Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Addon Development Developers post news, updates, & discussions here about your projects in development.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-29-2014, 08:06 PM   #106
4throck
Enthusiast !
 
4throck's Avatar
Default

Could someone please verify the CSM UMMU EVA hatch logic?
It's inversed for me: EVA possible with hatch closed, impossible with hatch open!

I'm getting this result with the CSM as the only vessel in the scenario.
4throck is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 01-31-2014, 10:16 PM   #107
clive bradbury
Tutorial Publisher
Default

I seem to have a problem - when I apply main engine in the CSM it rotate uncontrollably and the only way out is to exit the sim. Can anyone please help?
clive bradbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2014, 10:18 PM   #108
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4throck View Post
 Could someone please verify the CSM UMMU EVA hatch logic?
It's inversed for me: EVA possible with hatch closed, impossible with hatch open!

I'm getting this result with the CSM as the only vessel in the scenario.
Found bug in the focus checker that is likely culprit.

Will be fixed once LM is put back-together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clive bradbury View Post
 I seem to have a problem - when I apply main engine in the CSM it rotate uncontrollably and the only way out is to exit the sim. Can anyone please help?

In what stage of flight are you?

---------- Post added at 14:18 ---------- Previous post was at 14:18 ----------

PS:
Project is not dead, just in pieces.
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 01-31-2014, 10:47 PM   #109
4throck
Enthusiast !
 
4throck's Avatar
Default

Thanks! Another thing on my wish list is EVA with the CSM docked.

As with the CSM repaint, you will find some photo textures+normalmaps on my ATM B add-on that may suit your LEM.
The mapping is not the same, but you can simply copy the necessary parts. Feel free to use them for AAPO.
4throck is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 01-31-2014, 11:02 PM   #110
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4throck View Post
 Thanks! Another thing on my wish list is EVA with the CSM docked.
The code that (in theory) was supposed to make that possible is the code that is causing the problem. It's supposed to check the hatch status and current focus object and then assign a "Allow EVA" true/false value, but some wires got crossed somewhere .
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 01-31-2014, 11:18 PM   #111
N_Molson
Addon Developer
 
N_Molson's Avatar

Default

Quote:
I seem to have a problem - when I apply main engine in the CSM it rotate uncontrollably and the only way out is to exit the sim. Can anyone please help?
Did you try to stir O2 tanks, by any luck ?

N_Molson is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 02-01-2014, 12:15 AM   #112
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

The Kaboom is only supposed to happen on the second stir and only if you name your CSM "Odyssey"
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2014, 07:33 PM   #113
clive bradbury
Tutorial Publisher
Default

[QUOTE=Hlynkacg;454687]Found bug in the focus checker that is likely culprit.

Will be fixed once LM is put back-together.




In what stage of flight are you?

Gumdrop/spider in lunar orbit scenario. Seoarate the CSM, apply main thrust - spin, spin spin!
clive bradbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2014, 07:17 PM   #114
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clive bradbury View Post
 Gumdrop/spider in lunar orbit scenario. Seoarate the CSM, apply main thrust - spin, spin spin!
sounds like the TVC (engine gimbal control) is failing to reset after undocking, I will investigate.

---------- Post added at 11:17 ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 ----------


Feedback Needed

I'm making solid progress towards a release and need to ask a question.

Just how simple should the simple flight model (AKA oapiComplexFlightModel == false) be?

I'm already bypassing electrical and thermal management but should I also be bypassing thruster and propellant controls as well? I'm at the point in development where the call has to be made.

Note:
Things like burning up in the atmosphere or killing the UMMUs if you run out of O2 are already being covered under the "Damage and Failure simulation" option in Orbiter's parameter menu.

Last edited by Hlynkacg; 02-02-2014 at 07:23 PM.
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2014, 09:25 PM   #115
clive bradbury
Tutorial Publisher
Default

Thank you.
clive bradbury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2014, 09:55 PM   #116
4throck
Enthusiast !
 
4throck's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hlynkacg View Post
 .

Just how simple should the simple flight model (AKA oapiComplexFlightModel == false) be?
As simple as possible ("indestructible").
People like Gemini and AMSO because "it works" and "it's fun".

So go for fun, and add realism as an option (for replay value and for advanced users).
Perhaps you can set "invulnerable mode" by scenario, just like AMSO.

Just my
4throck is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 02-02-2014, 10:03 PM   #117
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4throck View Post
 As simple as possible ("indestructible").
People like Gemini and AMSO because "it works" and "it's fun".

So go for fun, and add realism as an option (for replay value and for advanced users).
Perhaps you can set "invulnerable mode" by scenario, just like AMSO.

Just my
"invulnerable mode" is already in place and controlled by the "Damage and Failure simulation" check-box in orbiter's options menu.

The question is how much of the other stuff should I automate or simply not model?

How much do you guys care about stability control, propellant management etc...

Should thrust vectoring be a "Complex model only" feature?

What about CG balancing?
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2014, 11:02 PM   #118
N_Molson
Addon Developer
 
N_Molson's Avatar

Default

Quote:
As simple as possible ("indestructible")
As complex as possible

Quote:
The question is how much of the other stuff should I automate or simply not model?
I'd say that depend how much time you have and how confident in your coding abilities you are.

Quote:
How much do you guys care about stability control, propellant management etc...
Personally, a lot. That kind of stuff makes all the difference. Especially if you link that with failures.

Quote:
Should thrust vectoring be a "Complex model only" feature?
Why that ? It helps to save RCS fuel.

Quote:
What about CG balancing?
Currently, and from my personal experience, the CG/CoM related functions are buggy, so I'd understand you don't want to venture into that. But if you manage to find a way, of course, that's a great feature to implement.

Last edited by N_Molson; 02-02-2014 at 11:08 PM.
N_Molson is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 02-02-2014, 11:31 PM   #119
Hlynkacg
Aspiring rocket scientist
 
Hlynkacg's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N_Molson View Post
 As complex as possible
Note that I am specifically talking about when the player leaves "Complex Flight Model" check-box un-checked.

Quote:
Personally, a lot. That kind of stuff makes all the difference. Especially if you link that with failures.
Agreed but see above

Quote:
Why that ? It helps to save RCS fuel.
Because it involves making calculations, pushing buttons, and monitoring gauges. I've already had complaints about not being able to fly AAPO in a strictly "glass cockpit" environment so the question becomes "is it important enough to be worth coding two interfaces for?" one for simple/glass cockpit mode and another for the VC.
Hlynkacg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2014, 11:54 PM   #120
N_Molson
Addon Developer
 
N_Molson's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Because it involves making calculations, pushing buttons, and monitoring gauges. I've already had complaints about not being able to fly AAPO in a strictly "glass cockpit" environment so the question becomes "is it important enough to be worth coding two interfaces for?" one for simple/glass cockpit mode and another for the VC.
Well, it depends at which public you aim. Again personally, I'm all for something that allow more flexibility than AMSO or NASSP in terms of fictionnal scenarios, but that has an equal or better level of realism (meaning that the spacecraft systems are simulated in detail, but that more a-historical scenarios and launch configuration flexibility is allowed).
N_Molson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:07 AM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.