the inside of a fuel tank part; they're both just as internal to it. I can't seem to turn off the Flight Assistance Systems... what's going on? In the Flight Assistance GUI every button that is pressed activates a control system; when none are pushed down no control systems are active. I suspect that you've actually created a poorly designed craft and that you're attributing aerodynamic forces that you're not used to dealing with to non-existent control inputs. Do I need ModuleManager and/or ModularFlightIntegrator? Yes; they are used to properly apply aerodynamic properties to stock wing parts and to interface properly with the game's physics system. Not using them will cause FAR to not function. I'm using the win64 KSP build and I am still too outraged to read the topic title or changelog, please mock me. Very well, I shall. Haha, silly person. Anyway, win64 is now unlocked for the foreseeable future. If it turns back into the crashtastic support-heavy nightmare it was, the lock may return, but I do not anticipate the need to do that.
  5. I'm trying to build a Delta II in RSS/RO, and i am having a repeat issue, where in vertical integration, the center of lift becomes very unstable, sitting very far off of where it should be, in extreme cases even being very far outside the rockets physical dimensions. adding fins and wings to said rockets does very little, as the center of lift does not move up or down, only staying directly on the COM if you manage to get it there. https://file.io/Bka5q8 ^ Output Log ^ https://imgur.com/a/ZJ3k0pY ^ Delta II COL issue ^
  6. mumbo jumbo

    FAR

    can anyone tell me how to change FAR(ferram aerospace research ) to work one 1.4
  7. Hi guys!!! I have a very simple question I'm sure you airplane experts will be able to answer easily! I am trying to incorporate flaps to my airplanes to smooth my landings - I place control surfaces and activate the flap buttons but I do not see/feel any effects on my craft - would anyone be kind enough to teach me how to set flaps please? Many thanks in advance,
  8. I seem to be having a little problem with my planes on takeoff. That's three separate designs now, so I have no idea what's wrong, and in fact I can't see much in common between them. They all have the exact same problem though. On the runway, during takeoff roll, a particular speed comes when the aircraft starts leering of the center of the runway. It should be noted that I am using FAR and I'm not really an expert with plane design, even though i enjoy it. Right coming back to the case, I present to you most recent of these troublesome designs. It is in no way a spaceplane, as one can see by its engine. Hence it was designed with low-speed, low-altitude performance in mind. However, the runawy sideslip is fatal on takeoff, the plane ususally rips off a wingtip, rotates around it and comes to stop, sliding backwards. I have also found a description of it that I've written. Both for RP purposes and as notes for myself in case i come back to it after a longer break:
  9. Hey guys! I have a moderately modded install of KSP version 1.3.0. My problem is that i encounter multiple issues during my play and get a ton of errors and NullReferenceExceptions to the point currently even my save file gets corrupted sometimes. The mods are all installed via CKAN with the exception of DeadlyReentry, PlanetShine and AGEx. These mods should be compatible with 1.3.0 as far as i know and the problem doesn't originate from them as i suspect. Problems i encounter during gameplay regularly are the following: FMRS sometimes corrupts my savefile which i need to restore via the S.A.V.E. mod FAR continuously spams the log with this error: [ERR 18:43:23.451] [FAR] NaN Prediction Section Error: Inputs: AtmDen: 0.0241596 Mach: 0 Re: 0 Kn: NaN skin: Infinity vel: (0.0, 0.0, 0.0) Sometimes in space i get a