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

[enjoybeta]

Hi, just wondering is there any version of FAR can I use with KSP version 1.2.2? So eager to play KSP but hate the stupid stock aerodynamics

Edited February 25, 2017 by enjoybeta

[Starman4308]

4 hours ago, eberkain said:

I started getting parts exploding when decoupling at high speeds, anyone else experienced this?  

I'm pretty sure that's intentional, as in "you are throwing an aerodynamically unstable object into a very high-velocity airstream, of course it's going to break into a thousand little bits" intentional.

This is why a lot of real-world decoupling occurs well above the atmosphere, so that the airstream doesn't do unfortunate things to the discarded stage while still in proximity to un-discarded stages.

[eberkain]

7 hours ago, Starman4308 said:

I'm pretty sure that's intentional, as in "you are throwing an aerodynamically unstable object into a very high-velocity airstream, of course it's going to break into a thousand little bits" intentional.

This is why a lot of real-world decoupling occurs well above the atmosphere, so that the airstream doesn't do unfortunate things to the discarded stage while still in proximity to un-discarded stages.

I've had planes and rockets break up before, that's not what I mean.  Like I decouple my first stage of 35km and the first stage engine poofs out of existence while the rest of the first stage acts normal. .  

[TIkonOR]

After installing FAR most of my wings (AV-R8 Winglet, Tail Fin, Delta-Deluxe Winglet, and some more winglets from mods) now dont have control surfaces (BUT Basic Canard still has). Is this a bug or a feature?

P.S. Playing in career and my game is VERY heavily modded (maybe thats the problem)

[blowfish]

5 hours ago, TIkonOR said:

After installing FAR most of my wings (AV-R8 Winglet, Tail Fin, Delta-Deluxe Winglet, and some more winglets from mods) now dont have control surfaces (BUT Basic Canard still has). Is this a bug or a feature?

P.S. Playing in career and my game is VERY heavily modded (maybe thats the problem)

Sounds like FAR isn't working, but the MM patches to remove stock aero are.  If you're on KSP 1.2.2, there is no released version of FAR that is compatible, so that's likely your problem.

[Svm420]

@ferram4

Would you work your magic before your next release so that wheels using KSPWheel would be toggled  by your wonderful mod? I ask because you have done so in the past with firespitter and BD though those 2 were pretty much the same. I hope this module will work as well. Thanks! 

Edited February 27, 2017 by Svm420

[Me1_base]

Are planes that with high aspect ratio (6~8) too powerful in transonic region? It was tested to be able to have a clmax of 3.5. Able to turn at a rate of 3.2rads^-1.

[JohnTomato]

Hello, I was wondering about the names of the versions of your mod (which are mostly of physicists, engineers and mathematicians, of course), are they chosen at random? Or you choose a certain scientist because they inspired you during the development of a mod version? I am a chemical engineering student and it's great to see names like Knudsen, Kutta, Helmholtz, Euler, Hoerner, etc. around, I find them very inspiring.

Oh and congratulations for the mod!

Thanks.

[Kerbal101]

I just want to express my huge thank you to @ferram4 and everyone who contributed to FAR!!

I have been testing this in a)checkered pattern displaced around center   b) linear not displaced placement (just click on each tank to make them autostick to nodes as they should);

in a straight launch (engine is valiant from porkjet's overhaul, quasi-stock, no changes).
Anyone interested can repeat this, just take other engine if you are not using porkjet overhaul engines.

The values of APoapsis measured directly after flame-out by KER:

1) FAR-dev, 1.2.2, easy sandbox - full drag, strict area ruling - 257km (checkered), 278km (linear)  <<< the only realistic result !
2) FAR-dev, 1.2.2, easy sandbox - full drag, moderate area ruling (default in far) - 278km (checkered), 278km (linear)
3) Stock 1.2.2, easy sandbox -  384km (checkered) ,384km(linear).... aka no difference whatsoever....

Edited March 1, 2017 by Kerbal101

[Sgt Doomball]

With the mod installed I can't get my aerodynamic surfaces to work they won't let me take off.

[blowfish]

6 minutes ago, Sgt Doomball said:

With the mod installed I can't get my aerodynamic surfaces to work they won't let me take off.

The most recent released version does not work with KSP 1.2.2 (indeed, the title of the topic says it's only compatible with KSP 1.1.3).  That is most likely the issue.

[Sgt Doomball]

Just now, blowfish said:

The most recent released version does not work with KSP 1.2.2 (indeed, the title of the topic says it's only compatible with KSP 1.1.3).  That is most likely the issue.

 

thank you

[TheMighyHowitzer/ClevMend]

but will the mod be updated? The ASET mod for the Mk1 Aircraft cockpit have flaps and spoilers that uses FAR, and this ASET version do not work in 1.1.3, but i can wait.

[Doc_Burgerello]

@TheMighyHowitzer/ClevMend, update is being worked on, see this post by Ferram a few pages back:

On 20-2-2017 at 4:30 PM, ferram4 said:

Alright, news update: an actual release should be ready soon, the only remaining thing I want to do is some more irritation involving the AppLauncher button, because changing everything to share a single button for a mod as intended (and as required now) doesn't play well when it toggles multiple variables, so I'm currently waiting on getting it to update its on/off state right.  Small, but irritating.  There should be no more serious bugs in the latest build, yell at me if you find any.

