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

[kcs123]

Most of KSP players, including myself play game with bunch of mods installed, it is not always easy to detect which mod is in conflict with other or which one is reason for bug.

Hell, there is still lot of stock game bugs that was not detected or fixed by developer or comunity. Well, while we all waiting for proper fix, at least we could try to narrow down possible reasons behind it.

Sometimes it misleads to false accusation for mod that cause bug, but sometimes helps mod developers to fix bug earlier. Hopefully there will be more other than first situations.

[Volt]

Yes, you're quite right. I only post bugs here when FAR is indicated in the debug stream, because Ferram would probably be able to at least point us in the right direction if not notice that it's his bug. I understand the voxel system is quite new and errors are expected, and the fact that a mod has been released which allows editing the vessel shape in flight doesn't help. I'm really hopeful that we can make the two work together, because FAR is essential to me, but KIS has given space a new dimension which was lacking in the game and I can't dispense with that either.

[Kitspace]

Hello.

There is an issue of some sort in both the latest release and the previous one.

I believe that is strongly related to the just fixed issue with the spoilers not working when installed flush.

Those lift spoilers that are too thin or installed too close to the surface of the parent part or just installed on a part with a complex mesh like the stock cargo airplane wing are partially broken.

They usually do open and close fine in flight however they are not recognized by the stability calculation tool.

They do not raise when running calculations with spoilers extended and they do not affect the calculation results.

I am not sure if they really produce proper aerodynamic effect?

Another thing is that almost every single craft strongly tends to yaw and roll into one direction at all times.

The more dynamic pressure the stronger the tendency is.

The voxel distribution seems to be perfectly symmetric unlike the pictures on the previous page.

Is the stock game bug with symmetric parts stiffness really fixed?

Or is it something else?

The airspeed indicator seems to work much better now and is useful for the piloting purposes.

Thank you.

[FirroSeranel]

The problem is that I cannot build a plane, or whatever, because the blue spherical marker (CoL) doesn't follow the wing part. It just appear, without the arrows, near the CoM marker and doesn't move arround. It happens both, VAB and SPH.

I'm getting the same thing. At first I thought it might be RCS Build Aid... but I didn't start having this bug until I installed the latest version of FAR. Basically, most of the time everything works great. But at some point during building, the CoL marker stops moving. It gets stuck wherever it is, and won't move anymore until I restart the game. When that happens, FAR also basically stops working. I can't turn on area rule or debug voxels, and all stability derivatives are zeroed out, nor will it run an AoA sweep.

I tried a flight to see if it was just a UI problem, but it wasn't. My plane had as much lift as a brick, like aerodynamics were just totally turned off.

I don't have a log, and I admittedly have tons of other mods installed, but since it's the same bug, I thought maybe it would be useful. Apologies if it's not.

[DuxDucisHodiernus]

Ferram i know you hate it when i bring this up, but its been like a week and i'm just wondering, is the issue with control surfaces patched yet?

[electroconvulsivo]

I'm getting the same thing. At first I thought it might be RCS Build Aid... but I didn't start having this bug until I installed the latest version of FAR. Basically, most of the time everything works great. But at some point during building, the CoL marker stops moving. It gets stuck wherever it is, and won't move anymore until I restart the game. When that happens, FAR also basically stops working. I can't turn on area rule or debug voxels, and all stability derivatives are zeroed out, nor will it run an AoA sweep.

I tried a flight to see if it was just a UI problem, but it wasn't. My plane had as much lift as a brick, like aerodynamics were just totally turned off.

I don't have a log, and I admittedly have tons of other mods installed, but since it's the same bug, I thought maybe it would be useful. Apologies if it's not.

I play with a billion mods as well, but did a fresh install just to help debbuging the issue. But for me, the CoL never works, it is allways stuck and I have been finding the same problem with all the versions of FAR for KSP 1.xx.

And I do confirm the "non existant" aerodynamics during flight. I've tried to fly a random stock ravenspear, it cannot take off even at the end of the runaway with a speed of +250 m/s. But I can launch properly, or at least it seems so, a rocket from the launchpad. I may post another log if needed.

Salud!

[Crzyrndm]

Edit: I may have it. I've just switched to a ship that doesn't use *any* B9 PWings. No weirdness there.

