Flight Question getting into orbit?

[Urwumpe]

ok so im a bad pilot. thank you.

Yes, that is all, you simply shout at your spacecraft to straighten up and stop flying funny. Instead of maybe looking at the manual.

What would you do if Orbiter would be a ship simulator? Try touch and go as well??? With the Titanic?????

 

[garyw]

What would you do if Orbiter would be a ship simulator? Try touch and go as well??? With the Titanic?????

Titantic touched (an iceberg) then went (under the water)...

RocketDued - I'm still waiting on that Orbit MFD image.

 

[Urwumpe]

You can produce screenshots in orbiter by pressing ALT + Print on your keyboard, and then pasting the screenshot from the windows clipboard into your favorite image processor to save it as image file. For example Windows Paint. I prefer Gimp 2 though, it produces JPEGs that are smaller at the same quality.

 

[Carmen A]

Orbiter's atmospheric craft are indeed really tame - if you find it hard to handle them watch some videos of the craft in action, sit on some autopilot space launches etc etc. Get the feel of an established orbital launch procedure and just develop your own in due course

no harm starting off slow, although unlike (the original poster) I found Orbiter's atmospheric flight models quite intuitive. They deal with the same 4 forces of lift, drag, thrust, gravity, anyway.

I held a mock air combat maneuvering session last night on Orbiter multiplayer but didn't do the later coordinated launch to orbit correctly and ended up far behind the formation (need to ride more shuttle flights..) but who cares, experimentation is fun!

 

[Lucy]

The DeltaGlider is a simple spaceplane designed for several reasons. It is the starting vessel for learning how to get into orbit, as it is more forgiving and has better fuel margins than most other vessels in the game, and certainly any realistic vessel. Its source code is also provided in the SDK to give new developers a practical example of a fully-fledged vessel with working panel, VC, animations and aerofoil components.

Yes, it has wings. Below ~70KM the wings generate lift - above this kind of altitude, you'll struggle to keep the nose up because you're getting to the point where the atmosphere you're trying to manipulate with the control surfaces just isn't thick enough to change the attitude of your vessel. While I will accept you telling me that Orbiter doesn't really simulate the lower portions of the atmosphere for aerodynamic flight as well as a simulator like FSX does, the implementation is more than sufficient for our needs.

I will point out that simply because you cannot do it rarely means that it is broken. Flying the DG into orbit is a skill which takes practice and study to learn - you need to understand the physics behind the process which have been outlined several times in this thread, and are described in detail in the manual and in Go Play In Space, our primary reference materials for learning to fly Orbiter. Forget what you know from other simulators, this one isn't the same. Just because it looks like a plane doesn't mean it behaves like one - and I wonder how you expect an actual plane would handle at the altitudes the DG operates at.

On the Orbit MFD, the numbers you want to watch are your current Altitude, your ApA, and your PeA (by default, they begin a scenario displayed as ApR and PeR - DST changes this. PRJ will change the angle of the orbit display to SHP which makes it easier to visualise the flightpath you're creating). Your initial takeoff, roll to heading and pitch up, get you out of the atmosphere and put some miles between you and the surface, but they don't put much into your PeA (Periapsis - the lowest point of your orbit). To do that you need to add horizontal velocity, as others have said in this thread, until your PeA is about as high as your ApA - there's another number called Ecc (Eccentricity) which compares the two - when that number is 0, your orbit is perfectly circular.

Turning the DG on-orbit requires RCS thrusters, because manipulating the air flowing over the vessel to change heading is difficult when there is no air flowing over the vessel. On the panel there's a dial on the upper right to switch from aerofoil control to RCS control - there are two modes, ROT and LIN. ROT - rotational - allows you to use the thrusters in differential pairs, which is how you change your vessel's attitude, while LIN - Linear - allows you to control the thrusters in directionally linked pairs, which allows you to fly sideways (useful for docking manoeuvres). The DG's RCS is somewhat overpowered, and there are stock autopilots to hold certain attitudes automatically for you, all covered in the manual.

If you want to just "jump in and go space", then I'd recommend a different simulator. Even the quickstart for Orbiter can take days to learn.

 

[garyw]

Yes, it has wings. Below ~70KM the wings generate lift - above this kind of altitude, you'll struggle to keep the nose up because you're getting to the point where the atmosphere you're trying to manipulate with the control surfaces just isn't thick enough to change the attitude of your vessel. While I will accept you telling me that Orbiter doesn't really simulate the lower portions of the atmosphere for aerodynamic flight as well as a simulator like FSX does, the implementation is more than sufficient for our needs.

