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

[Nansuchao]

Look some pages earlier, is a stock bug that FAR exacerbate.

[davidy12]

On what pg? Went 10 pages back.

[Nansuchao]

In the last pages, we had talk many times about this issue. Btw, to solve this, for now you have only one way. Quicksave often, and, when your ship explode to overheating, exit immediately the game and open the persistent file in your save. Search for your ship and you'll find that every parts has the two temp strings setted to "Infinity". Change Infinity with 0 (zero), and the heat system return to work properly.

[Tepidbread]

I have a question that is a bit random... I noticed that one of the stability derivatives was slightly off regardless of the velocity or altitude. (Zq I think) Anyway it is not much of a problem... I don't actually think that anything is wrong with my aircraft. It is extraordinarily maneuverable and stable. However, It made me wonder if configuring the control surfaces actually changes the way that longitudinal stability derivatives are calculated. I suspect the problem with my aircraft arises from the overzealous canards in the front of the aircraft. Will limiting the angle of the control surfaces change the way the stability derivatives are calculated?

[Tarheel1999]

On what pg? Went 10 pages back.

The page immediately before your post.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-1-0-4-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-15-4-Glauert-7-12-15?p=2086981&viewfull=1#post2086981

[Prasiatko]

Apologies should read OP more closely. Still occurs with a manual install. However upon installing a fresh copy and loading only procedural parts, toolbar and FAR i believe i have found a possible cause though unsure what is causing it.

dlrk, Do you have a part in the menu called 0 procedural tank? I notice in my usual install all the part names are prefixed with 0 but in the fresh install they are normally named.

EDIT: Okay appears to be coming from SETI tech tree. And confirm that as cause, at least in my case.

Edited July 19, 2015 by Prasiatko

[StevenRS11]

So, I got one of my friends who is in the Air Force to just try KSP with some mods I recommended installed. (He plays stock, unaware of existence of mods.)

He called me the other day, and said that he had built a model of the T-38, which he has flown in quite a bit I think. He said that he got it to fly almost exactly like the real thing, except for very low speed performance. He said that the real thing's controls get 'mushy' faster, and the plane gains a significant control lag that he never saw even just barely above stall speed in KSP.

Personally, I think that's pretty cool, and I bet the mushiness/ control lag not showing up might be more to do with the physical properties of the airplane like its various moments of inertia. Ill tell him to increase the mass of the wings near the edges and see if that helps.

[ferram4]

I bet I know what's happening with the lack of mushiness. FAR doesn't (currently) resolve the effects of downwash behind lifting surfaces. Since higher lift coefficients (read: lower speeds) generally result in stronger downwash relative to the freestream air, the errors will grow with decreasing speed. I'm not sure how much of the control lag might be due to that without knowing how the T-38's control system handles inputs. Not sure how all of that might come together without the control system in between the pilot and the plane, but if it's minimal involvement, then I can see what I can do.

Can you get him to send the craft file and give me some ballpark numbers for the control lag? Mushiness I'll have to do my best to guess, I realize that's not quantifiable, but the rest should be fixable.

[Yemo]

Apologies should read OP more closely. Still occurs with a manual install. However upon installing a fresh copy and loading only procedural parts, toolbar and FAR i believe i have found a possible cause though unsure what is causing it.

dlrk, Do you have a part in the menu called 0 procedural tank? I notice in my usual install all the part names are prefixed with 0 but in the fresh install they are normally named.

EDIT: Okay appears to be coming from SETI tech tree. And confirm that as cause, at least in my case.

Bad coding on my part fixed for SETIctt 0.9.1.4, procedural parts should work with FAR again.

My apologies for the inconveniences.

[capi3101]

Trying out FAR again, and for some reason I'm not getting any graph data in the SPH, and all the stats are blank. Any ideas?

Apologies for an "is it plugged-in" type of response; the graph data and stats default to blank before you "mash go" for the first time. Have you actually pushed the button on the graphs page that says "Sweep AoA" or "Sweep Mach", and/or have you pushed the button on the derivatives page that says "Calculate Derivatives"? If not, try that first.

