Project Here goes nothing: The Delta-StarLiner G42
- Thread starter Moach
- Start date
Usquanigo
New member
There's always Wing Commander....
In all seriousness, I don't mean to offend, I'm just busting your chops a little. The idea is that this is a simulator, and you are always "stuck" inside the cockpit of a real craft, so to simulate that experience, you should manipulate the cockpit.
It's a REAL shame that more add-on devs aren't like Moach in this approach. It would ratchet the quality of everything up in a dramatic way.
The best thing to do would be to get better hardware to use. Failing that, map some buttons to do the various things you need to do and you won't have to see so much or click on things. Failing that, worst case, just use the default non-sim, no-'pit view ("wonder woman" mode as we call it in IL2), so you can see the MFDs more clearly without losing the HUD. But for me, that would be the absolute last thing to do.
Things in the 'pit do seem a little blurry right now, but it's an early WIP, so I'm sure that will all be cleaned up in due course.
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
would it help if i added more info to the hud?
i could very easily have it display your ApA / PeA on surface mode as well....
i could even have a couple of toggle switches so you could choose what information you want displayed... wha'bout that? :idea:
also, the flight computer (waaaay ahead.... but in plans) should help in giving you a heads-up by voice callouts and HUD alerts upon flight-plan events... so you'd hear a warning about approaching your target ApA before you manage to overshoot it :hmm:
if you fly her seat-of-the-pants style, it's gonna be some trouble before you can make orbit... i'm currently tuning the flight and engine dynamics (which appears to be a job that never ends) and she's got a pretty specific way of balancing climb and acceleration in order to stay within optimal flight envelopes.... if you fly at inefficient regimes, you'll run dry before covering the required deltaV
Last edited:
Usquanigo
New member
A physical switch (like a knob switch (either the XRs or DG-IV use this, something does, I just can't recall specifically what), or maybe a 4-way hat, or even 4 separate buttons (like the XL-70/HyperDart) would be good, in addition to the MFD HUD data button.
We can just press H on our PC keyboards, but I would have to imagine that a real craft would use an actual mode select. The HUD button on the MFD would end up just being supplemental.
:thumbup:
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
yes, there will be switches and knobs for the hud... buttons for changing the main mode - since that can be altered from other places (MFD, H key...)
isn't the whole point of a heads-UP-display to not have to look DOWN all the time?
isn't the whole point of a heads-UP-display to not have to look DOWN all the time?
Eccentrus
Geekernaut
well, I'm talking about the APA/PEA, and all others, like CoG, temps, etc, but I think it will be better for Moach and everybody else if Moach can just add a secondary and, if you're willing, a tertiary hud, just like how it's done in DGIV or XR2 which can show all the additional informations without being too far away from the FoV or cramping the whole place, I suggest that the informations can be edited via a .cfg file and have the defaults to include the temperature (when you've already implemented it of course) APA/PEA, etc
btw, is it just me, but I can't find the RCS button just yet :lol:, and one more thing, if you use the Killrot autopilot, and anyother (like prograde,etc) the killrot text will overlay other autopilots on the autopilot marker (HUD)
Not that I'm being greedy for complaining on an already free and magnificent (and unfinished :uhh add-on, but, the G42 is so cool that one can't help but to provide feedbacks so that it can stand there, on the podium of top quality SSTO like the Ravenstar
btw, this particular add-on has the steepest learning curve I've ever seen in Orbiter, and after some time, I really love how it goes to orbit, so, keep at it Moach, may good luck will always be with you both in life, and especially in coding :tiphat:
---------- Post added at 11:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:25 PM ----------
btw, usquanigo's idea is also a good one, but it's always up to Moach to do whatever he pleases to
btw, is it just me, but I can't find the RCS button just yet :lol:, and one more thing, if you use the Killrot autopilot, and anyother (like prograde,etc) the killrot text will overlay other autopilots on the autopilot marker (HUD)
Not that I'm being greedy for complaining on an already free and magnificent (and unfinished :uhh
add-on, but, the G42 is so cool that one can't help but to provide feedbacks so that it can stand there, on the podium of top quality SSTO like the Ravenstarbtw, this particular add-on has the steepest learning curve I've ever seen in Orbiter, and after some time, I really love how it goes to orbit, so, keep at it Moach, may good luck will always be with you both in life, and especially in coding :tiphat:
---------- Post added at 11:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:25 PM ----------
btw, usquanigo's idea is also a good one, but it's always up to Moach to do whatever he pleases to
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
well... the learning curve tends to be a bit steeper when things aren't finished :hmm:
actually having visual indicators of engine performance would help a lot... gauging thrust efficiency by sound is not exactly optimal in terms of pilot workload
i had thought of a possible secondary HUD... but then i struck the problem of having no place to put it :huh:
another problem, is that since the HUD resolution is hard-coded somewhere among Martin's work, there's a somewhat limited number of pixels for use in there... so info has to be very well picked in order to avoid a huge ball of "WTF?!!"