NullReferenceError from which point SAS and AtmosphereAutopilot can not stabilize vessels. In the VAB sometimes engines ignore fuelflow priority and ignore crossfeed rules resulting in strange dV calculations from KER and magical cross-feeds to engines on vessels which should not receive fuel from specific tanks. Solar panels on vessels keep magically reverting back to retracted state on load but somehow still produce power and stay online when i don't load them. It's got out of hand to the point i can't deal with it alone. I think there are issues with multiple mods which is hard for me to backtrack so i ask for help here. Developers of the mods i'm having problems with may also find useful stuff in my logs. [20171108_1849] output_log.txt KSP.log
  10. Recreations of my craft from V0.25 SSTO contest thread: SSTO Spaceplane Airplane Design Contest II Akademy Awards and probably some new crafts too I want to use this post to promote some of my favorite mods, like FAR, B9, KW Rocketry, IR parts, Procedural wings and some that I found recently like Adjustable landing gears and Advanced Jet Engines. When I need to ask someone about something in other threads it is easier to pinpoint them to this post, so they can see pictures and even download a craft file to see what I was talking about. Unhide spoiler to reveal links for old KSP version craft files from V0.90 to V1.0.2. KSP V1.0.5. craft files moved to spoiler section. All craft files are available in one archive - Download craft files. KSP 1.1.2 Craft files - All craft files are available in one archive trough download link. Pictures and descriptions moved to spoiler. KSP 1.2.2. Craft files. All crafts are available in one archive trough download link. Some picture will be added later
  11. You know who you are. If FAR isn't installed, then it's not KSP. You've ripped the wings off a hundred planes a thousand times. You have PWM modulation for the pitch up key in muscle memory. Now, it'ts time to show off. Peg the g meter. The rules are simple, and the objective is even simpler. Objective: Build a plane that can generate and survive the highest gee-forces possible. Post an F3 screenshot of your plane (landed or flying) showing the max g-force as well as vessel mass. Short videos or even a gif of the attempt are always great too! Scoring is measured in kilonewtons, which is (the mass of your plane) x (your max g-forces survived) x (9.8). Rules- 0.) You have to have FAR installed, with all default settings. 1.) Your plane has to survive the attempt. (This is a flying challenge, not a crashing challenge) 2.) Your plane cannot have any stalling surfaces during the attempt. 3.) Your plane cannot have a TWR greater than 2. (This a plane challenge, not a rocket with wings challenge) 4.) You must perform your attempt in Kerbin's atmosphere. Other than that, have at it! All mods are in, nothing else I can think of is off limits. You get the spirit of the challenge by now I'm sure, which is pretty much make the most maneuverable plane possible. So far my best is 28 gees with a 1.2 ton plane, and after a bit more refinement I'll submit it! One submission per person on the leaderboard at a time, but feel free to one-up yourself as much as you want! Leaderboard: 1.) 2.) 3.) ...
  12. A drag-reducing aerospike is a device (see Nose cone design) used to reduce the forebody pressure aerodynamic drag of blunt bodies at supersonic speeds. The aerospike creates a detached shock ahead of the body. Between the shock and the forebody a zone of recirculating flow occurs which acts like a more streamlined forebody profile, reducing the drag. Does the game take advantage of such things? I don't really understand how KSP aerodynamics work, but it should benefit from these kind of gadgets if it modeled airflow realistically, especially in mods like RSS where the atmosphere part of ascent is quite long.
