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

[Temeter]

1 hour ago, JeeF said:

The F-14 is a work of art, my favorite aircraft of all times.

The very first flight simulator I've tried was Top Gun: Fire at Will, with my good old Logitech Wingman Extreme.

That was a proper game, great simulation aspect for the time, loads of missions and replayability. Sadly the remake of the game was a total joke.

I'll be trying to make a F-14 in KSP as soon as FAR gets released for 1.4, since a lot of mods I find a must-have are dependent on it.

Did you use Infernal Robotics for the sweeping motion of the wings?

Yep, used Infernal Robotics hinge. Bit problematic with how loose it is, but it works fine for smaller aircraft.

[JeeF]

1 hour ago, Temeter said:

Yep, used Infernal Robotics hinge. Bit problematic with how loose it is, but it works fine for smaller aircraft.

You can edit the files to make it very sturdy, almost like a KJR for IR. Works better. And also use TweakScale to make the part larger, but "sink" it into the fuselage a bit to hide it.

[Temeter]

20 minutes ago, JeeF said:

You can edit the files to make it very sturdy, almost like a KJR for IR. Works better. And also use TweakScale to make the part larger, but "sink" it into the fuselage a bit to hide it.

I just found that the "engage lock" option locks the parts in place just like solid parts; solved the issue.

Curious though, it would be very helpful to get some more stability. What variables would I need to change? Guy developing Infernal Robotics Next told me that stronger joints tend to be buggy.

[Temeter]

On 5/13/2018 at 8:39 PM, JeeF said:

You can edit the files to make it very sturdy, almost like a KJR for IR. Works better. And also use TweakScale to make the part larger, but "sink" it into the fuselage a bit to hide it.

Come on mate, don't leave me hanging. What's the stuff I gotta change to make it more durable?

[JeeF]

9 hours ago, Temeter said:

Come on mate, don't leave me hanging. What's the stuff I gotta change to make it more durable?

I'm not sure mate, you should probably ask Ferram, or someone at IR thread. I just heard about it, but long ago, can't recall details.

[Temeter]

7 hours ago, JeeF said:

I'm not sure mate, you should probably ask Ferram, or someone at IR thread. I just heard about it, but long ago, can't recall details.

I see. Well, for fighters, the lock function is 100% enough to stabilize wings.

[Kitspace]

17 hours ago, Temeter said:

I see. Well, for fighters, the lock function is 100% enough to stabilize wings.

I was just reading the thread and I am interested, if you have to keep the lock engaged, how do you change the wing position in flight, without breaking them?

[Temeter]

6 hours ago, Kitspace said:

I was just reading the thread and I am interested, if you have to keep the lock engaged, how do you change the wing position in flight, without breaking them?

I got the lock toggle on a key; so I just unlock them temporarily, whenever I need to move stuff around.

[JeeF]

Can't wait for FAR update, dying to try and build a Tomcat now XD

Also wanna try to finally break Mach 10 on RSS using Scramjets.

[Jesusthebird]

Amazing how most the community awaits the far update above anything else. Its truly a work of art! I check ckan daily for my dreams to become reality in for for of Far 1.4.x. Mmmmm

[JeeF]

7 minutes ago, Jesusthebird said:

Amazing how most the community awaits the far update above anything else. Its truly a work of art! I check ckan daily for my dreams to become reality in for for of Far 1.4.x. Mmmmm

It's not only that. Some of the mods I'm waiting for updating require FAR to be updated as well.

[Kitspace]

14 hours ago, Temeter said:

I got the lock toggle on a key; so I just unlock them temporarily, whenever I need to move stuff around.

Sorry, I did not make myself clear enough, I mean when you do that, do your wings not become wobbly and break off, while they are in motion?

[JeeF]

1 hour ago, Kitspace said:

Sorry, I did not make myself clear enough, I mean when you do that, do your wings not become wobbly and break off, while they are in motion?

Depends on the speed. If you try to do that at Mach 2 the wings would probably go the smitherinies, but then again so would the wings on a real Tomcat.

Purpose of the pivoting wings is mainly takeoff, landing, low speed flight. Also, from my understanding, he unlocks the part, then moves the wing into a desirable attack angle, and re-locks the part.

And he probably does that at lower speed.

Edited May 19, 2018 by JeeF

[Guest]

@ferram4, that post probably has the most likes of any thread! 112!

[Temeter]

18 hours ago, Kitspace said:

Sorry, I did not make myself clear enough, I mean when you do that, do your wings not become wobbly and break off, while they are in motion?

