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

[kcs123]

14 hours ago, ble210 said:

Thank you for the input, I appreciate it.  If you don't mind one last question- in your experience, is the decrease in dv required to reach orbit significant?  I think this is my main sticking point prior to jumping into FAR.

I never measured difference on my crafts. I doubt that there is exact answer and number in dV difference, because, even if you can create rocket that can work reasonably good in both, stock or moded FAR game, you would most probably have to use different trajectory. There is some data about it around on forums from several KSP versions ago when stock game was much more different, so can't tell if those are still relevant or not.

My best guess, based on presonal experience, but without taking any measurment, would be that you might get 100-500 m/s of dV difference. But you will probably have to be very skilled in both, creating proper craft and also properly steering it to get significant advantage. On the other hand, as other mentioned, re-entry is also much more challanging too. It is much more difficult to slow down properly before you can even deploy chutes.

100 m/s of dV might be plenty for some very skilled players, while at the same time it might not be enough for simple rendezvous and docking maneuvers in orbit. Best answer if FAR would fit your playstyle or not is to try it for yourself. Create a copy of whole game in separate folder, or create backups of saved games first and then try your craft in stock and moded game.

Personaly, since you have to put in consideration much more things than in stock game, I would not consider it as cheating if you play with FAR, even if you manage to get more dV to establish orbit with rocket. But, how much exactly you might get more depends on so many variables that makes impossible to tell in exact numbers. As said, best advice before final decision is to try it by yourself. Create rocket in stock game that you are familiar with, knowing how to steer it to spend least amount of dV for orbit and then try the same with FAR.

Only if you try it for yourself you will know if this mod suits your playstyle or not.

[ble210]

Thank you all for the thoughtful input- I appreciate it!  Based on your experiences and thoughts, I am going to give FAR a go with my new career.

[Nansuchao]

I'm confused. Wich one is the 1.4.5 version?

[Eridan]

6 hours ago, Nansuchao said:

I'm confused. Wich one is the 1.4.5 version?

The current build should work for 1.4 up to 1.6.x, but https://github.com/dkavolis/Ferram-Aerospace-Research/releases/tag/v0.15.9.5_Lighthill

was specifically noted to work with 1.4.5 if you're having trouble with the latest build.

[RocketSquid]

Does this mod allow waveriders?

[Svm420]

@dkavolis

Have an issue with heat shields and FAR. Link to details

[dkavolis]

On 4/3/2019 at 1:51 AM, Svm420 said:

@dkavolis

Have an issue with heat shields and FAR. Link to details

Fixed in #37. The same fix also works for stock heat shields. Expect a release next week when KSP 1.7 ships or use GameData folder from the repo for now.

[Svm420]

@dkavolis

Wow that was really fast! Thank you so much

[dkavolis]

FAR is updated to the latest KSP version but still works with 1.4+. MM and MFI for 1.6 still work in 1.7

Ferram Aerospace Research v0.15.10.0 "Lundgren"

Note for Kopernicus users: DO NOT overwrite MFI that comes with Kopernicus since it is locked to that particular version

Recompiled for KSP 1.7

Fix principal axes in simulation and other bugfixes (#23, @Rodhern)
Fix voxelization of most stock engines (#39)
Voxelization correctly handles jettison transforms with part variants (#39)
Fix voxelization of InflatableHeatShield (#39)
Fixed voxelization of simple heat shields (#37)
Added additional nodes to GeometryPartModule (#37, #39, see PRs for more details). The new nodes should allow parts to be voxelized much closer to what is visible and handle animations better:

• ignoreTransform (string)
• ignoreIfNoRenderer (bool)
• unignoreTransform (string)
• rebuildOnAnimation (bool)

NRE fixes (#36):

• Trying to display debug voxels with no parts in the editor
• Occasional NRE when voxelizing vehicle (due to race conditions?)
• When force closing the game from the editor with debug voxels displayed

Voxelization respects part variant changes in the editor (#35)
Expose IAS and EAS used by FAR in FARAPI (#34)
Enable/disable FAR speed display on the navball from FARAPI (#33)

[Tony422]

Just here to thank you for the timely update.   FAR updates used to take almost as long as the game updates

[taniwha]

On 4/1/2019 at 8:54 PM, RocketSquid said:

Does this mod allow waveriders?

I'm not entirely certain what a waverider is, but unfortunately, FAR does not do so well with partial immersion (per part, and mainly lift vectors).

[RocketSquid]

23 hours ago, taniwha said:

I'm not entirely certain what a waverider is, but unfortunately, FAR does not do so well with partial immersion (per part, and mainly lift vectors).

Waveriders are hypersonic vehicles designed to increase lift by riding their own shockwaves. They tend to be chisel-shaped, with sharp noses and small, anhedral wings.

[kcs123]

4 hours ago, RocketSquid said:

Waveriders are hypersonic vehicles designed to increase lift by riding their own shockwaves. They tend to be chisel-shaped, with sharp noses and small, anhedral wings.

Do you have links with more info about those ? I'm just curios as I never heard about those before. And, no, I don't think that those would work in game in same way as expected for real life counter parts. Reason is that shockwaves was not simulated in game at all as actual waves. Just calculated forces that craft experience when breaching mach 1 and some visual FX that were not related with mach 1 speed at all (engine exehaust looks exact same ASL and in space, for example).

