<awang>
How does FAR determine estimated range/endurance?
<taniwha>
it's a slightly complicated equation, but after close inspection, it looks a lot like the rocket equation
<taniwha>
essentially, it computes burn time based on a decreasing fuel flow rate (iirc), then uses that time and a constant current velocity to find range
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
That sounds surprisingly simple
<awang>
I'm just wondering how much I should rely on it
<awang>
Because the time remaining quoted by MJ is obviously wrong for planes, especially when flying at really high altitudes
<awang>
And given I want to reach high altitude/speed, ideally I'll run out of fuel with just about enough glide range to return to the runway
<awang>
So I don't exactly have a lot of margin
lamont has joined #RO
wb99999999 has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<taniwha>
I used to think FAR's estimate was way out, but once I got better at flying, I have found it to be quite reliable
<taniwha>
or even an under estimate
<taniwha>
(FAR assumes you are in level flight with constant velocity)
<taniwha>
awang: main thing for gliding is to watch the L/D
<taniwha>
keep that as high as possible
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
It predicts 7.09 hours, when MJ says I have 11 minutes 45 seconds of fuel left
<awang>
Flying at ~22500m at ~200 m/s
<awang>
idk if that's reasonable
<awang>
But my intuition says that something has got to be wrong
<awang>
I don't trust my intuition much though
<awang>
Watch L/D, got it
<awang>
It fluctuated a ton due to SAS instability, but I'll try to keep it up
<awang>
Does high L/D still apply when gliding at supersonic speeds?
<awang>
And high altitudes?
<Ezko_>
awang: L/D = lift/drag so the amount of lift you produce divided by the amount of drag you produce
<Ezko_>
awang: sr-71 published service ceiling is 85000 feet or 25900 meters, u-2 is 70000+ feet, both are probably still classified but i would guess that cruising at 50+km is very difficut and can't be done with current engine tech
<taniwha>
it's my first truly successful stock-only plane
<taniwha>
works well both stock and FAR
<awang>
"truly successful"?
<awang>
taniwha: Was that over 22km Kerbin or Earth?
<taniwha>
Kerbin
<awang>
Ezko_: Yeah, came to the same conclusion
<taniwha>
so about 44km for Earth
<Ezko_>
taniwha: you live in japan?
<taniwha>
I do
<Ezko_>
cool
<Ezko_>
i think i need to visit soon since i'm almost done with european countries
<Ezko_>
ones i want to visit anyway
<Ezko_>
taniwha: do you have a car there?
<taniwha>
yes
<taniwha>
my wife's, but yeah
<Ezko_>
a normal car or a kei car? :P
<taniwha>
actually, we have 3
<Ezko_>
kei cars are a pretty cool concept
<taniwha>
two normal, one kei
<Ezko_>
not really applicable to finland though
<Ezko_>
except for maybe people under 18
<taniwha>
however, the kei seats 4
<Ezko_>
the point of kei cars is the lack of space though
<Ezko_>
and we don't have that ehre :P
<taniwha>
yeah
<Ezko_>
japan is maybe 15% larger than finland but has over 20 times as many people
<awang>
Dangit
<Ezko_>
what happened
<awang>
What's with MM and sometimes refusing to load the proc avionics part
<awang>
Just started KSP and apparently proc avionics didn't compile or load correctly
<awang>
So all vessels with it were deleted
<Ezko_>
the will of crom
<awang>
Again
<Ezko_>
is what causes it
<awang>
I'll bet that the next time I start KSP the problem is gone
<awang>
Also, will of crom?
<Ezko_>
yes
<Ezko_>
alright good night guys
<awang>
Night!
