# OHMFirst in Space v1.0

#### thammond

##### New member
Ok, I kind of get what you are talking about, but lost me in the specifics. So I will explain what I was trying to do and let me know if there is a relatively easy way to do it.

I launched your Sputnik 1 add on and I was going to let it run until the orbit decayed.

Then I got to thinking that the real Sputnik 1 and likely the add on Sputnik 1 would not decay until after Sputnik 2 was launched. So why not try to make as real as possible and have both in orbit at the same time in orbiter.

So I let the simulation for the Sputnik 1 simulation run until it matched the start time for the Sputnik 2 scenario. I then paused it and recorded the orbital element parameters from the orbit MFD. Then I closed Orbiter and started scenario Sputnik 2 and tried to add Sputnik1 with the orbital elements I recorded previously. Which led to the crash.

Someone else in a different thread suggested adding Sputnik 1 to the Sputnik 2 scenario file with the orbital elements, but from what you described, I'm not sure that would work either.

I have learned a lot about orbiter in this process so even if it won't work out I consider this a net win for me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#### igel

What you are trying to do is totally doable. Just not as easy as simply adding another vessel in scenario - more changes are needed... and they are undocumented yet :-(. I should be too busy this week to try to do it myself, but hopefully next week I'll be able to make such a scenario and post it. It may then serve as example on how to do this, and scenario customization will be documented in future.

I did not do it up to now because there is usually no need to "mix and match" the 'historical' scenarios. To me (just a personal approach) there is no much value in flying two vessels in space if they cannot interact (or even can't see each other at reasonable distance) - and that's what will be happening here. Yes, they will fly around Earth at the same time, but orbits will be so far away that minimum distance between won't be anything exciting ...

Interestingly, it may be worth checking the reentry time of the Sat 1 huge rocket stage - if it was still in orbit at the time of Sat 2, it was actually much more visible to ground observers than the small spherical satellite. Most people reporting to see the satellite were actually seeing the rocket... And, of course, it will be possible to have spent rocket stage in orbit along with the satellite 1 in scenario with the Satellite 2 launch.

#### thammond

##### New member
Creating that scenario or even better documenting how to customize would be awesome.

I agree that what I am trying won't be anything exciting, but your last paragraph is precisely why I am trying to do it...because its interesting.

And to answer your question, the historical reentry for the core (block A) was 12/2/57 the reentry for Sputnik 1 was 1/4/58.

I am currently at 11/8/57 on the Sputnik 1 scenario and the block A apogee is at 941.4 and the Sputnik apogee is at 941.9. The decay rate is less than 1 km per day at this point. Seems like the core will go past the 12/2 historical date for sure.

#### igel

thammond - I just was able to test the "dual" scenario, and it worked for me, without messing up with Mission config files. Here's what I did:
1. Flew Sp1 into orbit, flew it for for some time there and exited;
2. Opened the auto-saved scenario, opened a copy of Sat2 scenario, and copied two vessels from first to second, with all parameters: Sputnik-1 and BlockA (did not care about the nose cone).
3. Extra vessels were placed at the end of the list, after the Launchpad;
4. I made two changes to the copied data: one optional another mandatory:
a). removed PLAY_SOUND entry for Sputnik-1 (the battery should have long died by this time... though it is not really modeled, and you can still activate beeping sound with P key);
b). renamed the coped BlockA to BlockA1, so it does not get confused with the original BlockA.

Here's what I got:

Code:
Sputnik1:FiS\Sputnik1
UPDATERS M_TIMER_P1S, M_GROUND_WATCH, SP1_SND,
TIMERS_P1S M_PLN_ENTER_EXIT, M_ATM_ENTER_EXIT,
STATUS Orbiting Earth
RPOS 3652408.80 4332635.71 3356818.43
RVEL -6150.610 1533.699 4849.746
AROT -13.40 12.23 15.89
VROT -0.49 3.07 3.57
AFCMODE 7
PRPLEVEL 0:1.000000
NAVFREQ 0 0
END
BlockA1:FiS\BlockA
CONDITIONAL_SEQUENCE FltSeqOrb 1,1,1,1,1,
UPDATERS M_ANIM, M_TIMER_P1S, M_GROUND_WATCH, M_ME_WATCH,
TIMERS_P1S M_PLN_ENTER_EXIT, M_ATM_ENTER_EXIT,
ANIM_CTRLS -0.000000,-0.931264,-1.000000,
STATUS Orbiting Earth
RPOS 3652614.76 4332653.55 3356550.38
RVEL -6146.660 1534.446 4844.446
AROT -163.92 -41.10 -64.13
VROT 36.34 -76.12 3.57
AFCMODE 7
PRPLEVEL 0:0.014694 1:1.000000
NAVFREQ 0 0
SUBTYPE R-7
ORBIT 7318000.000000 6599000.000000 1.136209
TEMPERATURE 150.897124
FLIGHT 0.650060 0.000000 0.000000 0.801461 1.105530 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000
END
Flew Sputnik-2 without problem, and got nice dual tracks in Google Earth.

