[1.3.1] Ferram Aerospace Research: v0.15.9.1 "Liepmann" 4/2/18

[Baughn]

@Baughn: I suspect a bad install. Nothing has changed there for that to be the case, and it works fine for me.

Then I don't know how to do it. I copied the GameData/FerramAerospaceResearch directory into a fresh KSP install, and it's still broken.

EDIT: Oh! Of course. ModuleManager is missing. Let's try that again... Yep, works. Great!

Edited October 11, 2014 by Baughn

[Wanderfound]

Jep, i'm also trying the devbuild (the 250t plane was the normal 14.2). The modifiable wing mass is great! Can't wait to see to what extremes i can drive my spaceplanes.

Also thx to ferram for making the general wing weight a bit less extreme. Just adding a few wings was a bit to simple before, but i feel the now adjusted way is better than throwing winged stones at the sky.^^

edit: Huh, I just brought a stone into stable orbit. Interesting point: EDIT: Nope, nvm. There seems to go on more than i understand... Oo

Also, very light wings might be a bit to stable. Might have been a procedural wings thing, but even big B9-stabilisators did withstand some crazy stuff. Hard stall including incontrollable spiral (at ~15k), and nothing happened to 0.2 to 0.4 mass stuff.

I'm thinking perhaps that 0-1 in 0.05 increments might be the way to go. With standard strength wings, it's easier to break the fuselage than to snap the wings off. Increasing that is unnecessary.

EDIT: just discovered that the latest dev build permits 0.01 adjustments. Nice.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Wanderfound

[coldblade2000]

What does it mean if it is extremely difficult to keep the prograde vector up? In some planes I have almost perfect stability (only Lr is red, and only by a bit) but I always have to have a 7-12+ AoA to even keep the prograde vector pointing anywhere than down. Getting to 18km is nearly impossible, and there the high speeds will destroy the crap out of me.

Also, is there a tutorial on doing turns and/or making a plane more maneuverable? I spend 3 minutes on a 180 turn alone, stalling over 7 times.

[AetherGoddess]

What does it mean if it is extremely difficult to keep the prograde vector up? In some planes I have almost perfect stability (only Lr is red, and only by a bit) but I always have to have a 7-12+ AoA to even keep the prograde vector pointing anywhere than down. Getting to 18km is nearly impossible, and there the high speeds will destroy the crap out of me.

Also, is there a tutorial on doing turns and/or making a plane more maneuverable? I spend 3 minutes on a 180 turn alone, stalling over 7 times.

seems like insufficient lift for level flight.

[Wanderfound]

What weights are people playing with the dev version using? I'm finding 0.15 to be light enough to fly with but still needlessly overstrong; trying 0.12 now.

[Wanderfound]

What does it mean if it is extremely difficult to keep the prograde vector up? In some planes I have almost perfect stability (only Lr is red, and only by a bit) but I always have to have a 7-12+ AoA to even keep the prograde vector pointing anywhere than down. Getting to 18km is nearly impossible, and there the high speeds will destroy the crap out of me.

Also, is there a tutorial on doing turns and/or making a plane more maneuverable? I spend 3 minutes on a 180 turn alone, stalling over 7 times.

The current release has extremely overstrength and overheavy wings that make generating sufficient lift at altitude very difficult with all but the lightest planes. It also discourages the sort of broadwing builds that are best at sharp turns. Fortunately, the dev build includes a weight tweakable that returns things to normal (and more!). About 0.1-0.15 seems to be the sweet spot for the weight tweakable.

If you have a look at the Kerbodyne link in my sig, you'll find piloting and building guides. What speed were you trying to turn at? Tight aerobatics are a thing that only happens at subsonic speeds. Also see http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94343-Spaceplane-Speed-Challenge-IV-Up-and-Down for some examples of possibilities.

[ArcticTroll]

--

Edited June 30, 2018 by ArcticTroll
removing

[GabeTeuton]

VERY disappointed i can't use far with x64 in windows... i don't know how to use linux nor have the time or will to learn as of right now... i just wanted to play ksp with FAR in a x64 build... any of you managed to compile a x64 version of it and it's willing, with the authors aceptance, to share it? It was working just fine in the lastest version......... it's so disappointing... i can't play with mods if one of the main mods i use won't work and the x32 build won't work either with 10 mods... I want to cry

So wanting to cry... what do i do now (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((?

Edited October 12, 2014 by GabeTeuton
just wanted to make sure everyone notice i'm disappointed and wanting to cry

[Wanderfound]

More experimenting...

Using the second-lowest possible weight setting (0.12, next down is 0.01) in the dev build, the wings still seem substantially stronger than ye olde Ferram. They're light enough to fly with, but nowhere near as gossamer as before. For example, I took up this plane (0.12 all over) and then threw it into a flat spin reentry.

