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

[reedhashlock]

Hello. I've been a long time user of far. Not sure if this is the place to ask for design tips so I'll delete my post upon request. I've been having problems with the current mass/strength system messing up my craft's balance. Will post pictures and craft file if requested.

[rentaspoon]

Personally I don't see the point of arguing about if FAR.

Stock is realistic to the point where it's still fun.

FAR is try realistic, so for people who want a simulator, its the closest thing they can have.

Both are better than the old stock model

[AndreyATGB]

Oh they do, far too well. It's amazing how aerodynamic a nose cone installed backwards inside the craft is.

Is this what happens in 1.0's aerodynamics? Or are you talking about old FAR inducing drag in parts with exposed nodes?

[FourGreenFields]

*kinda no longer true in 1.0, but nobody's used 1.0's tools to make prop engines yet.

KAX has just been released.

And I managed to make a propeller "plane" (had pulled too hard and lost my wings, but still flyable) reach more than Mach 0.9.....

What is AJE, and where can I download it?

Edited May 10, 2015 by FourGreenFields

[blu3wolf]

FAR has broken that mod that gives you money for spent stages.

Ah, an incredibly detailed bug report! I am certain that will be of great use.

Fancy seeing you here. Can't say as Ive seen any issues with StageRecovery so far - seems to play nice with FAR, FMRS and RealChutes.

[NathanKell]

KAX has just been released.

And I managed to make a propeller "plane" (had pulled too hard and lost my wings, but still flyable) reach more than Mach 0.9.....

What is AJE, and where can I download it?

Released or not, its engines sure as heck haven't been upgraded. Heck, they still include curves that don't exist anymore in 1.0. Let alone taking advantage of 1.0's new curves to approximate prop performance.

[FourGreenFields]

Released or not, its engines sure as heck haven't been upgraded. Heck, they still include curves that don't exist anymore in 1.0. Let alone taking advantage of 1.0's new curves to approximate prop performance.

Which is exactly my problem, which is why I asked for AJE. What is this?

[Mipe]

I reckon this: [0.90]Advanced Jet Engine v2.0.4 - Apr.10

It's not even updated to 1.0.2 (though there's a test version out).

[Nobody_1707]

Oh sweet, NuFAR is released.

[mikegarrison]

KAX has just been released.

And I managed to make a propeller "plane" (had pulled too hard and lost my wings, but still flyable) reach more than Mach 0.9.....

What is AJE, and where can I download it?

Tu-95 can reach mach of at least 0.87 in level flight.

[FourGreenFields]

Tu-95 can reach mach of at least 0.87 in level flight.

But not while climbing

Also, it would be nice to know the alt at which it did that.

[Lorunification]

I really like the new FAR Release! I have one question though:

What do the yellow indicators, well, indicate? (cf. images). I get them at almost any plane/rocket and can't figure out what this is. In stock the yellow arrows indicate torque and at first glance i tought my vessels are unbalanced and tend to flip to one side. But no matter what i do and how green my FAR stats get, the yellow force stays where it is. Even with yaw controle way behind the CoM.

Can someone give me a hint on what i am doing wrong?

Note: The plane and rocket in the pictures are not supposed to do anything but show the yellow marker.

Second: Is it possible that the CoL is kind of odd? Sometimes when i add wings to the back the CoL moves forward.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Thank you very much!

Edited May 10, 2015 by Lorunification

[kcs123]

Yelow line is pitching momentum, sum of other forces like from gravity and engine acceleration besides lift or drag that affect your craft.

It is same as yelow line on FAR graph. Check links in my signature for more info about it, although I didn't update tutorial from new nuFAR stuff, older info are still valid.

[Lorunification]

Thanks kcs123,

But isn't pitch up/down? The indicator goes ALWAYS to the left, never to the right. Even while rolling the plane the yellow indicator stays stable. Thus generating sideslip until things flip and break apart.

Nevertheless, what kind of flap/surface/wing does help? It seems kind of arbitrary to me.

[SSR Kermit]

nuFAR is awesome!

As has been noted, even with the new aerodynamics in stock, you can do some pretty silly things. After passing the KSC at Mach 3 and pulling a 12.9G back-flip somersault and landing on the first third of the runway, I decided I had beat the game

However, not one to be fazed be silly minecraft physics (voxels, right :yhbt: ), I have endeavoured to recreate the previously mentioned silly vessel with FAR.

The supermanoeuvrability bit is there, but as you can see in the video, at supersonic speeds those large surfaces disintegrate if you so much as touch the controls (or indeed, the airbrake). I haven't quite got the somersault landings yet, I think I'll have switch to an analog controller to get that down.