Okay, I can confirm, it's something to do with B9 Procedural Wings. An aircraft with the Swept Wing B on it had normal voxels, and when I switched it out for the default-shape B9 wing, the voxels were thicker on one side. Could be a FAR issue or a PWings one. A lot of people in the B9 Pwing thread are complaining of offset CoL issues and I guess this was my first vessel that really exposed it, so I suppose I'll have to wait/ask crzy for a fix, perhaps.

@ferram

I'm a little bit lost with this one. Initially I thought it may have been down to the lack of delay between symmetry counterparts sending updates, but testing has disproven any link with symmetry or update rate.

Any wing I place to port of the cockpit (up to and including perfectly vertical) is voxelised as if it was slightly larger on most surfaces than it actually is (the only surface that seems to be exempt is the outer face). Any wing placed to starboard of the cockpit is voxelised with minimal protrusion. Symmetry type/count, order of placement, changing update delay all has no effect on the issue.

The major difference in the FAR setup from standard parts is the "forceUseMeshes = True". Could this be the cause?

EDIT

Orientation, not location. Port facing is enlarged, starboard facing is normal.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Crzyrndm

[ferram4]

Every single time you report, "for some reason, at some point, things break" and can't provide any more information, I throw your bug report out, because your reproduction steps turn into nothing more than a convoluted version of, "HALP THINGS BORKED." I need to know exactly what you did to cause it, otherwise I can't fix it. All indications are that the bug everyone is complaining about was fixed, completely and totally, in Ferri, so now you're all gonna have to tell me what you did to break it because there's no method I can see to break things now.

So, full copies of logs. Full reproduction steps. What mods you're running. And some damn information that gives me somewhere to start other than a wild stab in the dark.

At this point,the bug reports have reached the point of such uselessness that my main reason for releasing the mod (people provide good feedback and bug reports) is basically gone. If this continues, I'll have to reconsider whether I want to bother releasing the mod anymore given all the grief that comes with it. You guys are really not helping yourselves here.

@Volt: I have no idea, the only thing that I can gather is that for some reason, KIS likes messing with a lot of stuff that just breaks anything that tries to work with vessels. I can tell this is one of those mods that I'm gonna really love, just like Tweakscale.

I also guess that B9 proc wings aren't orienting their collider faces properly. I guess someone should go and bring that up to whoever's (right, Crzyrndm is) maintaining that to check to make sure that the faces are oriented right.

@Kitspace: Okay,the spoilers should be a quick fix.

The constant rolling / yawing is due to slight asymmetry in the vehicle.Nothing I can do to fix that, that's just a product of the game. Not entirely unrealistic too.

@DuxDucisHodiernus: I'm honestly more annoyed that you didn't bother to read the changelog that covers fixing it,or Kitspace's comment above you that complains about an editor bug introduced by the fix. There's nothing more irritating than being nagged by someone who doesn't know what's going on.

@Cryzyrndm: Make sure that the collider / mesh faces are oriented the proper way. FAR's using that to get finer detail about the shape,and if they're facing backwards, it'll voxelize things wrongly.

[Volt]

I can only imagine how frustrating your day has been considering mine was bad enough, so I can understand that. When you say full logs, I assume the log since the last KSP start would do? My output_log is rapidly becoming cumbersome. Only reason I didn't post my modlist yet is because it's pretty long, and obtaining version numbers for all mods without an established standard for all modders is a total nightmare. But if it would help, I can post the list and full logs after I have a go at reproducing this in a fresh, sandbox copy with just KIS and FAR. I hope KIS improves rather than gets worse over time, because it's not really fair to expect you to insulate your code against muckery from other modders.

The issue that's causing the shrouding is fixable by a quicksave/quickload, so I'll be using that method, and it appears the NREs are causing weirdness but not breaking anything permanently.

Regarding the PWings bug, Crzyrndm - who posted above - is maintaining the code.

[Kitspace]

Ferram

Yes I know about the real life cases of wing heaviness with the real life airplanes due to their production process or something. Especially at the beginning of the jet age.

But it was always considered a problem to fix sometimes even dangerous and it was fixed for many planes that had it.

Just in the game it is considered a bug and Squad put it on their bug tracker with intention to fix it so I did not realize it was still there.

[ferram4]

@Volt: Yes, that would be the full log. Reproducing the issue with no other mods is always better, it helps narrow down the issue. I would hope that KIS improves over time, but if it needs to do this stuff I don't know how to fix it. It's not mucking about with my code, it's mucking about with adding stuff in the stock game, it seems; if it's destroying and recreating vessels willy-nilly then there's not much I can do to prevent anything from going wrong, and that's really the only thing I can see causing that; destroying vessels without cleaning up their VesselModules at the same time.