One thing I will add to Xyon's excellent pointers to the Deltaglider is that the Surface MFD is very useful for visually verifying that you have sufficient speed at altitudes above 70KM to keep climbing. If you are not going fast enough at that 70KM mark you'll find yourself descending at quite a rapid rate so during the ascent you should be lowering the nose to make sure you have maintain sufficient speed.

One other thing I'll draw your attention to is this smoke plume from a shuttle launch:

Notice how the curve of smoke goes from a climb to an almost level acceleration? the initial climb of the shuttle is to get above our thick atmosphere, after that it's all about speed with only a shallow climb.

 

[Ripley]

I've read through all this thread...I don't know exactly why...

Let me tell you, rocketdued: in the start of the thread your attitude towards Orbiter sounded maybe a bit over-excitated, so you started right away with Shuttles and such. I can understand that. But you obviously failed. Space flight ain't an easy task.
Then lots and lots of wise and patient tips have been repeatedly given to you by real Orbiter veterans.
You slowly started to acknowledge their value, and to recognize you should have started again from square one. Good.
Then there was a short break for Christmas, and after that you came back with your need of finding a different space simulator...Maybe you'll find something else that suits you more, but Orbiter is the real thing.

I am, as you, a (virtual) airplane pilot, one of the so-called hard-core gamers, with expensive hardware, HOTAS, rudders, TrackIR, etc...years of Falcon3 & 4, Jane's F-15, IL-2 series from the start. I actually fly in a WWII virtual squadron. Not much civilian flight (like MSFS), but quite an experience nonetheless.

I thought I knew "enough", thanks to flight-simming, and miserably failed many times (using Dan's DG-IV 2). Everything looked so complex and sounded so new...I then studied the manuals, re-reading them even before attempting what was described, until those new concepts slowly formed and took place in my mind.
In the beginning I thought (like you did) that it was enough to accelerate vertical to go into orbit. I couldn't understand why I was always falling down to Earth.
It's easy to loose faith and get discouraged without knowing the mechanical basics.
Forget flight-simming, this is different. SO different, that my first successful atmospheric reentry from ISS, was keyboard only!
Learning curve can be steep at the beginning, but is rewarding.

In this thread there is everything you need to know to safely get into orbit.
If you still have problems, it's you, or your hardware.

And please, post that Orbit MFD screen Garyw is waiting for

Happy Orbiting!

 

[Urwumpe]

Or paste the contents of "(Current State).scn" between [ code ] tags here...

 

[rocketdued]

well im takeing a break from orbiter. so a screen shot will be a while. i have other book and manuals im reading at the moment.

 

[Urwumpe]

well im takeing a break from orbiter. so a screen shot will be a while. i have other book and manuals im reading at the moment.

Breaks are bad if you just begin. You will never get over the steep learning curve then. You need the same strategy that broke the curse of the starfighter: Fly, Fly, Fly, Fly and Fly.

 

[rocketdued]

well it used to fun untill coming here and being told i don't know how to work a computer and don't know how to read. and being told im a bad pilot. and that i don't know jack about aircraft. i need to read books to keep my intelligence up.

 

[Ripley]

Don't let them bring you down...

 

[rocketdued]

i don't. i think it's really funny that none of the pepole that made those comments don't know me at all!!! yet they are acting like they do. i have forgotten more about flying on flightsimulator2004 then they will ever know. because yes i realize that there are a few things differrent on the serface mfd. BUT there are a lot the things very similar to an aircraft. the only thing thats truely diffrrent is the way the airspeed/altitude is read. instead on knots and feet it's read m/s.

 

[Wishbone]

Which would you prefer - people telling you the truth that you have to read books on spaceflight or lying that your present knowledge and skills are sufficient?

 

[garyw]

i have forgotten more about flying on flightsimulator2004 then they will ever know.

You do know that we have real pilots on here don't you? Also, there are others that are FSX gurus so I think you need to be careful what you say because there is always someone who knows more than you.

i have forgotten more about flying on flightsimulator2004 then they will ever know.
because yes i realize that there are a few things differrent on the serface mfd. BUT there are a lot the things very similar to an aircraft. the only thing thats truely diffrrent is the way the airspeed/altitude is read. instead on knots and feet it's read m/s.

