Project XR2 Ravenstar - Mk II

[Cornflake]

It's already got two powerful engines and hover thrusters? What else could you ever want! (You can strap anything to a rocket with addons that are out there, no need to code a booster or anything to come with the XR2).

Still think the ground turning performance needs improved, however

*EDIT*

I don't know what the flying monkey meant in his post, but doesn't hover engines do what he so aptly described?

 

[astrosammy]

It really needs a better turning performence. Currently I'm using a shuttle tow vehicle with an attached URMS that grapples the XR-2 to get to the runway:

 

[Coolhand]

guys, i agree, but you'd be better off reporting this to doug as bug.


-----Post Added-----

I don't know what the flying monkey meant in his post, but doesn't hover engines do what he so aptly described?

I think he means jet engines to perform a horizontal takeoff and a more airliner type of powered landing. I can't see it happening unless the scrams were perhaps swapped out for a PD engine which could take it from the tarmac to hypersonic.

 

[dbeachy1]

It really needs a better turning performence. Currently I'm using a shuttle tow vehicle with an attached URMS that grapples the XR-2 to get to the runway:

Unfortunately it is pretty much impossible to make nosewheel steering as responsive as I'd like due to how it is handled by the Orbiter core (the SetSurfaceFrictionCoeff method). What you can do is simply fire the port or starboard engine (i.e., just one engine) while turning right or left, respectively; that will help turn the ship.

 

[Kozak]

A list composed after 5 hours of flighttime and thinking:

• SCRAM support in Airspeed autopilot
• Thrust vectoring (have done such a mod for DG.)
• More "loose" hover autopilot, allowing you to control the craft like a helicopter in small margins - maybe even via small hover thrust adjustments (same)
• Altitude hold autopilot mode. Maybe just vertical speed hold?..
• Full trimmer system ->
• ->corresponding ability for attitude autopilot
• Auto APU turn off if it has been started by AP and there was no input from pilot.
• Maybe thinking of ability to customize autopilots?..
• ...raising wing and G-Load by 20-30%.

(...and 20 more hours of free time...)
Not nesessary, but, I think, useful additions.

And... Maybe, additional braking surfaces? (like on MiG-23, for example; one more)

 

[Coolhand]

The split surfaces are being moved to the rudders (like the STS orbiter) so they'll have more area... i'm not adding anymore airbrakes. As for the vectoring, it does vector and the model allows for a moving nozzle but as yet that isn't coded... for the rest i'll leave to doug.

 

[dbeachy1]

Thanks for the feedback. Note, however, that some of the features you requested are already implemented in the current version:

More "loose" hover autopilot, allowing you to control the craft like a helicopter in small margins - maybe even via small hover thrust adjustments (same)

You can already make very small hover thrust adjustments (0.1 m/s increments) via the Descent Hold MDA screen or ALT-NUMPAD2/ALT-NUMPAD8 hotkeys (Descent Hold hotkeys are listed on page 24 of the flight manual). If you want to make precise manual hover thrust adjustments, use SHIFT-NUMPAD_INSERT/SHIFT-NUMPAD_DELETE. (Custom XR hotkeys are detailed on page 23 of the flight manual.)

Altitude hold autopilot mode. Maybe just vertical speed hold?..

Vertical speed hold is already implemented; it is called Descent Hold. Details on page 46 of the flight manual.

Full trimmer system ->
->corresponding ability for attitude autopilot

Do you mean you want to make finer adjustments than 5 degrees bank and 0.5 degree pitch? (Attitude Hold is detailed on page 41 of the flight manual.)

 

[the flying monkey]

I think it would be cool to be able to switch out the SCRAM engines for jet engines in the XR2RavenstarPrefs just to make it harder to get into orbit and so are we have to use the rocket engines to taxi around but I'm probably the only person who wants this.

 

[Kozak]

My guilt - it was 2:00AM in my timezone, so I had to be brief. And it made the exposition of my thoughts a bit confused. Let's go through it in details:

You can already make very small hover thrust adjustments (0.1 m/s increments) via the Descent Hold MDA screen or ALT-NUMPAD2/ALT-NUMPAD8 hotkeys (Descent Hold hotkeys are listed on page 24 of the flight manual). If you want to make precise manual hover thrust adjustments, use SHIFT-NUMPAD_INSERT/SHIFT-NUMPAD_DELETE. (Custom XR hotkeys are detailed on page 23 of the flight manual.)

Here I meant differential thrust adjustments linked to stick. So that you can, for example, tilt the ship backward 5-10 degrees while descending to kill horizontal velocity. RCS thrusters work well, but are too limited in some situations - and combination of them and thrust deflection (by whole airframe rotation) will be quite useful.
Also, it will add a lot to immersion.

Not to confuse anyone: I'm currently working as DCS beta-tester - the average manual size for this series (Lock On/LOFC/DCS) is ~300 pages, so documentation is not a problem

Vertical speed hold is already implemented; it is called Descent Hold. Details on page 46 of the flight manual.

Here I meant vertical speed hold in horizontal flight without hover usage. I've tried to do an own autopilot for altitude hold and also used the one of Aerobrake MFD - both suffered from one problem: serious instability in >2x time acceleration. Stabilizing only vertical speed without actually looking for altitude may do a part of trick.
And in addition - vertical speed autopilot can be used for automating the standart winged landing just like hover one currently is.