@Kitspace: No one is talking about mass here. I'm talking about asymmetric aerodynamic forces caused by the parts not being exactly perfectly aligned.

[Nansuchao]

@Ferram I understand your point of view, but we're here cause we appreciate so much your work that we cannot enjoy KSP without a Ferram Aerospace folder in our GameData.

I learned how to build a plane properly thanks to your patience and your hard work and so many of us.

So, I understand your frustration, but keep going, you're great, and all of us, also who never write, is with you, in one way or another.

[Kitspace]

Ferram

I was not talking about the mass either.

Sorry if the term confused you.

English is not my native language and it is late evening here so probably the term is improper. I will look the proper name of that effect up.

[Volt]

Indeed. Through all the good and bad aero changes SQUAD has made, FAR (and NEAR) has been the only constant and a fine one it is. Those people who write two-line bug reports and then get ratty when you can't help them, don't deserve your attention. Why should you make an effort to fix a bug that's only been reported by people who make no effort to get it fixed other than just shouting about it?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Volt

[Tortoise]

Just wanna say keep up the good work and thanks for your support in the KSP community!

[yithpistol]

http://imgur.com/ME0KymE

For all your hard work, know that there are rewards... Enbin Kerman is a big fan, by the way, but he cannot spell 'aerodynamicist'. I cannot get the image to show, so let it be a surprise.

Edited May 22, 2015 by yithpistol

[Pyromaniacal]

Hi guys, I have a problem. Here's a screenshot.

After stage separation, somehow this is more aerodynamically stable than nose on. Note on the navball that I am not facing prograde. EDIT: Here's a screenshot that actually has the HUD..

I cannot get this thing to launch and not flip. I keep it subsonic below 10,000 meters altitude. I have all the parts inset so as to minimize drag. I maintain an AoA of less than 5 degrees at all times. I go straight up to get out of the dense atmosphere quickly, since this is only trying to break atmosphere. I am using the most up to date version of FAR, 15.1. What am I doing wrong? Why is the yellow bit so damningly squiggly? What in the hells do I need to do to fix this?

Edited May 22, 2015 by Pyromaniacal

[blowfish]

Maybe put some tier 0 fins on the upper stage and put the mystery goo inside a service compartment.

[Pyromaniacal]

I'll brb, trying that.

[blowfish]

Ah yeah. Well, you can still put tier 0 fins on. Maybe turn on FAR's stability assistants too - they do seem to help a bit.

[Pyromaniacal]

Ok. I installed the new fins, discovered that I was stupid and DID in fact have the service bay.

When I launched with the fins, the drag they added higher up made the first stage an absolute battle to keep it from coming over to 50 degrees at 1000m altitude. I finally staged out of that stage and it was smooth sailing, so long as I maintained a heading inside the prograde marker. Is there any way I can reduce the drag higher on the rocket so that the first stage is actually flyable?

[Drew Kerman]

how much control authority to you actually have on that? Do the bottom fins steer and how much does the SRB gimbal?

[Wanderfound]

Is there any way I can reduce the drag higher on the rocket so that the first stage is actually flyable?

1) Pull the lower tailfins as low as you can get them.

2) Antenna on the nose, with the antenna extended. It makes a surprisingly large difference.

- - - Updated - - -

how much control authority to you actually have on that? Do the bottom fins steer and how much does the SRB gimbal?

No and none, looks to me; the only first stage control authority I can see is the capsule torque. It can be done, but it is going the hard way.

[Drew Kerman]

yea I figured as much w/regard to the gimbal/fins. He may not have the option to build something with better control tho I suppose since he's in career judging by the look of the VAB. Also, if it is the VAB should he really have it turned sideways? Or does that not matter in nuFAR?

Regarding your antenna tip, how does it not snap off?

[Pyromaniacal]

I was finally able to get the fins that actually provide control authority, and barely escaped atmo by about 17 meters.

I knew Ferram made this game hard, but I forgot it was this frelling hard early on.

- - - Updated - - -

Next question: wat.

I had been separated from the previous stage since 60km altitude. I had been aligned retrograde, heatshield to the ground for the same time. At no time did the shield ablate away. I was pulling close to 1.1km/s before impact. Is this a common thing? If it is and I just didn't read, I apologize.