[0.90]NEAR: A Simpler Aerodynamics Model v1.3.1 12/16/14

[ferram4]

NEAR did not change at all between 0.25 and 0.90, besides for compatibility changes. Unless your install was borked before, you are dealing with the same aerodynamic properties as before, and it will behave exactly the same way aerodynamically. Any changes must be elsewhere.

Don't believe me? Check the github commits.

[sashan]

Any ways to keep yaw/pitch/roll dedication of a control surface changeable in flight as in stock? I really need them to be changeable in some of my designs.

EDIT: tried reentry with spaceplane. Wow, that's the area where this mod makes the difference with stock. S- and U- turns, etc. I've overshot the ksc by 300km from being unaccustomed to the new behaviour, but then turned around at 1500m/2 and landed.

Here's my design. Survived a dozen of iterations before I got rid of flat spins and pitch unstability.

Edited December 17, 2014 by sashan

[Eddlm]

I've used the new update as an oportunity to try this mod. I have to say, it was a great surprise to see that now, stock planes can reach much higher speeds, and an aerodinamic vessel saves me tons of fuel when trying to get into orbit.

This guy got into orbit alone.

Thanks for creating NEAR! It vastly improves gameplay, as now there are more ways to use fuel efficiently, aerobrake, stabilize crafts in atmosphere, etc. I don't have enough courage to try FAR fow now, though.

I've noticed that both SAS and Mechjeb like to wobble the crafts while flying. I see that others have this issue aswell. I've solved it by reducing the Ctrl Dflct thingies on the elevons. Reaction wheels and locked gimballs do help, too.

Also, I have a silly question about Mechjeb and NEAR. While using the Ascend Guidance and the "limit to Terminal Velocity" option , it doesn't seem to reach any "terminal velocity", ever. On the picture my craft is going 600m/s under 9km. It seemed weird to me, as its much higher than the stock 242m/s on 9km.

Is my new terminal velocity is much, much higher, so high that I can go 600m/s on lower atmosphere without reaching it, or could it be that Mechjeb fail to recognice this new "terminal velocity" NEAR handles?

[ViAlexis]

NEAR did not change at all between 0.25 and 0.90, besides for compatibility changes. Unless your install was borked before, you are dealing with the same aerodynamic properties as before, and it will behave exactly the same way aerodynamically. Any changes must be elsewhere.

Don't believe me? Check the github commits.

Thanks for the confirmation. That's what I assumed, but I wasn't sure if maybe something fundamental about .90 changed that was making things different. I installed KJR and it didn't help, so until I figure out what I'm doing different I'm just using unbreakable joints and it's working fine. I think it might be the wings I'm using, I can't recall if I used the stock wings in .25 at all because I used B9 so much. I'll keep looking around for an explanation, but in the meantime I've sort of solved the problem, even if it is 'cheating'.

[sashan]

Yep, terminal velocity is just enormous now for our designs, the way it should be. You should try it with something really unaerodynamical to check tho.

Btw, let's share our lifter's designs. Post pics of mechjeb's dV window, ascent guidance path and such. Really interested. Dv to orbit is something like 2800 for me. I use big first stages that have around 1.2 twr at liftoff, and that allows me to do the initial sharp part of gravity turn without flipping. I tend to acquire most of speed at around 30 km, so that deadly reentry doesn't burn me. I like DR settings on top hard.

[Eddlm]

For now, I'm still struggling to make a craft that doesn't pass the speed of sound when it lifts. The change in aerodinamics it's huge, i'm not accustomed to NEAR yet.

But something I have now much more clear is that its mandatory to change the ascend path. Mechjeb default's one is good for stock aerodinamics, but inefficient with NEAR. Even more inefficient with my "Sonic the hedghehog takes care of the kerbal space program" crafts, wich, when they pass the atmosphere, need to burn like 1500 dV to stabilize an orbit.

For now I've changed it to this:

As now I don't need to take terminal velocity into account, I can make the gravity turn much earlier, saving "orbit burn" dV. Right now I only need to burn an extra ~700 dV to achieve stable orbit.

[NathanKell]

Um, you basically never have to worry about terminal velocity, *especially* in NEAR with its lack of mach effects.

Also, since orbital speed is well above Mach 5, you do pretty much have to go supersonic whether you like it or not, unless you want to lift very slowly out of the atmosphere (mostly vertically), then have a giant burn at apogee, then have wasted about half your propellant.

[Knobby]

Just started a new career in 0.90 with NEAR, and my very first rocket consisting of nothing more than a pod and booster has a delta-v of 2.8km/s and reaches an apoaps of 422km....

is this supposed to be like that?