Do you mean you want to make finer adjustments than 5 degrees bank and 0.5 degree pitch? (Attitude Hold is detailed on page 41 of the flight manual.)

No, 5 degrees seems to be quite enough. Just maybe reducing the pitch resolution 2 times to 0.25... however, this wont add much.
I'm about another thing. In one of "test" flights I've managed to damage one of the wings - so the craft began to suffer a significant roll moment. In any combat sim I handle this problem (caused usually by battle damage) by trimming - and I think, given the overall XR modelling level, 3-channel trimmer will look "in place". And by giving the control of it to autopilot - you'll elimitate the need to use RCS in atmo flight (which looks a bit unrealistic) at all.
You've already disconnected some of the controls from Orbiter mechanics, so theoretically it should be possible.

It's all in order of proposals, indeed. You've already done an excellent work.

 

[wehaveaproblem]

It really needs a better turning performence.

What doug said, but also (based on XR5 experience) I found using one or other wheel break can help also. If you use the airspeed autopilot, your speed will remain constant regardless of one wheel breaking. Plus don't forget you have to go very slowly to get the best turn rate. I manouver the XR5 at about 3-4 m/s on turns.

 

[willy88]

I'd really like to see an advanced electrical system that requires some input from the pilot. Of course, this feature has probably already been requested a zillion times before.

 

[Coolhand]

Here's a wide angle shot of the new vc,sorry the render isn't better, the interior still uses the old texture so it doesn't fit the new geometry and i really should have illuminated the new overhead panels... I had some feedback about some overheads and with the new window layout its now practical. I'll have to re-arrange the instruments and displays - closer to the 2d layout that you'll all be familiar with - and i'll probably leave some room for future systems expansion

 

[willy88]

I don't remember you putting a skylight into it.

 

[Coolhand]

well... like i said its new... Moon roof, leather interior.

I'm wondering if its necessary to find a new position for the radiators, since they can't fit where they used to be, which though it looked pretty tidy was a little impractical as it would radiate heat back onto the ship... then thinking about it some more, the DG only has the radiator because there's no handy CBD's to use.. since this has a shuttle like cargo bay perhaps the radiator functions should be moved to those surfaces? or perhaps a separate radiator is useful where you might not want the cargobay open? Anyone have suggestions?

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

How about radiators in the wings - like an airbrake style radiator that opens out?

 

[yagni01]

well... like i said its new... Moon roof, leather interior.

I'm wondering if its necessary to find a new position for the radiators, since they can't fit where they used to be, which though it looked pretty tidy was a little impractical as it would radiate heat back onto the ship... then thinking about it some more, the DG only has the radiator because there's no handy CBD's to use.. since this has a shuttle like cargo bay perhaps the radiator functions should be moved to those surfaces? or perhaps a separate radiator is useful where you might not want the cargobay open? Anyone have suggestions?

Corinthian leather, I assume. . .

I like using top surface exposure ala PBD. For orbital maneuvering, there's no real shear forces that could occur in a mast-like structure as in the XR5. Or maybe a layered door where radiator was exposed using port-side hinge and cargo bay underneath exposed by stbd-side hinged door that radiators were attached to.

Radiator panels in the wings would have to extend forward 180deg to fully expose and you'd have to be concern airflow wrt hinges or air getting under the forward edge ripping them off, etc. I'd like to keep the visual appeal even with radiator extended as much as possible.

Just thinking out loud.

 

[dutchpirate]

well... like i said its new... Moon roof, leather interior.

I'm wondering if its necessary to find a new position for the radiators, since they can't fit where they used to be, which though it looked pretty tidy was a little impractical as it would radiate heat back onto the ship... then thinking about it some more, the DG only has the radiator because there's no handy CBD's to use.. since this has a shuttle like cargo bay perhaps the radiator functions should be moved to those surfaces? or perhaps a separate radiator is useful where you might not want the cargobay open? Anyone have suggestions?

I like keeping the bays closed unless I'm doing cargo operations. Better protection for the interior of the bay from radiation, micro meteors, etc. What if the hinge for the rad panels doors was switched to the bottom of the door? Perhaps if the rad panel was also attached to the door so that the door would open, then the panel would hinge near the top of the door and extend further beyond the hull? Please excuse the simple example

Rad Panel--->/
................../
..............\ /
Rad Door->\
................\
.................\__
..................Hull

 

[TSPenguin]

I would like to mention my previous idea (will find post later).
The radiators would sit near the rudders (two seperate ones) and open to the back. They could be relatively slim and there should be space for it. A folding mechanism of your choice could be implemented.

Only downside, I do not see how this can be made to look good. A cool hand might be able to pull it off

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

How about instead of having the radiators on the inside of the payload bay, having them on the outside? So the radiators open like the payload bay doors, however the actual doors stay closed.

Then, when payload bay doors are opened, as there will be no room for the radiators, maybe they could slide forward, so they are ahead of the bay doors?

 

[Scarecrow]

It would probably compromise the strength of the wings (a lot), but how about this? (rear view; top is with radiators closed, bottom is with radiators open) You could use only the wingtips if you wanted to, of course. Or you could do something similar to the vertical stabilizers.