Help with NASSP versions

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
also , when I get pads, the checklist tells me to copy them. Other than writing them down is there anything I should be doing with either the Apollo MFD or the RTCMFD ? I might be making some rookie errors :)

i've just had the collection (40) of abort pads @ 11h55m how do i pull them in or where should i find them in the MFDs?
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
time for bed
1611108042034.png
 

n72.75

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
2,346
Reaction score
914
Points
128
Location
Biddeford ME
Website
mwhume.space
Preferred Pronouns
he/him
I think there is something wrong on my setup as when I look around the RTC MFD, 11 hours into Apollo 11 (with MCC selected -2h before launch), i'm missing pads, TV screens are empty and it looks like it's not retaining info thats been pumped into it. Also it says telemetary is disabled, not sure what that refers to and my mission master table was disabled and empty. Nothing I click on in the RTC MFD looks filled out and i've had all the uploads work and PADs that have been sent to me since launch. My MCC-1 burn was scrubbed and I checked using LunarTransferMFD my solution was good for a 50km approach to the moon.

You won't see anything in RTCC MFD. Right now, what's going on in the MFD and what's going on in the MCC are separate. This may be different in a future version.

How would I check 1) what version of RTC/MCC i'm running and 2) What should I look to in RTC to see if "indy, I think we have a problem" :)

If you have the lasted build, it came with the latest copy of the MFD, they get built and packaged together.

You really don't need to use RTCC MFD, and flying missions with just the MCC PADs and following the flight-plans and checklists is probably the typical user case.

RTCC MFD is there because simulation is about "what if". So don't be afraid to use it, but it's not a necessity to use it, and somewhat less applicable in the MCC scenarios.
 

n72.75

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
2,346
Reaction score
914
Points
128
Location
Biddeford ME
Website
mwhume.space
Preferred Pronouns
he/him
also , when I get pads, the checklist tells me to copy them. Other than writing them down is there anything I should be doing with either the Apollo MFD or the RTCMFD ? I might be making some rookie errors :)

i've just had the collection (40) of abort pads @ 11h55m how do i pull them in or where should i find them in the MFDs?

By copy, it means "write them on the paper PAD form".

Here's an example of a TLI pad form from Apollo 11

a11-loc-l2-15.jpg



Page 40 onward has the forms for Apollo 11, if you want to print them out: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/a11final-fltpln.pdf

I usually just take a picture of it with my phone.
 

indy91

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
474
Points
98
Yeah the goal with the MCC is to automate what you would manually do with the RTCC MFD, so that you can focus on playing astronaut instead of also playing flight controller. So using the MCC scenarios should make using the RTCC MFD unnecessary. But being flight contoller can be fun and there is no MCC support for Apollo 12 to 17 yet, so the RTCC MFD is there to support those missions and the non-MCC launch scenarios for Apollo 7-11, if you choose to use those.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
By copy, it means "write them on the paper PAD form".

Here's an example of a TLI pad form from Apollo 11

a11-loc-l2-15.jpg



Page 40 onward has the forms for Apollo 11, if you want to print them out: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/a11final-fltpln.pdf

I usually just take a picture of it with my phone.
ah got it
writing programs in fortran 44 code on forms like this and sending them to the uni in my last year at school for compilation
i've just printed that out thank you it's marvelous

Is there an error in the numbers there, the SEP and EXT pitch should be R2(P)-180 not -80. I got these same incorrect numbers from the TLI burn in Apollo 11

I got this 180- from a couple of posts from Indy.

Indy, a we're a bit blurry here and cant read our own writing can you check us please.
 
Last edited:

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
You won't see anything in RTCC MFD. Right now, what's going on in the MFD and what's going on in the MCC are separate. This may be different in a future version.



If you have the lasted build, it came with the latest copy of the MFD, they get built and packaged together.

You really don't need to use RTCC MFD, and flying missions with just the MCC PADs and following the flight-plans and checklists is probably the typical user case.