If it's only the imperial vs metric that's holding you back try this: [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=369"]FlightInstMFD for Imperial air travel units[/ame]

 

[rocketdued]

well ok then. there are real flightsimulator 2004 pilots to. and yes i know that there are pepole that know more then me about aviation. and thats greagt. i like to learn. if somebody shares some good information with me about flying thats good. so now that we have established that. when you look at the attitude indicator in orbiter and a cessna for example. because it's blue on top and brown on the bottom correct? whats the differrrence? NONE!!! now when you look at the heading tape on the top of oribters display and one in a fighter jet whats the differrence? NONE!!! so no maybe i don't know all there is to know about space flight. if any one tells ya they do is full of it.

 

[Urwumpe]

...don't know how to read.

Yes. See below as evidence.

and being told im a bad pilot. and that i don't know jack about aircraft.

Nobody tells you that you don't know jack about aircraft, we are sure that you waste a lot of time of your life sitting in front of flight simulators and pretending to become flight captain one day.

What we told you is, that you are a poor pilot for spacecraft.

And that you are a poor pilot for spacecraft, because you are resistant to take our advice that spacecraft are absolutely no aircraft. You are not adapting to spacecraft, you expect spacecraft to adapt to you. But that is wrong. And that makes you a poor pilot. you sure wouldn't complain that a Concorde flies really bad at 240 knots IAS at low altitude, and that a Cessna is much more agile then. It is all logical.

And yes, you don't know jack about spacecraft as well, I am pretty sure. You maybe think that you do, because you know about aircraft, and at the lowest level of engineering you are really right, because spacecraft and aircraft are build by the same companies, by similar engineering and thus, share many concepts and parts. But spacecraft and aircraft are completely different at the same time.

If you know how to fly aircraft, it means nothing about spacecraft. Even for the Shuttle and other Spaceplanes. You think that they land on a runway means, that you can expect them to fly like a tame airliner? Sure not. They are flying bricks. and they are flying bricks because they are designed for flying in space. That they can fly below 384,000 feet altitude is only a compromise, but never their true realm. They belong into space.

That is the idea that does just not find a way into your head. Space is the absence of air. And thus also the absence of aircraft. About 45 km altitude, all that you know about aircraft is ballast. It helps you nothing. Contrary. It makes you fail. If you fly a spaceplane during reentry like an aircraft, it will melt and vaporize. You need to do exactly those things then, that your flight teacher told you to never do in an aircraft. You need to fly almost stalled all the time. You need to do S-Turns for bleeding energy slowly. When you can see the runway, instead of doing a gentle approach, you need to dive down at about 20-30° - otherwise you will drop at 70-90° a few seconds later, because you finally stalled completely, with no chance of recovery. The speed at which your wheels will touch the runway on a good gentle spacecraft landing, can be found in your aircraft manuals under the chapter heading "Things you should not even think about".

And now, you want to tell me, that all is Orbiters fault, because you are such a great pilot and we are all just putting you down by reminding you that you are on the wrong way? Sorry. We are trying to help you, but you don't understand what that help means.

It is not our task to give you what you want, but the help that you need.

 

[rocketdued]

Urwumpe im going to pretend i didn't hear you say that. first of all i use flightsimulators to keep my skills as a pilot in the real world sharp!!! you remind me of one of those that say no inhstructor sir i don't need a flightsim i can fly any thing. well those kind of pepole scare me they really do. if you think a flightsimulators a waste of time well then the jokes on you my freind!!! if you know orbiter like you say you do lets see you go to nasa and try the REAL space flightsimulators they have:lol:

 

[Urwumpe]

if you know orbiter like you say you do lets see you go to nasa and try the REAL space flightsimulators they have:lol:

I prefer the real thing. Even if this means sitting on a computer late at night, waiting for AOS, only to compare TLM to the predictions and send CMDs for the next 24 hours. Spaceflight is no pony club.

Also, I have serious doubts that you would even be permitted flying a paper plane in the real world. It is not only about "Pull the yoke to you - buildings get small. push the yoke away - Buildings get big. Push the throttle forward, engine gets loud...", but actually a lot about understanding physics, proper communication, constant learning of new regulations and procedures and a pretty large amount of knowing maintenance good enough to detect when something is wrong, how wrong it is and what actually is wrong.

All stuff that you don't really show here. You don't take things even slightly serious, you are just scraping on the surface and decide to do something easier when things don't work on the first attempt. If I wouldn't be told every new year that I should be a bit nicer to my fellow Orbiter users, I would say you are just 10 years old and not really ambitious.

 

[rocketdued]

Urwumpe thats funny. and umm how many flying hours you have? you give me a really good laugh. you know that?