another viable option, futuristic as this ship is (and even if it wasn't, 'cause this isn't really new stuff), is a HMD setup (Helmet-Mounted-Display)
this could be implemented easily as getting a bunch of text upon the screen.... which is close to what one would see through a real HMD, i believe....
there would be a little panel (somewhere) for selecting what fields should be displayed, and to turn it on and off as needed....
would that not be better?
actually having visual indicators of engine performance would help a lot... gauging thrust efficiency by sound is not exactly optimal in terms of pilot workload
i had thought of a possible secondary HUD... but then i struck the problem of having no place to put it :huh:
another problem, is that since the HUD resolution is hard-coded somewhere among Martin's work, there's a somewhat limited number of pixels for use in there... so info has to be very well picked in order to avoid a huge ball of "WTF?!!"
another viable option, futuristic as this ship is (and even if it wasn't, 'cause this isn't really new stuff), is a HMD setup (Helmet-Mounted-Display)
this could be implemented easily as getting a bunch of text upon the screen.... which is close to what one would see through a real HMD, i believe....
there would be a little panel (somewhere) for selecting what fields should be displayed, and to turn it on and off as needed....
would that not be better?
Eccentrus
Geekernaut
actually having visual indicators of engine performance would help a lot... gauging thrust efficiency by sound is not exactly optimal in terms of pilot workload
especially when the sound's really quiet (50km and up) :lol:
it could be an ear beside the main HUD, or stick it to the window :shifty:
that would work fine as well :thumbup:
Usquanigo
New member
An HMD would be reasonable in terms of tech, but... I dunno, they just don't have the right feel in sims for some reason.
IMNSHO, there should be a lower limit to adjusting the addon for lack of hardware. No offense intended to you Eccentrus, I'm not trying to squeeze you out, I'm just expressing my own view of the matter.
If I may wax philosophic for a moment - the bottom line of a simulation is to simulate the experience - to the fullest extent that the hardware of the day will allow. And sometimes, that does mean 'bending' the sim a bit (such as "icons" for sighting distant aircraft in air combat sims because no monitor avialable offers the level of resolution, field of view, magnification, or depth perception of the Mk. 1 eyeball of the pilot sitting in the real plane).
But where do we stop? Going too low invariably means hindering it at the upper end.
If we look at this cockpit, it's a really good layout. If you were actually sitting in it, it would not be a problem to use at all. Again, the only thing I could ask for would be enhanced clarity of the buttons, labels, switches, etc. You would see everything clearly and easily between all the custom displays and generic MFDs. There really is no need to add more "aids" on to it.
Granted, I do have a 19" monitor both here (work) and at home. But CRTs are practically free these days, and even a 19" LCD could be had for $50 or so. Less if you check eBay or CraigsList.
Anyway... the idea of a number of HUD layouts showing different info, changable via cfg file is a good one. The downside is that it means extra work, but then that would let us keep the default/current HUD, but allow others to switch to a layout that offers more or different info if it suits them. I'd imagine such a thing to be ground changable anyway.
The ultimate might be some sort of form/formatting system that would allow end users to completely configure the HUD as they choose, but that would seem to be a LOT of work from the dev side, and not really necessary when you get right down to it.
