OFMM Mission Discussions

[garyw]

Looking over this thread it seems that there isn't too much dissent on the missions list I've posted so I'm thinking of moving things on to the missions assignment thread.

Any objections?

---------- Post added at 21:34 ---------- Previous post was at 21:31 ----------

Some more questions about XR2 to the Moon and back:

-How much fuel/isp should there be?
-How much oxygen (I'm guessing 14 days)?
-How many people?
-How long should the EVA last?
-Will this involve a booster/launch vehicle for the XR2, or necessary fuel payloads?

In order:
-As much as can be taken
- 14 days
- 6
- 2 hours 4 minutes
- Yes.

Aerobraking:
-What's the optimum perigee and AOA for the XR2 returning to Earth?
-Is it normal for the temps to be at yellow?
-Is it normal to have to aerobrake two times?

- 165km
- No.
- Yes.

 

[Pipcard]

- Yes.

Did you mean the booster, or the fuel payloads?

- 165 km

Do you mean 65 km, as that is kinda high for aerobraking. What should the AOA be?

 

[garyw]

Did you mean the booster, or the fuel payloads?

Booster.

Do you mean 65 km, as that is kinda high for aerobraking. What should the AOA be?

I did, good spot.

 

[Pipcard]

Booster.

Would Energia be a good one?

-As much as can be taken

I'm talking about the fuel isp levels:

1 = Realistic (ISS Only) [20914]
2 = Default (ISS and Moon) [25962]
3 = Medium (ISS and Moon w/reserve) [32981]
4 = Stock DG (Moon w/large reserve; this is the original stock DG setting) [40000]

What should it be?

 

[garyw]

Would Energia be a good one?

Yes.

I'm talking about the fuel isp levels:

1 = Realistic (ISS Only) [20914]
2 = Default (ISS and Moon) [25962]
3 = Medium (ISS and Moon w/reserve) [32981]
4 = Stock DG (Moon w/large reserve; this is the original stock DG setting) [40000]

What should it be?

3.

 

[Cras]

You can get to the moon and back on setting 1 [Realistic] with fuel tanks in the bay, a launch vehicle, and good piloting.

 

[Pipcard]

You can get to the moon and back on setting 1 [Realistic] with fuel tanks in the bay, a launch vehicle, and good piloting.

I might try setting 2 [Default] (w/ bay tanks and Energia), just to be safe.

Also, I found out that for oxygen:
14 days for 14 people = 32 days for 6 people
7 days for 14 people = 16 days for 6 people

 

[Cras]

It will give you some more wiggle room doing the descent. Your window until you have to do an abort will be much bigger.


Its just with LTMFD, your burns can be so precise and you can get over the base perfectly, that the only thing really in your control is the descent.

Give it some practice and see how much fuel is left in your tanks when you hit the atmosphere. Using aerocapture, you may need this setting. Flying a direct return to Earth, once you complete the TECC, you don't need a drop of fuel again for the rest of the trip home. And aerobrake, you best have some drops left in the tank, first obviously to raise the Perigee so you stop ramming into the atmosphere once the apogee is adequate, and you then need again to burn for a de-orbit, but you may need to burn to lower the apogee (with IMFD, you can circurlarize the orbit at any altitude and kill two birds with one burn).

My last few flights to the moon with XR2, I did in fact launch some fuel (not much, just enough for some wiggle room coming home) along with my UCGO boxes aboard a Jarvis-M.

I look forward to seeing your results on your XR-2/Energy trip to the Moon. I have found Energy does not work well with XR2 under D3D9 (the launch capability is boosted under the graphics client somehow, and it destroys the vehicle every launch), so I have not used it for XR2 ops in quite a while.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Looking over this thread it seems that there isn't too much dissent on the missions list I've posted so I'm thinking of moving things on to the missions assignment thread.

Any objections?

I thought the mission list looked pretty rational. So... No objections here.

 

[Pipcard]

Direct re-entry is too risky for me.

 

[Cras]

Direct re-entry is too risky for me.

