[1.8-1.12] Ferram Aerospace Research Continued: v0.16.0.5 "Mader" 03/04/22

[capi3101]

I've been having the same issue with loading the FAR-Continued mod v.0.16.1.0 in KSP 1.10.1.2939 that others have reported. Occasionally when the game is loading and it gets to the point where Module Manager begins running post patch callbacks (right after loading asset definitions), the loading process hangs and the game crashes. Today it finally threw a bonafide error that I can report and it looks like the problem is related to FAR-continued.

My log file is here. It does seem to be intermittent; sometimes the game will still load and sometimes it hangs. I do run several WBI mods as well - Pathfinder, Buffalo, LDEF and MOLE, but I'm not seeing a conflict there nor with any of the other mods I have in common with others that have reported this issue.

Could there be some kind of issue with MM 4.1.4 causing this?

Edited September 20, 2020 by capi3101

[Neil Kermstrong]

How do i build a plane that doesn't break itself upon reaching high speeds? I'm trying to build a shuttle and it always breaks

[Stormwalker]

so, I just installed FAR, and... the wings on my planes seem to not have any effect on overall lift.

Which is to say, I can move the wings forward, backward, etc. and the center of lift doesn't move.

I've tested this with B9 Procedural Wings and also with stock wings, though there was one difference between the two - with the B9 procedural wings, it didn't even make any difference when I removed the wing entirely.  With the stock wing, that did make a difference, but I could still move the wing around to extremes with CoL not changing at all as long as it was still attached.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the intended behavior.  Any ideas what might cause it?

EDIT:  Never mind.  I had installed FAR via CKAN and apparently it messed something up.  I uninstalled it and then reinstalled it manually and now it is working just fine.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Stormwalker

[capi3101]

4 hours ago, Neil Kermstrong said:

How do i build a plane that doesn't break itself upon reaching high speeds? I'm trying to build a shuttle and it always breaks

To adequately answer this question in a helpful manner, we'd have to know a bit more about your flight profile. Let's start by what for you is constituting "high speeds" - can you tell us how fast and how high up you typically are when you RUD?

Typical spaceplane SSTO flight profile for me is to stay trans-sonic (loosely defining this at under 350 m/s) up to 10,000 ASL, then lower my nose to 20 degrees. Go to 15 degrees at 12.5k, 10 degrees at 10k and then if I'm still under 800 m/s (roughly Mach 3; I use Kerbal Flight Data so I can and do go with the Mach number) by that point lower the nose to 5 degrees at 12.5k. At 20k and above 1100 m/s, that's when I pitch up to head out of the atmosphere. Plane becomes a rocket at 30k and I plan for 1300 m/s in that part of the flight (usually that's enough to get up to orbit, fiddle around a bit and deorbit later).

Without more data, your options are to throttle back in the region of max-Q, or grab Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. Or both.

Edited September 23, 2020 by capi3101

[Zmeya]

I found a small problem that I know happens in 1.9.1.

[Stormwalker]

"Zw and Xu are basically just the effects of lift and drag, respectively (Z is positive down) as you increase downwards vertical velocity (increasing angle of attack) the plane makes more lift. As you increase your forwards velocity, the plane makes more drag. If Zw is incorrect, your plane is very badly designed. If Xu is incorrect, you have summoned the Kraken and should file a bug report."

If I'm understanding that correctly, I've summoned the Kraken and need to file a bug report?

In the first screenshot, Xu becomes positive at about 20 km at Mach 0.6 and becomes increasingly positive as altitude increases.

The second one appears to be more of a transient case, increasing or decreasing the altitude causes it to become negative again.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Stormwalker
Added another example.

[boribori]

After I install FAR antennas don't snap anymore:

 

Is that intended behaviour?

My Player.log: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tERa5sekci3qq-uD8dPhIGs0Bl96SEGP/view?usp=sharing

Thanks

 

[Neros7]

On 9/9/2020 at 10:39 PM, Neros7 said:

How do you get the dev branch-FAR?