A supplemental HMD that could be opted IN, might not be too bad. But I think there's a logistical question there... if you have HMDs, why bother with a physical HUD? I think when really thought out it would change the entire layout of the pit, which would be a shame IMO.
Anyway, that's my $1.98 on the issue. Ultimately it's Moach's call. I just vote for it being good like it is.
IMNSHO, there should be a lower limit to adjusting the addon for lack of hardware. No offense intended to you Eccentrus, I'm not trying to squeeze you out, I'm just expressing my own view of the matter.
If I may wax philosophic for a moment - the bottom line of a simulation is to simulate the experience - to the fullest extent that the hardware of the day will allow. And sometimes, that does mean 'bending' the sim a bit (such as "icons" for sighting distant aircraft in air combat sims because no monitor avialable offers the level of resolution, field of view, magnification, or depth perception of the Mk. 1 eyeball of the pilot sitting in the real plane).
But where do we stop? Going too low invariably means hindering it at the upper end.
If we look at this cockpit, it's a really good layout. If you were actually sitting in it, it would not be a problem to use at all. Again, the only thing I could ask for would be enhanced clarity of the buttons, labels, switches, etc. You would see everything clearly and easily between all the custom displays and generic MFDs. There really is no need to add more "aids" on to it.
Granted, I do have a 19" monitor both here (work) and at home. But CRTs are practically free these days, and even a 19" LCD could be had for $50 or so. Less if you check eBay or CraigsList.
Anyway... the idea of a number of HUD layouts showing different info, changable via cfg file is a good one. The downside is that it means extra work, but then that would let us keep the default/current HUD, but allow others to switch to a layout that offers more or different info if it suits them. I'd imagine such a thing to be ground changable anyway.
The ultimate might be some sort of form/formatting system that would allow end users to completely configure the HUD as they choose, but that would seem to be a LOT of work from the dev side, and not really necessary when you get right down to it.
A supplemental HMD that could be opted IN, might not be too bad. But I think there's a logistical question there... if you have HMDs, why bother with a physical HUD? I think when really thought out it would change the entire layout of the pit, which would be a shame IMO.
Anyway, that's my $1.98 on the issue. Ultimately it's Moach's call. I just vote for it being good like it is.
River Crab
SpaceX Cheer Captain
:goodposting:
My ￥50 on the cockpit usability issue:
Get head tracking! A simple head tracking setup is incredibly cheap, more so if you happen to have some of the things already, and there's a good chance of this. TrackIR, no matter how great it is, does some HUGE price gouging. The better solution is FreeTrack, which is totally free, and can be put together cheaply in however nice of a setup you want. I plan on getting a cheap Bluetooth adapter to use my Wii remote. Anyway I think the cockpit is fine how it is. Not just fine, AWESOME. I'm sure it would be blissful to sit in such a usable cockpit.
Satori, even.
And remember, it's the developer's choice, 'cause this is Cowboy Coding! YEE-HA!
My ￥50 on the cockpit usability issue:
Get head tracking! A simple head tracking setup is incredibly cheap, more so if you happen to have some of the things already, and there's a good chance of this. TrackIR, no matter how great it is, does some HUGE price gouging. The better solution is FreeTrack, which is totally free, and can be put together cheaply in however nice of a setup you want. I plan on getting a cheap Bluetooth adapter to use my Wii remote. Anyway I think the cockpit is fine how it is. Not just fine, AWESOME. I'm sure it would be blissful to sit in such a usable cockpit.
Satori, even.
And remember, it's the developer's choice, 'cause this is Cowboy Coding! YEE-HA!
