Project SpaceX SuperHeavy

Marijn

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
755
Reaction score
166
Points
43
Location
Amsterdam

Allrighty. In a single take: Launching two Tankers twelve seconds apart. Catching both boosters. Tanker_1 goes into an 200x220km orbit, Tanker_2 into 200x202km and therefore catches up. Then aligning Tanker_2 with a small anti-normal plane change at the ascending node shortly after both ships meco'd and an orbit sync manouver using RCS retro translation.

The default prograde, retrograde etc. ap's are a bit overshooty. I use killrot to help it a bit. At other times I time-compress over it knowing I'll be dumping fuel anyways later.

At redezvous, I used both ships default prograde AP's to maintain a predictable position. Then set up PursuitMFD to control position relative to the docking port, but not attitude (disabling HLD). After positioning, I rolled the ship over manually for the back to back docking and also controlled attitude manually with RCS rotation until final docking.

Then a fuel transfer, undocking, de-orbit, reentry and landing. No base alignment necessary. The reentry AP is able to correct for that.

Great work!
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Great vid - thanks! (y)
You got the docking looking pretty slick - a combination of manual attitude control and PursuitMFD for position (yes?).
Must try it.
I wonder why PursuitMFD wont handle the attitude (I thought it could).
Anyway, I enjoyed the vid. Cheers,
Brian
 

Marijn

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
755
Reaction score
166
Points
43
Location
Amsterdam
a combination of manual attitude control and PursuitMFD for position (yes?).
I wonder why PursuitMFD wont handle the attitude (I thought it could).

PursuitMFD can handle attitude. But the problem is, PursuitMFD will bring pitch, yaw and roll to 0. But that doesn't give the desired orientation. This is what happens then:
TwoTankersExternal.png

PursuitMFD is in docking relative mode and pitch, yaw and roll are zero'd. (Also, rZ=29.09 seems offset by 10 because pZ was set to 20.00)
TwoTankersMFDs.png

So to have the correct orientation, what I did was engaging the default Prograde autopilots of both ships shortly before docking so their attitude is almost fixed relative to each other:
TwoTankersExternal2.png

I did disable PursuitMFD's attitude control by clicking HLD after APD (no more display of HOLD in blue). According to PursuitMFD, yaw=-180 now.
TwoTankersMFDs2.png


Then roll the ship 180 degrees over manually to align the docking ports:
TwoTankersExternal3.png

From now on, attitude needs to be controlled manually. Pitch is -180 now and yaw is 0.
TwoTankersMFDs3.png

With the previous docking method, no such tricks were needed. Maybe the docking port is currently facing backwards or something like that?
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Hi,
yes, that's what PursuitMFD does for me too, if attitude control is enabled.
There shouldn't be a problem with docking port direction, given a correct definition of the port.
For back-to-back docking of two identical vessels, the docking port HAS to be pointing in the +Y axis.
I'll try some experiments to see if I can figure out whats going on - I feel PursuitMFD should be able to handle the docking.
Cheers,
Brian
 

Marijn

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
755
Reaction score
166
Points
43
Location
Amsterdam
Ok. I'll do some experiments as well. I think the XR5 presents the same situation. I'll check how PursuitMFD deals with that.
 

Marijn

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
755
Reaction score
166
Points
43
Location
Amsterdam
Using the XR5, PursuitMFD can do the docking. The Tanker is in Prograde orientation. The nose is pointing backwards as well compared to the first screenshot in the previous post. But unlike Tanker_2, the XR5 is pointing the top towards Tanker_1.
TwoTankersExternal5.png

TwoTankersMFDs5.png

Not sure what that could mean though. I'll try docking two XR5's later to see what happens then.
 

Marijn

Active member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
755
Reaction score
166
Points
43
Location
Amsterdam
Docking two XR5's in the same way results in this (the ship in the foreground is oriented prograde)
TwoTankersExternal6.png

Can you compare the port orientation of the Starship/Tanker with the one in the XR5?
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Hi,
well, I couldn't see the XR-5 dock parameters in the docs anywhere, so I just tried the simplest thing - reversing the dock rotation parameter from:
Code:
0 4.545 0   0 1 0   0 0 1
to:
Code:
0 4.545 0   0 1 0   0 0 -1
and it seems to work for PursuitMFD!
Attached patch zip has modules for starship, starship_2, tanker, tanker_2, with updated dock parameter.
Give it a try.
Cheers,
Brian
 

Attachments

  • spacex_starship_patch_220929.zip
    481.6 KB · Views: 31

Cosmic Penguin

Geek Penguin in GTO
News Reporter
Donator
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
3,672
Reaction score
2
Points
63
Location
Hong Kong
A question for Brian - I was trying to make a 2nd Starship launch pad at KSC LC-39A using your "double Starship launch" scenario, but the pad and Starship ended up at dangerous angles with respect to the ground like the Leaning Tower of Pisa. What did my scenario went wrong I wonder?

