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

[tetryds]

@cptcaptain your CoL has an arrow, FAR was installed wrong.

Edit: or some other mod broke it.

I have had no issues with shielded parts, FAR does not do anything special with cargo bays.

[Cairol]

On 22.4.2016 at 8:30 PM, ferram4 said:

That bug was fixed quite a few FAR versions ago.

The last version I tried was "Goldstein". So I guess I'll give the current version a go.
I'm really desperate to get FAR back into the game, as it makes things more predictable for me. It feels more real than vanilla and makes more fun,
although being a little less forgiving for flawed designs than vanilla.

[cptcaptain]

23 hours ago, tetryds said:

@cptcaptain your CoL has an arrow, FAR was installed wrong.

Edit: or some other mod broke it.

I have had no issues with shielded parts, FAR does not do anything special with cargo bays.

Thanks. So vectors are bad.

I emptied my GameData folder and began adding the mods one after another and testing them in combination with FAR. I think I narrowed it down to the MK2 Expansion and/or HullCam VDS. Leaving them out makes the CoL movable and arrow-less. Most of the time anyways. Also my planes get off the ground.

[tees]

Is there 1.1 gimbal mod for mechjeb2 and FAR ??

[tetryds]

@cptcaptain great, I would guess it's the Mk2 expansion mod, when you nail down the cause of the issue please report the problem to them as this is bad configuration rather than a FAR issue.

[brusura]

Hi @ferram4

craft+log+save: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=41700172752221825717

with only FAR and KIS launch the craft in the file, go on eva, equip the screwdriver, detach and attach the solar panel from the structural tube to the pod and you get this:

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at FerramAerospaceResearch.FARGUI.FARFlightGUI.StabilityAugmentation..ctor (.Vessel vessel) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at FerramAerospaceResearch.FARGUI.FARFlightGUI.FlightGUI.Start () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at FerramAerospaceResearch.FARAeroComponents.FARVesselAero.Start () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

 

[ferram4]

@brusura: This is not a FAR bug.  All of the values checked in FARVesselAero.Start() and in the above are incapable of throwing an NRE under normal KSP vessel creation conditions, regardless of how complicated.  This needs to be fixed on the KIS side through proper creation of Vessels.  Nothing I can do here.

[Chris97b]

Hey all,

I seem to be having a strange interoperability issue between FAR and the NRAP procedural test weight mod. With FAR installed, I am unable to resize the test weight in the VAB. The slider works, but the size of the weight does not change. Removing FAR solves the issue. This is 100% reproducible using only FAR and it's dependencies and NRAP.

Tested on KSP 1.1 x64 with the following mods:

FAR Version 0.15.6.1
MFI Version 1.1.3.0
MM Version 2.6.22
NRAP Version 1.5.1

The logs don't seem to have anything relevant, but included just in case

KSP Log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vdsutw0x2x16fp3/KSP.log?dl=0
Output Log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yeq38tabp4bnw88/output_log.txt?dl=0

Has anyone seen this before? If any additional information from me would be useful please let me know and I'll grab it

Posted on both mod threads as I have no idea which is likely to be the issue.

Thanks!

[chrisb2e9]

On 4/24/2016 at 1:38 PM, ferram4 said:

No plane ever lands at max takeoff weight.  Most planes don't even have gear designed to land at max takeoff weight. 

Not arguing, but interesting story. After the crash of Swiss air 111 back in 98, I was at the Moncton Airport in New Brunswick (in a private building, not the terminal). A RCAF Airbus A320 had just taken off and was going transatlantic. About 15-20 minutes into the flight they reported back to the tower that they had smoke in the cabin and were returning to land. While they did dump fuel on the way back, they didn't have enough time to dump enough fuel to get below the max landing weight. So they landed anyway, above max weight, with a tail wind in rain/fog(and i'm pretty sure that they took the ILS below mins). Full thrust reverse with a runway covered in water was pretty cool to see. We were hoping to see a tire blow from hot brakes but I guess with all the water it was able to keep things cool enough that it didn't happen.

Sorry, off topic but the comment about how max landing weight is lower than max take off weight reminded me of that story.

Edited April 27, 2016 by chrisb2e9

[EstebanLB]

Hello, quick question. Is this mod still necessary now since the drag model has been improved since 1.0.5 or so? What does this mod do now in the 1.1 version?

[Red Iron Crown]

5 minutes ago, EstebanLB said:

Hello, quick question. Is this mod still necessary now since the drag model has been improved since 1.0.5 or so? What does this mod do now in the 1.1 version?

It was never "necessary". No changes to stock aero have been made since 1.0.5 afaik. The current stock aero behaves somewhat similarly to pre-1.0 FAR. Newer versions of FAR are more sophisticated still, with much better handling of clipped and offset parts, transsonic effects, and a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting.

My recommendation would be: If you make a lot of planes or spend a lot of time in atmosphere, use FAR. If you mostly make rockets and only interact with the atmo on the way up or the way down, then stock aero is probably adequate.

[EstebanLB]

23 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

It was never "necessary". No changes to stock aero have been made since 1.0.5 afaik. The current stock aero behaves somewhat similarly to pre-1.0 FAR. Newer versions of FAR are more sophisticated still, with much better handling of clipped and offset parts, transsonic effects, and a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting.

