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

[Guest doughbred]

I am unable to launch load KSP after installing this mod. The loading stops when it tries to load "StandardCtrlSrf"

[Taverius]

You're on Mac and dragged the folders instead of copy-and pasting, which on mac replaces the folders instead of merging.

[Guest doughbred]

I did not drag the folder. I open it, select all of the content, and drag it to the corresponding game folder as I do with all other mods.

[Guest]

Same thing. This mod overrides stock config files, but not the models. On Mac, you need to specifically order it to merge the folders instead of overwriting them, or manually move every .cfg file.

[Taverius]

I did not drag the folder. I open it, select all of the content, and drag it to the corresponding game folder as I do with all other mods.

See: drag. If you drag folders on mac, it replaces. You need to select them all, copy, and then paste.

[Guest doughbred]

Okay, I believe I got it to work now, thankyou.

[taniwha]

ANWRocketMan: watch your units: delta-v is m.s^-1 (3000 is reasonable). m.s^-2 is acceleration (3000 = pancake).

[o_O]

1 Are control surfaces near the front of the plane good for getting the nose up for takeoff? And if I have control surfaces at an angle (like on the edge of a backward facing delta wing), will that cause funny handling?

2 How much lift is lost with a biplane/triplane configuration, is that worth trying?

3 Are there any good ways to set up landing gear for a large plane? I stick B9 structural panels on the bottom, so I can set the gear apart without angling them.

4 Is the cargo bay bug mentioned the reason my cargo bay shields things only when open?

[ANWRocketMan]

Oh oops, sorry x| My mistake!

[Van Disaster]

1 Are control surfaces near the front of the plane good for getting the nose up for takeoff? And if I have control surfaces at an angle (like on the edge of a backward facing delta wing), will that cause funny handling?

Yes. Canard designs are inherently unstable though, so a lot of care is needed. I'd be a bit wary about backwards facing pieces, I've provoked the low-speed flutter issue with things like that, however control surfaces seem to work fine.

2 How much lift is lost with a biplane/triplane configuration, is that worth trying?

I remember that some loss from interference was mentioned for biplane wings ( maybe in the pre-crash thread ), I don't remember how much.

3 Are there any good ways to set up landing gear for a large plane? I stick B9 structural panels on the bottom, so I can set the gear apart without angling them.

I use TT retractable wheels in pods, generally.

[taniwha]

You can also use the TV Aerospace and Pizza landing gear (resized stock gear). It comes in four sizes (and the extra large size is huge). using a 1.25m based body, small for the nose wheel and medium attached to the wings works well for me (gives a slight nose-up on the runway). The NTBI wings are a pleasure, too.

[NonWonderDog]

There's also the fact that KW Rocketry doesn't have the proper AttachNode sizes on its parts, making the drag forces lower than they should be, which would be helping to reduce the drag on the engine for this rocket.

What are you assuming the maximum AttachNode size is? I found an old post by Harv that said the size ranged from 0-5, so I edited my KW configs to give the 2.5-meter parts size 2 nodes and the 3.75-meter parts size 3 nodes. Everything looks proper in the editor, and size 3 nodes are bigger than size 2.

It had the opposite effect to what I expected on the aerodynamics. The center of pressure moved way far forward on all my real-life rocket replicas, and made my Delta IV Heavy and Atlas V HLV inspired designs unstable with no payload (even with no fairing drag!). Is this the same attachNode bug DauntingFlyer found, or is FAR assuming that the node size only goes up to 2 like it says on the wiki?

[EDIT] ...Or maybe that was some other display bug. It's not doing it any more. In fact the CoL doesn't move at all when I change the node sizes. I'm now confused.

Edited May 19, 2013 by NonWonderDog

[Videogama]

Out of curiosity, are non-wing parts capable of generating lift, or do they need to have the whole complicated wing code thing to do that in any capacity?

[Laphtiya]

Ugh sorry I didn't realise the links were wrong. I'll repost with correct links

Edited May 20, 2013 by Laphtiya
Wong links

[taniwha]

Videogama: I seem to get some lift from two fl-t400 tanks strapped to the sides of a jet fuel tank. However, I was going at about 1000m/s to get any worthwhile lift.

Put enough power behind it, and a gold brick will generate lift... and pretty reentry effects.

[zarakon]

Sorry if this has been answered already somewhere in these 37 pages

I just installed FAR, and it comes with a ridiculously huge plane called FAR Dark Hammer II. I tried to fly it, but it seems completely unable to do anything but crash into the ocean (or the ground before the ocean). Is there a trick to getting this thing to fly?

[Taverius]

Out of curiosity, are non-wing parts capable of generating lift, or do they need to have the whole complicated wing code thing to do that in any capacity?

Yes.

I was able to change my inclination while aerobraking on Jool by pointing Normal/AntiNormal and letting the lift generated by the tanks steer me.

Mind I was going > 10km/s, but it did change my inclination by quite a few degrees, and all for the price of some orbital speed I was trying to shed anyhow.

