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

[ferram4]

Alright, I believe I've fixed the issue with the old example ships, and I've also included a fix related to ModStatistics support.

[Advacar]

I'm getting pretty ridiculous lag with FAR enabled with a specific ship. It didn't seem to start until I tried that ship, though I have been adding mods as I see them get updated. The lag goes away as soon as I leave atmosphere and I can launch fine if I close the game and uninstall FAR first.

Here's the ship: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5740306/Kerbitor%202.craft

And here's my installed mods:

Mechjeb, AVC, and kOS are not installed at the moment. The astronomer pack for EVE is.

And, thanks for everything you've done, Ferram. It's good to see that you're still working on things.

Edit: The ship's stock, with procedural fairings and an S6 compartment.

Edit2: Here's the log file: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5740306/KSP.log

I'm getting tons of NullReferenceExceptions scattered among FAR errors.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Advacar

[ferram4]

If it is related to the previous craft file issues, go into the craft file and search for "FARBasicDragModel." Then go and copy the entire block the module is defined in, including the curly brackets {}. Then Go and use the replace tool to replace that block with nothing in the entire file; the issues should be removed.

[Onche]

I have a question, ferram4, could you add ground effect in next version ? to make ekranoplanes possible, and to add more difficulty when heavy plane take altittude

[Marasmusine]

Tell me if I'm missing something. I've update to FAR 14.0.1 to go with Kerbal 0.24. I launch a really basic rocket - a Mk 1 cockpit on a RT-10 Solid Fuel Booster, no nosecone, it launches to 260,000 meters, which is surely not right.

[Roaken Corporation]

Hello ferram, can you provide more information on how different the new version is from the previous?

Aparently wings now are a lot more fragile and our planes speed simply doubled (wing tests under the same speed as of previous version).

Also: some weird images (like a semi-loaded astronaut complex UI) show up when loading vessels.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Roaken Corporation

[taniwha]

ferram4: I get the following in my logs:

The following assembly referenced from /home/bill/ksp/KSP_linux-0.24/GameData/FerramAerospaceResearch/Plugins/ModStatistics-1.0.3.dll could not be loaded:
     Assembly:   JsonFx    (assemblyref_index=6)
     Version:    2.0.1209.2800
     Public Key: 315052dd637f8a52

And then periodic exceptions relating to it (though through ModStats, it seems). I'll poke Majiir about it, too.

[thorfinn]

Tell me if I'm missing something. I've update to FAR 14.0.1 to go with Kerbal 0.24. I launch a really basic rocket - a Mk 1 cockpit on a RT-10 Solid Fuel Booster, no nosecone, it launches to 260,000 meters, which is surely not right.

[Konnor]

I've just slapped together a quick and dirty Beechcraft Starship-inspired thing, and... exceeded Mach 1. Jeb approves of course, but is this even possible with turboprops?

It may be a firespitter issue though, since only library has been updated but not the parts.

[Guest]

Are you using AJE? Because without AJE, that behavior could very well happen...

[ferram4]

@Onche: If you had searched the thread, you would have seen that this suggestion had come up many times before, and that my response has always been that attempting to implement it resulted in no noticeable change in aerodynamics but a noticeable drop in performance. So no, it is not worth it.

@Marasmusine: That was possible in previous versions as well, courtesy of launching a rocket with 2.3 km/s of dV. Considering that FAR reduces drag from pudding levels to realistic ones, and the gravity losses getting to approximately 70 km is ~1 km/s, I'm not sure what you expected. If you're upset by this, I would suggest installing Deadly Reentry to balance it out.

@Roaken: Changelog is in the zip and the OP. Supersonic drag was also modified slightly, as it was way too high; perhaps your vehicles are over-engined. It is also possible that your craft files have been corrupted and you need to follow the directions I gave to Advacar to fix them.

@Konnor: In the real world, no. In KSP, where all airbreathing engines have ridiculous thrusts unless you use AJE, yes.

