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

[Wanderfound]

Any chance of a thumbnail tutorial from someone on how to use the aero sims? I really haven't the faintest idea where to start with those.

[ferram4]

1) Calc derivs for the case you want to check.

2) Go to sim and select lateral or longitudinal.

3) Enter initial perturbations from nominal, and see if it converges and damps out or diverges.

List of terms:

Longitudinal:

u = forward vel perturbation

w = downward vel perturbation

theta = pitch angle perturbation

q = pitch rate

Lateral:

beta = sideslip angle

phi = roll angle

r = yaw rate

p = roll rate

[Recon777]

Also, most of the time, you just need to copy the mod directory to KSP/GameData and maybe delete the old one if you're updating, which is not that hard.

Yes, that's true - however, keeping them up to date is another story. Even with 50-60 mods and CKAN, every couple days I find out that one or more mods have updated, and it's time to hit the checkbox and apply the updates. It's just a few seconds to do this, whereas keeping track of updates manually I can see being more trouble than it's worth. I suppose from a cost/benefit perspective, the real question is whether NOT using CKAN gives enough of a benefit to outweigh the inconvenience. I'm no stranger to the cumulative-mod scene. I've been a modded Minecraft player for several years. I prefer the Resonant Rise modpack which has 200+ mods in it. Tweaking it how I like it is a WHOLE lot of work, which usually means once I have it how I like it, I freeze the modpack and don't accept any updates for a good six months at least. With KSP, I've only really started playing it since 1.0 was released, and I'm still getting my feet wet in the mod scene. It's very similar to the Minecraft situation. Mods are made to improve the game experience and add stuff the vanilla game doesn't have, and they are typically focused on one specific improvement and coexist with other mods.

Seeing CKAN, I have to say it's quite impressive to get that many modders to even think about working together and making their mods available in a general repository like this. The fact that it exists at all is amazing. I can understand though, why some might not want to use it. Also, similar to Minecraft, KSP was created in a really crappy engine (because Reasons) that has frustrating limitations. With KSP it seems to be that Unity is 32 bit making gamers have to pick and choose which mods to add even though so many of us have high end gaming machines with more than enough memory and horsepower to handle whatever the game has to offer - and yet, the game up and crashes if you install too much content. I'd love to be able to use the EVE cloud / astronomer's visual pack, and it does look wonderful, but it seems to be either that or a bunch of other more useful mods. So, I'll have to sacrifice looks for function I guess. That's what KSP is all about anyway. If I wanted I beautiful space game, I'd play Elite: Dangerous or Star Citizen. So far, KSP has me more hooked than I expected, I'll say that much!

Edited May 26, 2015 by Recon777

[Aghanim]

Ferram is it possible for a modded wing to magically reduce voxel drag by several percent or so, or to directly manipulate the aerodynamic parameters without messing up with the wing geometry? Because there are techs in real life like Circulation control wing that increases lift without increasing drag by using blown air, or more scifi stuff like plasma drag reducer that reduces drag by using plasma.

[Demuder]

I'm experiencing an issue I haven't seen yet in this thread, apologies if I've missed it. After a craft reaches an altitude above approximately 140km, it will experience no drag upon reentry. I have included a screenshot with the FAR panel open to show drag stats.

The same issue seems to happen even with only FAR (and its dependancies) installed. http://i.imgur.com/gyncSru.png

If you read a few pages back, me and another player had a similar problem. We didn't do a proper bug hunt (you know, uninstalling all mods except FAR, reproduce the problem, etc) but we both used CKAN for FAR, and after people saying here that FAR doesn't play nice with CKAN, I just uninstalled FAR and installed it manually - aka copy FAR's folders to the game dir. Never had an issue again with reentry since - or any other issues that is. I am not saying it's CKAN's problem, but it could be worth a try.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying don't use CKAN - hell, if I had to give it up I would rather just play vanilla KSP, but since ferram himself says that it might have a problem with FAR, just install FAR manually and leave the rest of your mods on it. I hope that this fixes FAR for you, because honestly it's become one of my favorite mods.

[Crzyrndm]

@ferram

Bac9 found the probable cause of the issue with B9 Pwings. The mirroring axis used for the parts is (0,0,-1) so the objects get scaled negatively after rotation making it look like the triangles are inverted. Using the default mirroring axis the voxels are correctly placed (just the mirrored part is upside down)

[Tonnz]

Is the current version of FAR supposed to be updating the voxelization constantly? I'm also getting MissingFieldExceptions in the Debug Menu. I noticed it after the game started lagging horribly, reverting the flight fixed the lagging, but not the debug-menu spam. Below you can find the output-log and a screenshot:

The output-log is more than 25 megabytes large with over 0.7 million lines. I don't know if that's normal, i'm having trouble pasting it. You can download the compressed file (<1mb) here:https://www.dropbox.com/s/ebs7r2fi72mr7d2/output_log.zip?dl=0

EDIT: The game is modded, if needed i can post a complete list of all mods. I guess the most relevant mods are FAR (obviously), RSS (as part of the KSPRC visual pack) and Tweakscale.