[NonWonderDog]

Sorry if this has been answered already somewhere in these 37 pages

I just installed FAR, and it comes with a ridiculously huge plane called FAR Dark Hammer II. I tried to fly it, but it seems completely unable to do anything but crash into the ocean (or the ground before the ocean). Is there a trick to getting this thing to fly?

Pull straight up off the runway and go as vertical as you can. The wings don't help much when it's full of fuel, but it will put a decent amount in orbit if you get it right. I had to fiddle with the control surfaces to get enough authority, though.

Hopefully you've got a fuel depot in orbit or something, because I remember it being hard to land unless the tanks are nearly empty.

[Bluegobln]

I'm done. I'm re-installing KSP and this addon, and I am giving it one more shot with stock parts and default settings with NOTHING but this installed, and if it still refuses to behave in an even remotely tolerable playable fashion I am calling this garbage and never touching it again.

I've followed every posted advice to the best of my ability. I've tried a bunch more variations on designs. I've managed to get some really boring single stack craft to fly more stable, but now they can't get out of the atmosphere.... at all...

I'll go ahead and give you guys a list of suggestions I've followed so you know where I am at:

Note: it is not one craft, but many, with several iterations on each, that I have tried these things on (and more, these are just the suggestions I've gotten from you all)

- Fins at the back

- Start the gravity turn EARLY! This is not the stock drag model, start turning right as you're clear of the launch tower

- Do not go more than 5 degrees off from your velocity vector

- Do not asparagus

- start using the CoL/CoM indicators in VAB too

- go to space quick and easy for way less dV than stock nope not even close

-

See how much like a real rocket it looks like? That's a good guideline in FAR

Made several very close to that, zero success

- learn* what gravity turn actually means

- Keep your TWR below ~1.5 at launch

-

This went up ok:

You're kidding me... you're seriously screwing with me... *slits wrists*

- Make your payload streamlined, or get it hidden behind something that is (ie, use fairings ... )

- For any stage that will be operating in atmosphere ... get that CoL below/behind the CoM

- keep ASAS off during ascent

- do not want to be going much faster than 300m/s when you hit 10km (edit: this meant ground speed, but I've tried both anyway believe me)

- Keeping the TWR of your lower stages fairly low will allow for worry free ascents

.... RIGHT.... Suuuuuure it will. And you wonder why I am so frustrated right now.

- keep that angle of attack low by starting your gravity turn as early as you can

- Make it look like a rocket and be happy.

I've had no fun PLAYING KSP since I installed this addon. I've made some parts, and that was fun, I think I am a decent modeler and I love the game. But I can't play it with this any more if this keeps up. I will end up hating KSP and not playing it any more.

You can feel free to get all defensive if you like. But that's the flat out facts: this addon is ruining KSP for me, and none of the advice you're giving me is helping one bit.

I'm a reasonably intelligent guy and I spend a lot of time playing games. I've even tested games professionally before so I know my way around a frustrating buggy problem pretty well. I think its not unreasonable to expect this to be usable by someone like me. So again, get defensive if you like, but I'm not out to get you, I'm actually TRYING to like this addon. I WANT to use it. I even LIKE a challenge. But it's going beyond my tolerance level at this point.

Edit: I'm also having a bad day that didn't get better when I tried to tackle this tonight.

Edited May 20, 2013 by Bluegobln

[ferram4]

Okay, version 0.5.3.1 is out, fixing the payload fairing bug, some strange drag errors and setting things up so that DYJ can try to implement FAR compatibility for his procedural wings plugin. (I'm so excited )

@Bluegobln: If you don't actually post pictures of your vehicles, we can't help you out; if you're doing something wrong, we can't give targeted advice, such as "Make your second stage smaller and your first stage bigger; that will let you get higher in the atmosphere before you have a staging event, which means that the aerodynamics of the rocket-minus-first-stage vehicle won't matter as much." On the other hand, if I have screwed up royally somewhere, pictures are the best indication that something is wrong. As an example, Van Disaster's picture that you can't make sense of (and for that matter, I can't make sense of ) indicates that I'm doing something wrong with respect to handling odd mod parts, like Tosh's wheels and truck cab; I will have to try and account for that in a future update, but payload fairings still would have helped.

That said, I'd say to ignore "Don't go more than 300 m/s under 10km!" That's more accurate for the stock drag system than FAR's drag model. And keeping the TWR low isn't for "worry-free" ascents, it's for controllable ascents. I've seen rockets with TWR of 3-5 shake themselves apart during launch because of the combination of thrust + deformation + aerodynamic forces.

Try this: go to sleep, don't touch KSP until your bad day is over; extra stress from something that should be fun is terrible. When you get back into it, grab the FAR Base in the latest update and launch it; when it starts going ~50 m/s, start the gravity turn. Go full throttle the whole way. Keep it aimed within the prograde marker until you're above 35 km. Try building rockets similar to that example craft and flying them in a similar manner.

