Meadville Space Center
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 01, 2020, 11:01:16 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Project Apollo Beta 7.0 released!
25068 Posts in 2094 Topics by 2267 Members
Latest Member: Apollo Next
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18
31  Project Apollo - NASSP / Support & Bugs / Testing collision detection on: June 14, 2009, 12:10:34 PM
I wanted to test Artlav's latest collision module with NASSP, though my Orbiter crashes after initialization:

Finished initialising world
>>> ERROR: Missing texture: ProjectApollo/
>>>        [C:\Source\Orbiter\Texture.cpp / 781]

I am using the modules released 2009-03-22. Would I need modules compiled with the latest sources to solve this problem? Compiling is still somewhat way above my head. If AST_TEXT is a texture within a module a simple CVS update wouldn't cure the problem.
32  Project Apollo - NASSP / Support & Bugs / Re: apollo falling?!?!?! on: May 21, 2009, 03:08:32 PM
This could be related to MeshLand. Try it with the MeshLand module de-activated in the Orbiter launchpad modules tab.
33  Meadville Space Center / Off Topic / Re: concerning my brother on: May 21, 2009, 03:03:50 PM
Brian, thanks for letting us know.

This is devastating news. I just don't know what to say...

Your brother was a very active and contributing member here. He did a lot for Project Apollo and I believe you right away that he was a great guy, brother and father. I remember his post in the introduction thread here: just like it was yesterday. He was just 27 years old.
I hope so much that you and your family and Faith, Justin's daughter, get support in these tough times. I feel extremely sorry for you.

Justin will be sorely missed  *

34  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: LunarTransferMFD on: May 11, 2009, 10:50:31 AM
I see you found it, Jarmo! On a sidenote, the values given in the mission reports are exactly the numbers LazyD derived the scenario paramaters for the later AMSO "Lunar Module" scenarios.
35  Project Apollo - NASSP / Modeling / Re: LM Ascent Stage - new model - W.I.P. on: May 10, 2009, 04:34:16 PM

No updates available yet. Got dragged away from the project by MSFS.  Sorry
36  Project Apollo - NASSP / Modeling / Re: LM Ascent Stage - new model - W.I.P. on: March 18, 2009, 05:06:55 PM
Just a quick update:

Today is a great day for me, since I finally could resolve the frustrating polygon -> mesh conversion issues which ruined the look of my models once they were in Orbiter. The problem is gone! I am not yet sure, what exactly solved it, but it most probably had to do with multiple materials and doubled faces in Max, which haven't been obvious. This is fantastic, since now the model looks in Orbiter just the way it looks in Max. I can't tell you how happy I am now. I felt really bad, since my progress and contribution here was going so awfully slowly, but I was terribly frustrated of the mentioned issues. NOW, THAT IS HISTORY! Hail my new machine, errr I mean the mighty probe  Very Happy

Finally, the ascent stage mesh looks in Orbiter like I want it to:

Updates coming soon!

37  Project Apollo - NASSP / Modeling / Re: Apollo Spacecraft Components Meshing on: March 01, 2009, 07:42:35 PM
Whew... It looks like I was finally able to fix the errors which happened during the conversion from editable polygon to editable mesh on my new SPS engine bell model. I will add some more details and am going to map the textures on it within the next few days.

Regarding the LM ascent stage, I suspect I have to start from scratch again, it is awfully complicated to port it correctly from editable polygon to editable mesh. (Editable Polygon modeling is a very powerful modeling mode in Max, it gives you more freedom in altering the shapes than editable mesh mode)
The manual conversion of all wrong triangulation it just a nightmare. I'll do it as an editable mesh right from the start to the end. I have left over only one idea how the port-over could be managable, I'll try that.
38  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Apollo 8 vAGC test report on: March 01, 2009, 07:33:03 PM
Does anybody need new modules?


To get me fully back into our project again, I would like to have a newly compiled set of modules, please  Happy
39  Project Apollo - NASSP / Support & Bugs / Re: CTD with apollo 16 on: February 18, 2009, 07:22:07 AM
Also, as a french speaking person, does "broken scenarios" mean subdivided scenarios or not-working scenarios?

The latter. The Apollo 16 scenarios or basically all scenarios in the "broken scenarios" folder currently do not work with the latest beta, AFAIK.
40  Meadville Space Center / Off Topic / Re: Screen Shot? on: February 13, 2009, 04:56:03 PM

Free nice tool, works in Orbiter just as well!
41  Project Apollo - NASSP / Modeling / Re: Launch Vehicle (Visual) Enhancement - Saturn V and Saturn IB on: February 03, 2009, 05:14:45 PM
I was thinking about redoing the complete (texture) mapping of our whole Satun V stack model. This way, I could apply textures to all parts and surfaces which would, besides other advantages, also enable me to finally get the different textures for the various Apollo mission being shown AT ALL. I won't touch any of the models from the SLA panels and up, since Tschachim e.g. already textured the SLA panels very nicely.
Of course, I'll work with my own files on my HD, and when I'm happy with it, Tschachim or anyone can check them if they agree for submission. Does that sound like a plan? If yes, I would start with that not too long from now.
42  Project Apollo - NASSP / Modeling / Re: Suggestion: new CSM model/textures on: February 03, 2009, 04:54:35 PM
...but the SM textures, especially the engine bell, are due for an update.

Alrighty, I will finish up my new engine bell model till this weekend. Sorry folks, I got some sort of modeling burn-out, after I wasn't able to find the exact causes of my new LM ascent stage mesh being so screwed after conversion to *.msh format. I am investigating in this again.

On another note, my switch to my all new system is completed. I am a very happy camper now. With my old rig, I had really low FPS during NASSP launch scenarios (down to 3 FPS), especially when using VAGC mode. Now, it is well above 120 FPS in the same scenario! Yeehaa! NASSP is fun again for me Happy
43  Project Apollo - NASSP / Project Apollo - NASSP Development / Re: Apollo 8 Flightplan printable on: November 15, 2008, 08:54:10 AM
Agreed: Very nicely done, juhowee! I think this should finally push me to fly this mission 50 years later, this December.  Happy
44  Project Apollo - NASSP / Programming / Re: LM status... on: October 17, 2008, 05:53:39 PM
Hey Moonwalker!

First, I think your 2D panels are a truly awesome, and I would not be happy to see them vanish from NASSP. I agree with you though, a switch to use more 3D cockpits in the long run is the way to go. If we would do so, your gorgeous bitmaps should be used as textures in the VC's, and that is what you are thinking of as well, I assume. We've also talked about this briefly in my LM ascent stage thread, I think.

My only question about that step, or concern is: Which of both variants affects performance less, the current 2D panel structure or a full 3D VC? I'm asking this thinking of all NASSP users with low end machines...of which btw I have no clue how many we have.

Now that summer is over and my brief escapade with Celestia and FS9 is over, I'm going to update you folks soon on the LM ascent stage progress. Sorry for my absence here in the last months.  Embarassed
45  Project Apollo - NASSP / Support & Bugs / Re: Station Keeping on: October 05, 2008, 04:31:20 AM
Does that mean to actually dock with the SVB or just stay in close proximity?

AFAIK, the latter. Just like in formation flight, keeping the same (close) position to another aircraft during flight is also called station keeping.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 18
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!