SSU Development Thread (3.0 to 4.0)

[GLS]

So, with 3.0 out the door hailprobe, it's time for a new development discussion thread.

From the roadmap thread, here's what should be on the list for the 4.0 version:
SSU Workbench (AKA Mission editor)
RealRCS (tm) implementation
Partition-based DPS implementation
IUS
Centaur

I'd like to add:
Full MPS state save (I'll probably start today)
OMS upgrade in tandem with the RCS (and maybe the OMS kit?)
SRB/ET/pad mesh upgrades so it all more or less fits together
VC talkback and light upgrades (progressive)
Use the new GPC capabilities to add the RMS and Payload Bay SM displays
Throw CRTMFD out of the window and also draw our own displays (given the amount of stuff already in the list, this might be dropped to 5.0 :shrug

 

[Urwumpe]

I agree, we really need to prioritize, unless we want to end up doing only half as much in twice the time.

See also the Roadmap thread for such planning.

I think I will keep on making snapshot releases during the development now, I am just not sure about the best frequency... maybe just every 100 commits instead of about every 30?

 

[N_Molson]

Congrats guys, you are doing very well ! :thumbup:

 

[GLS]

I agree, we really need to prioritize, unless we want to end up doing only half as much in twice the time.

See also the Roadmap thread for such planning.

I think I will keep on making snapshot releases during the development now, I am just not sure about the best frequency... maybe just every 100 commits instead of about every 30?

Don't you mean "...instead of about every 600"? :lol:
Yeah, 100 sounds about right.

 

[Urwumpe]

Don't you mean "...instead of about every 600"? :lol:
Yeah, 100 sounds about right.

Well, during the release work, my frequency was about once every 30 commits, that allowed a pretty good number of changes per nightly. :lol:

I think getting a reliable IMU implementation into the next release might also be important, sadly I only have data on the first generation IMUs.

 

[DaveS]

As far as intermediate releases goes, my opinion is that we should do them once we have something substantial implemented. This will allow us to expand the bug-hunting circle a bit and possibly find the subtle bugs and errors more quickly. They won't be around for so long and end up being integrated into the whole thing.

 

[Urwumpe]

As far as intermediate releases goes, my opinion is that we should do them once we have something substantial implemented. This will allow us to expand the bug-hunting circle a bit and possibly find the subtle bugs and errors more quickly. They won't be around for so long and end up being integrated into the whole thing.

Of course, but then, making the releases too rare is also not helpful. There has to be a healthy understanding of substantial.

 

[Donamy]

What about payload intergration ?

 

[Urwumpe]

What about payload intergration ?

What suggestions do you have for the payload story arc?

Planned are the upper stages right now.

 

[Donamy]

What ever makes it easier to deploy, retrieve and track certain payloads. LDEF,SPAS ect.

 

[DaveS]

What ever makes it easier to deploy, retrieve and track certain payloads. LDEF,SPAS ect.

The Rendezvous Radar (RR) will come once we get the Ku band system implemented. We were close a couple of years ago but what stopped us was that we didn't have the equations that the PASS uses to calculate the El/Az angles from the orbiter gimbal angles. But we do now.

 

[Urwumpe]

What ever makes it easier to deploy, retrieve and track certain payloads. LDEF,SPAS ect.

Well ... we are getting closer to specific requirements. :hmm:

Deployment: Hard to see any missing things. What can be improved?

Retrieve: Would it be easier if we would get some more GNC tools for rendezvous with a payload? The Ku-Band antenna is still WIP, also we have no laser rangefinder. But then, would it help you, if some AI buddy would for example tell you the distance to the current mission target? Maybe also hold station at the target while you work with the RMS?

Tracking payloads: Could a generic payload control center help there maybe for a start?

Or as alternative direction: What about improving EVA?

---------- Post added at 06:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:52 PM ----------

The Rendezvous Radar (RR) will come once we get the Ku band system implemented. We were close a couple of years ago but what stopped us was that we didn't have the equations that the PASS uses to calculate the El/Az angles from the orbiter gimbal angles. But we do now.

Exactly. Also it suffered a lot from my lack of time. Also, the inverse from El/Az to gimbal angles is also important.

And it is not done by PASS... the calculations had been self-contained inside the Ku Band Antenna system and was calculated by the microcontroller of the antenna.

What PASS SM handled had been the antenna masking for example.

 

[DaveS]

Exactly. Also it suffered a lot from my lack of time. Also, the inverse from El/Az to gimbal angles is also important.

We got both, just check the tech notes subfolder for a file named Shuttle_Ku_gimbal_equations.jpg.

And it is not done by PASS... the calculations had been self-contained inside the Ku Band Antenna system and was calculated by the microcontroller of the antenna.

What PASS SM handled had been the antenna masking for example.

Ah yes, I believe it was Ku system EA1 that handled this right?

 

[Urwumpe]

We got both, just check the tech notes subfolder for a file named Shuttle_Ku_gimbal_equations.jpg.

Yeah, I remember.

Ah yes, I believe it was Ku system EA1 that handled this right?

I think so, but it was some time ago. I remember that I have a tech report here about the micro-controller and parts of its software.

Not sure why they did this - possibly the design of the Ku-Band antenna had planned for much more autonomy than was really useful in the final spacecraft.

A lot of the Shuttle can really only be understood if you follow its theoretical design since 1971.

 

[DaveS]

I'd like to add:
SRB/ET/pad mesh upgrades so it all more or less fits together

Here's a break-down of the current status:

• RSS: Nearly complete save for a few additional pieces of equipment
• FSS: Only GOX Vent Arm and Intertank Access Arm support structure left
• MLP: Nearly done, just the TSMs and nice texture for the zero level left
• Concrete Hardstand: Structure complete, still need to add the various bits of equipment
• SRBs: Done, current SRBs are correctly scaled
• ET: Nearly done save for the aft hardware and the intertank

 

[GLS]

Here's a break-down of the current status:

• RSS: Nearly complete save for a few additional pieces of equipment
• FSS: Only GOX Vent Arm and Intertank Access Arm support structure left
• MLP: Nearly done, just the TSMs and nice texture for the zero level left
• Concrete Hardstand: Structure complete, still need to add the various bits of equipment
• SRBs: Done, current SRBs are correctly scaled
• ET: Nearly done save for the aft hardware and the intertank

Would it be too hard to have just a mesh that could cover all the "versions"? And we would then hide/show parts as needed, just like we do with the RBUS now but also with the top crane, the RBUS "base" and all other RSS and FSS parts that were added or changed through the years.

 

[Urwumpe]

Here's a break-down of the current status:

• FSS: Only GOX Vent Arm and Intertank Access Arm support structure left

I would like to suggest a few improvements there:

• More realistic OWP panel structure and geometry (Big visible difference to the original)
• Improved orbiter access arm with white room (Since you can see into the OAA from the CDR seat, during retraction)

 

[DaveS]

I would like to suggest a few improvements there:

• More realistic OWP panel structure and geometry (Big visible difference to the original)
• Improved orbiter access arm with white room (Since you can see into the OAA from the CDR seat, during retraction)

Everything will be made as close to the real things as possible, limited just be the reference data available.

 

[GLS]

Improved orbiter access arm with white room (Since you can see into the OAA from the CDR seat, during retraction)

Yeah, an "empty" white room would be nice instead of the "solid block" we have now. It's probably not worth the effort to have a detailed interior, but if looking into it we could see the doors, it would really be nice.

 

[asdad]

GLS : how about pre launch sound can you add to the LCC code ?