No, never happened in straight flight at reseanable speeds. You can use tweakscale to make mechanisms bigger and a bit more resilient. Otherwise just change positions at subsonic speed; from transonic onwards you can use the arrow shape either way.

Using +/- instead of presets, I sometimes managed to move wings even at mach 2. Bit unreliable tho.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Temeter

[Kitspace]

On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 9:32 PM, Temeter said:

No, never happened in straight flight at reseanable speeds. You can use tweakscale to make mechanisms bigger and a bit more resilient. Otherwise just change positions at subsonic speed; from transonic onwards you can use the arrow shape either way.

Using +/- instead of presets, I sometimes managed to move wings even at mach 2. Bit unreliable tho.

Interesting. I guess real life planes also have limitations on speeds for operations of such mechanisms...

Sort of like the speed limit with the gear down is higher than while it is in motion quite often...

Can not wait for the 1.4 release too!

[JeeF]

On 5/19/2018 at 2:32 PM, Temeter said:

Using +/- instead of presets, I sometimes managed to move wings even at mach 2. Bit unreliable tho.

So you're saying we can't change wing attack angle at Mach 3 while pulling a 9G inverted loop? Absurd!

[The-Grim-Sleeper]

On 5/10/2018 at 7:48 PM, Arcanejack said:

Thanks! Worked like a charm. The icon in the toolbar is just a black box but otherwise it seems to be working just fine!

So, I know that 4x4cheesecake's recompile guide is right there, and I really shouldn't join in on the beggars choir and I could totally get that visual studio stuff to run if I was willing to put in the time and effort to boot to windows and install that stuff (or whatever is the smart way of doing that sort of stuff in Ubuntu)...

But...

Could you please share those 2 recompiled files online, and save us lazy beggars the effort?

 

EDIT: I just saw 4x4cheesecake's post about this, and I can respect respect.
Because I remember the good words.

Edited May 23, 2018 by The-Grim-Sleeper

[Boersgard]

10 hours ago, The-Grim-Sleeper said:

So, I know that 4x4cheesecake's recompile guide is right there, and I really shouldn't join in on the beggars choir and I could totally get that visual studio stuff to run if I was willing to put in the time and effort to boot to windows and install that stuff (or whatever is the smart way of doing that sort of stuff in Ubuntu)...

tbh it's probably easier in Linux; when I tried getting visual studio to work it turned into a minefield of .net whatever dependencies and I never managed to get compiling and running a program to actually work. Not even a basic "hello world!" Genuinely Dev C++ (by bloodshed software) was significantly easier to understand/use than VS (And significantly smaller/faster, but way fewer features; it would probably not be good for recompiling FAR since you'll do everything manually). For Linux, programming pretty much works right out of the box - nano or vim to edit, terminal to compile/run. For something most similar to VS on linux, I found CLion worked great.

I'm not any kind of guru with this stuff - I barely do any programming at all - it's just what I found trying to learn my way through it. Linux with whatever was way, way, easier to get working than visual studio on windows.

[Temeter]

On 5/21/2018 at 5:20 AM, JeeF said:

So you're saying we can't change wing attack angle at Mach 3 while pulling a 9G inverted loop? Absurd!

And that's probably more because of buggy physics than simulated material weakness! >:D

If you put the stability high enough in FAR, then Mach3/11g turns are perfectly possible. You just don't wanna move your wings or play with their joints while doing that.

Edited May 24, 2018 by Temeter

[JeeF]

12 hours ago, Temeter said:

If you put the stability high enough in FAR, 

What do you mean?

[JeeF]

@ferram4 How's the work coming along? 

[Cepheus]

On 5/30/2018 at 1:57 PM, JeeF said:

@ferram4 How's the work coming along? 

Please don't do this. He'll update when he updates. I'd rather have a product that is highly polished than one that's rushed out the door.

[Boomer]

1 hour ago, Cepheus said:

Please don't do this. He'll update when he updates. I'd rather have a product that is highly polished than one that's rushed out the door.

He's only asking how the work is going, he did not ask for a update or forced Ferram4 to release something, I really don't understand why asking anything about the wip mod is becoming a taboo..

[Temeter]

8 hours ago, Boomer said:

He's only asking how the work is going, he did not ask for a update or forced Ferram4 to release something, I really don't understand why asking anything about the wip mod is becoming a taboo..

Because sometimes people just do it all the time and a bunch of modders got really annoyed about it.