Space Shuttle Ultra development thread

[SiameseCat]

No estimates possible yet. I think about making a new pack of beta modules for some time now, but I am not happy at all with the quality of my share of the code. :dry:

Maybe somebody else in the team has less objections about the state of the add-on and compiles a pack, but I think more time for fixing broken stuff and internally known bugs will be better for us.

I'd like to try to release a new version fairly soon. I think we've added enough new features to make a release worthwhile.

 

[Urwumpe]

I have added a 7MB PDF file (648 pages) generate by Doxygen from our source code to the Doc folder, together with the Doxygen input file. Still many classes and functions are undocumented, but I think class diagrams and call graphs will make it simpler for us to navigate in the source code.

I will continue fixing the holes in our documentation, so everybody here knows what the other is up to. I recommend other developers doing the same with their code.

 

[DaveS]

Got the following errors when trying to compile the latest sources(Rev. 233):

[SIZE=1]
[SIZE=2]1>c:orbiterultraorbitersdkspace shuttle ultradpsAP101S.h(50) : error C4430: missing type specifier - int assumed. Note: C++ does not support default-int[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]1>c:orbiterultraorbitersdkspace shuttle ultradpsAP101S.h(50) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ',' before '*'[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]1>c:orbiterultraorbitersdkspace shuttle ultradpsAP101S.h(51) : error C4430: missing type specifier - int assumed. Note: C++ does not support default-int[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]1>c:orbiterultraorbitersdkspace shuttle ultradpsAP101S.h(51) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ',' before '*'[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]

 

[Urwumpe]

Got the following errors when trying to compile the latest sources(Rev. 233):

Fixed, had just forgotten to not commit AP101S while it is not finished.

 

[Kyle]

I'd like to try to release a new version fairly soon. I think we've added enough new features to make a release worthwhile.

What things will it have?

 

[SiameseCat]

What things will it have?

Off the top of my head, we've resized the shuttle, updated the launch autopilot and RMS and improved the visuals (especially the VC) and fixed a few minor bugs. By the time we actually release it, we'll probably have the ODS simulated, as well as some other things.

 

[DaveS]

Off the top of my head, we've resized the shuttle, updated the launch autopilot and RMS and improved the visuals (especially the VC) and fixed a few minor bugs. By the time we actually release it, we'll probably have the ODS simulated, as well as some other things.

Yes and I hope that a prelim version of the payload system will be implemented by then.

 

[Usonian]

Off the top of my head, we've resized the shuttle....

In addition to the cargo bay being 3% oversized, I find that the entire Atlantis mesh is offset about 5 cm along the X axis (Orbiter's coordinate system). The docking port, docking port camera and cargo bay attachment point are all properly located on the Z axis, at X=0. But the keel line of the Atlantis mesh is located at X=0.05. This is true of Orbiter's stock Atlantis mesh and the SS Ultra.

This throws the aiming reticule off center in the docking camera view. It's kind of annoying when working up shuttle payloads - other vessel's docking ports and attachment points must be offset to make them align with the Atlantis mesh. (On the other hand, I suppose the stock ISS and MIR stations are also configured with off-center docking ports to align with Atlantis, so maybe SS Ultra is stuck with this situation.)

This screenshot is from the STS docking camera. Docked to the STS is my Skylab re-boost module which has an Apollo-style docking probe - this would not happen, IRL, but the Apollo-style docking probe, seen head on, illustrates the offset. This makes the STS docking reticule inaccurate and less usefull than it could be.

 

[Urwumpe]

Usonian: I am happy to tell you, that, according to Mesh Wizard and our camera settings, the ODS is perfectly lined up in the center in the current meshes.

 

[DaveS]

Usonian: I am happy to tell you, that, according to Mesh Wizard and our camera settings, the ODS is perfectly lined up in the center in the current meshes.

I think Usonian means that all the meshes are off by 5 cm in the Orbiter X-axis(left/right). Since we're currently not aware of the 5 cm discrepancy we're compensating for it unknowingly in the code.

So any thing that comes from the orbiter mesh, is bound to the same 5 cm discrepancy mis-alignment.

 

[Urwumpe]

I think Usonian means that all the meshes are off by 5 cm in the Orbiter X-axis(left/right). Since we're currently not aware of the 5 cm discrepancy we're compensating for it unknowingly in the code.

So any thing that comes from the orbiter mesh, is bound to the same 5 cm discrepancy mis-alignment.

According to mesh wizard, they are not - or no longer. We also don't have a 5cm offset in the CoG constants now.

 

[Donamy]

I think the ODS target wire can be bumped alittle to line it up properly. I think if it lines up with the docking hud center it should be ok. I'll look at it.

 

[Kyle]

Alright, any possible Estimate for release date?

 

[GLS]

Alright, any possible Estimate for release date?

Hopefully before the end of the world!




OK, now seriously: sometime in the next decade....

 

[Usonian]

I think Usonian means that all the meshes are off by 5 cm in the Orbiter X-axis(left/right). Since we're currently not aware of the 5 cm discrepancy we're compensating for it unknowingly in the code.

So any thing that comes from the orbiter mesh, is bound to the same 5 cm discrepancy mis-alignment.

Dave has got the point. When another vessel (with its own docking port properly configured to center on its own mesh) docks with Atlantis the two vessels will appear slightly misaligned. Because it is only 5 cm you often have to look closely at the vessels.

This condition is much more apparent when trying to fit a tight payload using Atlantis's attachment point. It seems that if the Ultra team is going to the effort to correct the 3% scale error in the stock Atlantis mesh you might want to consider correcting this other defect.

It's just a suggestion. Ultra is not my project. But I assume this is why you are doing your development on a public forum - so kill joys like me can point out stuff like this :dry:

 

[Donamy]

The new external ODS mesh's docking target is exactly 0,0,0 in AC3D. But I don't think it's been released yet.

 

[DaveS]

Checked in new RMS mesh with fixed elbow cam position. Meshgroup order intact.

Note: For launch and landing with payloads still in the bay, the camera is tilted up 90°s and panned 90°s. See included ICD drawing. View is aft looking forward.

 

[Donamy]

Panel L4 done

 

[DaveS]

Could anyone check the latest sources? I'm getting repeated CTDs when try to load any SSU scenarios.

 

[DaveS]

Could anyone check the latest sources? I'm getting repeated CTDs when try to load any SSU scenarios.

So has anyone checked out this yet? Orbiter.log doesn't have any clues to what's causing the CTD.