Starship_Pisa.png


Thanks! :cheers:
 

Attachments

  • Double Starship Launch with KSC 39A.scn
    3 KB · Views: 11

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Hi,
if you switch focus to BC_TOWER2, open up Scenario Editor, go to Location tab, click Apply - that should straighten it up for you.
Then you need to save the scenario and edit it to change the BC_TOWER2 Alt entry to 0.
See attached .scn file :)
 

Attachments

  • bc_tower2_corrected.scn
    3.1 KB · Views: 13

Pioneer

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Messages
507
Reaction score
272
Points
78
Location
Greater Detroit
Hi Brian,
Thank you very much for your work on this great addon! I've been trying to do an aerobraking at Mars, and it seems that whenever I utilize the included AoA and Bank autopilot, the Bank values seem to reset and the spacecraft wants to roll fully over once the AoA goes from either positive to negative, or the other way. My point of reference is the XR bank and attitude autopilot which doesn't exhibit these behaviors. This is causing me issues with properly completing my aerobraking maneuvers.
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Hi Brian,
Thank you very much for your work on this great addon! I've been trying to do an aerobraking at Mars, and it seems that whenever I utilize the included AoA and Bank autopilot, the Bank values seem to reset and the spacecraft wants to roll fully over once the AoA goes from either positive to negative, or the other way. My point of reference is the XR bank and attitude autopilot which doesn't exhibit these behaviors. This is causing me issues with properly completing my aerobraking maneuvers.
Hi,
I don't really understand the precise nature of the problem, could you explain what happens in more detail or post a scenario?

the Bank values seem to reset
It resets to 0?

the spacecraft wants to roll fully over once the AoA goes from either positive to negative
I'm not sure I ever considered that a negative AoA would be required! That might be the cause of any problem.

Anyway, I can't remember how I coded the AoA/Bank autopilot, so I'll have to have a dig around :)

Cheers,
Brian
 

Pioneer

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Messages
507
Reaction score
272
Points
78
Location
Greater Detroit
Hi,
I don't really understand the precise nature of the problem, could you explain what happens in more detail or post a scenario?


It resets to 0?


I'm not sure I ever considered that a negative AoA would be required! That might be the cause of any problem.

Anyway, I can't remember how I coded the AoA/Bank autopilot, so I'll have to have a dig around :)

Cheers,
Brian
Hello Brian,

Perhaps these images will help illustrate the problem:
Screenshot from 2023-09-17 23-01-12.png

Screenshot from 2023-09-17 23-00-25.png
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Hello Brian,

Perhaps these images will help illustrate the problem:
Hi,
I had a quick look at your images and my first thought is that it is the negative AoA that is causing a problem.
(negative AoA means airflow is impacting the upper surface of the spacecraft, not heatshield).
In the first image the commanded AoA is -2.4 and Bank 20.2 .....but the attitude looks like AoA +2.4 and Bank (180 + 20.2).

I'll have a look in the code, but in the meantime - can you avoid the problem by using only positive AoA command?

Cheers,
BrianJ
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
@Pioneer
Thanks for the heads-up.
It was a coding error.
The code intended to restrict the FBW-Reentry commands to +ive AoA was actually resetting the Bank to 0.
Now it works as intended, so the FBW_Reentry AoA is restricted from 0 to 90 (in fact its 0.1 to 90, to avoid nasty vector singularity at 0).
I did try to make -ive AoA available, but the autopilot doesn't behave well going from + to -.

New starship and tanker .dll modules are in the attached .zip pack below.
Best I could do - hope it works for you.
Cheers,
BrianJ
 

Attachments

  • spacex_starship_patch_230928.zip
    481.6 KB · Views: 28

sberinde

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
16
Reaction score
11
Points
3
Location
Romania
Trying to recreate IFT-3 and the upcoming IFT-4 tests. Am I missing something in the package except a landing location in the Indian ocean?
I noticed autopilot cannot handle suborbital flights, so I have to "take control" at some point. I didn't try it yet, still review some data.:)
 

Jeremyxxx

Active member
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
297
Reaction score
88
Points
43
Location
Dawson Springs
Trying to recreate IFT-3 and the upcoming IFT-4 tests. Am I missing something in the package except a landing location in the Indian ocean?
I noticed autopilot cannot handle suborbital flights, so I have to "take control" at some point. I didn't try it yet, still review some data.:)
Maybe a lack of the Pez dispenser?
 

BrianJ

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
924
Points
128
Location
Code 347
Trying to recreate IFT-3 and the upcoming IFT-4 tests. Am I missing something in the package except a landing location in the Indian ocean?
I noticed autopilot cannot handle suborbital flights, so I have to "take control" at some point. I didn't try it yet, still review some data.:)
Hi,
if you know the latitude/longitude of the splashdown area in the Indian Ocean, and you can figure out the correct launch azimuth/orbit inclination, you can use the same method I used for the first flight test - use the ascent autopilot until ~100km alt, then switch over to IMFD "Base Approach" (IIRC reentry parameters for Starship are ReA 1.5, Ant 45, Alt 120km )

@Jeremyxxx Sorry, no Pez dispenser yet.

Cheers,
Brian
 
Top