OFSS III Project info and discussion. - Page 2 - Orbiter-Forum

Kyle · 07-24-2011, 08:50 PM

Thanks for the tips Gary!

---------- Post added at 08:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ----------

Important notice - several documentations and configuration files have to be changed to reflect the name change from CSS to OFSS3, so the first flight date is not yet confirmed but should be soon.

Be sure to check out the crew assignment thread to request for missions.

**Artlav** · 07-24-2011, 08:55 PM

A suggestion - Some people would just wander in, see this as a great idea, and want to participate...
And don't know how.
A FAQ would be nice - do you record flights, pass around scenarios, fly live in OMP, etc? What addons are to be used and where to get them?
These kind of things.

**Tex** · 07-24-2011, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artlav

A suggestion - Some people would just wander in, see this as a great idea, and want to participate...
And don't know how.
A FAQ would be nice - do you record flights, pass around scenarios, fly live in OMP, etc? What addons are to be used and where to get them?
These kind of things.

I've already created documentation with all the required addons and info necessary for the flights etc. We'll release the package on OHM as soon as it's ready and each time someone completes their flight, we'll upload a new package for the next flight. The turn around time will be fast so we keep things moving.

**Tex** · 07-25-2011, 12:15 AM

All OFSS III discussions moved to the new 'Orbiter Forum Space Station III' sub-forum.

While the OFSS II sub-forum is hidden from the home page now, you can still access it from the old URL or by visiting the OFSS II social group.

We're not going to use a social group for OFSS III. We're going to keep it simple in this forum, so anyone can post and participate without the need to join a social group. Packages will be uploaded to Orbithangar for each new flight. You can post your screen shots, post flight scenarios, and discussions in this OFSS III forum.

ky · 07-25-2011, 12:19 AM

I'd love to be a part of OFSS III.

**Izack** · 07-25-2011, 01:44 AM

It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-SSVP between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya.

diogom · 07-25-2011, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izack

It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-CBM between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya.

And these Soyuz/Progress need a Pirs or Rassvet between them and Zvezda.

**Tex** · 07-25-2011, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Izack

It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-CBM between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya.

That screen shot is actually from the early planning when I was using the scenario editor, it needs to be updated, my fault. After I actually flew the missions I realized I had them backwards. Zarya will dock to Neesys with it's opposite side which is for CBM adapters. So Zvezda would obviously dock on the other side of Zarya which works (I tested this in the scenario).

EDIT - Actually Zvezda can't really translate, so the way it plays out is Zarya undocks from Neesys and docks to Zvezda with its #2 docking port when Zvezda arrives. Then Neesys docks to Zarya #1 port. However, after P6 comes up many flights later, Zarya and Zvezda are moved to a different docking port on Neesys. This time URMS will be used to help. I planned it all out, still testing the later missions to make sure it all works as expected.

Quote:

Originally Posted by diogom

And these Soyuz/Progress need a Pirs or Rassvet between them and Zvezda.

I was able to dock Soyuz to Zarya and Zvezda just fine.

diogom · 07-25-2011, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

I was able to dock Soyuz to Zarya and Zvezda just fine.

I know, just for some visual compatibility

**Tex** · 07-25-2011, 02:16 AM

They are another vessel though, yes? Unless it's absolutely required, we should try to avoid adding any more vessels to the scenarios than we really need is my thinking. By the end it gets some what massive at 37 vessels I think it is.

diogom · 07-25-2011, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

They are another vessel though, yes? Unless it's absolutely required, we should try to avoid adding any more vessels to the scenarios than we really need is my thinking. By the end it gets some what massive at 37 vessels I think it is.

Holy Probe! Yeah, I see your point. Its nothing important. One of my ideas from over using Thorton's ISS

**Izack** · 07-25-2011, 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

Zarya will dock to Neesys with it's opposite side which is for CBM adapters.

It's actually an APAS-95 port, not CBM, so a PMA would be required between Zarya and Neesys, just like there is between Zarya and Unity in real life.

**Tex** · 07-25-2011, 03:21 AM

Interesting, I didn't know that.

I was able to dock both of them together just fine without the PMA though, so is there any harm in not using one? Having it there will add some complications to the flight plans I already drew up, but if we need it then it should be added to Flight #2 payload.

EDIT - Here is what it looks like without the PMA and with Zarya turned around the right way: (this is before P6 comes up, after which Zarya/Zvezda are moved to Neesys port #3.)

Eli13 · 07-25-2011, 03:22 AM

So is there going to be an insignia or anything along those lines for OFSS 3?

**Izack** · 07-25-2011, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tex

I was able to dock both of them together just fine without the PMA though, so is there any harm in not using one? Having it there will add some complications to the flight plans I already drew up, but if we need it then it should be added to Flight #2 payload.

No need if it's a pain; only if you want to go for hard realism.

07-25-2011, 01:44 AM	#21
Izack Non sequitur	It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-SSVP between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya. Last edited by Izack; 07-25-2011 at 02:58 AM. Reason: Wrong port type on Zvezda

07-25-2011, 03:22 AM	#29
Eli13 Fish Dreamer	So is there going to be an insignia or anything along those lines for OFSS 3? Last edited by Eli13; 07-25-2011 at 03:29 AM.