[Dinokin]

sir ferram a new bug for you

https://www.dropbox.com/s/etjks78mhns0o8x/output_log.txt

https://www.dropbox.com/s/soj406xw320se3u/Mun%20Buster.craft

basically all aerodynamics dies

@edit

i found the problem it's a incompatibility with RasterPropMonitor

when i remove this RasterPropMonitor the aerodynamics magically starts working again

@edit2

the bug is back

Edited July 19, 2014 by Dinokin

[dewin]

The latest version includes "Included JsonFx.dll, which is required by ModStats", but there is no JsonFx.dll anywhere to be found in either download.

[klikkolee]

is there a resource you can point me to that shows how the stability derivatives are calculated or at least what factors affect them in what ways? I tried search engines, but the results didn't include many of the derivatives, and they didn't say what each variable meant. I then tried to piece it together from your source code, but there was too much back-and-forth between functions for me to keep track of, and more variables that I didn't know what they represented though I wouldn't exactly expect to find definitions there.

[ferram4]

@Dinokin: If that is a craft file from before 0.24, you will need to follow the directions given at the bottom of the FAQ in the OP / in the past few pages to uncorrupt it. If you had read the past few pages, you would be aware that it is a known issue and that there is a known fix.

@dewin: Noted. I'll fix that when I get a chance, but given that the number of support requests hasn't died down enough for me to determine what is and isn't a valid bug, I'm not making another release and making things even more confusing for people.

@klikkolee: Search for "Stability Derivatives" and you'll find resources on it. Searching for "airplane stability and control" might also bring stuff up. A final thing to try is to see if you can find the USAF Stability and Control DATCOM, since that should also include information on that. Sorry I can't point you somewhere good, most of the data for that has come out of my textbooks.

[SnappingTurtle]

Hi Ferram. I have this plane that looks like this: http://imgur.com/7c7F28g. It looks to me like it has a lot of wing area, it weighs 6.66 tonnes but I cannot land it. I'm on my 15th or so attempt now and have yet to get it under 50m/s even as it becomes strewn across the ground. Partly it's because of the awful bouncy wheels but it also seems to have a very high stall speed. Is this realistic? Is it because the wings are smaller than they would be on a similarly heavy plane IRL because of Kerbal scaling?

This thing won't slow down and also will barely fly below 100m/s. It's driving me nuts. Please help, thanks.

[NathanKell]

You realize your wing loading is higher than the space shuttle's, right? And it landed at about 100m/s.

50m/s is about 111mph, which is lower than the loaded stall speed of some WW2 prop planes.

So a 100m/s stall speed sounds about right. KSP spaceplane parts are for heavy spaceplanes. Expect spaceplane like performance. If you want appropriate wing loading for that thing as a *plane*, put almost twice as much wing on.

Edited July 19, 2014 by NathanKell

[ferram4]

Well, for a delta wing plane with no flaps that isn't completely insane for a stall speed. It's kinda high, but that seems about right, especially considering that the rocket engines are pretty heavy.

[Ruedii]

I've just slapped together a quick and dirty Beechcraft Starship-inspired thing, and... exceeded Mach 1. Jeb approves of course, but is this even possible with turboprops?

It may be a firespitter issue though, since only library has been updated but not the parts.

It depends on the turboprop type if they can theoretically exceed Mach 1. If impeller blades are used (that rely on the compression on the back side of the blade, making it essentially an non-shrouded turbofan,) then a turboprop can exceed mach-1, but not by much. However, in the real world you could never get that much power out of anything short of a high-compression low-bypass turbofan.

Of course, if a pure-propeller type is used, which relies on lift on the front of the blade, theoretically it should not be able to exceed Mach 1 no matter how fast you turn it, and will hit it's limit shortly below Mach-1.

The vast majority of turbo-props are hybrid props that utilize both lifting and impeller principals, because the lifting principals provide the highest efficiency at low speeds and altitudes, but the impeller principal does the same at higher speeds and altitudes.