  13. Problem 1. RSS & Realism Overhaul (at least FAR+ deadly reentry) installed - game version 1.0+ (tested in 1.1.3) 2. You got an airplane (anything landing horizontally) into low earth orbit 3. You want to get it back down without burning up. Usual outcome: Let's assume, you finally got a craft flying in FAR at both subsonic and high Mach speeds and even have thing not spinning out of control during reentry attempt. As soon as you try to reenter at LEO entry speeds (~8000m/s ish) stuff simply overheats and explodes :-( Howto do it anyway: a) Procedure: You can't use ablative heat shields, so you'll want a very shallow lifted reentry with as low an initial speed as possible, so the heat load can dissipate. You really need to fly the craft all the way down from orbit using a steep AoA to get a detached bow shock and limit overheating. 1. Get Apogee of your orbit to under 200 km above earth (propulsively or with very careful >100 km perigee atmospheric breaking if you dare) Otherwise your reentry speed will be too high and you will overheat before you even get enough lift to fly. 2. Get your perigee at 70 km or below (very shallow reentry) 3. Make sure the reentry shock front is detached. If your plane is pointy in flight direction (MK2 cockpit - good for supersonic performance on ascent but too pointy for nose first reentry) then you need to fly with high angle of attack to form the shock front on the bottom of your plane (20°-30° AoA or even more!) 4. At 80-90 km altitude you will start to get significant lift (at speeds exceeding Mach 20) keep pitched up to control vertical speed. Try to sink as slowly as possible, don't exceed 100 m/s vertical. 5. Keep flying with high AoA (blunt shockfront, high drag, lots of lift) and low vertical speed. If you can force a shallow climb, do it. It will bleed speed even faster. You will likely end up between 60km and 70km for seemingly ever. The reentry corridor might span 1/3 of a whole orbit from initial reentry until you are slow enough to fly circles or change direction. 6. Once you are below 3000 m/s you basically made it. You can trim down the AoA and descent more aggressively and maneuver around. b) Craft Design: 1. All "exposed" components should be able to sustain 2500K surface heating. WARNING: Most RCS thruster pods are not, might have to be placed in the back of the craft, above wings or similar to be shielded from reentry bowshock. Most engines also can't survive that much heat and need shielding from front and bottom (like the Shuttle's SSME) -- Hint: Small Landing gear pods can only sustain 1500 K, you'l likely need medium or large unless you reenter bottom up to shield them. 2. The plane must be aerodynamically stable at subsonic (for landing), supersonic, and hypersonic speeds in rarified atmosphere. You can test that with suborbital flights not exceeding 3000 m/s going up to 60-80 km. Many MK-2 fuselage planes tend to enter a flat-spin in thin upper atmosphere even though they are stable further down. I solved that with "SpaceShip 1" style tail-booms, with SR-71 style tail fins on them ... even though they aren't foldable, they gave me both enough tail stability and enough control authority for #3: 3. You need to find a way to trim the plane for extreme AoA flight aerodynamically, so you need quite a lot of control authority. If the airstream at Mach 20 wants to bring the nose down, you can't fight it with RCS for long. Even in this configuration the plane needs to be semi stable (stable enough that SAS can keep it from spinning out of control) - in a nutshell that means you need forgiving stall behaviour (since you basically reenter high-speed-stalled) Example: Flight with large AoA (22°) and level flight - at this point already descended to 65km and 6100 m/s: (At this point also my bow and mid section RCS thrusters had all but vaporised, only the three at the tail remained. FAR and deadly reentry have a habit of overriding your decision where to place RCS thrusters in a very convincing way ) This shuttle can sustain flight at +20° AoA thanks to setting of max control deflection (40°) and AoA setting -200 on the tail boom rudders. SAS is only used to keep roll and yaw centered. Tail rudder trim reset to zero AoA and 15° max deflection once speed below 2000 m/s, SAS no longer needed (self stable) In this flight I overshot my landing site by more than half a continent and ended up in the middle of the Indian ocean. I managed to ditch the craft with onlyminor damage (ripped one of the tail fins off, but the fuselage and wings held, Jeb was fine )
  14. Thought this warranted a separate thread since FAR players and Stock players are usually completely separate groups. Download here: https://kerbalx.com/crafts/14936 My KSP1-Shuttle (https://kerbalx.com/Naito/KSP1-Shuttle2016) now fully compatible with FAR! Full launch/re-entry/landing. Add the challenge of FAR with your Shuttle launches! Almost the same launch profile/capabilities as my original shuttle, though you now need to be a little more careful with high dynamic loads during launch and landing or else you'll rip your wings off =D Practice your landings with the SCA: https://kerbalx.com/Naito/KSP1-Shuttle2016-FAR-SCA3
  15. jihajia

    built a FlyingBoat!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B34u5l9LkA i make a flyingboat!! and takeoff&lading at sea!! it was difficult but funny work.