<taniwha>
awang: I guess proc avionics is still flaky
<taniwha>
might be a bad MM spec (note, just a guess)
<taniwha>
anyway, check KSP.log
<taniwha>
specifically for where the PA parts are being loaded
<awang>
taniwha: Interestingly, "proceduralAvionics" was only mentioned 4 times in the log
<awang>
All 4 times as part of MM's logging of what patches it was applying
<awang>
No mention of anything wrong
<taniwha>
look at the parts themselves
<awang>
And at least in the past, the issue has been basically completely random
<taniwha>
ie, when the part is being "compiled" by KSP
<awang>
Start KSP, things work fine
<taniwha>
because that's were the error is occurring
<awang>
Start KSP again after having touched literally nothing, things break
<awang>
Start KSP again after having touched literally nothing, things work fine again
<awang>
There's no mention of proc avionics in the part of the log where KSP is compiling things
<taniwha>
there might not be any mention of it
<taniwha>
look for the parts themselves (by internal part name)
<awang>
What should I look for then?
<awang>
Isn't "proceduralAvionics" their internal part name?
<awang>
That's what's used in the MM patches?
<taniwha>
random example: [LOG 15:58:51.423] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'AirPark/Parts/Airpark_InfoDrive/Airpark_InfoDrive/Airpark_InfoDrive'
<taniwha>
(er, AirPark? I have that installed?)
<taniwha>
er, no, it's someone else's log file
<taniwha>
and sorry, it's the part's GameData path, not the internal part name
<awang>
Oh
<taniwha>
awang: the problem is that the part compilation is failing, which is LONG after MM had done its magic
<awang>
The GameData path is the path to the .cfg that defines the part?
<taniwha>
yes
<awang>
Ah
<awang>
Then the name was "ProceduralAvionics". Stupid case-sensitive searches...
<taniwha>
no, not stupid :)
<taniwha>
(though yes, they are a trap for the unwary)
<awang>
Yeah...
<awang>
I should remember to add \c to my searches more frequently
<taniwha>
\c... vim?
<awang>
Yep
<awang>
Bad choice?
<taniwha>
nope
<taniwha>
1) I use vim. 2) if it gets the job done and doesn't drive you batty in the process, then it's not a bad choice :)
<taniwha>
awang: re vim, you know of * and #?
<taniwha>
(as commands)
<awang>
Yep
<awang>
I don't use them nearly enough, but I do use them
<taniwha>
I don't use # much, but I do make extensive use of *
<taniwha>
also ctrl-p
<awang>
ctrl-p, the plugin?
<taniwha>
no, edit mode command
<awang>
Then I don't know about that
<taniwha>
it does a prefix-search (using the word before the cursor) for word completion
<awang>
ctrl-p just seems to scroll up for me
<awang>
Then again, I may be on an old version of vim
<taniwha>
it has been there for a very long time
<taniwha>
at least 10 years
<awang>
idk then
<awang>
It doesn't seem to be working for me
<taniwha>
the word does have to be in the file (though I have seen it search included C headers)
<awang>
Just scrolls up for me
<awang>
Equivalent to hitting k
<taniwha>
that's because you are in command mode, not edit mode
<awang>
Ohhhhh
<taniwha>
(I might be misnaming things)
<awang>
That could be handy
<awang>
Never took the time to learn about vim's more advanced features, so that was one I had not heard about
<taniwha>
it will help you when people say you should use VS for its "inteli"sense
<taniwha>
(I find that ntelisense gets in the way more often than not)
<awang>
To be honest, I haven't used a "real" IDE in such a long time that I've pretty much forgotten about using completions
<awang>
taniwha: "Pattern not found: Compiling.*ProceduralA"
<awang>
"\ccompiling.*proceduralav" doesn't work either
<awang>
Seems the part isn't being compiled at all?
<awang>
Yep, part didn't show up again
<awang>
Found the problem
<awang>
MM patch was borked
<awang>
Wasn't a problem with earlier MM versions, but v3.0 made that an error
<awang>
Presto, no more proc avionics part
<blowfish>
awang: you're starting with MM errors and just ignoring them?
