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

[sq10]

Thanks ferram for the update! I just want to ask if the animations for ailerons are not being displayed are the ailerons actually working? Because after installing the latest version of FAR, the aileron animations are no longer working...

Thanks!

[ferram4]

That means that you're probably missing a dependency. If you installed using CKAN, don't; do it manually, CKAN hasn't caught up to handling FAR yet.

[Azimech]

Great news, great release!

"The voxel model method FAR uses allows for the actual shape of the vehicle to play a role in how lift and drag are applied. Build a hollow shell, and close it up, and everything inside it will be protected from the airflow as it should."

Does this mean my 0.90 Errordynamics 100% stock turboprop airplanes might actually work with nuFAR? Once I solve the engine problems since 1.0x that is.

Also, does it mean building the actual shape of a wing has an effect?

And a nose cone on the prop really guides airflow around the engine? You can imagine the drag if the flow goes through the whole fuselage.

One of the solutions in Errordynamics was to use a stacked prop. This means, 3 blades, 4 segments long, 4 times stacked. That's 48 wing segments providing thrust. There's a pretty hard limit on the max rpm of a turboshaft, and it's around 300, due to the joints system. Turbine blades expand too much from their shaft, and they start hitting the engine frame or blowers. So having useful thrust depends on having a prop with a very good lift/drag ratio, and set the prop pitch angle in advance for the goal.

Can I now design a proper propeller without this stacking nonsense?

Edited May 9, 2015 by Azimech

[Wanderfound]

That means your processor is overheating. Have you doublechecked the processor fan? And if it's running fine, you might want to scrape off and re-add the thermal paste between it at the heat sink. (KSP makes my laptop fan go absolutely nuts. It's a gaming laptop so it even has a special "run the cooling fan as fast as possible" button).

Possible, but this doesn't happen in any other circumstance. Decent quality but five year old non-gaming laptop, low ambient temperature (winter here).

Even with stock KSP, the explosion effects slow the game to a slideshow until they clear away. I suspect that adding recalculation of the suddenly-changing airframe to the already high mid-explosion graphics load is pushing it over the edge.

[Wanderfound]

NuFAR jet power seems a touch on the generous side; 90 seconds to 15,000m and 960m/s for a single-engine ship built with no attempt at area ruling.

Was the FAR engine nerf removed?

Edited May 9, 2015 by Wanderfound

[UnanimousCoward]

Hi

With FAR installed, it's virtually impossible to get the CoL low enough on one of RoverDude's sounding rockets to make it stable, and tilted fins seem to impart zero spin to the rocket.

Even adding about 10 of these fins doesn't help. I'd just like to ask if this is reasonable/realistic. If you say it is, then that's fine - I'll play around with the lift on the fins and see if that helps.

[Ravien]

Seems like aerodynamic failure values are not stored properly - they resets after scene reloads. I set them higher to test some fragile craft, it initially worked but after visit in SPH and relaunch flight was like on default values

[steve_v]

NuFAR jet power seems a touch on the generous side...

Was the FAR engine nerf removed?

I can't see any relevant MM patches in the archive anymore, so... probably?

Turbojets are pretty lethal now, especially at low altitudes... the engine curves do feel a bit off to me, FWIW.

Then again, more power was needed for the Mk.3 parts... So maybe it's a good thing.

Definitely going faster than before, might try for Mach 5 before lighting the rockets next run.

* Still needs work, flies like a brick subsonic

I also note that the (rapier)engines don't flame out until ~33% Air Req Met - This intended behaviour?

Edited May 9, 2015 by steve_v

[Andy81le]

In the current version, installed via Ckan and with mods, the FAR button is missing from the stock toolbar.

Mods installed:

(X) Science

Community Resource Pack

Contract Configurator + Packs

Contract Window +

DMagic Orbital Science

FAR

Final Frontier

KAC

KCT

KER

Module Manager

RealChute Parachute System

RemoteTech

SCANsat

Science Funding

ScienceAlert

StageRecovery

Stock Bug Fix Module

TAC Fuel Balancer

TAC Life Support

Toolbar

TweakScale

Universal Storage

Waypoint Manager

[BudgetHedgehog]

installed via Ckan

There's your problem. Do it manually then check. If you'd read the previous page, you'd see that CKAN hasn't caught the other dependency, ModularFlightIntegrator.

Edited May 9, 2015 by ObsessedWithKSP

[Andy81le]

There's your problem. Do it manually then check. If you'd read the previous page, you'd see that CKAN hasn't caught the other dependency, ModularFlightIntegrator.