Of course, it may also be simply an issue with the parts.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Ruedii
added theoretically note, pointing out the unrealistic aspect

[Marasmusine]

@Marasmusine: That was possible in previous versions as well, courtesy of launching a rocket with 2.3 km/s of dV. Considering that FAR reduces drag from pudding levels to realistic ones, and the gravity losses getting to approximately 70 km is ~1 km/s, I'm not sure what you expected. If you're upset by this, I would suggest installing Deadly Reentry to balance it out.

I've been using the previous FAR (which I was very happy with, thank-you Ferram!), but I don't recall being able to send a Kerbal to to this height on a single booster, which before was a multi-stage job for me. I thought maybe there was some setting I had changed. I don't suppose anyone can confirm what height an RT-10 could get a Mk1 command pod to in the previous version?

[Dinokin]

@Dinokin: If that is a craft file from before 0.24, you will need to follow the directions given at the bottom of the FAQ in the OP / in the past few pages to uncorrupt it. If you had read the past few pages, you would be aware that it is a known issue and that there is a known fix.

i'll read those pages but this craft file isn't from a past version...

[lammatt]

it seems to me the drag is too weak in the lower atmosphere in this v0.14

not even planes dont slow down any bit when gliding, it picks speed up way too quickly when descending.

Edited July 19, 2014 by lammatt

[AndreyATGB]

Just got this exception after I boarded my craft on Minmus. Seems harmless but thought I'd post it anyway.

ArgumentException: Getting control 0's position in a group with only 0 controls when doing Repaint
Aborting
  at UnityEngine.GUILayoutGroup.GetNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUILayoutUtility.BeginLayoutGroup (UnityEngine.GUIStyle style, UnityEngine.GUILayoutOption[] options, System.Type LayoutType) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUILayout.BeginVertical (UnityEngine.GUIContent content, UnityEngine.GUIStyle style, UnityEngine.GUILayoutOption[] options) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUILayout.BeginVertical (UnityEngine.GUILayoutOption[] options) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at ferram4.FARControlSys.WindowGUI (Int32 windowID) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUILayout+LayoutedWindow.DoWindow (Int32 windowID) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUI.CallWindowDelegate (UnityEngine.WindowFunction func, Int32 id, UnityEngine.GUISkin _skin, Int32 forceRect, Single width, Single height, UnityEngine.GUIStyle style) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

What I actually wanted to ask was if it's possible to get "Surface" back, I understand why it's labelled as TAS now but it's silly on airless bodies since there is no air speed obviously.

[elfindreams]

I seem to be getting an odd issue.

First let me say none of the ships in question are old, all of them are created since installing the latest FAR.

Some of the ships I build I have no problem opening the FAR menu (whether it is on the new toolbar or the mod)... some however the FAR menu never opens no matter where it is. It "clicks" and nothing appears.

I put out a pair of logs and a quicksave from a launch where I cannot get the FAR menu to appear at all:

https://c4990ae854af0f39d9dc5e95454cc71275334fd5.googledrive.com/host/0B8a1K8EUgZmVeV8zUHNDdzQ4X3M/

[ferram4]

@Maramusine: That implies an improper install for previous versions of FAR. FAR has never been able to east away several km/s of dV during launch.

@Dinokin: Then you can certainly provide explicit reproduction steps to cause the issue, correct?

@lammatt: Nope, that's the way drag is in real life. Planes do need to be very careful to control their descent rate or they end up going too fast and being destroyed by aerodynamic forces / not being ale to land because they're going to fast. Unless you're gaining speed while descending at a rate of less than 5 m/s, there's no issue.

@AndreATGB: Yeah, I'm gonna switch away from TAS, but that error looks like it's outside what I can control, since it's inside Unity. Unless you can provide reliable reproduction steps there's nothing I can do.

@elfindreams: Based on the logs there is nothing clearly going wrong, although I see that you're using a very large number of mods and not all of them may be up-to-date for KSP 0.24. I'll need a lot more information to reproduce the issue, since you have not provided any reproduction steps whatsoever. Surely, all the ships that have this issue have something in common, right?