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

[Autochton]

@JunkyardDog: KSP does make some things harder and other things easier, compared to real life. For instance, the atmosphere is shallower, and the gravity well of Kerbin far less deep than that of Earth - we can make do with an escape velocity of 3500-4500 m/s to 70 km or so on Kerbin while Earth requires 10+ km/s delta-V and ~150 km as a minimum for a stable orbit. As such, the game balance is based on certain things being unrealistic - and the atmosphere model is a big culprit there.

That said, FAR does make for challenging rocket launches, once you're trying to launch things that are not aerodynamic in shape. You pretty much end up needing fairings (I recommend the Procedural Fairings mod) to launch e.g. a rover or long-range probe. I've had a dickens of a time building lifters for the station I've been planning, because it has some rather large and unwieldy parts (based on LLL's 4x4x2m habitat block). And, of course, space planes go from being monstrous and unrealistic to being beautiful and graceful things - at least if you want them to actually fly. :-)

[KOCOUR]

I was using FAR but then i found out that without it i get much better game performance. So i uninstaled it. Will there be any update to make FAR less performance impact?

Edit: by performance i mean FPS.

[SchroedingersHat]

I was using FAR but then i found out that without it i get much better game performance. So i uninstaled it. Will there be any update to make FAR less performance impact?

Edit: by performance i mean FPS.

What FAR is doing is inherently fairly performance intensive, and frankly I'm amazed at how little it impacts performance -- especially as it is a plugin written in a high level language. Once your craft are completely out of atmosphere it shouldn't be doing as many calculations and should not impact performance as much.

[taniwha]

FAR makes getting small (almost useless) things into orbit very easy. Getting useful stuff into orbit is much harder because of the hidden center of drag.

[SchroedingersHat]

FAR makes getting small (almost useless) things into orbit very easy. Getting useful stuff into orbit is much harder because of the hidden center of drag.

Things to try:

Bring two things up and dock in orbit, or make things you can undock and rearrange in orbit, install novapunch for some massive tanks/engines and use procedural farings to make something even bigger than that (8m is doable). Put tail fins, or for larger rockets full sized wings, with control surfaces on the bottom end to stabilize. Install realfuels and use a H2+LOX first/second stage, then store the LOX at the top end of the stage to move your COM up -- If it looks like a dart, and balances like a dart, it'll fly like a dart.

Quantum struts may be needed to stabilize it.

[ferram4]

@JunkyardDog: Congratulations, you've discovered what happens when you use a booster to propel a tiny (or nonexistent) payload; you should take a look at the rocket equation and think about what happens when the mass ratio becomes very, very large. This is completely and totally normal.

If you think FAR makes KSP too easy, you should try building a large space station. You'll have lots of fun trying to figure out how to launch an oddly-shaped payload or how to break up each section into several launches. If you stick to launching nice, simple, easy payloads don't be surprised if getting them into orbit is easy.

@KOCOUR: There are only a few possibilities here:

1. You're building massive, unnecessarily huge aircraft that would be a problem even without FAR.
   
2. Your processor is slow; I can only reduce the number of calculations that FAR needs to do so much, and it's already running close to the minimum there.
   
3. You don't have enough RAM and KSP is using the page file on your hard drive; FAR uses quite a bit of memory to reduce the load on the already stressed CPU and reducing memory usage won't help this too much.
   

In all of those cases, the problem is your designs or the hardware you're running. Unless your output_log got spammed will NullReferenceExceptions, there's really nothing I can do without making FAR less aerodynamically accurate.

Oh, and version 0.9.5.3 is out, with the most recent ModuleManager and 0.21 compatibility (I think). Any error reports from 0.21 are appreciated, but please post your output_logs or I can't do anything about it. I've left the coefficient debugging in for now to help with bugfixing (if necessary).

[Van Disaster]

Stations are ok, just lots of tubes - quantum struts hold everything together ok. Large rovers I have problems with and I'm still short of solutions. I think the actual solution might be to use one of the remote construction mods...