Then if you still have problems, come back and say so.

[MinimumSky5]

I've installed FAR, and I'm getting massive lag with a relatively small plane (the Blitzableiter). The debug menu is filled with errors saying MissingFieldException: Field ".Field.externalTemperature" not found. Have I done something wrong?

Edit: As it turns out, FAR had nothing to do with it, ignore me!

Edited July 21, 2015 by MinimumSky5

[MugWanaBe]

I need help with FASA Atlas launch vehicle. I am having the same problem that was found on page 235 reply 2348 but have no clue how to fix it please help

P.S. I am not using the rescaled version.

Thanks

Mug

[ferram4]

@MinimumSky5: Yeah, KSP updates are important. Never assume that small version increments imply compatibility, because Squad has never made much sense in the numbers they assign to updates.

@MugWanaBe: If you're experiencing issues with very high drag on the Mercury strap decoupler, then I'm sorry to say that you're out of luck; those issues only arise in old, unsupported versions of FAR and KSP. You'll have to update to KSP 1.0.4 and use the most recent versions of FAR, which will have proper aerodynamics for the Atlas rocket.

[ThorBeorn]

I get a bug with FAR and the electric prop engine from KAX. Craft explodes instantaneously after loading on the runway, log gets spammed with errors. This is with no other mods than FAR, KAX and the Firespitter plugin.

Reproduction steps:

1. Build (any it seems) a craft with the electric engine from KAX in SPH

2. Click launch and watch the kraken.

output_log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/eogir10q15gz8ly/output_log.txt?dl=0

KSP.log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5qtyxq48z66xs54/KSP.log?dl=0

ps. How do you make the text in the links not show the whole adress? I've seen just a clickable "output_log" leading to a dropbox link.

[gilflo]

FAR and 1.0.4 are making me crazy!! Here is a cargo hold, with a Scansat satellite, a Jr science lab on a Hinge, 4 mysterious goo and a Karbonite converter. I removed all stock batteries and stock Nuk thermo generators.

Aircraft is on runway, brakes on, cargo hold open. No engine running, nothing ON.

Temp is 347 increasing instead of 290-300

Here is time warp 5 (X100)

temp is increasing rapidly: here 648

On this pic, I timewarp 6 and temp decrease steadily to 314 !!! and stay constant as far as i remain on timemarp 6

I timewarp1, then 2 and again 5 and it science lab becomes red (from 1 to 5, temp is increasing all the time, whatever is timewarp)

and blow up

Then I refresh by time warping 6 and try to timewarp 1, then 2 and up to 5

this time it's an air entry that is heating

I refresh by time warping 6 tried another time 5 and it was the opposite air entry that became red and heated....

So whatever is timewarp, below 6, temp is increasing as soon as the aircraft is launched.

I removed FERRAM, left all my stuff (battery, generator, lab, satellite...etc)... inside the cargo hold and I could not see any temp increase. Temp was steadily 290-300 depending on night and day...

How can I help you to help me for this kind of bug? How can I get a log of the bug. I am on iMac with Yosemite

[Guest]

FAR puts stock "Rapid Sudden Overheat" bug on the overdrive. It's not FAR bug, I think.

And SQUAD is not going to fix any bugs before Unity 5 switchover, and I think, it will even more messy.

My personal solution is limited and awkward, but it's only thing I can do:

I design only moderately complex planes, and use FAR only during atmospheric flights, capsule craft launches and reentries. After spacecraft is in space in stable orbit, I do save, quit, and remove FAR folder to temporary folder, then do an approach and docking with main ship.

It's only way to make sure it will not explode in space after 1-2 minutes of doing nothing.

The only thing I can wish, that FAR, after detecting "out of atmosphere" condition, close all windows and deactivate, only leaving tiny watcher process behind to watch for atmospheric reentry, to pause game and load FAR back again.

[gilflo]

Thank's for reply. I think that if it's not being fixed, I'll then remain on 1.0.2.

I like FAR and I don't want to leave it...