<blowfish>
also where is this error? Been fixing it in a number of mods, but there may be others still remaining
<awang>
blowfish: Well, I didn't expect them to punch me in the face this hard
<awang>
You already submitted a PR, it just hasn't been merged
<awang>
RP-0 error
<blowfish>
ah
<awang>
RO/RP-0 errors are the only ones left
<awang>
And one SXT error, but I already submitted a PR for that
<awang>
Spend like an hour getting the X-1 launch ready, and TF kills the XLR11 on ignition
<awang>
Thanks
Maxsimal has joined #RO
<awang>
You know what
<awang>
I give up
<awang>
This takes wayyy too long
<awang>
And I know what contrats this would fulfill already
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<awang>
ferram4: For the yellow Cm line in the FAR static analysis GUI
<awang>
Does the line being above/below zero matter?
<awang>
Or only the slope?
<awang>
For example, if I have part of the line above zero for say an AoA of 0-5 degrees, but below zero for 5-25 degrees
<awang>
But the line has a negative slope the entire way
<awang>
Would my plane be stable over the entire AoA range?
<taniwha>
awang: only slope
<taniwha>
zero crossing is the neutral point (ie, the AoA to which the plane tends)
<awang>
Ah, so that's what that means
<awang>
Thanks!
<soundnfury>
o/ awang, taniwha
Shoe17 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<awang>
\o soundnfury
aradapilot has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
<awang>
Do I have to recompile B9 proc wings to get a thinner minimum thickness?
<awang>
I just read that the X-1E had a wing thickness of 3/8" at the root
<awang>
But B9 seems to limit me to 40mm
<soundnfury>
awang: that sounds more like wing _skin_ thickness
<soundnfury>
I'd be very surprised if the X-1E had a wing <1cm thick...
<soundnfury>
although OTOH, 1cm _is_ a bit thick for skin too; idk v0v
<awang>
Wikipedia says "changes included... A re-profiled super-thing wing (3/8 inches at the root), based on the X-3 Stiletto wing profile, enabling the X-1E to reach Mach 2"
<awang>
I took that to mean the wing itself was 3/8" thick
<awang>
3/8" does sound pretty thick for the skin to me
<awang>
That'd be pretty darn heavy, wouldn't it?
<awang>
Also, proper area ruling is hard o_O
<awang>
Don't have the part flexibility to easily compensate for wings
<awang>
And is there a significant aerodynamic difference between the Taerobee X-1 cockpit and the RP-0 one?
<soundnfury>
yikes, okay then (X-3 was craaaazy btw)
<awang>
Crazy in what way?
<soundnfury>
just look at the thing. Intrinsically stabby.
<awang>
UmbralRaptor's aircraft of choice
<UmbralRaptor>
<_<
<egg>
!wpn UmbralRaptor
* Qboid
gives UmbralRaptor a gamma VS-15
* UmbralRaptor
presents text photons.
<UmbralRaptor>
"the X-3's planned Westinghouse J46engines were unable to meet the thrust, size and weight requirements, so lower-thrust Westinghouse J34 turbojets were substituted, producing only 4,900 lbf (21.8 kN) of thrust with afterburner rather than the planned 7,000 lbf (31.3 kN)."
<UmbralRaptor>
ow
<awang>
How good/bad of an idea is it to mess with B9 proc wing mass-strength multipliers?
<Bornholio>
are you burning off wings or stressing them off?
<awang>
As of now, neither
<awang>
I haven't tried any particularly stressful maneuvers
<awang>
Just plain speed for now
<awang>
As for burning them off, idk
<awang>
They're rated for Mach 3, but I've hit Mach 4 at 30km and no temperature gauges showed up
<awang>
Does anyone here bother trying to tune the fuselage for good area ruling?
<soundnfury>
awang: I usually try to area rule, but mainly by lining up the various lumps
<soundnfury>
I don't tend to e.g. waist my fuselage
<awang>
How many lumps do you have on your aircraft usually?