I have not noticed a performance hit from FAR after running quite a number of versions by now.

[taniwha]

SchroedingersHat: I've got launching useful stuff in FAR going quite nicely. My comment was for JunkyardDog. (but still, getting the "things to try" refreshed in the forum is always good)

[e-dog]

I've noticed significant slowdowns in 0.9.5.2 with KSP 0.20.2 when there's debris near the Space Center (in "physical" 2.5km range), wings in particular.

The debug log is spammed with null reference exceptions, I guess vessel or something is null for debris.

Terminating all debris removed the slowdown.

I haven't tested it in 0.21 yet.

[SkyHook]

Upon loading the FAR patch for 0.21, nothing works. There is no UI for FAR in ANY scene, and the flight characteristics do not appear to change. I have tried the included files in various configurations, to no avail. Can anyone shed light on the issue?

[White Owl]

Ferram, I just downloaded and installed KSP .21, downloaded and installed a fresh copy of FAR v0.9.5.3, and started a new default save. Using one of the game's stock airplanes with no changes at all and no other mods installed, the mod isn't working correctly.

I see the appropriate GUIs in the SPH and flight scene, but the aircraft is experiencing almost no drag at all. In the SPH, if I sweep the AoA without changing any settings, the L/D line is nearly vertical and simply extends off the graph.

This is identical to the problem I was having with v0.9.5.2, but since nobody else reported it, I figured I must've had a plugin conflict or corrupt install. But this time is with a brand spanking new install, and I have literally done nothing else but launch the game once, close it, install FAR, relaunch the game and test FAR.

Any more information you want, please let me know.

[Van Disaster]

Upon loading the FAR patch for 0.21, nothing works. There is no UI for FAR in ANY scene, and the flight characteristics do not appear to change. I have tried the included files in various configurations, to no avail. Can anyone shed light on the issue?

That sounds like what happens on the odd occasion my game doesn't load the dll: that is usually either because I have two copies open by accident or because my firewall has sandboxed it. A new version would count as an unknown application to it & it'd throw it in the sandbox.

I have only briefly tested 0.21 and I had all the right guis - I've only launched a rocket though so I don't really know about drag issues.

[taniwha]

One possible problem I've noticed is the Mk1 pod (with the usual nose parachute) no longer remains retrograde below about 1100m/s. I guess the CoM shifted with the 0.21 update.

[NathanKell]

Still on .20.2, and creating a standardized set of FAR-compatible launchers. But I'm encountering some issues. I.e. this drag...it does not seem right.

In fact it's worse than it appears, because there's more drag from the _front_ of the rocket than if it's retrograde. (I have a 0.625m procedural fairing over the payload that's been decoupled in the picture; it doesn't get more than 0.7m wide). Also, the drag gets worse if I use a tapered adapter from the fairing to the tank; it's better to just have the toroidal tanks right in the airstream.

Further, I went and increased the bottom node size on those engines from 0 to 1, and it made no difference (and I checked node position vs CoM, too.)

Another weird issue with drag I've found--and note, this may be working as designed, I don't know aeronautics--is that adding some fins can drastically increase drag, but only sometimes. The Cd more than doubles, but the Cd of the winglets is very low.

Example:

Before:

After:

Have I mentioned how great the debug info is!? It's great. Please leave it as an option!

[palker]

I launched two SRBs one with nose cone one flat and they behave as expected but there is one thing strange the nose cone equipped SRB behaves like a glider, even without any fins it falls very slowly. The vertical speed is just above 10m/s on the variometer. The other one either crashes shortly after start or gets deleted when it flies too far away .

[SkyHook]

That sounds like what happens on the odd occasion my game doesn't load the dll: that is usually either because I have two copies open by accident or because my firewall has sandboxed it. A new version would count as an unknown application to it & it'd throw it in the sandbox.