Future work includes a variable sweep wing with IR (disintegrates and/or flaps like a bird currently), using kOS or custom mod to limit control surface deflection by dynamic pressure. There are zero struts presently, and I'm trying to avoid using any as a challenge.

Service ceiling is about 20km, where it will melt if going above Mach ~3.

MODS in use:

FAR

Kerbal Joint Reinforcement

BD Vector Jets

TweakScale (wheels and control surfaces)

Lots more visuals and visualization, but other than the engines all parts are stock.

https://youtu.be/fKqTsdb9vzA

[tetryds]

Anyone got any guesses as to what's going on here? The cross section curves appear very strange, I have no idea what those black lines are, and the position of the CoL appears somewhat suspect. Despite this, it flies just fine...

http://i.imgur.com/s05WQ50.jpg

My previous design was giving similarly strange things, although in that case the curves were shifted to fully vertical. It's almost as if it's confused about which direction the airflow is coming from.

This bug has been found, killed, found again and killed again, but it continues to reincarnate.

I have noticed it happening after placing medium landing gears.

About the COL, it's calculated for a certain speed, if at that speed your airplane cannot maintain level flight, it can be anywhere

[Azimech]

Nope, if you're not using an AJE-patched prop, you're using a rocket engine with a whirly bit on the front. Propellers are not rocket engines, and without AJE, all you can make are rocket engines*.

*kinda no longer true in 1.0, but nobody's used 1.0's tools to make prop engines yet.

100% stock:

But incredibly poor performance compared to 0.90. I really dislike what they did with the basic jet engines, they're useless as blowers for my turboshafts now.

[MarvinCZ]

I'll second a question asked and unanswered in the thread: What does it mean, if the CoL arrow returns with the placement of certain parts? B9 procedural wings do that. I can include illustrative screenshots or anything else, if needed.

[ferram4]

@Lorunification: The moment vector represents a torque, which means that the vector is the axis that the torque acts around. A left yellow line indicates a pitch-down moment, and given that it's happening at the cockpit, is probably due to the shape of it. There is currently nothing acting on your vehicle that would force it to turn left besides its flexing or natural asymmetry.

I'll be hiding that by default for the next release and adding an option somewhere instead. I forgot that I have users unfamiliar with representing forces and moments and that I do need to hide things in the UI for their sake.

@MarvinCZ: As was mentioned the last time someone posted a picture with that happening, it means that the parts are, for some reason, still running on the stock model. Why, I don't know. But that needs to be fixed on the other mod's end, not mine.

[Bakase]

This bug has been found, killed, found again and killed again, but it continues to reincarnate.

I have noticed it happening after placing medium landing gears.

About the COL, it's calculated for a certain speed, if at that speed your airplane cannot maintain level flight, it can be anywhere

Really? I was assured this was fixed in the latest version.

[ferram4]

Hence the part where it continues to reincarnate. Then again, IIRC, you didn't bother to check on the most recent dev version when you reported a bug, and so it wasn't of any value because it wasn't testing the new code, only old code.

[Roxette]

Yo ferram4 ... FAR v0.15 is great, but I'm trying to fix the necessary changes to make Vanguard Technologies EVA parachutes work with it. Could this be done by a simple ModuleManager patch, or would editing the code in the Vanguard plugin be the only option?

(I know stupid_chris is working on a new version of RealChutes that will incorporate chutes for kerbals, but I would still like to have the Vanguard one working if possible)

[LostOblivion]

Why do all the individual stock wing sections have a CoL that is at the extreme edge of it? Shouldn't it be at the center? Oversight likely, since you usually have two wings and then it mostly doesn't matter, but I noticed this when making a space shuttle style "board" at the back below the engines, by centering a wing section. The aggregate CoL was far right of the centerline...

I haven't tried the new FAR yet, but with the new voxel approximation, does it take into account the CoL given in the part?

[ferram4]

That depends on how it works. If it already adds a PartModule to KerbalEVAs through a ModuleManager config, then it certainly can be done with a MM config. If not, then it's adding it in code and unfortunately that means the fix will need to be in code.

Given the issues with the CoL and the fact that it's just damn useless as a design tool, I'm half tempted to just kill it at this point and force everyone to use the graphs. It's misleading in the stock game, and it'll be misleading here.

Edited May 10, 2015 by ferram4

[Bakase]

Hence the part where it continues to reincarnate. Then again, IIRC, you didn't bother to check on the most recent dev version when you reported a bug, and so it wasn't of any value because it wasn't testing the new code, only old code.

My mistake, evidently you did fix it.