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

[Ser]

By the way, ferram4,

Well, if the AppLauncher exception occurs, and I have no data about it, I have to worry. You're the only one who's had that occur, so yes, I have to worry about it.

I've got this stuff

NullReferenceException
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.Component:InternalGetGameObject ()
  at UnityEngine.Component.get_gameObject () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ApplicationLauncher.ScaleModList () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ApplicationLauncher.RemoveModApplication

at onDestroy() related to FMRS and RealChute as well so that is doubtly something FAR specific.

Edited July 31, 2015 by Ser

[Tarheel1999]

I know, that's why I suggest to ignore it for now. Reproduction of the issue itself is easy, as it happens every time with the munar station in the linked save file. One just needs to try to transmit science from it. The antenna won't deploy. It's nevertheless pretty hard to build a craft in the VAB that shows the same behaviour...

Is the Antenna on the affected station attached to a service bay/cargo bay? If so that's a known problem with stock. Sometimes stock registers radially attached parts to service bays as stowed and the only solution is not to do that or open the service/cargo bay.

[ferram4]

@Ser: First, FAR doesn't change anything that would be related to the aeroFX; those are based off of vessel velocity and air density, and FAR does not change the velocity fed in or the density read in, so it must be something else. I need full reproduction steps with nothing but FAR installed and a full copy of the log.

Same for the other issue.

Edit: Also, you're not using CKAN, right?

[Ser]

I need full reproduction steps with nothing but FAR installed and a full copy of the log.

Ok, I'll do that just a bit later.

Same for the other issue.

What other issue? In the post #10730 I just pointed out that those logs with ApplicationLauncher error are not likely to be the FAR issue as other mods generate them too.

Edit: Also, you're not using CKAN, right?

Yes, I install and update everything manually.

[NathanKell]

RealHeat does, if you've got RealHeat installed...

[Ser]

RealHeat does, if you've got RealHeat installed...

Yes, I've just figured it out myself.

So the issue in my post #10725 isn't related to FAR. It had gone together with it because I removed ModularFlightIntegrator also.

[ss8913]

so if I want to run FAR on 64-bit Windows.. I just need to download the source from github, install the VC# 2010 compiler, edit the source to take out that one conditional, and recompile it? Or is that still needed with the current build? I would of course use a separate copy of KSP for this so that if I thought I found a bug, I could attempt to replicate it in an official 32-bit environment before posting it here, since I know 64-bit anything with KSP is "at your own risk". I'm just... really pressed for memory with all the mods I have and I get about 10-15 minutes between crashes lately due to OOM.

[Shad0wCatcher]

Essentially yes ss8913; that's what I had to do; but there's a number of .dlls that disable themselves in a 64 bit Windoze environment. You'll need to check ModuleManager, KSPAPIExtensions, FAR, DeadlyReentry, and possibly a few others that I'm sure I'm missing. I've been to that point myself (haven't personally run into any issues with the dlls with removed conditionals in a 32 bit environment on my end; but your mileage may vary; basically I have a clean 32 bit install but for the most part swap between the 64 bit exe and mono.dll on my 64 bit "dirty" install)

[Triarius]

Any idea how to get CoL down below the top of my rocket? Nothing I do in this mod can get the CoL away from the nose of my rockets. I can, for instance, add 8 of the large delta wings to the very bottom of a long, slender rocket but there is no change. I can delete the payload shroud, no change. The airfoils on the bottom have almost no impact!

[blowfish]

Any idea how to get CoL down below the top of my rocket? Nothing I do in this mod can get the CoL away from the nose of my rockets. I can, for instance, add 8 of the large delta wings to the very bottom of a long, slender rocket but there is no change. I can delete the payload shroud, no change. The airfoils on the bottom have almost no impact!

CoL is meaningless in FAR. Use the static analysis graph in the FAR editor analysis window to determine stability.

[sashan]

For some reason the latest version doesn't work for me. Mach number is always zero, graphs are inactive etc. Jus tdeleted old folders, dropped new ones in their place.

[taniwha]

sashan: It is likely you are missing dependencies, probably either (or both) Module Manager or Modular Flight Integrator. One other possibility is you are attempting to use 64-bit Windows KSP (don't, if you need 64-bit, use linux).

[sashan]

None of above. Previous version worked just fine.

I run simple 32 bit KSP, with lotta mods and dx9. USed to run dx11, but Scatterer doesn't work with it.

[Triarius]

CoL is meaningless in FAR. Use the static analysis graph in the FAR editor analysis window to determine stability.