[kcs123]

We can only hope that Claw will be able to provide some fix for this heating bug. I have informed him about it, so just keep finger crossed that fix for this bug will be possible to create.

[ferram4]

@ThorBeorn: Known issue, looking at possible causes. It's something about it being an intake that doesn't bring in IntakeAir.

@gilflo: As I've mentioned many, many, many times at this point, I can't fix stock bugs. It's not my fault that they don't clamp temperature changes to make sure the temp doesn't oscillate to hell between parts, and there's not much I can do to even fix this besides ripping the temperature system out entirely. Is that what people would like?

@WildLynx: That would not only be horrendously expensive to do, but would also lead to heating issues because of random changes in the radiative area of parts. Basically, you'd get vehicles that have enough radiative area to cool themselves changing to not be capable of it when switching between the stock area calculations and FAR's area calculations. FAR is currently not the root cause of any heating issues, and I am not going to change things to make it one.

@kcs123: I don't think that's even possible. It seems to be caused by the temperature transfer between a small part with 2 or more much larger parts attached to it not being clamped to deal with the finite timestep; getting that changed would require gutting the entire temperature system and replacing it given where that code runs in FlightIntegrator.

[Vegatoxi]

Another try with FAR still negative impressions.

In that case i start thinking that FAR abbreviation means Flip Aerospace Research

[StevenRS11]

I had totally forgotten that FAR recognizes landing gear now. Deployed gear at mach 3, and my 'plane' turns into a cockpit all by its lonesome.

[Nansuchao]

Another try with FAR still negative impressions.

In that case i start thinking that FAR abbreviation means Flip Aerospace Research

Have you tried to be gentle with the controls?

[Guest]

Let me explain what happening. May be someone will come up with solution. May be it's bug Ferram mentions, may it's some other.

Imagine ship, mostly made of habitation modules, structural tubes, docking ports, small batteries, and such. About 200 parts.

It's basically a station - no reactors, no burning engines, nothing. And in the shadow of the planet.

I have an Engineer mod, so I can see part with max temp, min temp, and critical (closest to the part's max survivable temp).

All the parts are cool. Like 300 K average. May be even less.

Suddenly, one structural part, usually structural fuselage, ... just explodes. Due to overheating. If you watch Engineer's readouts closely, parts suddenly heats to max temperature, like 1000K per second.

Ok, I reload and use cheat menu to disable heat damage. What I see in next 1-2 minutes (it was predetermined for that save and unavoidable, until I temporarily removed FAR) :

Structural part suddenly becomes antimatter bomb: it's heats from 1000s K per second to 10E6 to 10E12 K per second. It's antimatter explosion alright. Entire ship quickly becomes new star.

How Squad managed to miss this bug? They never test ships more then 100 parts?

P.S.

One more detail - this structural part have about 6 other structural parts connected to it, basically a handmade hub.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Guest

[ferram4]

@Vegatoxi: Yes, that happens with poorly designed rockets that are piloted roughly. Without more information, no one can help you besides telling you that you're doing it wrong, because apparently everyone else can handle it just fine.

@StevenRS11: ...what possessed you to try that?

@WildLynx: Asking again and again doesn't cause me to fix someone else's code. I know there's the stock bug, we all know there's the stock bug, but continually reporting here doesn't give me the ability to hack into Squad's offices, change their source code, and force a 1.0.5 release to fix it. I'm sorry that I'm not a witchdoctor, I'd like to fix it too so that the issue goes away; I'd [CENSORED] love for it to be an issue in my code rather than stock, because then I could actually fix it, but since it can be reproduced in stock in similar circumstances (small parts connected to multiple larger parts), there's absolutely jack that I can do to fix it.

Seriously, do you think that I'd leave it there if I could actually fix it?!

[Hodo]

Another try with FAR still negative impressions.

In that case i start thinking that FAR abbreviation means Flip Aerospace Research

Hmm... let me see how I could put this kindly.

Learn to fly, or learn to design more stable aircraft.

I havent had a flip issue outside of user error in years.