Hardest thing in Orbiter

[pazuzu]

First post woooohooo.
This sim is so frustrating, yet source of great satisfaction when things go the way you want.
Main source of stress is transX, I'm trying to learn how to use it, but it's not cooperating
Strange enough IMFD is mostly a piece of cake, excluding slingshot module still being cryptic and the fact I can't plan many stages: I'm actually trying to get to Jupiter, make half orbit, get close to Europa and insert into orbit.
No problem getting to destination, but orbit insertion is still a failure, I don't know when starting the braking burn either missing it or crashing on the surface.
I'm a lazy bum and I need to start using more math than autopilots...

 

[n0mad23]

Completely the opposite for me...I can dock to anything anytime. I can only travel to the moon using transfer MFD, as I don't like IMFD. IMFD does the burns for you, I want to use TransX, where you have to do the burns manually, and where you have more control. Anyone have a good TransX tutorial?

You don't actually have to use AutoBurn in IMFD if you don't want to. I'm very comfortable with this MFD, and do everything manually.

Now if I can only get as comfortable with TransX!

BTW- originally the hardest thing for me was landing! For Earth re-entry it was the problem of skipping like a stone across the upper atmosphere. When I finally got that down (though I still need to fine tune my technique), I found the challenge of landing on the Moon without an atmosphere to be equally challenging for a completely different reason.

 

[cjp]

Maybe we can make a list of "standard Orbiter skills". This is my first version of such a list:

• Launching from earth into an orbit
• Standard orbit maneuvering (apogee change, perigee change, plane change)
• De-orbit, re-entry and landing on earth
• From launch to rendez-vous
• From LEO to the moon, orbit around the moon, and back to earth
• Free return around the moon
• Landing on the moon
• Interplanetary transfer, and entering a useful orbit around the target planet
• Make add-ons

Each of them can be a challenge for a beginner. Each of them also has an infinite number of variations, by using different spacecrafts, different instruments, different simulation settings, and different norms for a successful mission. For instance, a beginner might be happy with a re-entry that brings him on the day side of the planet, while an expert wants to land exactly at the landing spot of a certain base.

Usually, when you want to learn something new, you can do it first in a very easy and unrealistic way, and then refine your skills and increase your level of perfectionism.

 

[ar81]

Making addons requires some basic skills

• Using notepad
• Familiarizing with Orbiter SDK (see my tutorials at OH) and other addons that enhance Orbiter (like Vinka's spacecraft.dll) to understand addon structure and syntax rules
• 3D modelling
• 2D arts (drawing and coloring to make textures)
• Coding (C++ for Orbiter DLL or other language for external apps)
• Persistence (to learn new things and to bring a huge project to an end)

I have tried to automate or make tutorials for most of those to make things easy. But there is still a long way to go.



There are different types of addons:

• Vessels (DLL file + CFG file + mesh+textures+sounds)
• Spacecraft.dll vessels (Vinka's addon + mesh + INI file+textures+sounds)
• MFDs (DLL file+other types of files)
• Surface bases (CFG file+mesh+textures)
• Planet textures (Pltex file)
• Other (like external apps)

I use to work in the realm of "Other".
I am right now involved in the creation of another "Other" addon that is going to take a loooong time...
I do have the tools and skills to make it.

I have noticed that as addon making becomes more automated, the artistic skills seem the most challenging.
But still there is a lot to automate. For example we still need a good mesh texturing tool...
----------------------------------

IMFD TUTORIAL
I see many people here having problems with IMFD.
I would suggest IMFD 4.2.1, since 5.1 is still being perfected.
I made a tutorial that explains concepts you need to plan your trip.
[ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3403"]Tutorial: Concepts for Interplanetary MFD 4.2.1[/ame]

-----------------------------------

Getting the DG IV to re-entry from the moon to land at the KSC. I tell you its impossible.

Yes, you need to circularize orbit, lower your orbit as much as you can, and then try atmospheric entry.
DGIV is very sensitive to heat, unlike Apollo capsule heatshield.

 

[n0mad23]

Ar81,

Is this Orbinomics? Or are you working on some other yet undisclosed addon?

As a developer, one thing I'd like to see is an easier way of animating things. Mesh Wizard is indispensable for this work, but I inevitably find that it requires a ton of trial and error tests before the animations turn out right.

 

[ar81]

I have never made any animations and that's the reason why I have not automated it.
Back in the era of M6 forums once I asked someone to teach me and no one replied.
So I dropped it. Then I had things in my offline life that kept me busy, so I never took care about animation.
Mesh Wizard needs to be revamped anyway. Code is messy, not easy to change as it is now.
This is why I am trying to rework Orbinomics, to incorporate good coding practices.