Yes, I noticed that while testing all mods individually. Installed ModularFlightIntegrator and now it works fine! Thx!

[BigNose]

I love the new example craft, the FAR Colibri kinda reminds me of a Mon Calamari Cruiser from Star Wars:

It's so curvy yet so smooth!

[Iasus]

I'm experiencing an odd issue with the new version of FAR - the centre of lift in the VAB doesn't appear to be moving much when I add fins, but the rocket flies stably. For example, the VAB is telling me that the CoL is in front of the CoM which should be unstable, but it flies stably indicating that the real CoL is behind the centre of lift where I would expect it to be from the effect of the fins. Pics attached.

Has anyone else experienced this/is this a known bug?

[Goddess Bhavani]

After getting sick of 1.02 errordynamics flipping all my perfectly logically designed craft end over end, I shall try nuFAR right meow!

I wonder what nuFAR would think of the world leading product of the USSR circa 1930

[Mipe]

What?! nuFAR released? This will not stand! I must immediately check it out!

[John FX]

PSA : If using Realchutes and checking transonic drag curves, when you resize your chute casing you will need to detach and replace the chute part to update the transonic curve graph and voxels.

Don't know if this is needed for accurate chute casing modelling in flight but in the VAB it's needed.

[prog]

Are stock airbrakes supported? They seems to have no effect on simulation if opened in VAB/SPH.

[Horus]

Sample craft - FAR Blitzableiter - has following issues on load in SPH:

1. Gears are retracted.

2. AG3 assigned to 1 gear raise/lower action.

[ragzilla]

I'm experiencing an odd issue with the new version of FAR - the centre of lift in the VAB doesn't appear to be moving much when I add fins, but the rocket flies stably. For example, the VAB is telling me that the CoL is in front of the CoM which should be unstable, but it flies stably indicating that the real CoL is behind the centre of lift where I would expect it to be from the effect of the fins. Pics attached.

Has anyone else experienced this/is this a known bug?

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb209/Obsidiansphinx/screenshot12_zpsrfnztg8n.png

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb209/Obsidiansphinx/screenshot11_zpsgwglyghd.png

Pick the rocket up by the root part, and rotate it using shift-wasd, you'll likely see the center of lift moving back to/through the CoM which will increase aerodynamic stability as AoA increases. Remember to un-rotate when you're done.

[cttw]

With a simple single stack ship I set my periapsis to 30k to airbreak and ended with more apoapsis than when I started. Now I'm lost.

[Iasus]

Pick the rocket up by the root part, and rotate it using shift-wasd, you'll likely see the center of lift moving back to/through the CoM which will increase aerodynamic stability as AoA increases. Remember to un-rotate when you're done.

Thanks for the tip - this seems to work for a simple vessel, but once Proceedural Fairings gets involved then no luck - CoL stays resolutely well in front of CoM. Hmmmm.

[Bakase]

With a simple single stack ship I set my periapsis to 30k to airbreak and ended with more apoapsis than when I started. Now I'm lost.

This is correct airbreaking -- you have indeed broken the air.

[Hodo]

Possible, but this doesn't happen in any other circumstance. Decent quality but five year old non-gaming laptop, low ambient temperature (winter here).

Even with stock KSP, the explosion effects slow the game to a slideshow until they clear away. I suspect that adding recalculation of the suddenly-changing airframe to the already high mid-explosion graphics load is pushing it over the edge.

Sounds like you have a CPU overheat issue. This is why I dont run laptops for gaming.

Even on my hand built gaming rig that I put together myself if I REALLY push it I can get the CPU to overheat, but I have to be running 8 different KSPs on max at once on all three monitors. But at that point I am getting .5FPS.

As for people having issue with the high thrust of the jet engines. I know last version of KSP .90 with FAR and B9 SABREs I wouldnt switch over till mach 5 to closed cycle mode anyway. Give yourself time to get used to them, and streamline your designs before making a lot of snap judgements on them.

Here is a good example, this is my third SSTO design in FAR.15 and it is far from perfect yet. It still hasn't passed my basic SSTO test of achieving 100km orbit, it can get to 72km but not 100km.

But I am slowly getting there. Maybe tonight I will have a bit of inspiration to get a new improved design built.

@Ferram4

What exactly is the Critical Mach Number? Is that the speed at which the airflow over the wings goes supersonic?

And what is considered a good number for say a high performance fighter vs a Concord type aircraft?

Edited May 9, 2015 by Hodo

[CrisK]

Ferram, Thank you for your work. I sent a few dollars your way.

[MatterBeam]

I heard there might be issues with ProceduralParts fuel tanks. Have these been fixed or has a workaround been achieved?