<Qboid>
awang: egg left a message for you in #kspacademia [10.12.2017 16:12:10]: "can you test https://github.com/eggrobin/Principia/tree/use-the-current-time with realism overhaul to see if it fixes your krash crash, and whether it introduces weirdness in RSS launches (try using procedural SRBs to check that #1421 isn't brought back by this)"
<soundnfury>
wings, tailfin, horizontal stabiliser (either tailplane or canard), bulges holding SM tanks if I need to carry extra LS, bulges holding equipment/experiments (e.g. sometimes a camera), maybe droptanks...
<soundnfury>
*shrug* depends on the mission really
<soundnfury>
mmm, I love planetary probes
<Bornholio>
probing outer planets?
<soundnfury>
just Mars at this point
<Bornholio>
darn i can't make crude jokes then
<Bornholio>
I like mars becuase dV is low and plus moons
<soundnfury>
In a previous career game I _did_ do a fly-by of Ouranos, if that's what you mean.
<soundnfury>
Bornholio: sadly, there aren't any moons right now (either RSS or Kopernicus is presumably bugged)
<soundnfury>
egg: of course I don't count, I'm a mathmo
<soundnfury>
I do combinatorics instead
<AmbulatoryCortex>
ah, cool, I was looking at the wrong spreadsheet
* egg
slaps soundnfury with a Catalan triangle
<soundnfury>
ow, pointy!
<awang>
:(
<awang>
Starwaster: How did you find part.skinExposedArea?
<Starwaster>
dont remember, either from looking at Part's fields or from FlightIntegrator
<awang>
Is it something I would be able to find in-flight?
<awang>
Or do I need to repurpose a mod to print that value?
<Starwaster>
I'm using a custom build of DRE to expose it... but it might be in either the aero or thermal GUI?
<Starwaster>
Which you can open from the debug window
<Starwaster>
brb
<Starwaster>
no not in either of those. I thought it might be but I dont see it
<awang>
Time to find something to hijack then
<awang>
Guess I can stick it into MJ then
<Starwaster>
wow... the original Mk1-2 heat shield that comes with DRE is not as effective in KSP 1.3.1.... it's no longer enough to protect the pod :(
<awang>
What changed?
AndreZero has joined #RO
<AndreZero>
hello
<Bornholio>
hi, starwaster does real heat affect that at all?
<AndreZero>
I'd like to try fixing the config files in AJE that reference legacy Firespitter models by pointing them to the current models but I can't figure out how to get the correct path to the models. Could anyone help me figure that out (or point me to a reference)?
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<Bornholio>
awesome. lets .poke some people NathanKell|AFK ferran4
<Bornholio>
ferram4
<Bornholio>
!seen blowfish
<Qboid>
Bornholio: Value cannot be null.
<Starwaster>
bornholio I doubt that it would
<Starwaster>
also, the value cannot be null
<Bornholio>
I'm using PhineasFreaks 1.3.1 RH dll so if i get loaded up i'll test later
QuantumSwag has joined #RO
QuantumSwag is now known as QuantumFalcon
<Starwaster>
awang I'm not sure what changed... that shield never covered the entire bottom but the amount of heat that came through wasn't enough to seriously matter -
QuantumFalcon has quit [Client Quit]
<Starwaster>
so more heat would be my guess OR the manner in which occlusion is calculated changed OR the exposed area of the pod is calculated differently
<Bornholio>
Lately i've had to shadow payloads quite a bit for re-entry to always be successful
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<Starwaster>
bornholio, honestly both DRE and stock reentry have always been too lenient with regards to the effects of occlusion on reentry heating. Even the top or backface of a reentry vehicle needs shielding
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<Bornholio>
true but at this point ther is now way to "apply" heat shielding
<BadInternetCo>
Mechjeb docking autopilot is being a dumb and so am I and I just can't dock witg my space station
<AmbulatoryCortex>
just fly straight at it with your main engine
<Bornholio>
turn all the authority down and then use that to balance
<BadInternetCo>
Sounds like a deal
<Bornholio>
rcs that is
<Starwaster>
badinternetco what is the docking autopilot doing that's being dumb? Is your RCS array properly balanced? Can it translate in all directions without imparting angular momentum?