RTCC MFD is there because simulation is about "what if". So don't be afraid to use it, but it's not a necessity to use it, and somewhat less applicable in the MCC scenarios.
me being thick i thought so thanks understood now. Finished reading the latest manual for RTC good bit of maths in there some very cool features.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
Yeah the goal with the MCC is to automate what you would manually do with the RTCC MFD, so that you can focus on playing astronaut instead of also playing flight controller. So using the MCC scenarios should make using the RTCC MFD unnecessary. But being flight contoller can be fun and there is no MCC support for Apollo 12 to 17 yet, so the RTCC MFD is there to support those missions and the non-MCC launch scenarios for Apollo 7-11, if you choose to use those.
Ahhh yes sorry it was me not fully understanding the goals of each.
On the subject of cislunar horizon/star mapping ...... how important are these as the first batch I did took me a whole evening to get right with low errors under the reject threshold ?
Are there a couple of hints you have about doing these in the sim.
It feels like trying to spin 3 plates at once whilst playing darts standing on a turntable.
I watched a video by someone on this forum who seems to have good results from not getting it very close by hitting the reject button twice cant get my head around this. I can do the std alignment but the cis is a bugger.
 

indy91

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
474
Points
98
Is there an error in the numbers there, the SEP and EXT pitch should be R2(P)-180 not -80. I got these same incorrect numbers from the TLI burn in Apollo 11

Yes it's plus or minus 180°. 107° sep pitch gives 287° extraction pitch, just as the PAD says. I'm not seeing any -80...

On the subject of cislunar horizon/star mapping ...... how important are these as the first batch I did took me a whole evening to get right with low errors under the reject threshold ?
Are there a couple of hints you have about doing these in the sim.
It feels like trying to spin 3 plates at once whilst playing darts standing on a turntable.
I watched a video by someone on this forum who seems to have good results from not getting it very close by hitting the reject button twice cant get my head around this. I can do the std alignment but the cis is a bugger.

P23 is about the only thing we haven't fully figured out yet. One problem with star/horizon marks is the shape of the Earth. The Earth in Orbiter is spherical, while the AGC does calculations assuming an ellipsoid Earth. So that already can throw off the results. No Apollo mission really relied on any P23s, it was just practice for the case of lost communications with the ground. So I would say it's not very important that you are getting good results from them.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
understood re:p23 i will just PRO the next batch
The figures I got on Apollo 11 TLI pad I must have written down incorrectly ! I had a drink or 2 at the time sorry. I just checked back to one of my old screenshots.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
Another quick question if I may over mid course correction resolution. For the first part of my lunar coast had a stable [email protected] of 39k (using lunary xfer MFD to monitor). MCC-1 was scrubbed all good. During the last time rate increase it appears this had dropped to -39k. I expected MCC-2 to correct that but this was also scrubbed. It's prob a small dv so my question is will this be picked up when closer to the moon? Here is my current soln ignore the GET actual GET is ~26h in.
thanks.
1611239448149.png
 

indy91

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
474
Points
98
So you are flying Apollo 11 and MCC-2 was scrubbed? I find that very surprising, that almost never happens. For most Apollo missions MCC-2 and MCC-4 were preferred maneuver points. So MCC-1 and 3 would only be done if the Delta V is quite large. That's why MCC-1 usually gets scrubbed. Can you maybe share a scenario from before MCC-2, so before the MCC told you that the maneuver was scrubbed? Maybe there is a bug...

The code to decide if MCC-2 has to be done basically does this. It tries a midcourse maneuver at the time of MCC-3 and if that burn would exceed 25 ft/s then MCC-2 will have to be done. Normally MCC-2 is already nearly 20 ft/s and just increases if you have the time of ignition at a later point. But maybe you do have an outlier case and MCC-3 will be just below 25 ft/s. So it's possible that this is normal. But in any case I will revisit the 25 ft/s number, maybe that is not correct and should be lower.
 
Last edited:

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
mmmm the plot thickens.
a few hours ago I got a P30 pad for GETI:71:5:31 for a lunar slingshot (i'm guessing free return) for 29.4DV

This is what happened
TLI Burn - PeA +39km
MCC-1 Scrubbed (correct call)
Following some accelerated time my PeA jumped to -38km, maybe i over accelerted it I have now restricted to 50 and enabled multi-threading (I have a 5960X)
MCC-2 Scrubbed (wrong call maybe @ 4. sec burn just not large enough?)
P30 a few hours later for Slingshot showing PROGRADE 29.4 DV (4 seconds) R258 P186 Y017
MCC-3 schedules new SPS P30 DVC12.7 @ 54:5:32

I will work through this tomorrow but I have a question . I see from the tasks ahead for he P30 I need to make a call on P40/P41 this made me read about that.
a) I hadn't appreciated that there are different burns could you explain that in a sentence please
b) I also hadnt nulled out any small DV left over from main engine burns with RCS I fear now that was stoopid
c) simply put what should I be working through
i) Main engine burn only
ii) Main engine burn plus translational
iii) i, ii and whatever the P40/41 needs to be i.e. should i PRO or FAIL that step