I am with you. I prefer getting into LEO first myself. Safer that way, and since Orbiter_NG client in 2010p1 does not support runway lights, I have to land during the day in order to see the runway, the aerocapture procedure allowes me to pick and choose when and where to land.

 

[Chub777]

Looking over this thread it seems that there isn't too much dissent on the missions list I've posted so I'm thinking of moving things on to the missions assignment thread.

Any objections?

Place a probe to Mars to select landings sites between OFMM-3 and OFMM-4. Other than that, no.

 

[Pipcard]

About attaching the XR2 to the Energia:

I can get it aligned (correct orientation), but I don't know how far upwards or downwards you should place it to get a good center of mass.

 

[Cras]

My XR2/Energia settings:

Placement: x=0 y=5.32 z=-1.13
rotation 0 0 0
adapter nose=6.49 tail -9.13

Works very well with the in-line client. Destroys the vehicle with D3D9 (Energia autopilots goes all nuts and actaully shuts down under D3D9)

 

[Pipcard]

No need to worry, I don't use external graphics clients at all.

 

[Pablo49]

Quick question: Why are we discussing super fine details of only one specific mission? Spent a couple pages going over aerobrake lessons and such. I wouldn't worry too much about if you can fly a certain type of reentry, when you may not even be assigned that mission. Meanwhile Gary's question about if the plan is generally approved went basically ignored. (minus PhantomCruiser and Chub77. :thumbup As far as I know, the finer details of each mission will be discussed later, in their own thread. This jumping straight to details thing won't help now. (if anything it hurts by burying gary's relevant post.)

I am personally fine with the mission plan how it is, Gary.

 

[Pipcard]

Quick question: Why are we discussing super fine details of only one specific mission? Spent a couple pages going over aerobrake lessons and such. I wouldn't worry too much about if you can fly a certain type of reentry, when you may not even be assigned that mission. Meanwhile Gary's question about if the plan is generally approved went basically ignored. (minus PhantomCruiser and Chub77. :thumbup As far as I know, the finer details of each mission will be discussed later, in their own thread. This jumping straight to details thing won't help now. (if anything it hurts by burying gary's relevant post.)

I am personally fine with the mission plan how it is, Gary.

I have no objections to the mission plan, so I didn't need to post anything about it.

I want to know the details in advance so I can be prepared when it comes up. Besides, there's not much discussion going on about the generalities of the mission.

 

[Cras]

Well I volunteered to be involved in the mission planning, so getting into fine details excites me. And its always good to talk with fellow orbinauts and get to know how they do things, and its fun to share my methods and see how people think about their validity.

 

[Zatnikitelman]

I have no objections to the mission plan, so I didn't need to post anything about it.

So then why post off-topic stuff in the thread for it?

I want to know the details in advance so I can be prepared when it comes up. Besides, there's not much discussion going on about the generalities of the mission.

I don't know if you've noticed, but Gary won't let a mission fly unless everyone who needs to, knows all the details. The time for preparing individual missions is coming up, but until a program plan is finalized, talking about specific mission details is useless; what if the program plan changes? This whole expedition is not going to be something thrown together over a few days with all sorts of running ahead and people tripping over each other.

Well I volunteered to be involved in the mission planning, so getting into fine details excites me. And its always good to talk with fellow orbinauts and get to know how they do things, and its fun to share my methods and see how people think about their validity.

Sure it's good to talk, but having a collision of conversations with lots of topics all going on at once is helping no one. Asking for aerobraking advice in a program planning thread only adds to the confusion. As I said above, Gary won't let the mission fly without the right people knowing what's going to happen at each step. If you're one of those people, then you'll know what you're doing before it's time to implement it.

 

[Pipcard]

How is discussing a mission (even though it's the specific details) off-topic? Besides, I'm done talking about that mission.

It doesn't seem like the plan isn't going to change a whole lot, anyway.

There was no "collision of conversations" going on.

I hope that a flamewar doesn't start here.