EDIT2: I'm using the most recent version of FAR.

I also have a little question that is not related to the the problem. How does the new version of FAR deal with flexing of parts, especially wings?

Edited May 26, 2015 by Tonnz

[Volt]

Those missing field exceptions are coming from Distant Object Enhancement, a mod I also had to disable due to bug spam. Also I think we came across tweakables causing constant voxel update requests, earlier in the thread. In that case I think it was tweakableeverything, though. Try disabling tweakscale and test? Otherwise the full modlist would probably be necessary.

[Tonnz]

Those missing field exceptions are coming from Distant Object Enhancement, a mod I also had to disable due to bug spam. Also I think we came across tweakables causing constant voxel update requests, earlier in the thread. In that case I think it was tweakableeverything, though. Try disabling tweakscale and test? Otherwise the full modlist would probably be necessary.

Oh yes, i do have DistantObjectEnhancement installed, but not tweakableeverything. I'll try what you suggested right now.

+EDIT: This seems to have fixed it! Thank you !

Edited May 26, 2015 by Tonnz

[Gryphon]

@Recon777 You don't have to stop using CKAN, just don't use it to manage FAR for the moment. As I understand it, CKAN respects if you install a mod manually, so it should play nice if you install this one mod manually for now.

Personally, I believe that the first step of debugging a mod installed via CKAN should be installing the mod manually, to make sure it's not a CKAN installation issue.

[Volt]

Oh yes, i do have DistantObjectEnhancement installed, but not tweakableeverything. I'll try what you suggested right now.

+EDIT: This seems to have fixed it! Thank you !

Happy to help!

[bartekkru99]

Am I the only person, that thinks, that new FAR is a bit broken?

[Motokid600]

Your the only one who doesn't care to explain why.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Motokid600

[bartekkru99]

Your the only one who doesn't care to explain why.

You don't need to be that rude..

Planes fall apart too easily, a long time before reaching the sound barrier. Cross section curve, shows ridiculous dents, even when wings are angled by 45*. My aircraft starts to spin a second after pitching up, when all of my sability derivatives are green.

[MatterBeam]

You don't need to be that rude..

Planes fall apart too easily, a long time before reaching the sound barrier. Cross section curve, shows ridiculous dents, even when wings are angled by 45*. My aircraft starts to spin a second after pitching up, when all of my sability derivatives are green.

That sounds more like poor piloting combined with bad designs.

[tetryds]

You don't need to be that rude..

Planes fall apart too easily, a long time before reaching the sound barrier. Cross section curve, shows ridiculous dents, even when wings are angled by 45*. My aircraft starts to spin a second after pitching up, when all of my sability derivatives are green.

1-Check your G force and wing strength, as well as wing placement, you probably did it all wrong.

2-Yep, just like it should when you are using lego parts.

3-What about the steady-state graphs? If you checked them too you are probably just stalling.

Sorry but complaining like that does not help anyone.

FAR is not made to be "fun", it was made to be realistic, there are a few things that are changed on purpose to make it playable, like cross-section smoothing, but don't expect area ruling to be simple.

Provide actual data of what should be happening and show the discrepancies and ferram4 will happily do his best to fix it.

The mod just suffered a massive overhaul, the new mechanics are very fresh, and the results comparing to actual data are better than you imagine.

There has been a lot of bad bug reports here recently, together with a few rants and people having issues simply because they have too many mods.

So, if you want to have the issues fixed, the best thing to do is nail them down and figure out exactly what is going on, making a complete report.

Or just do nothing and wait for someone else to do it for you, both of these options are better than just saying that the mod is broken.

[Motokid600]

I do apologize for that rudeness, but you must understand it is called for at this point. Because if not me then it'll be somebody else who's even more rude. Your original post was asking for it. All people ask for on these forums when it comes to complaints is information. It's as simple as that. Detailed information and as much of it as possible. It's just as rude to make short posts like that.

As for your issues... FAR is tough. It is. But trust me when I say it's not broken. If that was the case it'd be obvious. Nine times out of ten it's user error. Or in this case builder/pilot error.

Post a picture of the craft with that cross section curve next chance you get. Chances are someone will tell you what's wrong.

Now I'm not the most experienced plane builder myself. I'm just learning most of the technicalities that come with FAR, but I'm pretty confident in saying that cross section curve is dictated by a lot more then just the angle of your wings. For instance last night I had intakes making my cross section curve go haywire, but after messing around with the placement I was able to find nice smooth spot.