These graphs are all blank, and the values are all zero. I started with a fresh install of 1.0.4. No matter how many aerodynamic surfaces I add to the bottom of my rocket it is unstable. No amount of RCS, control surfaces, reaction wheels, and gimbals can hold this rocket upright.

Edited August 1, 2015 by Triarius

[Azimech]

Not sure if already mentioned, but I solved some problems I had after installing the latest version (namely small parts exploding due the stock bug, same craft), with deleting the Module Manager cache. Ferram, maybe this solves a lot of problems with a lot of users. Maybe it's an idea to add it to the OP and include it in a troubleshooting protocol.

It might even solve some CKAN problems, but I don't have any experience with it. Just a gut feeling.

[ferram4]

@sashan & Triarius: I can't reproduce any of these issues, both of them seem like install errors. Maybe Azimech's solution works, but if it doesn't, you're both on your own until you provide full, complete reproduction steps ("it just doesn't work" isn't full reproduction steps, I know you're leaving stuff out, people always do), a complete copy of the output log, and all installs must be manual, no CKAN.

[Bakase]

These graphs are all blank, and the values are all zero. I started with a fresh install of 1.0.4. No matter how many aerodynamic surfaces I add to the bottom of my rocket it is unstable. No amount of RCS, control surfaces, reaction wheels, and gimbals can hold this rocket upright.

Assuming you remembered to calculate the stability derivatives rather than just opening the graph window...

You done installed it wrong, lad.

Have you got Modular Flight Integrator? How about module manager?

- - - Updated - - -

Also -- is there a known issue with the axis of the graph shifting? I know it existed before and I've just encountered it again... have you managed to iron it out in the dev build? Or is it something that's impossible to fix? I imagine working out the plane's main axis could be rather tricky...

In any case, if you'd like more information on it I've got a craft that can reproduce it at several different angles if you take the engine on and off. If it's an issue you'd like me to look into I'll test it on the dev build, but otherwise I'd rather spend my time playing with the stable version. The glitch doesn't really matter to me.

[ferram4]

Just post the test craft, I'll look into it.

[Bakase]

Just post the test craft, I'll look into it.

https://my.mixtape.moe/hwurmf.craft

I just forgot -- I'm running Ven's Stock Revamp so that may be the cause of the issue: if so I sincerely apologise!

Nonetheless, the glitch happens when I take the tail piece off and move one of the two turbojets into its place instead. Removing the turbojet and playing around with its position causes all sorts of funny things to occur.

[ferram4]

Oh, I see. Somehow the landing gear are the source of the problem. I'll see what I can do.

[Shazbot]

Hey Ferram, have you considered expanding on the control surface settings? For example, separate upper and lower deflection limits, so you can for example have ailerons on top of a wing that only move in one direction. I've also found that I wish I could toggle functionality on and off, so that I can choose which control surfaces are currently active.

Both would be great to have for automatic (using the AoA slider) leading edge surfaces. I have them on some of my planes, and they work great when pitching up. Pitch down, and the'll point upwards and cause all sorts of hilarious havoc. So ideally I'd want them to only work in one direction. It would also be awesome to be able to turn them off to change the flight characteristics on the fly.

Edited August 1, 2015 by Shazbot

[blnk2007]

ferram4, with Goldstein I have the drag halo around vessel's surfaces appear too early, at approx. 80 m/s. And it's FAR that causes it somehow because removing FAR fixes it. I think it shouldn't appear at that speed but if that's intended is there a way to get rid of it as it is unrealistic and impedes the view too much?

http://i.imgur.com/3GY7YgQ.png

Have you found the solution to this?

[NathanKell]

The solution is "it's not a FAR issue." It was stated upthread.

You have realheat installed but your stock aerofx settings aren't configured to play nice with it (or vice versa).

RealHeat is designed for the current Realism Overhaul aeroFX settings. If you don't have them, you'll get what you describe.

[AccidentalDisassembly]

Ferram, what variables would I need to tweak to create some kind of balance between FAR and stock - like 25% of the way in between FAR's atmosphere and stock's? I feel like my planes barely decelerate flying level at 100m/s at sea level and don't make much lift off of relatively large/long wings =(

EDIT: Maybe it also has to do with the radically increased wing mass under FAR...?

Edited August 2, 2015 by AccidentalDisassembly

[ferram4]

There are no variables to tweak, FAR is what it is.

If you're having those problems, it means that your planes are horrendously overweight. Bring their mass down to realistic levels.