Quick Links	Need Help?
About Us Register to Participate Orbiter Website Orbiter Download Projects Recommended Addons Orbit Hangar Mods Photo Gallery Social Groups External Links	Did you forget your password? Rules & Guidelines Frequently Asked Questions Orbiter F.A.Q. Orbiter Tutorials Orbiter IRC Chat Search Forum Site Map Contact Us Mark Forums Read

07-24-2011, 08:50 PM	#16
Kyle Armchair Astronaut	Thanks for the tips Gary! ---------- Post added at 08:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ---------- Important notice - several documentations and configuration files have to be changed to reflect the name change from CSS to OFSS3, so the first flight date is not yet confirmed but should be soon. Be sure to check out the crew assignment thread to request for missions.

07-24-2011, 08:55 PM	#17
Artlav Aperiodic traveller	A suggestion - Some people would just wander in, see this as a great idea, and want to participate... And don't know how. A FAQ would be nice - do you record flights, pass around scenarios, fly live in OMP, etc? What addons are to be used and where to get them? These kind of things.

07-24-2011, 09:04 PM	#18
Tex O-F Administrator	Quote: Originally Posted by Artlav A suggestion - Some people would just wander in, see this as a great idea, and want to participate... And don't know how. A FAQ would be nice - do you record flights, pass around scenarios, fly live in OMP, etc? What addons are to be used and where to get them? These kind of things. I've already created documentation with all the required addons and info necessary for the flights etc. We'll release the package on OHM as soon as it's ready and each time someone completes their flight, we'll upload a new package for the next flight. The turn around time will be fast so we keep things moving.

07-25-2011, 12:15 AM	#19
Tex O-F Administrator	All OFSS III discussions moved to the new 'Orbiter Forum Space Station III' sub-forum. While the OFSS II sub-forum is hidden from the home page now, you can still access it from the old URL or by visiting the OFSS II social group. We're not going to use a social group for OFSS III. We're going to keep it simple in this forum, so anyone can post and participate without the need to join a social group. Packages will be uploaded to Orbithangar for each new flight. You can post your screen shots, post flight scenarios, and discussions in this OFSS III forum.

07-25-2011, 12:19 AM	#20
ky Director of Manned Spaceflight	I'd love to be a part of OFSS III.

07-25-2011, 01:47 AM	#22
diogom Survivor of 21/10/2011	Quote: Originally Posted by Izack It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-CBM between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya. And these Soyuz/Progress need a Pirs or Rassvet between them and Zvezda.

07-25-2011, 02:07 AM	#23
Tex O-F Administrator	Quote: Originally Posted by Izack It looks like the OFSS3 ROS has some incompatible docking ports connected: APAS-CBM between Zarya and Zvezda, and CBM-SSVP between Neesys and Zarya. That screen shot is actually from the early planning when I was using the scenario editor, it needs to be updated, my fault. After I actually flew the missions I realized I had them backwards. Zarya will dock to Neesys with it's opposite side which is for CBM adapters. So Zvezda would obviously dock on the other side of Zarya which works (I tested this in the scenario). EDIT - Actually Zvezda can't really translate, so the way it plays out is Zarya undocks from Neesys and docks to Zvezda with its #2 docking port when Zvezda arrives. Then Neesys docks to Zarya #1 port. However, after P6 comes up many flights later, Zarya and Zvezda are moved to a different docking port on Neesys. This time URMS will be used to help. I planned it all out, still testing the later missions to make sure it all works as expected. Quote: Originally Posted by diogom And these Soyuz/Progress need a Pirs or Rassvet between them and Zvezda. I was able to dock Soyuz to Zarya and Zvezda just fine.

07-25-2011, 02:11 AM	#24
diogom Survivor of 21/10/2011	Quote: Originally Posted by Tex I was able to dock Soyuz to Zarya and Zvezda just fine. I know, just for some visual compatibility

07-25-2011, 02:16 AM	#25
Tex O-F Administrator	They are another vessel though, yes? Unless it's absolutely required, we should try to avoid adding any more vessels to the scenarios than we really need is my thinking. By the end it gets some what massive at 37 vessels I think it is.

07-25-2011, 02:24 AM	#26
diogom Survivor of 21/10/2011	Quote: Originally Posted by Tex They are another vessel though, yes? Unless it's absolutely required, we should try to avoid adding any more vessels to the scenarios than we really need is my thinking. By the end it gets some what massive at 37 vessels I think it is. Holy Probe! Yeah, I see your point. Its nothing important. One of my ideas from over using Thorton's ISS

07-25-2011, 03:12 AM	#27
Izack Non sequitur	Quote: Originally Posted by Tex Zarya will dock to Neesys with it's opposite side which is for CBM adapters. It's actually an APAS-95 port, not CBM, so a PMA would be required between Zarya and Neesys, just like there is between Zarya and Unity in real life.

07-25-2011, 03:21 AM	#28
Tex O-F Administrator	Interesting, I didn't know that. I was able to dock both of them together just fine without the PMA though, so is there any harm in not using one? Having it there will add some complications to the flight plans I already drew up, but if we need it then it should be added to Flight #2 payload. EDIT - Here is what it looks like without the PMA and with Zarya turned around the right way: (this is before P6 comes up, after which Zarya/Zvezda are moved to Neesys port #3.)

07-25-2011, 03:29 AM	#30
Izack Non sequitur	Quote: Originally Posted by Tex I was able to dock both of them together just fine without the PMA though, so is there any harm in not using one? Having it there will add some complications to the flight plans I already drew up, but if we need it then it should be added to Flight #2 payload. No need if it's a pain; only if you want to go for hard realism.