Meadville Space Center
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 27, 2020, 06:59:09 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
25068 Posts in 2094 Topics by 2267 Members
Latest Member: Apollo Next
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
1  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: November 21, 2016, 02:06:45 PM
Last month we talked about sponsoring the Zerlina 56 scans as a NASSP group. With 1735 pages and a price of "$3 plus $0.25/page" this results in $436.75. I am positive we are able to get this amount together with a few people here. I can't personally give much currently, but I want to advertise this again, so it's not forgotten.  Happy

I'll pledge $50 USA to this. I do want to see this code!
2  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 08, 2016, 07:27:17 PM
Well, the original Apollo 7 flight plan called for drifting flight with the computer in standby to check CMC/IMU restart capabilities. It would be worth adding just for feature completeness and emergency checklist ops.

Ahhh, I didn't know this. Did they actually perform it during the flight?

Agreed, it should definitely be in the checklists/working capability.
3  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 08, 2016, 06:57:52 PM
If anything correct TIME6 phasing will improve the RCS DAP of the LGC.

But what I was really getting at with asking for help, is that every day I work on Virtual ACG topics that are not important for Apollo 7+8, the 7.0 release happens one day later. I would really like to focus on getting the Checklist MFD files ready and fixing any exisiting bugs in MCC, RTCC or RTCC MFD. I would also like to see the standby mode being implemented, so I thought someone else could take over work on our Virtual AGC for now.

Are we thinking that the proper standby mode would be needed for Orbiter time acceleration? As the function wasn't used in real flights?

 
4  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 07, 2016, 11:31:54 PM
I am not sure there is much hope for more pad load documents right now, but I am sure Ron would know the right people to ask. I've been in a lot of contact recently with Ron, since he and @thewonderidiot helped us with some Virtual AGC bugs that prevented successfull lunar landings. I have also implemented in our version of the AGC engine whatever changes have been done to the Virtual AGC in the last few weeks. The most recent topic was standby mode (https://github.com/rburkey2005/virtualagc/pull/164), which I haven't implemented yet.

@kneecaps, your signature seems to indicate that you have worked on such things in the past. I am having a little bit of a hard time working out what changes have to be done to NASSP for the Virtual AGC standbye mode, so if you want to take a look at it, that would be great.

Good work on all fronts! Well with standby mode I concluded that it was essentially done as a hardware function of the AGC (specfically part of the power supply electronics). I'll see what changes have been made on yaAGC itself.

Edit: I've had a quick look and it does appear that the hardware elements to perform the standby are now provided as part of yaAGC. Also since some of the timing scalers were not phased correctly (as discussed here somewhere I recall), those corrections would likely improve the behaviour of timing sensitive flight code!
5  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 06, 2016, 10:23:43 PM
Regarding pad loads, I wonder if we might simply be able to make a request for such information. They must exist somewhere.

I mean, we have two LM Pad Load documents and parts of CMC pad loads in the Apollo 14-16 G&C Checklists. We also have the pad load mostly figured out for our three CMC versions. But at least one complete CMC pad load, preferably Apollo 8 or 9, would be very nice to confirm that what we have figured out ourselves over the years is correct. Especially the TVC parameters and maybe some flagword presettings.

Okay, I will reach out to Ron Burkey and Fabrizio Bernadini, i've not been in direct contact with either for several years but I'm sure the would be willing to make requests for the pad loads.
6  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 05, 2016, 07:23:22 PM
The simulations have some pages of setup information for the AGC, so it's possible that we might get the equivalent of a pad load out of them. Wink No promises, though. Either way, that Zerlina simulation is going to be our best bet at finding such numbers for it.

Regarding pad loads, I wonder if we might simply be able to make a request for such information. They must exist somewhere.

I'm so stoked by all these new docs, even the YUL source code and the fabled RETREAD.

So are we thinking the Zerlina software and sim?