Sorry I thought I understood this but clearly there's a few "the devil is in the detail". A few of the vids I watched on youtube either have zero audo explaining or have someone grunting so badly you really cant make out what they are saying :)

I've caused this issue for sure and I want to make sure i grease my way out of it. Sorry for being a burk ! Current zip file attached the forum doesnt seem to like .scn files :(
1611272532635.png
 

Attachments

  • (Current state) 0002.zip
    46.1 KB · Views: 98
Last edited:

Thespacer

Active member
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
106
Reaction score
44
Points
43
I will work through this tomorrow but I have a question . I see from the tasks ahead for he P30 I need to make a call on P40/P41 this made me read about that.
a) I hadn't appreciated that there are different burns could you explain that in a sentence please
b) I also hadnt nulled out any small DV left over from main engine burns with RCS I fear now that was stoopid
c) simply put what should I be working through
i) Main engine burn only
ii) Main engine burn plus translational
iii) i, ii and whatever the P40/41 needs to be i.e. should i PRO or FAIL that step
I am no Indy but I think I can partly address these:
a) You do not have to make a call on whether P40 (SPS burn) or P41 (RCS burn) is used. MCC, in both real life and NASSP, tells you what it will be when they give you the P30 PAD. It generally depends, I think, on the magnitude of DV required (although if I recall, in real life, MCC directed P40/SPS burns for the early burns in one or missions, even if they were very short, so they could get data on how the SPS was performing and to calibrate data for future burns). From your P30 PAD screenshot, you can see from the 3rd line it says “SPS” - therefore when it comes to actually going through the checklist before the TiG you will have the choice of P40 or P41, and you will PRO on P40 (and Fail P41 if it comes to that). And vice versa if the P30 is an “RCS” burn. There are only so many burns in a typical mission and you will soon get a feel for which is which (eg for Apollo 11 LOI will always be P40; the Sep burn after undocking will always be P41 etc).

b) If the primary burn was accurate, with some residuals, I don’t think failure to trim will be a major problem. The flight plan generally indicates if you should trim or not. I think trimming will provide better results in terms of more accurate timings compared to real life, but that is speculation, and we’re probably only talking minutes of different by the time you get to the moon.

c) see (a) above, the decision has been made for you! In this case it is SPS P40 (“PRO” on that step).

hope that helps
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
I am no Indy but I think I can partly address these:
a) You do not have to make a call on whether P40 (SPS burn) or P41 (RCS burn) is used. MCC, in both real life and NASSP, tells you what it will be when they give you the P30 PAD. It generally depends, I think, on the magnitude of DV required (although if I recall, in real life, MCC directed P40/SPS burns for the early burns in one or missions, even if they were very short, so they could get data on how the SPS was performing and to calibrate data for future burns). From your P30 PAD screenshot, you can see from the 3rd line it says “SPS” - therefore when it comes to actually going through the checklist before the TiG you will have the choice of P40 or P41, and you will PRO on P40 (and Fail P41 if it comes to that). And vice versa if the P30 is an “RCS” burn. There are only so many burns in a typical mission and you will soon get a feel for which is which (eg for Apollo 11 LOI will always be P40; the Sep burn after undocking will always be P41 etc).

b) If the primary burn was accurate, with some residuals, I don’t think failure to trim will be a major problem. The flight plan generally indicates if you should trim or not. I think trimming will provide better results in terms of more accurate timings compared to real life, but that is speculation, and we’re probably only talking minutes of different by the time you get to the moon.

c) see (a) above, the decision has been made for you! In this case it is SPS P40 (“PRO” on that step).

hope that helps
Great intro, manage expectations down (no need) and then knock it out the park. I understand and thanks , very well explained. I would say you're a 4 star indy. The EMS is still a bit of a mystery i need to do more reading or watching silent "instructional" videos !

If I were to say twitchy Fuel Cell number 3 (O2 usage and pressure) is that a bug or have i broken something. It's never faulted, but when comparing to 1 and 2 its not stable and it trembles. Am I about to be blown to pieces at any moment ? Does it simulate degradation of the plates/buffer etc. I may shut it down ......