I have the same issue, now it got even weirder; when i leave to space hangar after i have moved the carrier into open sea and reenter it from the space center it works short but then starts spinning violently; could it be because it is a one part carrier and the rudders work wrong?

https://mega.nz/file/W1wi2KoZ#O8N5TLD_U_wxDqpVozSaMyzpmGf3EWllxsTXq7Yp2hE

On 9/9/2020 at 10:12 PM, Neros7 said:

Is there any other fix for the already mentioned boat issue of locking in space?

I'd love to help!

Anyone wanting to help?

 

 

[ebigunso]

How can I stop FAR from automatically bringing up the menu every time I stage?

[capi3101]

2 hours ago, ebigunso said:

How can I stop FAR from automatically bringing up the menu every time I stage?

That's not something FAR does as a rule...

The mod administrators are going to want to see a KSP.log file from a session wherein the described behavior occurs and maybe a screenshot of the behavior in progress; just telling you that now. "Menu" is a vague term in this case too; to which menu are you referring? 

[taniwha]

@capi3101 Logs won't help here (I know, I've been "fighting" this issue for years).

@ebigunso It seems to have something to do with the state of FAR's UI at the start of the scene. ie, if it's open when you put your ship on the pad/runway then close the UI, staging brings it back up. Note that this is very much a "cargo-cult" diagnosis, so take it with a pinch of salt. However, closing the UI, saving, then loading seems to help.

[ebigunso]

@taniwha Thanks, I'll try that out.

[RealTimeShepherd]

Looking for some help if possible! I'm using RSS/RO with FAR

Basically, I have a modded SpaceX StarShip, using the Tundra Explorer model with RO settings in a cfg file. During reentry though, no matter how shallow I make the entry, the forces climb to around 8G and the tank section explodes "Due to aerodynamic stresses"

I would like to alter the cfg file to allow the part to withstand greater aerodynamic stresses. Is this possible?

Many thanks!

[taniwha]

@RealTimeShepherd It sounds to me like FAR is doing the right thing:.I wouldn't expect starship to survive such a reentry. 8g from dynamic pressure is a lot. try a different profile (less aggressive angle of attack).

And when you consider that starship is intended to have passengers, 8g s about 3x maximum permissible g-loading.

[dafidge9898]

How does FAR calculate Indicated Airspeed?

[RealTimeShepherd]

18 hours ago, taniwha said:

@RealTimeShepherd It sounds to me like FAR is doing the right thing:.I wouldn't expect starship to survive such a reentry. 8g from dynamic pressure is a lot. try a different profile (less aggressive angle of attack).

@taniwha - I must thank you for that advice!!! 

I saw an animation that showed StarShip at a 90 degree angle to the direction of travel during reentry (belly forward, nose up), so was just slavishly following that. Switched to 70 degrees (with the nose slightly towards the direction of travel) and I've just made my first successful reentry. Absolutely made my day

 

[taniwha]

@RealTimeShepherd awesome, I was concerned that there might have been other issues (lowering AoA -> higher heat, etc), so I'm glad you got your reentry working

[SofieBrink]

Hey all, I have recently noticed that with FAR installed i cannot deploy (partially) clipped solar panels, i get the "X Cannot deploy while stowed" X being an antenna, solar panel, or what have you.
It doesn't matter if you're sitting on the launchpad, flying in the low atmosphere, high atmosphere, or in space.
quick saving and loading doesn't seem to do anything either. 
is there a way to disable this? or is this a bug?

 

Steps to Reproduce issue:
1. Install FAR
2. Clip a gigantor solar array into a fuel tank
3. Launch and try to deploy the panel
 

 

https://imgur.com/a/f88NOex

Edited October 31, 2020 by SofieBrink
Typo

[Strait_Raider]

Has anyone else struggled with low-speed lift? I've got about 50 kg/m2 wing loading, comparable to light aircraft like the Fiesler Storch or Cessna 150, but while those aircraft have stall speeds from 50-80 km/h, this thing drops out of the sky at 150 km/h. The engine has no problem dragging it through the air, but the wings feel almost like they're not shaped like an aerofoil, and only generates lift when it has AOA...