  16. Using FAR+B9 Procedural Wings, so basically i feel like B9 procedural wings always making the centre of lift so far back. If i want this plane more maneuverable, i have to move the main wing much more to the front than a normal air liner would looks like (Picture 1). If i move the main wing a little bit back and make the aircraft looks normal, the centre of lift (CoL) is way back from the centre of mass (CoM) (Picture 2). It makes the plane so hard to pitch up, and cant even level fly, surely cant be used, as shown in the following pictures. I can move the fuel tank to the back, so that the CoM and CoL can stay close to each other, but this dosent solve the problem, because the CoM will move to the front during flight, while the fuel is burning up, the plane wont feel good about that. So i am really confuse about this. The stock wings work fine though, their CoL wont be too far back, if with the same configuration as the above procedural wing one. So i am wondering what i need to do if i want this aircraft flyable? Why FAR+B9 procedural wings so hard to use? thats all, if you can help, i am much appreciate. if you cant understand my English then i should rip. PS. some of my mod list: AJE, FAR, B9 Procedural wings, RSS, Firespitter, KerbalJointReinforcement, MechJeb, RealFuels, TacFuelBalancer, TweakScale, KSP interstellar extend... Thank you.
  17. So recently I downloaded FAR because I was getting tired of the weird stock aero behavior. Now I'm dealing with real aero issues, and this one is baffling me. I'm trying to launch a rocket, and these are the two iterations of it (in reverse order of development, compared to how the album is ordered): I know CoL is generally supposed to be behind CoM, but hey, I'm trying out 'realistic' designs, so no fins. I feel like logically, it should still work, but MJ's autopilot always ends up losing control somewhere between 3km and 7km, depending on the settings. I've tried changing AoA, toggling Corrective Steering, modifying the Ascent Path (currently I've got it set to begin gravity turn at 0.8km and 75m/s, ranging from 50-80% shape in my tests)... and I still can't get this thing to space. Either aero forces drag it way down or drag it back up, which then ends in the rocket spinning out of control and breaking up. Help. MJ autopilot makes this game playable for me, because I've been through enough manual launches that I'm not really in the mood to even supervise the launch stage.
  18. The Kerbal Alliance military, in their infinite wisdom, has decided to open yet another competition for the best BDArmory fighter design on the planet, disregarding the fact that the entire planet has been at peace for decades. Entrants are restricted, but barely, by what’s noted down in appendix one. Since the Kerbal Alliance is not a terribly pro-active organization, they’re probably never going to get around to determining the winner, so the competition is running in a “beat the best” format with challengers going up one-on-one against whatever beat the last champion, with both designs controlled by the idiot AI that took over the control tower last week. Competitions will be broadcast via the state-approved TV channels when Real Housekerbs isn’t on. APPENDIX ONE: DESIGN RESTRICTIONS 1a: You MUST USE FAR, BDArmory,and Dynamic Deflection. Dissenters will be processed into delicious snacks. 1b: Other Allowed Mods List: Adjustable Landing Gear, B9 Procedural Wings, Procedural Parts, and any visual/audio mods you want. In fact, if you can record at a respectable framerate while using visual mods, please submit your rig to the Kerbal Alliance for usage in recording the dogfights, in return for the Alliance’s everlasting gratitude. 1c: Entrants are limited to using a single 20mm hidden Vulcan for the guns, as per KOSPAR regulations. 1d: Entrants are limited to a maximum missile count of ten, none of which can be PAC-3s, and all of which must be faced forwards. We don’t want a repeat of the Monkey Flight incident. 1e: Entrants shall program their AI autopilots to a minimum altitude of 1400, default altitude of 2000, and maximum speed of 400. All other settings are up for grabs, but AI settings resulting in unstable flight will be glared at disapprovingly. If you can’t get the slider to exactly the stated settings, “close enough” is good enough. 1f: Entrants shall limit their engine choices to one of the following: up to four Junos, up to two J-33s, up to two Panthers, one turbo-ramjet limited to 50% of throttle. Any fighters using other engines will be laughed off. 1g: Entrants may use one ECM pod, two chaff dispensers, and two flare dispensers, and are limited to one forward-facing radar array [required for entry]. 1h: Manned fighters only. The Kerbal Alliance is still not comfortable with the moral ramifications of automated killing machines, especially when they’re using probe cores developed last Tuesday. Video of first "match" because I can't find the YouTube embed button on this new forum interface Download the F-12 now to get started!