I restarted Space Orbinomics to make it compatible with DGIV but I got stalled because it was just too filled with plenty of subs and functions that I got overwhelmed. So I stalled it. But then I did some research on how to build a framework and I decided to group them and refit the code to separate them in modules to make things easier. I am almost done with the refitting. I have almost 10 modules by now and I still know I will need some more modules.

Another problem I had was that it became sluggish and resource consuming, so I had to find a better trick to display images. I got a solution for this refitting and I found a way to make it faster and less consuming. I am minimizing the amount of controls now and I got to find a way to work images faster without the preload that I thought that would save me some processing time.

In this first stage I will try to ressemble the features of the previously released beta. Later I might try to add new features. However I am planning it in a way that I can add those features. The old beta was too hardcoded to be flexible, it had too many forms. This one is far more scripted and it works in a single full screen.

It is still very far from any workable beta. Progress is slow for now I have an offline life to worry about. But it goes... Unlike the previous Orbinomics that was mostly a collection of Windows forms with some background images, I want this to have some extra cool factor and that makes it longer.

I do not want it to become too heavy, so optimization is becoming a key feature. I am trying to make better code, but even now I am still not entirely happy with the way I am coding. But I am 90% happy.

I also need to learn about how to work graphics for DirectX 8 in Visual Basic. I have not found a decent tutorial that allows me to display 3D. Without it, animations or decent velocity for a future version of MW is not satisfactory to me.

 

[Agent0ne]

Hi;

One thing I'd like to suggest,

Orbiter has great developpers,
Why not consider VRML ?

For example,
One could build a VRML "replica" of a Space Station (or a vessel, etc.),
and put it on so people could get into that "place" (Space Station) with VRML...

I think VRML ought to be considered seriously,
It is really easy, smooth and only requirers an Internet Browser Plug-in (Blaxxon),

There should be an Orbiter Forum/Site dedicated to VRML,
this 'd bring 3D interactivity in, instead of these flat 2D pages...

I strongly suggest the responsible people (Webmasters and others)
get a SERIOUS and ADVISED look into this great and awesome potential !

Agent0ne.

 

[Urwumpe]

Isn't VRML already dead, as it never got really accepted. And a replacement being defined this time with 3D accelerator companies supporting it?

EDIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X3D

Yes, I was right with my memory.

 

[Agent0ne]

Here;

http://3dvuc.blogspot.com/


One can see and have a precise idea about VRML...

Agent0ne

 

[Urwumpe]

Here;

http://3dvuc.blogspot.com/


One can see and have a precise idea about VRML...

Agent0ne

Not really. But I won't stop you from using VRML yourself. But I think, from the stuff you are proposing, that the precise description of the features of X3D is more suitable...

 

[ar81]

At http://esfa-board.blogspot.com/ they made a list of addons...
Luna-OB1 space station image I made for station remake, was used there and not credited... :huh:

 

[clatonium]

What in your opinion, was the hardest concept of space flight, when you where learning the physics behind it.

You know, I have been playing for a few months now and I still screw up orbit normal/anti-normal EVERY time I need to change my orbital inclination. You'd think I'd at least get it right 50% of the time but somehow...

 

[Biscuit]

Reentry has always been the hardest thing for me. I can take a DGIV from KSC to ISS, refuel, then to Luna wheel, refuel, land at Brighton, refuel, reverse course, enter LEO ... then fry that puppy to a crisp trying to get it down. *SIGH*

... haven't really done any serious interplanetary travels yet.

Now that I've started flying (or, trying to fly) the Space Shuttle Ultra for even more realism, the hardest thing I'm having trouble with is figuring out just how much deltaV I need to input into CRT so the flight computer can handle the OMS burns to alter apoapsis/periapsis to what I want. (I can do it manually just fine using Orbit MFD and eyeballing it ... but I really want to have CRT do it ... just like the professionals do.)

Tried to use the values from AutoBurn MFD, but they were way off ... but then, I haven't gotten all the way through it's manual yet.

Ah, well ... maybe one day I'll just figure out the maths and learn to 'pencil-n-paper' it for myself.

... haven't tried Equation MFD yet ... at work now, can't get to Orbit Hangar ... lousy proxy ...

 

[ar81]

Having problems with atmospheric entry?
[ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3428"]Tutorial: Concepts for atmospheric reentry[/ame]
I used to get fried often too.
By then I was making the first version of Space Orbinomics and it was really frustrating.
Now I can glide to the runway after deorbiting.