Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > OrbitHangar Addons & Comments
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

OrbitHangar Addons & Comments Addons uploaded at Orbithangar.com will automatically generate a new thread in this forum for comments. The thread link will also be included on the addons page.

Thread Tools
Old 09-19-2016, 12:54 AM   #46

I've launched the scenario you gave and I didn't get yet the overshooting you experienced in the landing phase.

Did you get small MFD refresh rate drop in the final? It could be important in the calculation.
Did the error at the end of the approach phase was not too high?
If the vessel misses the narrow area to initiate the final descent (1x2meter with speed less than 0.25m/s in this build), it will be hard to compensate smoothly the growing error (weak AP, indeed, in this phase and I thought few times to write another one).
A little tip : at this moment you should hit the hold key to stop AP and the ship will keep its current altitude and set its velocity to zero (too basic too work well, I will look at this ), giving the time to regain control manually .

Anyway, the current final phase is really tricky because of its use of hover or main engines direction to control all the forward & lateral trajectory and highly dependent of the previous phase. It's less precise and more vulnerable to error than using the linear thrusters in conjunction but I feel it should be like it is (and maybe I'm wrong...).

The changes you've made are close to those, currently, for the ArrowFreighter and similar (big ship with no roll thrusters dedicated).
I didn't tweak it too much after recent changes but it sounds good afterall.
It also sounds like it needs a configuration file for less.
Rawash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2016, 01:20 AM   #47

Did you get small MFD refresh rate drop in the final? It could be important in the calculation.
Did the error at the end of the approach phase was not too high?
Good points, I forgot to mention.
Yes...MFD-refresh-rate could be an issue. I used 0.1, which is the max for this MFD according to the docs.
But if I go to a lesser value (i.e. 0.05), the new D3D9-client kills my FPS-rate.

The error happend when crossed my landing-spot, about a few meters before the landing spot at an altitude of exact 30 meters.
So first it was looking good, but than it crosses the landing spot, without any intervention, and missed. (maybe the intervention was in the 0.05 time-frame...so in a 0.1-time-frame, the exact spot has been missed/skipped).

So in short words: the descent from "30-0" has never happened.

Just for fun, I tried "my" build yesterday to its extreme.
Same situation, but altitude at about 760*760 kms .
A real steep aproach, but the landing was even here successfull.(I have not expected this...).

Maybe putting a "more tolerant profile" into the CFG page, so the user can decide if:
-he wants to be very precise i.e. landing in the exact middle of a pizza
-he does not care about 1-3 meters miss, and has stable gear (early engine cut-off (i.e. 50-60 cm freefall).


A little tip : at this moment you should hit the hold key to stop AP and the ship will keep its current altitude
This is good to know, that the hover keeps active.
I believe this was different in previous version.

So I could switch AP off and can let "HoverMFD" do the rest few meters for example.

Last edited by turtle91; 09-19-2016 at 01:24 AM.
turtle91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2016, 03:23 AM   #48
Bug Crusher
boogabooga's Avatar

I like the option of turning off the roll control. Nice.
boogabooga is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-20-2016, 12:33 AM   #49

Hi turtle91,
The MFD refresh rate is the number at the bottom right corner.
It should not be more than 0.3sec at normal acceleration time, unless calculation goes fuzzy.
It's different than MFD (display) refresh that I split from background calculation.
btw: did you enable the limter in the D3D9Client config file?
I set mine to 60fps.

The errors between calculated and current trajectory are the two data named errY (height) and errZ (distance to target) below the graph. They should not exceed around 0.2 close to the switching time between approach and landing. If so, the position and the velocity constraints needed for targeting and smooth deceleration lead to a missing landing.
You should try to build for testing with your landing setting.
Those are good and more fuel friendly.

HoverMFD offers a different way to land. PursuitMFD can be stopped at the end of the approach phase (by pressing hold two times) in order to switch to another landing MFD.

Last edited by Rawash; 09-20-2016 at 12:36 AM.
Rawash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2016, 01:37 AM   #50

Hi Rawash,

I just realized, that you have provided a test-scenario with a standard DG, approaching Valles Marineris.
So I used this scenario for another test....and a mind blowing landing experience.
This time I tried to concentrate on the FPS and the error-rate.
It was not so easy to monitor the values, while enjoyed the spectacular panorama..

The FPS-indicator (nice feature btw) was in the 0.01-0.02 range, so FPS should not be an issue.
The error-rated went down to X=0.002 Z=0.63 when transitioned from aproach to final-landing-stage.
Even that the landing was a success this time, the target was overshooted about 8 meters. The 5m to 0m descent was a bit slow, so the target drifted away a bit.

I will do this test again, but using the XR2. Maybe here, FPS could be an issue on my lame system.
I didn't used the FPS-limiter so far, but will give it a try.

As a last step I will ry to rebuild PursuitMFD2016 with my previous settings.
At least the alt-cutoff should be a bit higher (I believe you set it now do 25 cm ?).

However, much stuff to test from my side.
I let you know the details within the next days.
turtle91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 06-19-2017, 09:15 PM   #51
pclaurent's Avatar

In docking mode, activating the TRIM autopilot doesn't seem to do anything. With this new version, I cannot automatically dock as the RCS in linear mode doesn't seem to be controled any more by the MFD. The alignment (roll) works fine, but the vessel is not automatically aligned in x, y or z... I didn't have this behaviour with the previous version which worked fine for both orientation and x,y,z alignment. Did I miss something?
pclaurent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2017, 09:24 PM   #52

well It's kind of good to know that it isn't just me, the Trim does nothing at all for me either, is there an archive available where I can get an older version that DOES work?

ETA: I downloaded the zip provided up thread and it works fine for my present needs.... station keeping the dragon and maintaining the ISS in LVLH, finally going to be able to try out the Canadarm

Last edited by rcraig42; 08-22-2017 at 10:54 PM.
rcraig42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2017, 07:52 PM   #53
Default small update

I've just updated to version 171119.
Trim should be back...
Rawash is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 01-21-2019, 09:31 PM   #54
Spring of Life!
Cras's Avatar

Just gave this (170619) a try in Orbiter 2010, the RPM and TOR modes send an XR-2 into a wild tumble
Cras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2019, 08:50 PM   #55
Thundersnook's Avatar

EDIT: Nevermind ... issue solved...

Last edited by Thundersnook; 03-14-2019 at 09:07 PM.
Thundersnook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2020, 04:33 PM   #56


are there a more detailed guide for PursuitMFD somewhere?

Thank you!
ACH0002 is offline   Reply With Quote

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > OrbitHangar Addons & Comments

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 07:20 PM.

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 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.