Recent content by n72.75

  1. n72.75

    General Question Which integrator should I use?

    Higher order propagators are almost always more accurate, but they will sacrifice some performance (mostly unnoticeable with a few vessels and Orbiter's zonal gravity). In a case where the higher order models were impacting performance so much that you were getting like 1-5 fps, you're probably...
  2. n72.75

    Question Realistic Addon-Spacecraft with simulated systems?

    If you like Apollo there's NASSP We have very detailed systems and several virtual cockpits.
  3. n72.75

    Hi everyone

    Welcome to the forum.
  4. n72.75

    Astrological transit

    Like, affect us gravitationally?
  5. n72.75


    Welcome to the forums
  6. n72.75

    About Me

    The add-ons from Orbithangar are now available under the "Orbiter Downloads" tab of the Forum menu.
  7. n72.75

    Project Shuttle-A Mk.IX

    One of the great things about putting something up on GitHub (or equivalent) is that you can still be the primary developer, but getting help on little things is way easier than dropboxing files to each other. I'd be happy to help with some little things here and there.
  8. n72.75

    Question How did you get into Orbiter Sim?

    I was looking for Celestia add-ons in 2006 and googled the right combination of things to end up on the Orbiter home page.
  9. n72.75

    Project Shuttle-A Mk.IX

    That looks amazing. Love it.
  10. n72.75

    V8 Release Work Thread

    PLEASE READ After a long process of review and consideration, we have pushed through a small but important update to the way specific heats and temperatures are calculated in the internal systems' simulation state. Previously, every substance had one specific heat value, and it was invariant...
  11. n72.75

    Discussion Improved (Tesseral) Gravity Model

    I moved one line of code and bought us several orders of magnitude in performance benefits: That's a solid 50-60 FPS with a degree and order of 1200, so 719,400 coefficients, where before it was ~0.5 FPS Because of timestep length, and the performance issues of using higher order...
  12. n72.75

    Discussion Improved (Tesseral) Gravity Model

    Well that's very promising. I ran this using the default Orbiter propagators at 100x (variable time step length). So there's probably a lot of RK2 and RK4 errors accumulated here. I can try it again on RK8 with a fixed step length.
  13. n72.75

    Discussion Improved (Tesseral) Gravity Model

    Sure. I was using a a cutoff of 120th order/degree.
  14. n72.75

    Discussion Improved (Tesseral) Gravity Model

    After some much-needed help and feedback from my NASSP colleague, the one and only: @indy91 Now we're not violating any conservation of energy rules. Mind your muls and tmuls, kids, and your right and left-handedness. This is what 2 days of sitting in an 35x35km orbit, launched on a 90°...
  15. n72.75

    Discussion Improved (Tesseral) Gravity Model

    That's pretty much how I'm doing it.