  19. Hello. I have several issues following an attempt to play New Horizons and Outer Planet Mod in x6.4 scale, using Planetshine, Distant Object Enhancer and SkyToneMapper as visual enhancements. Modlist: 1) MechJeb cannot calculate any PorkChop trajectories. After a full minute (used to be under 10 seconds), it just draws up a fully red window with no values. 2) FAR is spamming dozens of NULL reference exceptions and voxel update errors 3) Planetshine is producing errors for every single planet. 4) I'm getting THOUSANDS of these errors. It might be the reason behind why my FPS is much lower than any of my previous 1.0.5 careers: 5) Whenever I disengage SAS, with a wheel currently providing torque, all vessels spin out of control. They recover when I re-engage SAS. They do not spin wildly if the torque is disabled. What could be the cause behind the behaviour? Is it 'realism' being introduced in 1.0.5 or bugged behaviour? Link to full output_log: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9_zZN0vr4CcQWxzZWs4a2FRNnM/view?usp=sharing
  20. Mighty1

    FAR for dummies

    I've been using FAR for some time now but I am still confused about the static analysis. Is there a simple guide somewhere that says that a number is red you should add more wing/control/more lift front or back and so on. Please, oh good Kerbal comunity, help me. My planes do fly but on some designs it is a constant struggle to keep it from flipping or loosing control.
  21. This year while all the staff are away from the KSC on holiday Jeb decided to host a race, but this race is unlike anything anyone would ever approve of, requiring small nimble aircraft to get in between all of the narrowest corridors between the KSC buildings. This challenge is inspired by 1930's air races and modern drone racing and is a combination of the two, with tight drone racing style corridors but with an emphasis on improving aerodynamic design rather than the rather crude bricks which constitute drones. Each race is a single lap around the course starting at the runway, pilots then guide their craft as fast as possible over the SPH, as close to the tower as possible. The second marker is the launch pad water tower, each pilot must pass to the right of the water tower and head to the east side of the runway which is the third mark. Rounding the third mark, the next mark is the cylindrical fuel container with the blue stripe which is between mission control and the VAB. The player then continues through the corridor past the administrative building and makes a left turn around the R&D complex and flies behind the VAB avoiding obstacles. The course ends when you cross the midpoint of the runway. Record your time at this point and land safely for a valid entry. This is the course, the red outlines the boundaries of gates with reference to buildings. The Rules: 1) Ferram Aerospace Research is necessary 2) Passing under gates is necessary, flying above the highest point of a structure is considered passing over a gate 3) You must add 5 seconds to your time every time you pass over a gate 4) One should consider an entry invalid if the course is not followed (cutting inside a gate, flying over corridors) 5) Your power plant of choice will be included on the leaderboard, I hope to see some interesting choices 6) Flying above the VAB while racing renders the result invalid. 7) And I almost forgot, absolutely no torque reaction wheels or cockpit torque! Suggestions: 1) Wings may be helpful 2) The aircraft/rocket should not be wider than a corridor 3) Stay subsonic, this challenge is all about cornering, precision and speed is last in terms of concerns 4) you need about 1 minute and 30 seconds of fuel, no more is necessary. Leaderboard:
  22. Wanderfound

    Junoracer Challenge

