ferram4

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

Recommended Posts

I reported this issue a while ago and thought that it was a dev version problem but it is happening again.

So, a clean install, only Modular Flight Integrator 1.2.4,ModuleManager 2.7.6 and FAR De Laval installed. I landed a stock Gull in the water some 15 km off the KSC in the water, launch another gull and approach. When I get to cca 200 m distance the game crashes. Sometimes there is no crash but the targeted vessel just vanishes and lands on the sun accoring to the tracking station. I tried the same approach while landed and nothing happens and in orbit there are no issues also. It appears it is a water thing.

Here is the crash log https://www.dropbox.com/s/ikrh70zh7sxyfdi/2017-05-23_093008.rar?dl=0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the FAR crew, well done!! Arguably one of the more complex and technical mods out there, and one of the best, imo! Glad to see it finally ready for 1.2.2!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top props to you guys who've been working on this mod!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic!

Is there some kind of tutorial or instruction on how to make new wing parts work properly with FAR? Airplane Plus adds new wing shapes, elevons, and even special-built flaps and slats and I'm not sure how to make it all work together.

 

Edited by theonegalen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, theonegalen said:

Is there some kind of tutorial or instruction on how to make new wing parts work properly with FAR? Airplane Plus adds new wing shapes, elevons, and even special-built flaps and slats and I'm not sure how to make it all work together.

I honestly don't know how slats and flaps should be handled when they are actual parts, @ferram4 would have to weigh in there. As for the wings, look at the FAR wiki AFAIK the tutorial I helped write up still applies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Drew Kerman Yeah, I used the tutorial to get the wings and normal control surfaces to work. Thank you for that.

Edited by theonegalen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does FAR require about twice the wing area compared to stock model for <100m/s landings? My spaceplane used to land at ~80m/s with stock but now it's more like 150m/s to get the same AoA. Also flaps do not seem to make much of a difference with stock parts. Are some of the plane part mods better in that regard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have encountered a problem running this mod with Procedural Fairings (which is FAR-compatible according to its OP).

One of my probe designs has a shrouded midsection which contains solars, radiators and scientific instruments and is meant to be exposed after leaving the atmosphere. Jettisoning the fairing works perfectly fine, but the probe's solars and radiators refuse to deploy, reporting they are in a stowed state. This does not occur without FAR.

I would like to know possible causes of and, if available, solutions to this problem.

 

This message has also been posted to the Procedural Fairings thread.

Edited by Angstinator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, siimav said:

Does FAR require about twice the wing area compared to stock model for <100m/s landings? My spaceplane used to land at ~80m/s with stock but now it's more like 150m/s to get the same AoA. Also flaps do not seem to make much of a difference with stock parts. Are some of the plane part mods better in that regard?

Yes, the stock model generates too much lift for wing area.  Your planes will also reach higher speeds in FAR than you do in stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jikahn said:

Yes, the stock model generates too much lift for wing area.  Your planes will also reach higher speeds in FAR than you do in stock.

Not only does the stock model generate too much lift when going slow, it generates too little lift when going fast (high subsonic speeds) preventing super cruising. So not only does FAR allow planes to go faster, it allows them to go higher and farther.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, taniwha said:

Not only does the stock model generate too much lift when going slow, it generates too little lift when going fast (high subsonic speeds) preventing super cruising. So not only does FAR allow planes to go faster, it allows them to go higher and farther.

That's why I can't play without FAR, I'm an SSTO guy and once I started using FAR I couldn't go back. This long wait was a tough one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Sees FAR update*

Time to play some KSP again!

Also, I recently purchased a basic starter kit from flitetest.com and have been having a blast with it. It's amazing what flies with insane power those electric motors put out. Equally amazing are modern lithium ion batteries- the amount of energy those things store is quite frankly scary, especially when you see the equivalent amount of mechanical work they can produce. (ie, fly an airplane around at 50+ mph for over ten minutes)

The reason for this? Well, I want to see if my FAR creations really fly :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.  I have a cylindrical rocket with a force of 1.5 TWR and increases as fuel is burned off. What horizontal force is being applied to it? Should it not fly down it's velocity vector? Why would it deviate from it?  Shouldn't the acceleration of the rocket trump the stasis of Kerbin's atmosphere? Just saying because there is NO WEATHER on Kerbin.

