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

[asmi]

9.5.5 locked up VAB's action groups mode - no part is selectable so I couldn't assign anything to any action group. Reverting to 9.5.4 fixed the problem.

[ferram4]

I have reproduced the CoL bug; the actual issue is that building a craft part-by-part with it active results in an error, but loading a complete craft works properly.

@asmi: Can you post the output_log for when that issue occurred? I suspect I caused a NullReferenceException in the EditorLogic class but I'd like to be sure.

Edited July 31, 2013 by ferram4

[wased89]

@Ferram4 I am quite sure this is a bug, but whenever I have cargo bays from B9 Aerospace pack, and I put a battery pack on the inside, it increases the drag of the craft a bit. I don't think it should do this since it is shielded by the cargo bay doors. I have put a poop ton of batteries on the inside of the cargo bay, then I checked the mach lines in the popup in the SPH, and saw it was really high amount of drag (the red line I think is drag through different machs?). So I removed them, and rechecked the red line again in the popup window, and it was SIGNIFICANTLY lower, even though everything should be shielded. Is this supposed to happen, or is this a bug?

[Dirt_Merchant]

@ferram4: Which part of this 175mb output_log do you need? I've got millions of lines showing "MissingFieldException: Field '.FlightGlobals.fetch' not found" in addition to "NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object

at ferram4.FARControllableSurface.CalculateSurfaceFunctions () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0"

let me know what is most useful to you and ill have it posted asap

oh and this occurs when i take a craft above 9500m in version 9.5.5

Edited July 31, 2013 by Dirt_Merchant

[Tyren]

Since i installed this mod, i dont even get a rocket / spacecraft / whatsoever out of atmosphere...it seems like my crafts are "clamped" to the upper atmosphere border, starting a nose dive when hitting about 20 km height...am i doing it wrong?

[Torham234]

Hey, I want to intall this mod, but when ever I try it it does not work. Can someone PM me a step by step guid to install this mod? Thanks.

-Unzip the archive

- copy the GameData folder onto KSP_win/ folder (this means that in your KSP_win/gamedata, you should now have 2 new items: one is the Ferramairospaceresearch folder and the other is the Modulemanager.dll)

- optionally, if you want some pre-designed planes that work with FAR, copy the Ships folder into the KSP_win folder.

BTW, I am not having any of the issues some people are reporting, and my COL is fine, even with procedural wings. It does point a little backwards on few of the designs, but I just assumed that the computation logic was updated.

And for very floaty planes, I have installed a few air brakes form the Firespitter pack and they do amazing job at slowing your craft down enough for landing.

[Dirt_Merchant]

yep i just deleted all the debris in my save and all seems to be well now.

[p1t1o]

9.5.5 locked up VAB's action groups mode - no part is selectable so I couldn't assign anything to any action group. Reverting to 9.5.4 fixed the problem.

This happened to me a coupla times - also noticed that it affected things like text highlighting in menus when moused over (including the main menu, which was no longer clickable.)

Re-starting KSP fixed the problem and the error only occured rarely (twice in several hours - don't recall what triggered it), so I've stayed with 9.5.5.

I've actually only just got FAR, my experience with it has been pretty good.

Seen some odd CoLs but they normalise once I've done an AoA or Mach pass in the static sim, so no problems for me (touch wood).

[BubbaWilkins]

I have reproduced the CoL bug; the actual issue is that building a craft part-by-part with it active results in an error, but loading a complete craft works properly.

@asmi: Can you post the output_log for when that issue occurred? I suspect I caused a NullReferenceException in the EditorLogic class but I'd like to be sure.

My experience with it says it doesn't matter whether its a new craft or an existing one. The determining factor seems to be whether or not its completely stock or not. This suggests that ModuleManager has something in it that isn't quite kosher. Like I said, reverting back to the earlier version completely negates the error. Perhaps you still have some issues with ModuleManager to iron out?

[Van Disaster]

Doesn't matter if it's stock or not for me either, as I showed - it just looks like the CoL ball bug from quite a few versions ago. Gone back to 9.5.4, I never had a floaty plane issue.

[p1t1o]

What is a "floaty plane"? Is it a bug?

I am having a problem putting large spaceplanes in orbit, they have enough power, enough lift, perfectly stable enough to fly.

At least that is, until about 27-30k and Im usually around Mach 3-4 (1000-1200m/s) - at this point Im usually (trying) to pitch up to gain altitude for orbital insertion, and my nose will sloooowly swing to one side or the other, if I am unable to correct - I lose ALL control authority and the plane spins on ALL 3 AXES, quite slowly, but entirely uncontrollably without any regard for my velocity vector.

Plane falls out of the sky, eventually reaching an altitude where some modicum of control can be restored - although this is not always possible - Isn't FAR being a bit overaggressive in how is degrades an aircrafts aerodynamic performance after a stall?? (ie: those 2 curves in the static sim)

If there is so little atmosphere that my plane will tumble, then what is pushing my nose off course in the first place?