I've been playing with NEAR or FAR since .22 and i don't remember it ever doing this.

[FeliusKerNes]

So, by using NEAR my launches tend to have to be far more vertical than in vanilla, since if I try to do the gravity curve, the atmosphere buffet my rocket into losing control and generally point to the ground. What I'm getting at, is there any guides or guidelines on how to better design your crafts given this add-on aerodynamic model?

[Prismatech]

with the new modulmanger is the cfg brocken message from him 20 error from near cfg. in far is this too

https://www.dropbox.com/s/idvqqno3w5013dg/KSP.log?dl=0

Edited December 21, 2014 by Prismatech

[ferram4]

@Knobby: Then this is the first time you have correctly installed FAR / NEAR, since that is the normal behavior. Yes, 2.8 km/s is enough to get that high up, it really only takes 1 km/s to counter the gravity losses up to 80km.

@FeliusKerNes: Make your rockets aerodynamically stable, less TWR, actual gravity turn. Note that going up to 10 km and twisting over 45 degrees is not a gravity turn, no rockets in real life do that for obvious reasons.

@Prismatech: Get MM 2.5.6.

[sashan]

I start gravity turn at 100 meters, end at 40k, turn shape - as required by craft. Below 15k, keep the speed low enough to be able to turn - twr or 1.2 is enough. I am also trying to replicate real rocket ascent, so that the circularization burn is no more than 400m/s, and top stage is ignited only for it.

[T.Lancer]

I'm running NEAR with Kerbal joint reinforcement and have some serious problems. Whenever I try to re-enter kerbin with the stock Spaceplane (Learstar) my ship will glide in pretty well down to around 12 and 20km. At that point the ship just violently starts wobbling and explodes tearing the rear part of the ship off. Doesn’t matter if I have SAS or Mechjeb or neither running. Every time it loses control and flys apart. The few times it doesn't explodes I still looses total control and the ship enters into a spin around every axis. I'm flying parallel to the surface with a pitch of 0°.

Is this really normal? How can I prevent this? Or is the stock Learstar really so badly designed? I can get into orbit with 0 problems.

I'm running KSP windows 32bit version.

Edited December 24, 2014 by T.Lancer

[LoggerM]

Hello Guys,

I love using NEAR, but I missing something: Building huge rockets needing almost 4500delta-V to reaching the Orbit.

Is there a Mod that increases the amount of delta-V needed to reach the Orbit?

Thx :-)

[tetryds]

Hello Guys,

I love using NEAR, but I missing something: Building huge rockets needing almost 4500delta-V to reaching the Orbit.

Is there a Mod that increases the amount of delta-V needed to reach the Orbit?

Thx :-)

There is this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52882-0-90-Kerbal-Isp-Difficulty-Scaler-v1-4-2-12-16-14

May help.

[LoggerM]

thank you for your very Fast answer.

Fly save ;-)

[TheReaper]

i hope i will see NEAR or FAR with x64 friendly version.. i understand the issues but issues are our issiues and we all know the risks of MODDING, if something goes bad and we are unable to fix it, we can always delete the mod and say: "oh well, we tried"

i am back to ksp after great break and colelcting my old mods, and i am simply UNABLE TO RUN X32... stock game itself runs to limits, i am unable to play x32 no matter what mods i sacrifice, x64 is my only way of actualy playing this game. Yes some people may complain about the issues but a very good argument on that case would be :

1- read this part again " we all know the risks of MODDING"

Thanks

[Superfluous J]

i hope i will see NEAR or FAR with x64 friendly version.. i understand the issues but issues are our issiues and we all know the risks of MODDING, if something goes bad and we are unable to fix it, we can always delete the mod and say: "oh well, we tried"

i am back to ksp after great break and colelcting my old mods, and i am simply UNABLE TO RUN X32... stock game itself runs to limits, i am unable to play x32 no matter what mods i sacrifice, x64 is my only way of actualy playing this game. Yes some people may complain about the issues but a very good argument on that case would be :

1- read this part again " we all know the risks of MODDING"

Thanks

Actually "we" all don't know the risks of modding, which is why there is no 64 bit support. It's not like the modders who don't allow their mods used in 64 bit chose to do so in spite of having no issues with users who had no right to complain complaining.

Also, all you need to do to support 64 bit is to find the spot in the source code that restricts it, remove it, and recompile. Don't distribute it or you're violating the license, but if you do it for yourself there is no legal or moral problem.

[Elthy]

Hello Guys,

I love using NEAR, but I missing something: Building huge rockets needing almost 4500delta-V to reaching the Orbit.