<BadInternetCo>
Yeah, it should be. The autopilot just brings me to a complete halt just before aligning with the docking port.
<awang>
Does KSP at least try to help you keep things balanced by throttling certain RCS engines?
<BadInternetCo>
Seems so.
<BadInternetCo>
I think I may have gotten too little rcs onto my craft
<BadInternetCo>
She turns like a dying turtle
<BadInternetCo>
Ughhh
<BadInternetCo>
I don't understand
<BadInternetCo>
The docking ports are right together and they just wont dock
<soundnfury>
maaan, after like 25 straight launches my H-1 engines have suddenly started failing
<soundnfury>
first a spaceplane launch loses one of its boosters (but makes it to orbit anyway), then the launch of my space station core ends up in the sea because its single-H-1 first stage dies after 2 minutes
* soundnfury
invokes the dread name of Agathorn -_-
<BadInternetCo>
Wait
<Bornholio>
bumper retracted?
<BadInternetCo>
Oooooooh
<BadInternetCo>
Well that explains everythinh
<BadInternetCo>
Bornholio: do both sides have to have bumpers deployed?
<BadInternetCo>
also, o/ soundnfury
<Bornholio>
retracted. I've had problems with ven's ports in the past that nothing worked to fix
<BadInternetCo>
Oh
<BadInternetCo>
I had both retracted
<Bornholio>
any parts close to the ports that are bumping?
<BadInternetCo>
Nope
<BadInternetCo>
Wait
<BadInternetCo>
Testflight doesn't do anything to docking ports, does it?
<Starwaster>
soundnfury should I be dreading that name? Explain
<Starwaster>
awang if you enable lever arm compensation (caps lock) then it balances RCS for rotational purposes but not translational
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<Bornholio>
Is it like docking is hard or something? I am super anal about using RCS build aid to get mine balanced to a gnats a...
<soundnfury>
o/ BadInternetCo
<soundnfury>
Starwaster: Agathorn wrote TestFlight, eater of souls and engines
<Starwaster>
well why in hell are we invoking him then??? Let sleeping agathorn's lie
<soundnfury>
I'm invoking him to make everyone else suffer as hard as I just did ;)
<BadInternetCo>
Btw, has NK shown any signs of life recently?
<soundnfury>
BadInternetCo: haven't seen any sign of him for weeks :(
<Starwaster>
badinternetco last time I saw him active in here was never ago
<Starwaster>
just put a Kerbal through reentry just to listen to the new scream sounds
<Starwaster>
well not really new
<BadInternetCo>
Starwaster: sociopath in making :D
<Starwaster>
:P
<Starwaster>
bornholio some people have more troublet han others. Sometimes it's unbalanced RCS, sometimes it's Ven's parts. There's also an overshoot problem I think I introduced the last time I was poking at the docking system but I keep forgetting to go back and look at it
<Starwaster>
btw who is responsible for the bulk of the RO radiator edits? Or is it multiple people?
<Bornholio>
you are! .smirk
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<soundnfury>
what I want to know is, how does one come up with a cost number for them so they can be in RP-0?
<Starwaster>
dart board?
<Starwaster>
with little scraps of paper with costs on them?
<soundnfury>
Thomas: I have fear and panic now, thanks :)
<Starwaster>
CHAPPIE HAS FEARS!
<Bornholio>
I have a doubt.
<Bornholio>
I don't, Mr. President."
<Starwaster>
big baddaboom
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
TM1978m has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
BadInternetCo has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
Maxsimal has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
BadInternetCo has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
stratochief has quit [Remote host closed the connection]