[RocketSquid]

9 hours ago, kcs123 said:

Do you have links with more info about those ? I'm just curios as I never heard about those before. And, no, I don't think that those would work in game in same way as expected for real life counter parts. Reason is that shockwaves was not simulated in game at all as actual waves. Just calculated forces that craft experience when breaching mach 1 and some visual FX that were not related with mach 1 speed at all (engine exehaust looks exact same ASL and in space, for example).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waverider

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/x51-wave-rider/

[NipperySlipples]

@dkavolis Small bug report.  Latest version creates NRE spam in the log as soon as you go EVA. I'm not sure if this is a problem.

Quote

[EXC 15:17:32.632] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
    FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.IgnoredPredicate (UnityEngine.Transform t)
    System.Collections.Generic.List`1[UnityEngine.Transform].RemoveAll (System.Predicate`1 match)
    FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.RebuildAllMeshData ()
    FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.FixedUpdate ()

This is with a fresh install of 1.7 and nothing except module manager, FAR and modular flight integrator on a brand new save. Log file here.

Reproduction steps are simple, launch a pod with a kerbal and EVA.

 

[dkavolis]

9 hours ago, NipperySlipples said:

@dkavolis Small bug report.  Latest version creates NRE spam in the log as soon as you go EVA. I'm not sure if this is a problem.

This is with a fresh install of 1.7 and nothing except module manager, FAR and modular flight integrator on a brand new save. Log file here.

Reproduction steps are simple, launch a pod with a kerbal and EVA.

 

Fixed

[HB Stratos]

Does the 1.7 recompile work in 1.6.1?

[dkavolis]

10 hours ago, HB Stratos said:

Does the 1.7 recompile work in 1.6.1?

Works for KSP 1.4-1.7

[dkavolis]

Ferram Aerospace Research v0.15.10.1 "Lundgren"

Hotfix for 0.15.10.0

Note for Kopernicus users: DO NOT overwrite MFI that comes with Kopernicus since it is locked to that particular version

Fix config values reset on load in GeometryPartModule #47
Fix NRE spam on EVA #43 (#44)

[jonassm]

49 minutes ago, dkavolis said:

Ferram Aerospace Research v0.15.10.1 "Lundgren"

Hotfix for 0.15.10.0

Note for Kopernicus users: DO NOT overwrite MFI that comes with Kopernicus since it is locked to that particular version

Fix config values reset on load in GeometryPartModule #47
Fix NRE spam on EVA #43 (#44)

I had an issue with not being able to fly (lift off) any planes after going to 15.10, is this why?

[kcs123]

50 minutes ago, jonassm said:

I had an issue with not being able to fly (lift off) any planes after going to 15.10, is this why?

More likely it is same bug as described in B9PW thread. Seems to be happening with large surface wing parts.

Seems that latest FAR 15.10. works properly for KSP 1.7. but it is not backward compatible for KSP 1.6.x

[dkavolis]

54 minutes ago, jonassm said:

I had an issue with not being able to fly (lift off) any planes after going to 15.10, is this why?

Have you tried the hotfix version yet? It might be the bug I've introduced in OnLoad method when I didn't realize that on switching scenes it wouldn't be called with config values.

[Kitspace]

Hi guys!

Does anyone know what aerodynamics model does FAR use?
What parameters are assumed from the voxel model shape, and what information is taken from the wings config files?
What kind of airfoil or lift curve shape does it assume for the parts it classes as "wings"?
What about body lift?

Thank you!

[kcs123]

6 minutes ago, Kitspace said:

Hi guys!

Does anyone know what aerodynamics model does FAR use?
What parameters are assumed from the voxel model shape, and what information is taken from the wings config files?
What kind of airfoil or lift curve shape does it assume for the parts it classes as "wings"?
What about body lift?

Thank you!

Your best bet is to checkout FAR wiki. Wings need "special" calculation compared to rest of craft, I assume for game performance reasons(to maintan reasonable frame rate). More detail is on this wiki page. The rest of craft, including body lift is calculated with voxel model shape. Can't provide better info than it is available on wiki page, I hope that those suffice.

[Kitspace]

24 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

Your best bet is to checkout FAR wiki. Wings need "special" calculation compared to rest of craft, I assume for game performance reasons(to maintan reasonable frame rate). More detail is on this wiki page. The rest of craft, including body lift is calculated with voxel model shape. Can't provide better info than it is available on wiki page, I hope that those suffice.

Thank you for your reply!

Though, the wiki only talks about it from the end user perspective, while my questions are more about the maths, happening inside, to convert all these values into a flight model.
Also that page talking about Blender, refers to the wing planform shape as an "airfoil", which is an entirely different thing. Airfoil normally means the cross section of a wing, or more broadly, its characteristics, such as lift drag and pitching moment as a function of the angle of attack. Similar to the static graphs the mod makes, but for a section of a wing.

FAR, I suppose, is not computational fluid dynamics software? No way that is happening in real time, is there?  Therefore it has to make some assumptions, and use empirical approximations, which is very difficult to do with an arbitrary shape, from the voxel model. That is why it is so interesting what it does.

I am closely related to aerospace engineering in real life, and I have been thinking for some time now, about some of the things that the mod does, and how it can be improved further, to be a more accurate model of real physics. The problem is I know pretty much nothing about coding.
So, if anyone, who understands the mod source code, could tell me in normal language, or even in equations form, what it does, I would greatly appreciate that, and possibly, be able to contribute to improving the aerodynamics.