Tumbling from orbit, bouncing the g-meter into the red the whole way, the plane was still intact at ~10,000m when I gave up and hit quickload.

Still a bit of calibrating to be done, looks like.

[taniwha]

Wanderfound: what mod gives that extra info around the navball? Is it part of the enhanced navball mod?

[Wanderfound]

Wanderfound: what mod gives that extra info around the navball? Is it part of the enhanced navball mod?

Kerbal Flight Data.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80842-Kerbal-Flight-Data-R8-(05-08-2014)

[DaMichel]

Allow me to answer

It's KerbalFlightData

Edit: Ninjad!

Btw. @Ferram, nevermind! I'm just reporting what i find odd

Also i like the tweakable wing mass. I made a new separatron-assisted-takeoff ultra light glider with wing mass set to the minimum, which weights less than a ton and has L/D ratio of 20. The wings seem still pretty strong. It has an incredible turn rate if you get it up to speed and so far nothing broke off.

[taniwha]

Both of you: thank you.

[Voculus]

I was able to get a plane into orbit and land it after reducing the wing weight and control surface sliders to 0.11. The plane is now closer to its original weight of 86 tons. With the default weights, it was 96 tons. Here's the thing: Before the latest update, it could carry 38 tons of cargo into orbit, so the new wing values were definitely not overloading it. In any event, it's still nearly impossible to use SAS, due to the oscillation that I can't get rid of.

SAS before .25

SAS after .25

This is a problem with all aircraft. Not just the heavyweights. If I can figure out how to stop it, I'll be golden.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Voculus

[blowfish]

VERY disappointed i can't use far with x64 in windows... i don't know how to use linux nor have the time or will to learn as of right now... i just wanted to play ksp with FAR in a x64 build... any of you managed to compile a x64 version of it and it's willing, with the authors aceptance, to share it? It was working just fine in the lastest version......... it's so disappointing... i can't play with mods if one of the main mods i use won't work and the x32 build won't work either with 10 mods... I want to cry

So wanting to cry... what do i do now (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((?

Install Active Texture Management and 32 bit will probably stop crashing. Also use -force-opengl. Both reduce RAM usage.

[Camacha]

VERY disappointed i can't use far with x64 in windows...

It is what it is and for good reason. Use OpenGL, that should help a lot. If you don't like it, please complain to Squad. They are the cause of this, the modders are only protecting the user (that includes you) from frustration.

[Hodo]

I was able to get a plane into orbit and land it after reducing the wing weight and control surface sliders to 0.11. The plane is now closer to its original weight of 86 tons. With the default weights, it was 96 tons. Here's the thing: Before the latest update, it could carry 38 tons of cargo into orbit, so the new wing values were definitely not overloading it. In any event, it's still nearly impossible to use SAS, due to the oscillation that I can't get rid of.

SAS before .25

http://www.animated-gifs.eu/war-bow/0044.gif

SAS after .25

http://netanimations.net/dolphin--2.gif

This is a problem with all aircraft. Not just the heavyweights. If I can figure out how to stop it, I'll be golden.

Glad I am not the only one experiencing this problem. Not sure if it is FAR related though.

[Maschinenbauer]

Senshi: part of the lockout is it is a filter: those who can recompile it themselves will anyway. However, they take on the responsibility. More importantly, they take on the responsibility of providing support should they distribute the modified version.

Which setting disables the filter? I use PE explorer. I can disassemble and recompile it, but have no idea what line, command, or value to tweak.

[Sychopath52]

Where can i get the 32 bit version of the game to play with .25 and FAR? I have the steam version.

[Hodo]

Where can i get the 32 bit version of the game to play with .25 and FAR? I have the steam version.

Then you have the 32bit version, and the 64bit version. You have to go into your KSP folder and manually launch 64bit, the game defaults in 32bit.

Also a Steam user.

[Sychopath52]

Then you have the 32bit version, and the 64bit version. You have to go into your KSP folder and manually launch 64bit, the game defaults in 32bit.

Also a Steam user.

I launch the shortcut steam made, and it launches the 64bit automatically. So I guess i have to go into the file and make a shortcut for the 32bit version. I hope Squad fixes the 64bit version soon. ( ; _ ; )

[SuccessPastaTime]

I was able to get a plane into orbit and land it after reducing the wing weight and control surface sliders to 0.11. The plane is now closer to its original weight of 86 tons. With the default weights, it was 96 tons. Here's the thing: Before the latest update, it could carry 38 tons of cargo into orbit, so the new wing values were definitely not overloading it. In any event, it's still nearly impossible to use SAS, due to the oscillation that I can't get rid of.