    It's a real simple challenge: build a Juno-powered jet that flies as fast and/or as high as possible. Rules: 1) Juno power only. You can have as many Junos as you like, but no other type of propulsion is allowed. 2) Conventional HOTOL single-stage aircraft. It must be able to make a rolling take off or landing from the runway; it cannot drop any parts. 3) Must be Kerballed. You can do this with a command chair if you want, but that's unlikely to be good for your aerodynamics. 4) Stock parts only. Minor part clipping (adjusting wings, stashing batteries in an empty fuel tank, etc.) is fine, but no stacking twenty engines onto a single node. Minor flight assistance mods (Kerbal Flight Data, Pilot Assistant's PID tuner, etc) are fine. 5) Scoreboards will be kept for both fastest and highest, in separate categories for stock aerodynamics and FAR. 6) Post screenshots of your highest and fastest moments, and a link to the craft file. 7) Using different planes for highest and fastest is fine. 8) Remember Wheaton's Law. To get it started: Craft file at https://www.dropbox.com/s/p68iml1ev3zhhcr/Junoracer.craft?dl=0 Scoreboard Stock Altitude Nefrums, 33,115m DoctorDavinci, 20,954m Speed Nefrums, 721.6m/s DoctorDavinci, 646.5m/s FAR Altitude DoctorDavinci, 26,622m Wanderfound, 25,652m Speed DoctorDavinci, 633.7m/s Wanderfound, 598.7m/s ZalgoWaits, 530m/s
  23. As I understand it, there are various kinds of drag an airplane can encounter. It is not possible to optimise for all in a single design, so it is necessary to set priorities based on the role of your aircraft - 1. Parasite drag. Same as your car experiences. Dominant in high dynamic pressure reigimes. Minimise wing span to reduce. 2. Lift induced drag. Worst at high angles of attack, ie. low dynamic pressure reigimes. Having a high aspect ratio wing (long span but comparatively thin, like a glider) reduces lift induced drag, as does having sufficient wing area to avoid high angles of attack. 3. Wave drag. Dominant in the transonic flight regieme. Optimise your area ruling to minimise. 4. Shockwave drag ? Significant at supersonic speeds. Keep the wing tips and basically the entire aircraft behind the "bow wave" created by the aircraft's nose, to minimise this. Now there are other aerodynamic qualities an aircraft might design for, but I'm not going to include roll rate or supermanuverability since this is all about space planes not fighters. Of the above, 1) is not so important to me either because of the way I fly - i don't try to go fast until i'm really high up, at which point the air is so thin, i need a large wing area to avoid 2) more than i need small wing span to avoid 1). The trouble with FAR, at least to a noob like me, is that Transonic Wave drag is very much thrown in your face, and I find myself becoming a slave to it. Optimise the heck out of the problem you can see, and forget about Lift Induced and Shock Drag because whilst they are modelled, they are buried deep in the UI. To be more specific, I always end up optimising so that the Mach 1 Wave Drag area is less than 20% of the Max Cross Sectional Area of the aircraft, sometimes much less. However, so long as it's 30% or less you're likely to find penetrating the sound barrier easier than with stock aerodynamics in 1.05, and certainly much easier than with the brick wall you faced in 1.04. I'm unsatisfied with the aircraft I've created so far because I'd like to transfer some of their excessive performance in the middle part of the speed range, transonic, into better performance at the bottom and top end. Why am I bothered about low and slow? Because I like to set up IRSU infrastructure and have my space planes refuel and go beyond Kerbin to other bodies, eg. Duna, Laythe. There they will need to make off-airport landings, and reducing the stall speed is vital to accomplish this in one piece. Why am I bothered about hypersonic flight through the Mesosphere? For the way I operate, this is the most critical regime of all. A lot of people fly like an airplane up to 20km/Mach 4, then transition to thrust-borne flight and zoom up to orbit at TWR > 1 in a cloud of burnt LF/O. I tend not to use any oxidizer at all however and after getting as high as possible in airbreathing mode, light up the NERV engines simply keep flying ever higher on their meagre thrust. So long as I can keep a good lift/drag ratio above 30km and mach 4, thrust will exceed drag and i'll