Is there a Mod that increases the amount of delta-V needed to reach the Orbit?

Thx :-)

Same problem here, my 130T launcher didnt even need its 3rd stage with NEAR installed. Sadly ISP isnt a nice solution, it makes my rocket go even faster on low altitudes due to extreme acceleration with close to empty boosters. I would love a mod that makes just Kerbin larger so i would need about 1000m/s more DeltaV to get into orbit. Until then i will play without FAR or NEAR, while its awesome for spaceplanes and realism it just makes rockets to easy...

[tetryds]

Same problem here, my 130T launcher didnt even need its 3rd stage with NEAR installed. Sadly ISP isnt a nice solution, it makes my rocket go even faster on low altitudes due to extreme acceleration with close to empty boosters. I would love a mod that makes just Kerbin larger so i would need about 1000m/s more DeltaV to get into orbit. Until then i will play without FAR or NEAR, while its awesome for spaceplanes and realism it just makes rockets to easy...

Like this one: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90088-6-4x-Kerbol-System-v2-0-1-RSS-Config-11-16-14

I didn't try it but I heard that it works like a charm with FAR/NEAR.

[Drelam]

Since there is little documantation (or i simply cannot find one) and i don't have the time to read the previous 63 pages i hope you can answer some of my questions.

What does Ctrl Dflct and Flp/splr Dflct exactly mean (when right clicking control surfaces) and where can i find relilabe documentation about things like that?

How can i prevent control surfaces to continously "swinging" in flight (steering up/down all the time, instead of just keep course).

Is there a option to engage SAS that makes the craft fly straight, instead of flying uncontrollable?

(that's not just at one of my airplanes, but on ALL of them)

Before you ask, i have read all tutorials i could find in the last months.

Yes COL is just behind COM (with and without fuel).

I try to keep as few control surfaces as possible.

Don't get me wrong i always try to solve problems like this for myself before asking you guys here at the formus, but i have come to a point where it becomes really frustrating.

My question doesn't refer to a specific craft i have build, but it it more general, because i have problems like this even with aircraft/SSTOs from other people.

[Crzyrndm]

What does Ctrl Dflct and Flp/splr Dflct exactly mean (when right clicking control surfaces) and where can i find relilabe documentation about things like that?

How can i prevent control surfaces to continously "swinging" in flight (steering up/down all the time, instead of just keep course).

Is there a option to engage SAS that makes the craft fly straight, instead of flying uncontrollable?

Control Deflection is the maximum angle a surface can deflect by when the relevant control input is maxed (eg. roll for ailerons).

Flap/Spoiler deflection is the same thing, just for when you use the surface as a flap or spoiler instead of a surface that responds to pitch/roll/yaw control input.

For the SAS issues: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/100073-0-90-Pilot-Assistant-Atmospheric-piloting-aids-0-9-6-0-%28Dec-20%29

Open the SAS window => switch it over to stock SAS => increase the scalar value under the pitch heading until the oscillations stop

[Andrewmacor]

So lately MM is telling me that there is 11 errors in the GameData/NEAR/NEAR folder and I have tried re downloading and re installing the mod fresh. I don't know if this is a critical thing but I wanted to let you all know because I wanna know what is it about.

[ferram4]

The errors are due to you using MM 2.5.5 rather than 2.5.6. Upgrade your MM.

[chrisl]

I finally updated my Kerbal to 0.9 and wanted to try out NEAR with it but I'm encountering what I can only assume is a bug. Either that or I've just not setup NEAR correctly. I've started a new career mode game so I have limited parts. I've assembled a small ship built with the mk1 command pod, an RT-20 solid rocket booster and some parachutes. According to Mechjeb (I do have the MechJebNEARExt.dll so I expected Mechjeb to give accurate data), the drag coefficient is only 0.009. And even if Mechjeb isn't giving accurate data, the small RT-20 rocket apparently has enough thrust on it's own to push my ship up to about 94km. As soon as I remove NEAR the exact same ship can barely make it up to 8km. So, am I doing something wrong?

And just in case the issue is that one of the mods I'm using is interfering with NEAR, I'm using all of the following (though many aren't relevant yet because I'm still early in career mode):

Active Texture Management

COmmunity Tech Tree

Cross Feed Enabler

Deadly Reentry

Firespitter (just the dll)

Ioncross Crew Support

Karbonite

Kerbal Alarm Clock

Kerbal Join Reinforcement

Mechjeb

Near Future Construction

Near Future Solar

NEAR

Procedural Fairings

Procedural Wings

Regolith

Remote Teck

Scan Sat

Ship Manifest

Stockalike Station Parts

Tech Manager

Toolbar