7  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: DEVELOPERS, READ THIS FIRST: WORKING WITH GIT / HOW TO GET A GIT CHECKOUT on: October 04, 2016, 05:17:40 PM
I would suggest that even if you can commit to the master branch directly, that we never do that. Best practice in the industry is to do all work on a branch and then merge it via a pull request. This keeps things very clean and tidy.
8  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 04, 2016, 03:42:46 PM
Maybe we can arrange to split the tab between a few of us and sponsor one as a NASSP group?


Yup. More than willing to do that as long as we can split the cost enough so individually we don't bear too much.

Although I just looked at the list and it appears that the 'prime' choices have already been sponsored (which is good)...but Don Eyles ZERLINA 56 version is rather exciting. LUMINARY 131 rescan (although we wouldn't get anything we don't already have)...
9  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 04, 2016, 03:38:30 PM
Maybe we can arrange to split the tab between a few of us and sponsor one as a NASSP group?


Yup. More than willing to do that as long as we can split the cost enough so individually we don't bear too much.
10  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Virtual AGC on: October 04, 2016, 03:30:44 PM
Here the request for sponsoring one of the program listing scans I was talking about: https://rburkey2005.github.io/virtualagc/volunteer.html

So, if anyone has the money and desire to earn the eternal gratefulness of a handful of people, please become a sponsor!

:O

At around $300 a document, I'm amazed some kind of Historical Preservation type fund or grant doesn't back this. I would be willing to contribute a share of scanning some document(s). I can't spare an entire $300 just right now though, but 1/3 of that is doable.
11  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: What needs done? on: October 02, 2016, 04:27:54 PM
I have commited my big RTCC reorganization. Mostly the MFD, but also the RTCC calculations itself. So I expect new bugs to be mostly in the MFD, but of course it's possible that now something is broken with the MCC, too. Hopefully not. I have to do such a reorganization from time to time, because it has happened a few times before that too many new features were added and the code became a big mess. There is notihng really interesting for the end user in this commit, just stuff in the background.

Thanks for the work as always! I'll try the new builds.
12  Meadville Space Center / Off Topic / Re: Apollo 11 hardcopy re-print on: September 29, 2016, 05:32:20 AM
Interesting...looks like just a historical replica thing though?
13  Meadville Space Center / Off Topic / Re: Apollo 11 3D CM Model on: September 29, 2016, 04:00:55 AM
I was not aware of this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
14  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: What needs done? on: September 19, 2016, 04:05:00 PM
I found the problem with the LVDC scenario loading. The LVIMU parameters are loaded in the LVDC loading function after the LVDC parameters are loaded. So after the string "LVDC_END" it expects "LVIMU_BEGIN". What it actually currently reads there is the first line of the CMC padload, "CMPAD0110 1144". That is not the expected string, so it isn't loaded for the LVIMU. The scenario loading is then continued and because the Orbiter API function "oapiReadScenario_nextline" is always going to the next line in the scenario file, it has now skipped the line "CMPAD0110 1144". That's why EMDOT is not loaded and during a SPS maneuver the CSM mass isn't decreased. I'm going to fix this by simply adding the lines

Code:
LVIMU_BEGIN
LVIMU_END

to the LVDC launch scenario files. That way the LVDC loading has the expected structure, even if no parameters are loaded for the LVIMU. The more elegant solution would be loading the LVDC parameters like the AGC padloads, which don't use the normal save/load functions for the initial scenario loading. The LV Operational Trajectories even have the octal adresses in the LVDC memory for the parameters, which would be one way to do it. But for now the solution above works.

Ohhhh. Nice catch. Certainly explains the behavior!
15  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: OrbiterSim2016 on: September 06, 2016, 03:56:41 PM
Yep, sounds good. I'll continue testing on Oribter 2016 and not commit anything until build env and merge back it done.

To keep your work safe you should create an branch for yourself in Github and ensure your changes are committed back to that branch only. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!