SAS before .25

http://www.animated-gifs.eu/war-bow/0044.gif

SAS after .25

http://netanimations.net/dolphin--2.gif

This is a problem with all aircraft. Not just the heavyweights. If I can figure out how to stop it, I'll be golden.

Yeah, my game is like this too. It seems it's much more sensitive. I've only been able to get a single rocket to orbit since I've installed .25 w/ FAR, but I haven't been playing a whole lot. Planes are also much more difficult to fly. I have played with FAR for a long time, so I'm used to its changes, so I assume something is different with this update. I bet I just need to adjust some settings, but I've never done it before, so I'm not sure what to even do.

[ferram4]

I don't know how any of you had any success with SAS before, nothing significant has changed on the physics end. On the other hand, the number of changes to the SP+ modules might have changed things (they had a few problems previously) and so that might be part of the cause. Regex is looking into how SAS works to see if anything can be done about it, but I don't know how long it'll be before I can consider messing with that.

At any rate, the dev build in the github repo now includes a refactoring of wing interactions stuff that should be more efficient and act a little smoother wrt what parts are in front of what. Feel free to try it out.

[UncleCrusty]

I've noticed something rather annoying - FAR seems to be multiplying the mass of wings by a factor of 5.05, if KER's readout is accurate. I've scoured the options and config files and nothing seems to indicate this as a "feature" so I'd chalk it up to a bug. I've checked with on old 0.24 install, and the mass did not appear multiplied there. This coincides with aircraft seeming significantly more difficult to get off the ground in this version, especially if they require a lot of wings - for instance FAR's "strato whale" has a total mass of well over double with FAR installed as compared to a stock install.

[JackCY]

What does it mean if it is extremely difficult to keep the prograde vector up? In some planes I have almost perfect stability (only Lr is red, and only by a bit) but I always have to have a 7-12+ AoA to even keep the prograde vector pointing anywhere than down. Getting to 18km is nearly impossible, and there the high speeds will destroy the crap out of me.

Also, is there a tutorial on doing turns and/or making a plane more maneuverable? I spend 3 minutes on a 180 turn alone, stalling over 7 times.

1) Do you have enough lift for the weight of the craft?

2) Is your CoL too far back behind CoM?

More maneuverable will be unstable and with the SAS, MJ, FAR assistants you won't stabilize it, it's gonna be a pain to fly.

It would be light, with CoL very close to CoM and decent lift and control surfaces. Apart from weight it's easy to do in KSP.

180 turn 3 minutes? I can take off the runway and turn around 180 to fly the other way before the runway ends. You must be doing something wrong or are trying to fast turn a whale.

VERY disappointed i can't use far with x64 in windows... i don't know how to use linux nor have the time or will to learn as of right now... i just wanted to play ksp with FAR in a x64 build... any of you managed to compile a x64 version of it and it's willing, with the authors aceptance, to share it? It was working just fine in the lastest version......... it's so disappointing... i can't play with mods if one of the main mods i use won't work and the x32 build won't work either with 10 mods... I want to cry

So wanting to cry... what do i do now (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((?

This is a so far not ending issue with Squad's miserable texture loading, we don't need 64bit if Squad KSP would not use 10 more memory than other games because they load uncompressed textures to RAM, instead of loading textures straight to VRAM when and only when they are needed and in a compressed state. My KSP runs something like 2GB+ RAM but only 600MB or so VRAM, it's silly. Complain to Squad, the 64bit version is even worse from what everyone says, for me even the 32bit version tends to close randomly sometimes without any error and I doubt it's hitting 3GB limit or something since I don't have that many new parts in it, could be bugs in some of the .25 mod releases. 0.24 didn't do it.

I was able to get a plane into orbit and land it after reducing the wing weight and control surface sliders to 0.11. The plane is now closer to its original weight of 86 tons. With the default weights, it was 96 tons. Here's the thing: Before the latest update, it could carry 38 tons of cargo into orbit, so the new wing values were definitely not overloading it. In any event, it's still nearly impossible to use SAS, due to the oscillation that I can't get rid of.

SAS before .25

http://www.animated-gifs.eu/war-bow/0044.gif

SAS after .25

http://netanimations.net/dolphin--2.gif

This is a problem with all aircraft. Not just the heavyweights. If I can figure out how to stop it, I'll be golden.

Glad I am not the only one experiencing this problem. Not sure if it is FAR related though.

It does the opposite for me, stock SAS is the only thing that can handle my planes so far. FAR assistants are a deadly try quite often as they tend to oscillate craft out of control or do not have enough steering power to correct.

Sure there is always some overshooting with anything sometimes but it's not that bad. My cargo plane (with no cargo loaded) I can fly even at 4x acceleration without it veering off somewhere.

Try lowering the control surfaces power, that should help in general whether flying by hand or having it hold course via SAS.