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
yes, i did too worry about that... HMD's in sims usually just look like "text splattered over the screen"
over-adapting things to suit the lowest-common-denominator has been known to be the downfall of many possibly great game ideas... namely, Spore... which should have been one of the greatest revolutions in gaming history... but it was all dimmed down so it would be accessible to "everyone"... long story short, EA must die horrble velociraptor deaths :facepalm:
perhaps i'll go for an "alternative readout UI", which would kinda like the shift+z thing in FSX... simply a way of "simulating" that you would be able to read the gauges if you were really there
but first things first.... accessibility options are ways ahead in the dev plans :thumbup:
over-adapting things to suit the lowest-common-denominator has been known to be the downfall of many possibly great game ideas... namely, Spore... which should have been one of the greatest revolutions in gaming history... but it was all dimmed down so it would be accessible to "everyone"... long story short, EA must die horrble velociraptor deaths :facepalm:
perhaps i'll go for an "alternative readout UI", which would kinda like the shift+z thing in FSX... simply a way of "simulating" that you would be able to read the gauges if you were really there
but first things first.... accessibility options are ways ahead in the dev plans :thumbup:
Eccentrus
Geekernaut
well, just like what I said, whatever you pleases to do, it's not like I'm not gonna fly it if you don't do those extras :lol:
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
well.... readouts aside, i've tuned the flight model even further now... :hmm:
i increased the rotational drag parameters to impossible values in order to simulate Fly-By-Wire stabilization... perhaps i even overdid it a notch.... it holds it's attitude now like it's on rails.... i'm clearly not done
i also reduced the ship's empty weight in order to add an oxidizer tank for orbital maneuvers... i also tuned the lift parameters a bit, so she takes off more naturally... then lowered the engine's thrust output to compensate so that it doesn't feel like a carrier takeoff
it's coming along nicely... i'm almost happy with how it handles now :thumbup:
---------- Post added 08-09-10 at 12:33 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-08-10 at 11:08 AM ----------
very much minor update.....
still tuning flight dynamics - but it's looking better and better....
it feels a lot more solid now that it doesn't wobble throughout the whole flight... fly-by-wire guidance would make this possible, even with the uncontrollably unstable nature of the G42's geometry....
in order to illustrate this, i've added a smooth noise function to the control surfaces, so even if you hold the stick steady you'll still see them move a bit, as the "flight computer" constantly makes small corrections to keep you under control :thumbup:
and now, the oxidizer/propellant setup is complete - you can take it up all the way into orbit, but doing so in a way that leaves any usable amount of fuel in the tanks is almost an art-form :lol:
another very much noticeable issue, which must be considered during ascent in order to achieve maximum fuel efficiency, is the point where to switch to internal oxidizer...
this last engine mode transition, has an implication which distigueshes it's proceedure from the previous transition - it's crucial that it is done at a specific propellant level, so that no fuel or oxidizer is wasted :blink:
when on "internal" mode, the main engines will drain ~1.5 units of oxidizer for every 1 unit of propellant, if either one ends, the engines will stop :huh:
i intend to add a mark on the main fuel gauge, indicating the point where propellant and oxidizer are balanced - the crew warning system should also alert to this event as it approaches
if one fails to make the final engine transition at this precise point, then either propelland or oxidizer will need to be vented in order to relief the vessel of the dead weight that such disproportion represents :facepalm: and we don't want THAT... :lol:
also, i think i'll add a "turbo-RCS" mode, a special hookup that uses an APU-powered high-pressure pump to feed small nozzles - yet larger than the regular RCS vents - so that the monopropellant RCS fuel can be used for larger dV burns
do mind however, this is the same fuel used to run the APU - and you CAN'T crossfeed it from the main tanks, as you can in the XR1, since they are completely different chemicals.... so do not abuse this
this way, you can still maneuver effectively after the ascent tanks are dry :thumbup: - kinda like the shuttle, no?
i increased the rotational drag parameters to impossible values in order to simulate Fly-By-Wire stabilization... perhaps i even overdid it a notch.... it holds it's attitude now like it's on rails.... i'm clearly not done
i also reduced the ship's empty weight in order to add an oxidizer tank for orbital maneuvers... i also tuned the lift parameters a bit, so she takes off more naturally... then lowered the engine's thrust output to compensate so that it doesn't feel like a carrier takeoff
it's coming along nicely... i'm almost happy with how it handles now :thumbup:
---------- Post added 08-09-10 at 12:33 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-08-10 at 11:08 AM ----------
very much minor update.....