If you have a problem with a rocket, go into the VAB, turn on the CoM and CoL indicators, post a picture and explain at what altitude, stage and speed things fall apart: transonic effects can make fins less effective, dense air can make aerodynamic forces stronger than control authority and staging can cause an otherwise stable vehicle to become an unstable nightmare. If it tumbles near ~330 m/s, that's transonic effects; you'll need either more control authority or to go slower. If it tumbles high up in the atmosphere, your ascent path is too low / your rocket is unstable after staging; you'll need to either take a taller ascent path or redesign the upper stages. If it tumbles soon after launch, that probably means that your payload is far, far too bulky and unaerodynamic to launch in it's current state; you'll have to redesign it.

If you do decide that FAR isn't for you, uninstall it, but feel free to come back and try it again after a few more updates; the aerodynamics can change quite dramatically as I add more effects / adjust current effects to be realistic / simplify things for gameplay purposes. If and when you decide to come back, I and all the other people who use FAR will be more than happy to try to help you out.

[zarakon]

Sorry if this has been answered already somewhere in these 37 pages

I just installed FAR, and it comes with a ridiculously huge plane called FAR Dark Hammer II. I tried to fly it, but it seems completely unable to do anything but crash into the ocean (or the ground before the ocean). Is there a trick to getting this thing to fly?

Pull straight up off the runway and go as vertical as you can.

I can't even get it to do that. It refuses to pull up at all, even with RCS help

[ferram4]

@zarakon: It's quite possible that the aerodynamic changes have made it a less effective vehicle. Make sure that it is angled upwards as much as possible before it reaches the end of the runway and allow it to rotate the rest of the way beyond the edge. If you need to make any changes, I'd suggest building some extra trim into the pitch control surfaces.

[taniwha]

The < ~300m/s below 10km is for FAR + deadly reentry (FAR lets you go so fast that deadly reentry canl get you even below 10km). If you don't use deadly reentry, then yeah, ignore that bit of advice.

[Laphtiya]

Hi all,

Sorry for my last post I completely messed up the links! I am ashamed to admit I am an ICT technician -.-

Okay I've finally designed and successfully flown my first space shuttle! However, the design it self is far from perfect, there are a few issues with the design that make the craft rather unstable at certain parts of the flight.

Okay firstly before launch I activate SAS, this allows for a perfectly straight lift at 100% throttle for a few seconds then I power down to stop the overheat counter from clocking up as you don't need full throttle at this stage its not worth it and I'll explain why. Okay if you've launched from the runway the top of the shuttle itself will be set so the shuttle is facing 90degrees and the fuel tank the direct opposite so as you gradually make the turn the shuttle will be upside-down. Okay I deactivate sas and move 5-10 degrees towards 90 then reactivate SAS, then basically using throttle only I correct and control the angle. The higher it gets the shuttle will automatically start to tilt towards the 90 degrees line (actually I should explain that when I mean 90 degrees I mean the direction of travel actually hovering over the 90 number on the directional orb at the bottom, its explained better in the pictures), as soon as the shuttle tilts too fast I activate the second pair of engines on the shuttle and throttle down slightly, this will keep the ship from tilting too much. As the shuttle gains altitude I slowly increase throttle to control the tilt as best I can and as soon as I get to where I need I max throttle and engage RCS to keep it on target. Things are going smoothly until the SRB runs out, as soon as this happens and I detach the shuttle starts to spin. I quickly cut power and regain control before I can continue and thus overcoming the first design flaw that I need help with. After this it is smooth sailing into a orbit of about 100k I can go higher but my space station is located at this height so I don't need to go any higher. After a complete circular orbit is achieved I transfer all the fuel and RCS resources I need to the shuttle and detach, using the hidden probe and solar panel I control the tank into a decent to burn up in the atmosphere.

Docking is a little tricky I need to relocate a few RCS to gain more side strafing controls but I eventually dock with no problems........okay here is the second and biggest problem. The shuttle itself is a flying brick, as soon as I try and reenter the atmosphere the thing points its nose down into the path of flight. I cannot control or lift the nose at all and if you look at the craft you'll see parachutes located in various places, this is basically an abort feature that will rip the shuttle apart and keep the cockpit intact to save the crew from a tragic death. I'm in need of help to try and make the shuttle that more stable on flight, the SRB problem I can deal with but the flightless shuttle is a real pain.

Sorry for the crappy links before but hopefully if you follow the link below you'll find pictures and a link to the .craft file if you want to try it out for yourself.

Thanks in advance!

Pictures and .craft file:

http://sdrv.ms/18ap0b3

P.S: Jsut realised the flipping out of control might actually be because I still have SAS technically pointing virtically even though physics have dragged the rocket at an angle.........hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Edited May 20, 2013 by Laphtiya

[Itsdavyjones]

I just got FAR and haven't used it yet, but I am wondering how much it effects aero breaking in respect to mechjebs aero breaking predictor.