I'm running FAR in 1.10.1 with stock wings.

[kcs123]

2 hours ago, Strait_Raider said:

The engine has no problem dragging it through the air, but the wings feel almost like they're not shaped like an aerofoil, and only generates lift when it has AOA...

As much as I can recall from conversations in old ferram FAR thread, FAR does not calculate aerofoil. Instead, assumption is made that wings would be thin and most of flight be at transonic or supersonic or higher speed. At supersonic velocities aerofoil shape has very low influence on lift in comparison to AoA, so it was not calculated at all. My advice: put some 2-4 degree AoA angle on main wings and you will get desired effect, or at least close to it.

[Philyawa]

Has anyone had any issues running FAR with Conformal Decals.

I have been experiencing a bug in my career playthrough where vessels with any decal added to them will case to interact with the atmosphere at all. I also noticed that during flight the Reynolds number is displayed as NAN.

Is there any way to just exclude this mods parts from interacting with the FAR system?

[YaBoyShredderson]

I just discovered an issue in 1.10.1 with one of my shuttles, using the shuttle orbiter construction kit mod.

For some reason the nose seems to be generating a huge amount of lift (downwards lift) moving the CoL very far forward, well in front of the wings, making it extremely unstable and impossible to fly. 

Theres also the issue with the stock centre of lift indicator showing (much further back with upwards pointing arrow) instead of the ferram indicator, which is usually just a blue ball with no arrow.

[Drew Kerman]

22 hours ago, YaBoyShredderson said:

Theres also the issue with the stock centre of lift indicator showing (much further back with upwards pointing arrow) instead of the ferram indicator, which is usually just a blue ball with no arrow.

you're using parts not properly designed for FAR, otherwise the stock CoL should not be visible - IIRC

[YaBoyShredderson]

3 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

you're using parts not properly designed for FAR, otherwise the stock CoL should not be visible - IIRC

Sometimes its not. If i revert to sph the FAR CoL (usually) becomes visible. But this stuff still has the stock action windows, where pitch roll and yaw is just a toggle on or off, not the slider like with FAR. I dont think thats causing my issue though, as even then the craft is still impossible to fly.

[kcs123]

On 11/24/2020 at 12:39 AM, YaBoyShredderson said:

Sometimes its not. If i revert to sph the FAR CoL (usually) becomes visible. But this stuff still has the stock action windows, where pitch roll and yaw is just a toggle on or off, not the slider like with FAR. I dont think thats causing my issue though, as even then the craft is still impossible to fly.

Reason why you got stock PAW is that FAR didn't recognise part from mod you are using and removed stock data. Like in following example for stock part:

@PART[AdvancedCanard]:FOR[FerramAerospaceResearch]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceRange = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceArea = 0
	!MODULE[ModuleControlSurface] { }

	MODULE
	{
		name = FARControllableSurface
		MAC = 0.93122
		MidChordSweep = 37.044
		maxdeflect = 20
		b_2 = 1.7904
		TaperRatio = 0.139074
		transformName = ctrlSrf
        	rootMidChordOffsetFromOrig = 0, 0.546675, 0
	}
}

In that patch all of stock aerodynamic info is removed and replaced with FAR data. It didn't happened for part you are using. Except for proper removal of stock data, you also need to provide proper info for FAR. Info how to do that is on FAR github page.

Following MM patch can help you to identify parts that miss FAR data:

// Change Part title to make it visible in VAB/SPH if part is not compatible with FAR

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface],!@MODULE[FARWingAerodynamicModel]]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]:FINAL
{
	@title ^= :$: *Non FAR*:
}

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleControlSurface],!@MODULE[FARControllableSurface]]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]:FINAL
{
	@title ^= :$: *Non FAR*:
}

That MM patch will put "Non FAR" text in part title, so you would be able to identify culprit parts from VAB/SPH.

EDIT:

Forum does not let me to edit "code" part of post, so I will just put a link for suggested changes on MM patch from Drew Kerman:

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by kcs123
additional notes