 

This overall is a great mod... But the mods physics would mean that an arrow fired from a bow would hit it's user.....

Edited by Fizwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fizwalker said:

Ok.  I have a cylindrical rocket with a force of 1.5 TWR and increases as fuel is burned off. What horizontal force is being applied to it? Should it not fly down it's velocity vector? Why would it deviate from it?  Shouldn't the acceleration of the rocket trump the stasis of Kerbin's atmosphere? Just saying because there is NO WEATHER on Kerbin.

I don't really get what you're saying - are you trying to figure out why your rocket is tipping over as it ascends? Better description of what is happening is needed. And pictures. Def pictures

Edited by Drew Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. I am.

I think there is too much horizontal force being applied to my rocket. It's like firing a mortar and having the round land behind you. It doesn't make sense. I don't know the physics involved.... But I know it's wrong.

Edited by Fizwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fizwalker said:

Yes. I am.

I think there is too much horizontal force being applied to my rocket. It's like firing a mortar and having the round landing behind you. It doesn't make sense. I don't know the physics involved.... But I know it's wrong.

There is nothing wrong with physics, just with your rocket.
It may be that you have a faring that gives a good body lift, or you have wings positioned in the wrong place, or you don't have a good stabilization in your rocket (fins are always good to keep it pointed in the right direction).

Anyway, post us an image of the rocket you are trying to get up in orbit. It may also be a problem with the air pressure against the speed/mass/whatever of your rocket due to its acceleration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This forum doesn't allow the posting of pictures, so I cannot post a picture of my craft (Not going to a third party just for a picture, sorry). Suffice to say, it is powered by 3 in line engines. The outboard engines are locked to controlling roll. The center engine is locked to Pitch and Yaw. Overall, the rocket is over ~35M long.  18M is in the first stage, by the end of the first stage, where the center of gravity should have move further to the nose... Honestly, it behaves like I would expect it from gale force winds.

Given that weather isn't modeled in the game, it seems off

 

Edit: The force is applied to the bottom with a relatively high center of mass As the CoM moves f.urther up, the rocket loses stability. That's what is incongruous. Top is narrow and there isn't anything that could create drag.  Bottom is wider horizontally. Design moves the Center of Gravity further to the nose, rather then backwards towards the engines.

 

Edited by Fizwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know that you may use imgurl without having to create account or anything like that, right?
Anyway, I fail to understand your craft with this description you gave. Are you saying that you have two rocket engines for roll, and another for pitch and yaw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Scoppio said:

You know that you may use imgurl without having to create account or anything like that, right?
Anyway, I fail to understand your craft with this description you gave. Are you saying that you have two rocket engines for roll, and another for pitch and yaw?

It is a linear 3 engine design. The outboard engines are responsible for Roll. The Center engine controls pitch and yaw.  That said, atmospheric forces seem to apply more on the nose, than the section applying the thrust. Like I am launching during a hurricane.

 

Edit: Not going to a 3rd party, so yes I understand that I can post to Imgur.....I won't because I  do not wish to go to a 3rd party.

Edited by Fizwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seens quite normal to me.
Are you "falling" during your gravitational curve right? Or going completely straight up? Its not that the "weather is pushing you down", but you have drag and lif being applied to the nose of your rocket (air pressure -> acceleration -> difference of drag against lift surface).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bare with me for a bit. When you put your hand outside a window while traveling in a car, you experience lift from the deflection of the airflow deflected from your vector of travel. That's because your hand is being propelled forward by the car. Generally speaking once the car is at cruising speed, it is 1G. Equal force opposing the constant acceleration of the car. Now that is horizontal acceleration. That is what it is because the point of thrust is horizontal. Meaning it is along the surface of the Earth.

 

Now, when you launch a rocket in this game and mod, the atmosphere seems to behave in a similar fashion to sticking your hand out a window of a car. That is to say, that the horizontal travel is more important than the direction of thrust. I posit that horizontal force is less than the force applied by rockets along the direction the force is being acted upon. This isn't being modeled properly in my opinion.

 

It is my theory, that action upon an object going to orbit will find more force being applied to towards its direction of travel based on it's length. Meaning it will not be deflected off track by random atmospheric forces while a constant source of thrust is behind it.

 

Edited by Fizwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.