I have only briefly tested 0.21 and I had all the right guis - I've only launched a rocket though so I don't really know about drag issues.

Thank you for the reply, it helped me track down the problem! The version of 0.21 that I had installed in program files was basically borked. Once I installed it elsewhere, the version patched itself without my interference, and everything works now.

[Ound]

Just quick two questions.

1. This works with Procedural Fairings?

2. FAR does not overwrite any stock files anymore?! ( Thus allowing to re-stock KSP easily? )

[ferram4]

@SkyHook & WhiteOwl: Make sure that your KSP install is outside of ProgramFiles; I believe the problem is KSP not giving the plugins the permissions it needs to function properly. This would be especially true to make ModuleManager.dll work. I will check the Editor GUI to see if there are any stupid problems occurring.

@taniwha: Noted, will fix for next hotfix; this one was just to guarantee 0.21 compatibility and nothing else.

@NathanKell: The reason Cd increases with winglets is that Cd needs a reference area to be calculated; if any wing parts are available it uses the total wing surface area while if they are not it uses the total surface area. Basically, the drag is similar but it's being measured "acting" over a smaller area.

The effects of drag on that payload are probably correct; at very high Mach numbers the majority of drag is produced at the front of the vehicle, not the back.

@palker: Could you post pictures? If the SRB is flying at a bit of an angle while this is happening it is possible that it is simply producing enough body lift to stay in the air.

@Ound: It works with Procedural Fairings; this is noted in the Procedural Fairings thread. It also doesn't need to overwrite stock files anymore.

Edited July 25, 2013 by ferram4

[White Owl]

@SkyHook & WhiteOwl: Make sure that your KSP install is outside of ProgramFiles; I believe the problem is KSP not giving the plugins the permissions it needs to function properly. This would be especially true to make ModuleManager.dll work. I will check the Editor GUI to see if there are any stupid problems occurring.

Mine is installed outside ProgramFiles, in D: Games - KSP. I should note the problem isn't just in the editor; the planes also fly like they have far too little drag.

[palker]

Here is the picture

[Weatherman159]

Mine is installed outside ProgramFiles, in D: Games - KSP. I should note the problem isn't just in the editor; the planes also fly like they have far too little drag.

Seconded, installed out of program files.

This is one of my best planes from 0.20.2:

This is the same plane in 0.21:

[Playful1510]

For some reason, during flight, the FAR window doesn't appear, but in the VAB it seems to work correctly... I am running .21 and .9.5.3 FAR...

[NathanKell]

Hi ferram, thanks!

Regarding the rocket-ends question, I mean if the rear of the rocket is pointed into the airstream, it has a lower Cd than if the nose is (seems to be because engines, especially those, produce very little drag; fuel tanks produce only a little, even at their blunt end; and tapered sections, like the nosecone adapter, produce tons--it's better to have a 1.25m tank straight flush against a 0.625m tank than to use the adapter.)

[theonegalen]

@theonegalen: First, make sure that KSP is installed somewhere where it has the proper permissions to run; try running it as an administrator or making a new install with it in a directory that doesn't need special permissions like ProgramFiles does.

Make sure that there is a folder in your GameData folder called "FerramAerospaceResearch". If that exists, go into it and make sure that there is a "Plugin" folder with ferramaerospaceresearch.dll and ferramgraph.dll. Further, make sure that in the GameData root there is a file labelled "ModuleManager.dll". If one of those is missing, go back into the FAR zip and extract the files to the relevant location.

If all of those files are in the proper place, load up KSP, check to make sure that the problem hasn't magically fixed itself, and then quit. Go into the KSP_Data folder and find output_log.txt; upload that here so that I can go through it and find the problem.

Thanks! I had tried everything I could think of, but I didn't think of changing the directory out of ProgramFiles, which is a protected directory. That worked. So I'll have my stock .21.1 install and my modded .20.2 that I can both play now! Thanks again!

[Dexee]

Can anyone certify that FAR's current version supports v21.1?