still tuning flight dynamics - but it's looking better and better....
it feels a lot more solid now that it doesn't wobble throughout the whole flight... fly-by-wire guidance would make this possible, even with the uncontrollably unstable nature of the G42's geometry....
in order to illustrate this, i've added a smooth noise function to the control surfaces, so even if you hold the stick steady you'll still see them move a bit, as the "flight computer" constantly makes small corrections to keep you under control :thumbup:
and now, the oxidizer/propellant setup is complete - you can take it up all the way into orbit, but doing so in a way that leaves any usable amount of fuel in the tanks is almost an art-form :lol:
another very much noticeable issue, which must be considered during ascent in order to achieve maximum fuel efficiency, is the point where to switch to internal oxidizer...
this last engine mode transition, has an implication which distigueshes it's proceedure from the previous transition - it's crucial that it is done at a specific propellant level, so that no fuel or oxidizer is wasted :blink:
when on "internal" mode, the main engines will drain ~1.5 units of oxidizer for every 1 unit of propellant, if either one ends, the engines will stop :huh:
i intend to add a mark on the main fuel gauge, indicating the point where propellant and oxidizer are balanced - the crew warning system should also alert to this event as it approaches
if one fails to make the final engine transition at this precise point, then either propelland or oxidizer will need to be vented in order to relief the vessel of the dead weight that such disproportion represents :facepalm: and we don't want THAT... :lol:
also, i think i'll add a "turbo-RCS" mode, a special hookup that uses an APU-powered high-pressure pump to feed small nozzles - yet larger than the regular RCS vents - so that the monopropellant RCS fuel can be used for larger dV burns
do mind however, this is the same fuel used to run the APU - and you CAN'T crossfeed it from the main tanks, as you can in the XR1, since they are completely different chemicals.... so do not abuse this
this way, you can still maneuver effectively after the ascent tanks are dry :thumbup: - kinda like the shuttle, no?
Last edited:
ghostrunner01
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 240
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Beautiful ship! I finally got it to orbit on my second try! Those ramcasters really kick when they start! On my first try as soon as I started up those ramcasters the G42 started to tumble out of control before I could counter it.
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
they really do pack quite a punch....
sometimes i find it better to make the switch with half-throttle, then slowly bring it back up... it feels more controlled that way...
anyhow, now with the new FBW simulation, the kick is a lot less severe, and you should be able to hold it steady without too much fuss.... it still pulls up, tho... but it's easier to trim it out
sometimes i find it better to make the switch with half-throttle, then slowly bring it back up... it feels more controlled that way...
anyhow, now with the new FBW simulation, the kick is a lot less severe, and you should be able to hold it steady without too much fuss.... it still pulls up, tho... but it's easier to trim it out
ghostrunner01
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 240
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Sounds good! When is the next WIP release gonna be out? Sorry about that if it sounds bad but this ship is so awesome I want to stay almost up to date if possible.
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
don't sweat it :thumbup:
i really don't have any dates set for WIP releases... usually i just put one up when i reach a point where i have some noticeable improvements and things seem to work to a minimum extent
it's not an exact science... even though it's rocket science
i could even upload a new WIP today... but you wouldn't notice any new major features...
last progress was adding two small OMS exhausts and changing the main gears to dual-axis config... but it's a mesh-only upgrade or now... and the gears still look quite crude :shifty:
i wish i had superhuman programming habilities... or a skill like that kid from Heroes that can "talk" to machines...
but meanwhile, i guess i'll just have to do like normal people do, (well, as normal as us programmer folks can get) and code my way into something cool :hmm:
i really don't have any dates set for WIP releases... usually i just put one up when i reach a point where i have some noticeable improvements and things seem to work to a minimum extent
it's not an exact science... even though it's rocket science
i could even upload a new WIP today... but you wouldn't notice any new major features...
last progress was adding two small OMS exhausts and changing the main gears to dual-axis config... but it's a mesh-only upgrade or now... and the gears still look quite crude :shifty:
i wish i had superhuman programming habilities... or a skill like that kid from Heroes that can "talk" to machines...
but meanwhile, i guess i'll just have to do like normal people do, (well, as normal as us programmer folks can get) and code my way into something cool :hmm:
GuiConteDGIV2X
<img title="Ninja" alt="Ninja"
correction
hello guys i don t died yet.
i think the trim control to control the ship is sucks because for me is much secondary i use more Ailerons and RCS.