My recommendation would be: If you make a lot of planes or spend a lot of time in atmosphere, use FAR. If you mostly make rockets and only interact with the atmo on the way up or the way down, then stock aero is probably adequate.

Thanks for the answer, I've just started playing KSP again after many years, probably since 0.22 and even then I've played very little. I'll stick to vanilla game for now

[Ilya]

Has anybody else found it extremely difficult to use SRBs in the current version of FAR? No matter how slow I make my gravity turn, and how much gimbal I have, my rocket will tip over and flip if I have SRBs radially attached. I always had some difficulty making them work in this mod, but now I just find them impossible.

[ferram4]

@Red Iron Crown: Well, I have to disagree with that, primarily due to the fact that stock greatly underestimates the drag on pods during reentry and on rockets going through Max Q.  There are a lot of things that you should be able to reenter in stock that you can't because reentry vehicles are just too slippery.

@Ilya: That sounds a lot like a case of "not enough control authority for the TWR" and if the problem only shows up when you have SRBs involved, I'd guess the issue is just that you're outrunning the control authority you have.  I'd suggest reducing the TWR at launch, adding more mass / payload, or adding control fins.  Or make the payload narrower, this is also something that can happen if the payload fairing is too large (read: more than ~1.5 times the diameter of the rest of the rocket) and creates too much body lift as a result.

[funkcanna]

Is this a problem with a part or FAR?  My CoL remains in the cockpit no matter what I do.

[tetryds]

@funkcanna Mod problem, probably that Mk2 engine.

[funkcanna]

Just now, tetryds said:

@funkcanna Mod problem, probably that Mk2 engine.

It happens when I remove everything and use stock parts too.  (when I say remove, I mean I remove them from the build, not from the game)

[tetryds]

@funkcanna did you install it via CKAN?

If not, remove and reinstall it, you may have installed it wrong, or maybe there is some other mod interfering.

If yes, don't expect support here, head over to the FAR CKAN support thread.

[funkcanna]

Nope, FAR Is installed manually, always  learned the hard way! I'll try to work out what could be conflicting but its only recently started happening (since I installed FAR).

[Van Disaster]

12 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

It was never "necessary". No changes to stock aero have been made since 1.0.5 afaik. The current stock aero behaves somewhat similarly to pre-1.0 FAR. Newer versions of FAR are more sophisticated still, with much better handling of clipped and offset parts, transsonic effects, and a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting.

My recommendation would be: If you make a lot of planes or spend a lot of time in atmosphere, use FAR. If you mostly make rockets and only interact with the atmo on the way up or the way down, then stock aero is probably adequate.

Stock doesn't behave like older FAR either - it just behaves a little better than it did before. If you have any sort of innate feel for dynamics it'll annoy you in short order, if you care about that sort of thing. I'd recommend trying FAR first & dropping it if it's too time-consuming ( it shouldn't be, especially for rockets ), and then see if you can put up with stock.

[funkcanna]

30 minutes ago, tetryds said:

@funkcanna did you install it via CKAN?

If not, remove and reinstall it, you may have installed it wrong, or maybe there is some other mod interfering.

If yes, don't expect support here, head over to the FAR CKAN support thread.

Ok - I removed FAR, checked and the CoL is working correctly.  Re-downloaded and reinstalled FAR manually, and now the CoL is stuck in the cockpit again.  Either something is up with FAR or its a mod its conflicting with, I can't think of any other mods I use which would have anything to do with CoL calculations, but I have no idea what I'm talking about!

Edited April 28, 2016 by funkcanna

[Flashblade]

Without FAR flying planes just feels off and wrong. So thank you again for creating this stellar piece of a mod @ferram4

[DKnight54]

2 hours ago, funkcanna said:

Is this a problem with a part or FAR?  My CoL remains in the cockpit no matter what I do.

Just to check, do you have Hullcam VDS installed? I'm betting that if you check the voxelization using the FAR supersonic tab, you'll see that it voxelizes the cockpit only, and that the docking port and anything attached to it will not be voxelized.

Not sure what the interaction is, but because Hullcam VDS adds a camera to docking ports, this somehow breaks the voxelization to that part and anything attached to it. Please note that I've not done detailed testing, and am assuming that normal docking ports may have the same effect.

I've only just caught the source last night have chucking mods one by one, and there's no errors(That I could see) in the logs. AFAIK, there was no issues with this in the previous "Johns" version.

Edited April 28, 2016 by DKnight54
Correcting version tag

[funkcanna]

1 hour ago, DKnight54 said:

Just to check, do you have Hullcam VDS installed? I'm betting that if you check the voxelization using the FAR supersonic tab, you'll see that it voxelizes the cockpit only, and that the docking port and anything attached to it will not be voxelized.

Not sure what the interaction is, but because Hullcam VDS adds a camera to docking ports, this somehow breaks the voxelization to that part and anything attached to it. Please note that I've not done detailed testing, and am assuming that normal docking ports may have the same effect.

I've only just caught the source last night have chucking mods one by one, and there's no errors(That I could see) in the logs. AFAIK, there was no issues with this in the previous "Johns" version.

Youre a super hero @DKnight54 - yes I do have HullCamVDS installed! Removed HullCam and FAR back to working again.  Thanks man!

[funkcanna]

On to another point, is there any reason why at around 15000 this plane wants to yaw like crazy then blow up?  SAS is not turned on:

 

 

Video: http://tinypic.com/r/11rvdd0/9