I am actually surprised it did not require changing the mission specifications. Was fully expecting it to crash. Maybe it just worked by accident... but give it a try first . If it does not work in your environment, I'll then try to explicitly split the missions in the scenario.

#### thammond

##### New member
I finally got a chance to try out your latest suggestion and it worked for me too.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

#### igel

Great news, thanks!

#### RubberToe

##### New member
Whenever I try to launch the addon, it terminates due to critical error. Help?

#### PhantomCruiser

##### Wanderer
Moderator
Tutorial Publisher
Whenever I try to launch the addon, it terminates due to critical error. Help?
Going to need some additional information. What version of Orbiter, what scenario, do you have all the req'd dependencies. Are you using the inline or external graphics client.

Also does the Orbiter log file give any clue as to what is missing?

#### IronRain

##### The One and Only (AFAIK)
Moderator
Donator
Whenever I try to launch the addon, it terminates due to critical error. Help?
Going to need some additional information. What version of Orbiter, what scenario, do you have all the req'd dependencies. Are you using the inline or external graphics client.

Also does the Orbiter log file give any clue as to what is missing?
FYI, you can find the log in the root of you Orbiter installation. It's called orbiter.log.

#### andqui

##### New member
'First in Space' and 'R-9' addons introduce a special notion of 'Mission' that is not present in the regular Orbiter scenarios. Mission combines a 'loose set of Orbiter vessels' that relate to the same... well, mission, to process and combine data that is common to all of them. This notion is implemented as a separate invisible Mission vessel at the top of scenario. Additionally, all known missions are listed in a special configuration file, referenced by parameter MissionsFile in the Mission.cfg.

When there is a single mission is scenario, everything is simple: all vessels compiled with VesselM library are by default considered part of this single mission. It is also easy to add a regular Orbiter (or any other non-VesselM) vessel, like Deltaglider, to the scenario.
Thank you so much for these wonderful addons- I've been looking around and haven't found a clear answer- is there some sort of guide or API for how to create your own missions within this framework or customize the existing ones?

For example, first I corrected the inclination fo Molniya-1 to 65.5, found that correctly in the FisMissions configuration file. Now I want to change Luna 9 and 10 to launch from pad 35 (historical) instead of LC-1 (which is where they launch from in the supplied scenarios), and I can't figure out where I do that. The scenario file is totally empty of that information because it's handled elsewhere, and I haven't found documentation for what the different options are and how to manipulate things yourself.

As another example, off topic for this addon but relevant to the question at hand, I'm taking a look at the Soyuz TMA pack, and it looks really cool- but I want to be able to create my own missions with it, change launch times, target orbits, etc to simulate different historical Soyuz missions, and I can't figure out how to make that happen. Some sort of API or mission creation documentation would be wondeful.

Thanks

#### igel

Thanks a lot for your interest, andqui! Yes, unfortunately, the "API" (which can hardly be named API) is not well documented, very 'experimental', and some desired changes may turn out not to be possible from just config files.

Yet, your particular changes are -luckily - quite simple! In the FisMissions.cfg file, in the missions lines for Luna-9 and Luna-10, simply replace B1-M field with B31-S. That's it! Like that:
Code:
Luna9  = LunaM, 39156.48000,182,247,51.6, B31-S,...
Luna10 = LunaM, 39215.45000,180,200,51.6, B31-S,...
This field changes mission launchpad from B1-M configuration (which stands for Baikonur Pad 1 - Molniya) to B31-S configuration (Baikonur Pad 21 - Soyuz). Mission will then tell Launchpad to select the proper pad coordinates and meshes combination. That's why this info is "missing" in scenario.

The only thing you'll definitely want to change in the launch scenario, when you change launchpad, is the Context field at the top. It should be set to B-1 for Pad 1 launches and for B-31 for Pad 31 launches. This seldom-used field tells Orbiter to skip the loading of the launchpad meshes in the corresponding Surface Base from "Historical Spaceports" addon. Because live scenario will load live Launchpad "vessel" with live animated (rather than static "landscaping") meshes.

Your last question, about new TMA missions, can be solved in a similar way:
- create new mission record in SoyuzMissions.cfg file based on TMA mission template;
- give it a new unique mission name;
- set liftoff MJD (second field in the record) to the needed date-time;
- copy a scenario file from the existing one;
- set its starting time a couple of minutes prior to liftoff time;
- change mission name in the MISSION vessel in scenario.

The filnal, hardest thing may be to place ISS into the launch orbital plane. I use Scenario Editor for that, and then copy ISS state vectors from saved scenario into my new launch scenario.

Hope that helps. Let me know if you encounter any troubles.

#### andqui

##### New member
This field changes mission launchpad from B1-M configuration (which stands for Baikonur Pad 1 - Molniya) to B31-S configuration (Baikonur Pad 21 - Soyuz). Mission will then tell Launchpad to select the proper pad coordinates and meshes combination. That's why this info is "missing" in scenario.

The only thing you'll definitely want to change in the launch scenario, when you change launchpad, is the Context field at the top. It should be set to B-1 for Pad 1 launches and for B-31 for Pad 31 launches.
Thank you, that worked perfectly, now I have Luna 9 and 10 launching from pad 31!