Is that a "floaty plane"? Or am I just making a mistake in design? They fly pretty forgivingly in all regimes up to the height/speed combo described above.

I can design a small spaceplane by the same principles and fly it into space no bother at all (though there is a hint of that instability it is usually much easier to control).

Im new to FAR so Im not sure which of the above is me not doing it right, which bits are known bugs and which bits are working as intended.

[asmi]

@asmi: Can you post the output_log for when that issue occurred? I suspect I caused a NullReferenceException in the EditorLogic class but I'd like to be sure.

I reinstalled 9.5.5 back and didn't get the issue. Looks like it's a "lurking" issue. I'll be on my guard though - if I'll get it, I'll make sure to save log file.

[ferram4]

@Dirt_merchant: As much of the file as you can provide. I need some idea of what happened when the errors started and what caused them to end.

@p1t1o: First, you're flying a little too high too slowly; there isn't enough atmosphere for you to properly control the vehicle up there and you're going about 500 m/s slower than you should at that altitude. Try flying lower and not going above ~22km or so until you're going faster than that. Part of the issue is that though your intake spamming might allow you to get away with running the engines that high up without enough atmospheric density your wings won't do anything to control the plane.

If that's not the issue, I'd look at how large your vertical tail is and how far behind the CoM it is; if the nose is wagging side-to-side that sounds like you don't have enough yaw damping and a larger tail further behind the CoM will deal with that.

And no, FAR is not being overly aggressive in how it degrades an aircraft's performance in stall; a poorly designed / poorly flown aircraft will crash as a result of stall.

[jaked122]

Just to address one concern I have for every mod that makes anything more realistic, is the model built at launch, or is the model used for the calculations calculated realtime?

[p1t1o]

@p1t1o: First, you're flying a little too high too slowly; there isn't enough atmosphere for you to properly control the vehicle up there and you're going about 500 m/s slower than you should at that altitude. Try flying lower and not going above ~22km or so until you're going faster than that. Part of the issue is that though your intake spamming might allow you to get away with running the engines that high up without enough atmospheric density your wings won't do anything to control the plane.

If that's not the issue, I'd look at how large your vertical tail is and how far behind the CoM it is; if the nose is wagging side-to-side that sounds like you don't have enough yaw damping and a larger tail further behind the CoM will deal with that.

And no, FAR is not being overly aggressive in how it degrades an aircraft's performance in stall; a poorly designed / poorly flown aircraft will crash as a result of stall.

First thing I did was put a bigger tail on

Your first explanation sounds promising to me, I havn't spammed intakes but i am generous -and it has a huge wing. I'll try a much more gradual climb - I'd have already done so but the PSU on my main computer just died :mad::mad:

On another note, I tried adding more tail surface by putting a large tail on the underside of the wing as well, by installing it horizontally using a large hinge from I-forget-what-mod and rotating it to nearly vertically downwards in flight.

In general, is that going to work? I mean, will the flight model recognise it?

Cheers for the help

[ferram4]

@jaked122: It's a little of both. Information about where parts are in relation to one another and what forces will act on them at various orientations is calculated every time the craft's part list changes; this means that every time you clip the tower with a wing or drop a rocket stage that information will be updated. Information about how the part is oriented to the flow and Mach number effects are handled in real-time.

@p1t1o: I think that should work... I don't see why it wouldn't. I would say that if you need more vertical tail you're be better off using two tails on the top of the plane, as many fighters do rather than the convoluted method you're trying, since it might cause some very strange yaw-roll coupling and might affect the pitch stability of the vehicle in strange ways.

[gotBurner]

That thing sort of looks like a TOMCAT.

[Van Disaster]

Moving aero pieces with robotics does work. I asked ages ago & ferram said it wouldn't be quite as efficient, but I've moved CoL around in flight with hinged pieces.

[p1t1o]

@Ferram

Had two on top, two on the bottom baby ....probably was overkill - ginormous stabilators.

It must be the flight profile like you said, changing the tail surfaces had only minor effects.

Also I see Valkyrie-style drooping wingtips in my future

Edited August 1, 2013 by p1t1o

[Van Disaster]

You can do them, but you won't get any compression lift ( likewise ground effect ). Nice way to shift the CoL forwards when you're supersonic, though.

[p1t1o]

No, I wasn't expecting advanced high-sonic effects like that, but hopefully it will increase yaw stability along with the CoL effect. Its not deliberate, but all my spaceplanes end up looking like a fat B70 anyway, may as well go the whole hog and see if an attempted replica has any Kerbal-legs.

[Zeroignite]

Does FAR break MechJeb's aerobrake predictions, or does MJ incorporate the different drag model?

[jrandom]

Does FAR break MechJeb's aerobrake predictions, or does MJ incorporate the different drag model?

Last I heard, MJ and FAR still do not play well together, since MJ looks at the default drag values (which FAR zeros out).

[nhnifong]

Are prior versions available anywhere?

[Swifty]

Does anyone have any advice for calculating aerobreaking altitudes when using FAR?

Thanks