Right MCC-3 for me tomorrow followed by entering the freezing cold LM. I will open my window here to simulate the cold as it's -1C outside.

thanks again for the help .
 

n72.75

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Donator
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
2,346
Reaction score
914
Points
128
Location
Biddeford ME
Website
mwhume.space
Preferred Pronouns
he/him
If I were to say twitchy Fuel Cell number 3 (O2 usage and pressure) is that a bug or have i broken something. It's never faulted, but when comparing to 1 and 2 its not stable and it trembles. Am I about to be blown to pieces at any moment ? Does it simulate degradation of the plates/buffer etc. I may shut it down ......


If you're seeing the needles jump occasionally on the reactant flow rates, it's because of current draw from the RCS solenoids. In real life you wouldn't see this behavior, because the flow rate is measuring the flow of gas through a physical flow-meter and pressure regulator into the reactant chamber; what's shown on the gauge at the moment is the actual "usage" or diffusion of H2 and O2 which changes with current draw transients (probably not this fast, but fast).

I wouldn't worry too much about them right now. as long as you do the purges when the checklist asks you to and you don't get any master alarms or C/W lights, you're good.

I have an update to the fuel cells that is still probably a month or so away. When that gets released you can worry about them a bit more (ideally you'll then be able to worry about a appropriately realistic amount more). Don't worry about them for now, unless an alarm squawks at you though.
 

indy91

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,169
Reaction score
474
Points
98
Ah so the MCC-3 (without doing any MCC-1 or 2) does have a rather small DV, at least below the 25 ft/s threshold I was talking about. So I think the MCC is working correctly, at least how it is currently programmed. Not sure I've tested the situation much where MCC-1 and 2 are both getting scrubbed, so I hope it works out!

Regarding your perilune altitude, there is a maneuver after TLI you probably did, the evasive maneuver not long after getting away from the S-IVB. That probably altered your trajectory. The TLI is normally targeted for free return, but as there is that evasive maneuver TLI gets slightly biased to account for it. But still, as I heard the Apollo 11 FIDO say on the MOCR audio loops, you are not going to be exactly free return even in ideal circumstances.

And yeah, as Thespacer said, if it says "SPS/G&N" at the top of the Maneuver PAD you should be using P40 for the burn, P41 for "RCS/G&N". The Checklist MFD doesn't know what the burn is going to use, so it has both options.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
If you're seeing the needles jump occasionally on the reactant flow rates, it's because of current draw from the RCS solenoids. In real life you wouldn't see this behavior, because the flow rate is measuring the flow of gas through a physical flow-meter and pressure regulator into the reactant chamber; what's shown on the gauge at the moment is the actual "usage" or diffusion of H2 and O2 which changes with current draw transients (probably not this fast, but fast).

I wouldn't worry too much about them right now. as long as you do the purges when the checklist asks you to and you don't get any master alarms or C/W lights, you're good.

I have an update to the fuel cells that is still probably a month or so away. When that gets released you can worry about them a bit more (ideally you'll then be able to worry about a appropriately realistic amount more). Don't worry about them for now, unless an alarm squawks at you though.
brilliant thanks; and yes I saw your model with the charts for implementing flow in another thread. Very detailed. I have some tank stirs coming up but hey i'm on 11 not 13. Cryo slushie anyone!
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
Ah so the MCC-3 (without doing any MCC-1 or 2) does have a rather small DV, at least below the 25 ft/s threshold I was talking about. So I think the MCC is working correctly, at least how it is currently programmed. Not sure I've tested the situation much where MCC-1 and 2 are both getting scrubbed, so I hope it works out!

Regarding your perilune altitude, there is a maneuver after TLI you probably did, the evasive maneuver not long after getting away from the S-IVB. That probably altered your trajectory. The TLI is normally targeted for free return, but as there is that evasive maneuver TLI gets slightly biased to account for it. But still, as I heard the Apollo 11 FIDO say on the MOCR audio loops, you are not going to be exactly free return even in ideal circumstances.

And yeah, as Thespacer said, if it says "SPS/G&N" at the top of the Maneuver PAD you should be using P40 for the burn, P41 for "RCS/G&N". The Checklist MFD doesn't know what the burn is going to use, so it has both options.
yes had that and forgot. It also flew the main booster away using Lox release.
 

sw34669

Active member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
31
Points
28
Location
uk
The numbers on a pad that relate to pitch and yaw trim get fed to N48. Is there anything else I need to do post SPS burn to trim with thrusters other than nulling out any small dv on the EMS.
 
Top