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

[superm18]

i get an error with AVC saying it's not compatible

[ferram4]

Then you have downloaded one of the old versions. The compatibility info is up-to-date.

[Eleven]

Then you have downloaded one of the old versions. The compatibility info is up-to-date.

Nah, something is borked. I double checked and made sure it was 1.3 that I just got and I too get the incompatibility error.

FYI the downloads from Kerbal Stuff and GitHub both produce the compatibility error.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Eleven

[ferram4]

The NEAR.version file should indicate that this is NEAR, v1.3, for KSP v0.25.0. The zip I uploaded has this listed. I suspect an error on AVC's side.

[superm18]

Crap...my bad

[stardestroyer]

i get an error with AVC saying it's not compatible

Even for me but it seems to work..

[Pokletu]

I can't get slow enough to land with this addon. Is lift overpowered in NEAR after .25?

[goldenpsp]

The NEAR.version file should indicate that this is NEAR, v1.3, for KSP v0.25.0. The zip I uploaded has this listed. I suspect an error on AVC's side.

I am actually having KSP say it is incompatible.

[ferram4]

@Pokletu: No, you've just built something aerodynamic and are now trying to go from flying to landed without enough time in between. Drag is not as strong as gravity and lift, and takes time to slow vehicles down. Consider adding airbrakes and flaps to your vehicle to slow it down a little faster, that's what real aircraft do.

@goldenpsp: KSP itself has no compatibility checking for mods. I do not know what you're talking about.

[goldenpsp]

@Pokletu: No, you've just built something aerodynamic and are now trying to go from flying to landed without enough time in between. Drag is not as strong as gravity and lift, and takes time to slow vehicles down. Consider adding airbrakes and flaps to your vehicle to slow it down a little faster, that's what real aircraft do.

@goldenpsp: KSP itself has no compatibility checking for mods. I do not know what you're talking about.

My bad then. It was a separate window from AVC, and one I had seen a long while back long before I knew AVC existed. But I guess if AVC components were built into another mod I was using it would have been the one to pop up the window?

[ferram4]

Oh, the CompatibilityChecker. If that's going off, then you are not running NEAR on a version of KSP that it is intended for or you are running the win64 build. Upgrade to KSP 0.25, and if you're on windows, don't use the win64 build, it's too unstable.

[Eleven]

Oh, the CompatibilityChecker. If that's going off, then you are not running NEAR on a version of KSP that it is intended for or you are running the win64 build. Upgrade to KSP 0.25, and if you're on windows, don't use the win64 build, it's too unstable.

I'm running 0.25.0.0, Linux 64bit. So there might be something else going on? Any ideas on how to just disable the message if everything is indeed ok?

[endl]

getting same error, running on 32bit with ver 1.3. the error is not from AVC

[goldenpsp]

Oh, the CompatibilityChecker. If that's going off, then you are not running NEAR on a version of KSP that it is intended for or you are running the win64 build. Upgrade to KSP 0.25, and if you're on windows, don't use the win64 build, it's too unstable.

I am running KSP .25 32 bit. I literally got the error once removing my existing NEAR folder and replacing it with 1.3

[ferram4]

Yeah, I uploaded the wrong dll. Somehow. O_o Should be fixed.

[endl]

that did it good sir

[Eleven]

Yay. And once again all in the world is right

[Thalience]

Oh, the CompatibilityChecker. If that's going off, then you are not running NEAR on a version of KSP that it is intended for or you are running the win64 build. Upgrade to KSP 0.25, and if you're on windows, don't use the win64 build, it's too unstable.

I see the same error. Running Linux x64 KSP 0.25.

I cannot help but notice that the modification date of NEAR.dll in the release zipfile is Oct 3. And that when I inspect that dll with MonoDevelop, it does not contain the NEAR.PartExtensions namespace.

The NEAR.dll I built from the tip of your NEAR github branch does contain the PartExtension namespace (and FARPartExtensions class). It does not trigger the CompatibilityChecker warning.

It really looks to me as if an older NEAR.dll is in the release zipfile.

EDIT: Nevermind ! Btw, the git tag NEAR_v1.3 points to a commit on the master branch.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Thalience

[ferram4]

Yes, I noticed. And I re-uploaded a new version to fix that, go get it.

[AbhChallenger]

I know this likely gets asked thousands of times. However is there anything that can be done for automatic control of aircraft? (Mechjeb etc..) I simply can't use NEAR or FAR if it means I have to hand fly things up every single time.

[ferram4]

MJ has an optional extension that makes it FAR / NEAR aware. That said, it's just like all the other MJ features: if you tell it to do something that will end badly, it will end badly, so you do need to change things like your ascent options. NathanKell did a MJ Ascents for RSS + FAR tutorial, which while you're not playing with RSS (I assume), most of the basics are easily transferable.

[Yalin Hawk]

Just a heads up, I'm playing KSP .25 x32 and using NEAR my control surfaces are non-responsive. Saw a few posts about this in the modded support forum, uninstalled NEAR to troubleshoot and that fixed the problem. I have a bunch of other mods installed, RLA stockalike, the whole Near Future pack, and a few others but none related to aerodynamics or spaceplanes. I see that you uploaded a new NEAR just a few posts up, so I'll try that. Just wanted to give a bug report. Was driving me bonkers

Edit:

Newest version of NEAR fixes the problem.

Edited October 16, 2014 by Yalin Hawk

[AbhChallenger]

MJ has an optional extension that makes it FAR / NEAR aware. That said, it's just like all the other MJ features: if you tell it to do something that will end badly, it will end badly, so you do need to change things like your ascent options. NathanKell did a MJ Ascents for RSS + FAR tutorial, which while you're not playing with RSS (I assume), most of the basics are easily transferable.

Thanks. However I hope you will not be offended in a NEAR newb's opinion.

Which is. Because these modules have such an impact on the way craft control. In my opinion you ought to consider implementing some kind of automatic control system that is designed from the ground up to work with NEAR/FAR.

Nothing too fancy. (Not asking for an FMS) but it would be nice to have MSFS style autopilot controls. I know there are those who scoff at the idea of an autopilot but for me it is a simple case of realism and time. Very few people in the future are going to be allowed to handfly a multimillion USD spaceplane into Orbit. And for time I rather not have to babysit a single craft over and over while I want to construct a station or ship in orbit.

Just my opinion. I will attempt the Mechjeb module but I don't have much hope from what I am reading in that topic.

[ferram4]

IMO, that's out of the scope for an aerodynamics mod. FAR does have some very simple stability systems, but those were cut from what would become NEAR after user feedback was basically, "NO GUIS!" for a FAR-lite kind of thing.

Even so, no amount of control system can save a poorly-designed vehicle, and that's where most of the problems come from. Too much TWR. Too severe a turn. Not enough restraint.

If you've built something good, I suspect MJ should be able to handle it. I've used it for launches in RSS so I don't have to wait for everything to finish, it works good enough, though I'm not the best MJ guru out there.

[Wanderfound]

And for time I rather not have to babysit a single craft over and over while I want to construct a station or ship in orbit.

So build faster planes. Runway to orbit in under four minutes isn't hard to do with a specialist speedster, and serious cargo ships can do it in about six.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94343-Spaceplane-Speed-Challenge-IV-Up-and-Down