We just have to be patient, which is in my opinion FAR easier than updating this mod .

Edited March 6, 2017 by Doc_Burgerello
Fixed typo...

[doktorstick]

5 hours ago, Doc_Burgerello said:

We just have to be patient, which is in my opinion FAR easier than updating this mod .

I see what you did there.

[stk2008]

6 minutes ago, doktorstick said:

I see what you did there.

I did not it was to FAR away for me to spot it.

[TheMighyHowitzer/ClevMend]

Time to stop before this goes to FAR(  )

[stk2008]

We are FAR beyond the point of return TBH

[-dead-]

Oh, FAR crying out loud...

[Deddly]

That's far enough off topic for this thread, I think. Back on topic.

[Bersagliere81]

Where can I find the dev builder (for game version 1.2)? I can't find any link

Edited March 9, 2017 by Bersagliere81

[VentZer0]

So I am running 1.2.2 and use the dev build for FAR.
I get a weird issue with my plane, a selfmade replica of an SU27, or rather the B9 procedural wings are weird in relation to flight behaviour under FAR.

Here is a little video which shows what I mean:

First part: Notice the gap between leading edge flaps and the main wing.
I have no idea how this came to be, my guess is that it happended from an import from 1.1.3. Never the less, flight behaviour is great, I can pull cobras like nobodies business. The plane is well behaved in this deep stall territory.

Second part: I reattach the wings to close this gap and fly again. Now everytime I pull to 90° the nose veers to the left and never goes straight up. Its hard to regain control.

Third part: I reload the original model and attach wingtip launch rails to the side. Even though the CoL and Com are almost not even affected by this the handling is very different. Not even possible to reach 90° AOA anymore.
And When I up the control deflection, again instable behaviour upon recovery from a cobra.

You can see the lift vector preceeding around everytime when the instable behaviour is shown. I do not know if this is a FAR issue or something else.
It is also not an import issue in of it self. I can modify my craft just fine. Only when I edit the leading edge flaps or add the wingtip rails will I get this deep stall instability.

[Akira_R]

1 hour ago, VentZer0 said:

So I am running 1.2.2 and use the dev build for FAR.
I get a weird issue with my plane, a selfmade replica of an SU27, or rather the B9 procedural wings are weird in relation to flight behaviour under FAR.

Here is a little video which shows what I mean:

First part: Notice the gap between leading edge flaps and the main wing.
I have no idea how this came to be, my guess is that it happended from an import from 1.1.3. Never the less, flight behaviour is great, I can pull cobras like nobodies business. The plane is well behaved in this deep stall territory.

Second part: I reattach the wings to close this gap and fly again. Now everytime I pull to 90° the nose veers to the left and never goes straight up. Its hard to regain control.

Third part: I reload the original model and attach wingtip launch rails to the side. Even though the CoL and Com are almost not even affected by this the handling is very different. Not even possible to reach 90° AOA anymore.
And When I up the control deflection, again instable behaviour upon recovery from a cobra.

You can see the lift vector preceeding around everytime when the instable behaviour is shown. I do not know if this is a FAR issue or something else.
It is also not an import issue in of it self. I can modify my craft just fine. Only when I edit the leading edge flaps or add the wingtip rails will I get this deep stall instability.

Can you provide some screen shots with the debug voxels showing, of both sides of the plane before and after making all the mentioned changes, especially with close ups on the changed parts, also if you use the offset tool to close the gap instead of reattaching do you still experience the change in handling?

[VentZer0]

3 minutes ago, Akira_R said:

Can you provide some screen shots with the debug voxels showing, of both sides of the plane before and after making all the mentioned changes, especially with close ups on the changed parts, also if you use the offset tool to close the gap instead of reattaching do you still experience the change in handling?

Will do.
http://imgur.com/a/7UtoE

Yes I do. I compared the two craft files in notepad++ and the only difference is that the craft file with the fixed flaps has the part {} section at the end of the file and the pos rot attach parameters are different. Everything else is the same.

[Akira_R]

2 hours ago, VentZer0 said:

Will do.
http://imgur.com/a/7UtoE

Yes I do. I compared the two craft files in notepad++ and the only difference is that the craft file with the fixed flaps has the part {} section at the end of the file and the pos rot attach parameters are different. Everything else is the same.

Welp I was hoping for something simple like the right side was voxelizing weird after reattachment, I remember there being some issues way back with symmetry on the procedural wings and maybe that was rearing it's head again but it all looks good... unfortunately I don't have any other ideas...

Part of me wants to say it's probably not an actual issue with FAR itself, I personally  haven't had any issues so far in the dev build, it's been extremely stable and all odd aircraft behavior has been identified as my own design flaws, but this does seam weird. I don't have B9 procedural wings installed so I haven't had a chance to test them. I wonder if you were to readjust the shape of the leading edge after it's reattached so that the leading edge ends up in the same location as before you reattached it if that would fix the problem? It seams like such a small amount of change to cause such a drastic result in flight performance but who knows...

Also no idea RE the rails...