Your last question, about new TMA missions, can be solved in a similar way:
- create new mission record in SoyuzMissions.cfg file based on TMA mission template;
- give it a new unique mission name;
- set liftoff MJD (second field in the record) to the needed date-time;
- copy a scenario file from the existing one;
- set its starting time a couple of minutes prior to liftoff time;
- change mission name in the MISSION vessel in scenario.
Thank you, I will try working on this next. I've made several scenarios intercepting different orbiting targets, that's not the part I have trouble with.

I understand these addons are labors of love and that there's no official API or anything like that- but do you have some list of valid launch pad names or parameters for making these scenarios, or even just an explanation for what each of the parameters are?

Code:
Luna10 = LunaM, 39215.45000,180,200,51.6, B31-S,LaunchSeq1,I,  Vostok,FltSeq3st,EndSeq3st,PitchSoyuz, Vostok, mAdMolniya,FltSeq,StartSeqNP,EndSeq,Pitch, StartSeq,EndSeq,MOON,0,FltSeqOrbit
For example, "PitchSoyuz", can I create my own pitch autopilot? What if I want to put a different spacecraft as a payload for Molniya? Etc etc etc.

Also, I love the way you created the Historical Spaceports Baikonur, I've had a problem with various conflicting addons making a mess in Canaveral and I'm going to try to redo all of that with your system so I have the Shuttle LC-39 replacing the Apollo LC-39 at the appropriate time, dummy base for a live launch, etc, it's great.

#### igel

It is exciting to see a renewed interest in these rather old addons. My failure in not updating them for a long time... and in fact I am hoping to roll out some updates fairly soon! I also hope to finally bring the VesselM to a real API and finalize its documentation. If you PM me, I can send you an unfinished document for the "internals" and all these config files features. It will be for a newer, redone version, but the main principal is still there.

You indeed can do custom pitch programs and reference them in the mission. In the mission template (which is LunaM for Luna-9 and Luna-10, for example) some fields can be guessed from their names, like SBlockAPitch meaning "string value, BlockA, pitch program name). In the actual mission record, the value for this field is PitchMolniya. This name should correspond to a name of the pitch program in the corresponding (BlockA) config file (or in its subtype BlockA/Molniya config file). There, the actual pitch program consists of sections:
PitchProgramID = (section1) (section2) (section3)...
Where section consists of four values: (Type, EndTime, StartingPitch, EndingPitch). Types are CONST, LIN or PERI (the last one is special handling when approaching perigee), endtime is end MET of the segment, and angles are in degrees. Pretty simple, but sufficiently effective. Of course, in multi-stage rocket each stage has its own pitch program. I could go further, but even a severely unfinished manual is about 40 pages... just for overview of non-programming configurable features. It's massive...

#### 4throck

##### Enthusiast !
Looking forward for this.

While these missions don't have much flying (they are mostly automated), it's interesting to be able to run them. For example, how about sending Luna 9 to Apollo 17's landing site ? It's interesting to be able to try that with some amateur mission planning...

#### Gargantua2024

##### Active member
Can the available meshes in this addon create a Voskhod rocket? Thanks in advance

#### igel

Looking forward for this.

While these missions don't have much flying (they are mostly automated), it's interesting to be able to run them. For example, how about sending Luna 9 to Apollo 17's landing site ? It's interesting to be able to try that with some amateur mission planning...
Yes, I understand that these missions are mostly "automated demos". Probably was more fun for me programming them than for you "playing" with them . But they turned out perfect for education/popularization uses!

As for Luna-9... well, it's accuracy is pretty much "somewhere on the Moon". Not really that much different from real missions - we still don't know for sure where she sits, not even with LRO. It's not until they started landing from orbit that they could pinpoint landing to a specific area.

---------- Post added at 02:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:10 PM ----------

Can the available meshes in this addon create a Voskhod rocket? Thanks in advance
Voskhod rocket is actually the same as Molniya rocket (which is already in the addon). It only misses the Voskhod spaceship (which can probably be loaded f4rom some other addon) and maybe more custom payload fairing.

#### Gargantua2024

##### Active member
Thanks! Well there is one on this thread, but it only works in Orbiter 2006

#### clipper

##### New member
I don't have anything to add to the discussion but I just wanted to say how much I love your add-ons igel, and in my opinion after all these years they still remain a benchmark for historical accuracy in terms of spacecraft and scenario development for Orbiter and I think it would be absolutely awesome to see some of them in Orbiter 2016 one day.

#### igel

Thanks, clipper! This is very nice to hear!

...As for seeing them in Orbiter 2016... well, I'm afraid they won't be so "awesome" when you see it . I am trying to bring them over now, but only as bare minimum (so they at least won't be crashing the Orbiter)... and ground landscapes are busted beyond repair.

#### 4throck

##### Enthusiast !
Just go with the default Orbiter 2016 terrain and place the launch platforms as best as possible....
Things have to start somewhere, otherwise it's egg and chicken. No updated terrain because no rocket uses the base, no base because we have no rocket!

Anyway, Fred has an easy solution to flatten the area around a launch platform, making 2016 work like 2010.