But what happens if you have a ploblem during reentry the ejection capsule will add much dead weight so why don t put termal isolant over the cockpit and on door if anything happens just disconnect from the ship and use parachute MFD to land gently on the ocean or other place and you can send a another UMMU compatible ship to rescue you crew and you will have a happy end =)
PS That s horrible for me see my crew cockup any english errors i will correct by editing it. :hail:
---------- Post added at 04:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ----------
on my youtube channel i want to upload a reentry tutorial video on XR2 Ravenstar and i think i will post a video about the G42 Starliner what s the better recorded to record it Camtasia? (Fraps if you tell me how to record more than 30 seconds) Hypercam no chance! because on full screen mode the bug on hypercam will ruin my video any awnsers thanks =)
---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 PM ----------
Be here at 5 hours PM! Bye :hello:
hello guys i don t died yet.
i think the trim control to control the ship is sucks because for me is much secondary i use more Ailerons and RCS.
But what happens if you have a ploblem during reentry the ejection capsule will add much dead weight so why don t put termal isolant over the cockpit and on door if anything happens just disconnect from the ship and use parachute MFD to land gently on the ocean or other place and you can send a another UMMU compatible ship to rescue you crew and you will have a happy end =)
PS That s horrible for me see my crew cockup any english errors i will correct by editing it. :hail:
---------- Post added at 04:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 PM ----------
on my youtube channel i want to upload a reentry tutorial video on XR2 Ravenstar and i think i will post a video about the G42 Starliner what s the better recorded to record it Camtasia? (Fraps if you tell me how to record more than 30 seconds) Hypercam no chance! because on full screen mode the bug on hypercam will ruin my video any awnsers thanks =)
---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 PM ----------
Be here at 5 hours PM! Bye :hello:
Last edited:
Moach
Crazy dude with a rocket
well... an escape system such as ejection seats or capsule is not in the plans.... the windows in which such a system would actually INCREASE safety are marginally small
no... to save the crew, it's best to try and save the ship.... with the tanks empty, it can even safely float in the event of a water landing....
should that be necessary upon takeoff, when the tanks are full - there'll be a fuel venting system to purge the contents of the tanks and allow for a smooth(er) landing (crash)
there are only rare occasions in which it's a wise move to ditch the ship... in all other cases, trying to "eject" will result in CERTAIN doom, as opposed to "possible, looming demise"
an inflatable rescue pod could be used if the ship needs to be abandoned in orbit.... but it's only safe to do so if you're in a circular orbit... if an inflatable "space dinghy" hits atmosphere... well, that'll be the end of your story
as for the controls, i'm still tuning it, but i got it a lot more stable now... FWB simulation looks good... specially, the crazy-banking issue is now gone :hmm:
no... to save the crew, it's best to try and save the ship.... with the tanks empty, it can even safely float in the event of a water landing....
should that be necessary upon takeoff, when the tanks are full - there'll be a fuel venting system to purge the contents of the tanks and allow for a smooth(er) landing (crash)
there are only rare occasions in which it's a wise move to ditch the ship... in all other cases, trying to "eject" will result in CERTAIN doom, as opposed to "possible, looming demise"
an inflatable rescue pod could be used if the ship needs to be abandoned in orbit.... but it's only safe to do so if you're in a circular orbit... if an inflatable "space dinghy" hits atmosphere... well, that'll be the end of your story
as for the controls, i'm still tuning it, but i got it a lot more stable now... FWB simulation looks good... specially, the crazy-banking issue is now gone :hmm:
jedidia
shoemaker without legs
I think it would still be safer to remain in a non-functional ship than in a "rubber boat". It's not going to sink, after all (and if it is in danger of deorbiting, the same would aply to any unpropelled lifeboat...)