slowly gain kinetic/potential energy. As we get ever higher, lift will decrease, but since speed is increasing, the centrifugal force of hurtling around the planet will cancel out more and more gravity. What's our design point? Well, up to 30km/Mach 4 I still have RAPIERS , so this is the lower boundary. And by 50km/Mach 7 I usually shut down and coast to an Apoapsis over 70km, so we can say the mid point is Mach 5.5 and 35/40KM. How do you optimise for low drag here, which factors matter? Is transonic/area ruling still the most important? Does the aspect ratio of your wings still matter at all? Presumably we still need plenty of wing area to keep our AoA down to reasonable levels in what is going to be VERY thin air? Lastly, is it at all possible to have the above with also a reasonable landing speed, by sacrificing other flight areas I don't find so important? Certain real world strategies aren't available to us in game, eg. Variable Geometry wings, flap blowing etc. but we shouldn't complain too loudly as orbital velocities in KSP are only 1/3 of real life, greatly reducing the speed range we have to get our designs to perform under. -------------------------------------------------------------------- This is an example of my last design under FAR with Procedural Wings. My reasoning went thus - This is the aircraft that resulted. I had Interstellar mod installed, so that thing you can see poking from the forward cargo bay is a pebble bed reactor that doesn't quite fit. At the rear of the fuselage is a hybrid thermal turbojet/nuclear thermal rocket. It operates as a nuclear turbojet in the lower atmosphere, then as a nuclear thermal rocket higher up. Buried in the cargo bay is a mk1 cockpit whose canopy clips through the bay doors, and a mk1 passenger cabin. Crew capacity - 3. I'm not sure what most of these numbers mean, but i've been told that green is good. At sea level this design needs AoA of 4.2 to maintain level flight @ 120 m/s, which is as good as anything i've made in FAR. The numbers on this screen don't seem to be affected by me lowering the flaps, but they do seem to have an effect when actually flying. With full fuel, I can stay airborne down to 70 m/s at about 10 degrees nose up. After that the canard stalls and the nose drops. I suppose there's not much point going to greater pitch anyway, it would just result in a tailstrike. In practice we'd be landing with little or no fuel. I've found that 3 Vernier engines translating upward can substantially lower airplane landing speeds on Duna. EDIT - oh yes, the main point. The best L/D ratio I seem to be able to get with this airplane is 3, in the >Mach 4, high altitude regime. To me , that sounds very low, but can it realistically be made better?
  24. Why is it that when realchute is installed, with FAR, all parachutes that would usually be MM patched (i assume) into realchutes, because FAR comes packaged with realchute lite, but with Realchute (not lite) installed, the parts without realchute configs no longer get patched to be realchutes. any help? ex: the big radial parachutes, from the lithobraking exploration mod, i assume, or maybe it was the spaceY mod, with only FAR installed, the parachutes become realchutes, but with FAR AND realchute, they turn back into normal, stock parachutes.
  25. It's been a while. Been posting solely on Reddit for the past year but I figured it's time to start sharing content on the forums again. Here's my latest creation: the Kossack Super-manoeuvrability Demonstrator (SMD). You can download the craft file here. Action groups: toggles engines on/off toggles afterburners and toggles the gimbal so it's off while they're active increases flap deflection decreases flap deflection toggles the boarding ladder toggles the rudder airbrake Below are a couple of videos showing what can be done with it. I'm flying exclusively with control surfaces here; no reaction wheels were used, and cockpit torque was turned off: p.s. if anyone could tell me if there's a way to re-size the youtube videos using the new WYSIWYG editor or a workaround I'd really appreciate it.