You say your planes are falling apart. That could be anything without having more information. Could be too much control input over stressing the craft or it could be as you said. A rough cross section curve ripping the plane appart at mach.

Your pitching problems sound a lot like you have your center of lift ahead of your center of mass. I'd like to think those FAR readouts will show you that, but just in case always fall back on that cardinal rule. Center of lift just behind the center of mass.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Motokid600

[bartekkru99]

1-Check your G force and wing strength, as well as wing placement, you probably did it all wrong.

2-Yep, just like it should when you are using lego parts.

3-What about the steady-state graphs? If you checked them too you are probably just stalling.

Sorry but complaining like that does not help anyone.

FAR is not made to be "fun", it was made to be realistic, there are a few things that are changed on purpose to make it playable, like cross-section smoothing, but doesn't expect area ruling to be simple.

Provide actual data of what should be happening and show the discrepancies and ferram4 will happily do his best to fix it.

The mod just suffered a massive overhaul, the new mechanics are very fresh, and the results comparing to actual data are better than you imagine.

There has been a lot of bad bug reports here recently, together with a few rants and people having issues simply because they have too many mods.

So, if you want to have the issues fixed, the best thing to do is nail them down and figure out exactly what is going on, making a complete report.

Or just do nothing and wait for someone else to do it for you, both of these options are better than just saying that the mod is broken.

Maybe some of it is just me, but no matter how hard i try to replicate a real world design, It doesn't fly half as good as it does in real life or don't work at all. Also straight wing aircraft are unstable or can't even turn. I tried to make A-10 (very, VERY maneuverable aircraft) few times looking excatly like the original and it was crap. My beautifully looking F-16 replica was a crap, my F-15 was a crap, my F-22 was a crap. FAR aerodynamics only work as they should for bulk, arrow shaped design. Center of lift is often found few meters behind the wings.

EDIT: and what do you mean by "lego parts"

Edited May 26, 2015 by bartekkru99

[kcs123]

If you want examples how to build craft with FAR mod, better check official FAR craft exchange thread, link is in OP and in my signature.

There is a lot of things that could influence why your craft does not behave as you expect, there is not simple answer to your question because FAR is not simple mod. You need to understand it first, know how to use properly tools provided (graphs) and then you will start to enjoy it.

Now, make some screenshots of your aircraft in SPH editor with graph files. Each of them. Then someone could help you with it. But post it in FAR exchange thread, not here, to help out ferram easier tracking of possible issues of mod.

For CKAN users, here is example what kind of things could go wrong with CKAN. Also example how to help yourself to iron out possible conflicts between various mods.

It is "normal" that some mods are in conflict with each other, but it is not up to developer of any mod to find out which one can't be used with other.

It is up to user to find out conflict with few mods as possible to find out reason for some bug. In that way you could expect sooner that developers could find out possible reasons behind it and solve it.

Even if they were not able to fix it, you can warn others to be aware what mod does not work well with other. But put some effort from your side into it, don't expect that everything could be solved just like that, soon as you noticed something and reported it.

[bartekkru99]

If you want examples how to build craft with FAR mod, better check official FAR craft exchange thread, link is in OP and in my signature.

There is a lot of things that could influence why your craft does not behave as you expect, there is not simple answer to your question because FAR is not simple mod. You need to understand it first, know how to use properly tools provided (graphs) and then you will start to enjoy it.

Now, make some screenshots of your aircraft in SPH editor with graph files. Each of them. Then someone could help you with it. But post it in FAR exchange thread, not here, to help out ferram easier tracking of possible issues of mod.

For CKAN users, here is example what kind of things could go wrong with CKAN. Also example how to help yourself to iron out possible conflicts between various mods.

It is "normal" that some mods are in conflict with each other, but it is not up to developer of any mod to find out which one can't be used with other.

It is up to user to find out conflict with few mods as possible to find out reason for some bug. In that way you could expect sooner that developers could find out possible reasons behind it and solve it.

Even if they were not able to fix it, you can warn others to be aware what mod does not work well with other. But put some effort from your side into it, don't expect that everything could be solved just like that, soon as you noticed something and reported it.

I'm using FAR for about a year... I'm a veteran, I have made a lot of great planes and now they aren't half as good as they were, some don't even fly. And copying SSTO wing shape, won't help me design a fighter jet...

[tetryds]

Maybe some of it is just me, but no matter how hard i try to replicate a real world design, It doesn't fly half as good as it does in real life or don't work at all. Also straight wing aircraft are unstable or can't even turn. I tried to make A-10 (very, VERY maneuverable aircraft) few times looking excatly like the original and it was crap. My beautifully looking F-16 replica was a crap, my F-15 was a crap, my F-22 was a crap. FAR aerodynamics only work as they should for bulk, arrow shaped design. Center of lift is often found few meters behind the wings.

EDIT: and what do you mean by "lego parts"

Hold on a second, please.

First of all, looking similar has very little to do with having the same flight characteristics.

For instance, take a look at the YF-22 and the F-22, even though they look alike, their flight characteristics are very different.

Now don't tell me that if you make something that resembles a real life airplane on KSP it would actually behave like the real life counterpart, the precision goes much further than that.

In fact, something like moving the wings 10cm forward can kill a good design, but if you balance it properly you will have great results.

If you doubt me, check NathanKell's replicas, they are built and balanced to be as close to their real life counterparts as possible, and guess what, there is nothing wrong with their flight characteristics at all.

FAR forces you to build arrowplanes, then how can you explain the airplanes that come bundled with it?

Making flyable airplanes on FAR is very easy, making good airplanes on FAR is quite a challenge.

So, from now on, instead of building it how you think it should be built, start doing it in a way that the information given about it says that it's right.

KSP building is modular, "lego parts" stand for premade parts that you use to assembly your vehicle, without any flexibility to their shapes.

These parts do not resemble sections of real life aircraft nor were made to have good aerodynamic proprieties.

So yes, building a replica is going to be a pain with stock parts.

Now I recommend you to do one thing:

Fly one of the stock crafts I have made for the mod, FAR Blitzableiter, at Mach 0.7 (engine at 30%).

Then, simply move/remove the Oscar-B bumps and try it again.

[bartekkru99]

Oh and I've found a bug, where, no aerodynamics are aplied to loaded craft and nothing in FAR window loads, when I want to toggle cross section curve or reload static analysis graph nothing shows up, I use CKAN by the way.

[tetryds]

Oh and I've found a bug, where, no aerodynamics are aplied to loaded craft and nothing in FAR window loads, when I want to toggle cross section curve or reload static analysis graph nothing shows up, I use CKAN by the way.

Then you should not be reporting it here, you should be reporting it at the CKAN thread.

Pick a fresh install and install the mod manually, without any other mods, if the bug persists explain exactly what you did and provide an output_log.

Otherwise the report is of no use.

[bartekkru99]

Hold on a second, please.

First of all, looking similar has very little to do with having the same flight characteristics.

For instance, take a look at the YF-22 and the F-22, even though they look alike, their flight characteristics are very different.

Now don't tell me that if you make something that resembles a real life airplane on KSP it would actually behave like the real life counterpart, the precision goes much further than that.

In fact, something like moving the wings 10cm forward can kill a good design, but if you balance it properly you will have great results.

If you doubt me, check NathanKell's replicas, they are built and balanced to be as close to their real life counterparts as possible, and guess what, there is nothing wrong with their flight characteristics at all.

FAR forces you to build arrowplanes, then how can you explain the airplanes that come bundled with it?

Making flyable airplanes on FAR is very easy, making good airplanes on FAR is quite a challenge.

So, from now on, instead of building it how you think it should be built, start doing it in a way that the information given about it says that it's right.

KSP building is modular, "lego parts" stand for premade parts that you use to assembly your vehicle, without any flexibility to their shapes.

These parts do not resemble sections of real life aircraft nor were made to have good aerodynamic proprieties.

So yes, building a replica is going to be a pain with stock parts.

Now I recommend you to do one thing:

Fly one of the stock crafts I have made for the mod, FAR Blitzableiter, at Mach 0.7 (engine at 30%).

Then, simply move/remove the Oscar-B bumps and try it again.

If by lego parts you meant what you have just said, then I need to tell you, that I use a lot of different "custom" parts I often use tail pieces as bi-couplers, I've made my cockpit in very simlar manner to your Blitzableiter. I use a lot of offset and rotate tools to shape it's shapes (yeah I know it sound silly), so I would call it "lego" by any means. I will upload my new design on craft exchange thread...

EDIT: It's not that bad, has no serious issues, but I would call it a good plane...

And oh F-22 and it's precursor, YF-22 can be distinguished really easily, F-15/F-15E or F/A-18/F/A-18F would be better examples.

Edited May 26, 2015 by bartekkru99

[Kitspace]

The no drag bug discussed here does not seem to depend on the method of installation. I am using the manual official installation procedure and it does happen to me sometimes anyway.

In fact it is beyond just the absence of drag. The plane behaves like a ballistic artillery shell like if there is no aerodynamics at all all the aerodynamic numbers in all menus show zero and the analysis interface stops operating. Like the whole mod just instantly stops operating completely.

Also it does happen without any other mods present.

The particular reproduction steps still seem undiscovered.

Just play the game normally for some time causing voxelisation events changing the scenes and switching vessels. After some time spent in game without restarting it happens.

Does not seem to depend on what exactly you are doing. Same behavior as a classic memory issue. But instead of a game crash we get a mod crash.