Meadville Space Center
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 20, 2013, 07:22:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the new Meadville Space Center forums!
20010 Posts in 1929 Topics by 2250 Members
Latest Member: mikegk
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Meadville Space Center
|-+  Project Apollo - NASSP
| |-+  Project Apollo - NASSP Development (Moderators: movieman, Tschachim, Swatch, lassombra)
| | |-+  Orbiter 2010
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print
Author Topic: Orbiter 2010  (Read 8973 times)
vrouleau
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #30 on: September 07, 2010, 10:10:19 AM »

I was meaning to execute the launch until transposition&docking to test out the latest LunarTranferMFD on Orbiter2010 prior to the next module build but never got around to it. Now, I'm just in LEO with stack without LVLH hold. I say that you were close to producing it so I just commited that code that was there for 3 weeks...  I'll still try to continue testing P51&P52 +TLI and report back.
Logged
meik84
Project Team Member
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 299



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 10, 2010, 08:43:13 AM »

Quote
I tested the Apollo 8 VAGC scenario and arrived in a kinda "not too bad" orbit, so I hope so...
The orbit itself seems quite ok, but the way we're reaching it is bad. SECO occurs at 0:12:03 GET -38 sec to late. But we will need those 38 sec burn time for TLI.
Logged
Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 3687


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2010, 07:09:35 AM »

The orbit itself seems quite ok, but the way we're reaching it is bad. SECO occurs at 0:12:03 GET -38 sec to late. But we will need those 38 sec burn time for TLI.

OK, I understand. The problem is that the Saturn is flying a suboptimal, historically incorrect ascent trajectory. Bad news is that I don't have the time to fix that now, good news is that you can do something by yourself: Save an Apollo 8 scenario shortly before liftoff and look for the staging times / stage propellant masses / stage dry masses settings like SICSHUT, SISHUT, SIEMPTYMASS etc. explained here: http://nassp.sf.net/wiki/Scenario_File_Options#General_options. By tweaking these settings (especially dry masses  Happy) you should be able to save enough fuel for TLI. Then you can copy/paste all changed settings to the launch scenario (and post them here so we can put them in CVS as a fix for now).

Cheers
Tschachim
Logged

vrouleau
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #33 on: September 11, 2010, 09:23:47 PM »

FYI, Apollo11 PostTLI using LunarTransferMFD. Burn was right on... Had enough full. Man the new high res earth is amazing.


* postTLI.jpg (350.71 KB, 1920x1200 - viewed 90 times.)
Logged
meik84
Project Team Member
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 299



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 12, 2010, 04:51:23 PM »

Quote
and post them here so we can put them in CVS as a fix for now
Not a problem. Wink
He're some times first:
SICSHUT 126.000000000000
SISHUT 154.000000000000
SIICSHUT 1000.000000000000
SIIPUT 443.450012207031
SIISHUT 524.000000000000
ISTGJT 184.000000000000
LESJT 189.000000000000
IGMST 204.100000000000

And here some masses:
SIFUELMASS 2035312.6632
SIIFUELMASS 429324.828
S4FUELMASS 101733.8817
SIEMPTYMASS 138390.9192
SIIEMPTYMASS 40097.5328
S4EMPTYMASS 17243.2999

And some other things:
ATTACHSTATE 59 (deletes the docking probe)
LMDSCFUEL 9026.4808
LMASCFUEL 0 (dummy weight for the LTA)
TOAPO 191.3
TOPER 181.5 (original Apoapsis and Periapsis)

With this, SECO occurs at 0:11:32, just 7 sec late -I think we can live with that. Wink
Interestingly, the times and masses are 100% the historical ones, I just converted lbs to kg and GET to sec. Cool, huh? Cool
I'm going to see if we got enough fuel for TLI now -but I strongly believe so.
Oh, before I forget it: the scenario should start earlier, there's no time for the back-up crew pre-checks.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 05:42:39 PM by meik84 » Logged
vrouleau
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #35 on: September 12, 2010, 06:48:47 PM »

Updated the scenario with your date, plus repositioned the ML and rocket of the pad. At night ,it's hard to see the fix point on the ground.Also set the time to T-4:00.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 06:52:08 PM by vrouleau » Logged
Rex
Full Member
***
Posts: 14


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2010, 12:22:58 PM »

negative exhistance of LEB - Panels 100, 101, 120, 121, 122, 140, 163 and scanning telescope and sextant veiws in Virtual Cockpit
confirmed on apollo 7 and 8
*note* i am running 2010 p1 with current nassp build

Rex
Logged
Moonwalker
Project Team Member
Hero Member
****
Posts: 767


Panel Graphics Designer


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #37 on: September 16, 2010, 09:38:52 AM »

As you see, the 'E' has a different (call it darker or whatever) color than the other characters.

I'm impressed. Even a hair-splitter like me didn't notice the different "E" ROTFL

Being back to work on nassp (and basically completing the LM panels stuff), I will fix the "E" Very Happy

Sorry for the late reply btw.
Logged

meik84
Project Team Member
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 299



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: September 17, 2010, 11:55:13 AM »

Quote
I'm going to see if we got enough fuel for TLI now -but I strongly believe so.
Just checked it -we have. But it's really on the razors edge -I believe there was fuel left for no more then 3-5 sec burntime. As we talk about it: what's the source for the flight data in the xls-flight plans?
And we really need that orbital rate for the SIVB - I tried to do a P52 when the original flight plan called for it, but the optics faced earth as the booster held its stellar inertial attitude. Sad
Logged
Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 3687


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: September 19, 2010, 09:31:56 AM »

Updated the scenario with your date, plus repositioned the ML and rocket of the pad. At night ,it's hard to see the fix point on the ground.Also set the time to T-4:00.

Yeah, one need to do that in daylight and by enabling the code in ML/Saturn/MSS::clbkConsumeDirectKey to move the vessels around with key presses. I improved that a little bit more, I hope you don't mind.

Cheers
Tschachim
Logged

vrouleau
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2010, 08:40:51 AM »

Sure no problem. I guess I don't have that touch for graphical things Wink 

Question: Reviewing execution of procedures for transposition&docking word checklist. Instead of using the Scenario to null the rates of the SIVB, couldn't we call

ui.HoldAttidude()  in Saturn::StageOrbitSIVB after "if (CSMLVPyros.Blown()..." when ApolloNo>7 ?

If feels like a hack to null rates manually in the simulation where it could be done automatically in the code. I assume here that after pre-separation orientation was done, Mission control was keeping the SIVB attitude constant?

I would like to add that code...
Logged
Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 3687


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2010, 08:51:03 AM »

Question: Reviewing execution of procedures for transposition&docking word checklist. Instead of using the Scenario to null the rates of the SIVB, couldn't we call

ui.HoldAttidude()  in Saturn::StageOrbitSIVB after "if (CSMLVPyros.Blown()..." when ApolloNo>7 ?

This is already done: After CSM/LV separation the S-IVB is a vessel of its own (SIVB.dll), the Saturn1b.dll is the CSM from that point on. In SIVB::clbkPreStep there's the following handling code at the moment:

Code:
//
// Attitude control
//

// Special handling Apollo 7
if (VehicleNo == 205) {
if (MissionTime >= 11820) {
// retrograde
iu.SetLVLHAttitude(_V(-1, 0, 0));

} else {
iu.HoldAttitude();
}
} else {
// In all other missions maintain initial attitude for now
// \todo Correct behaviour of the S-IVB
iu.HoldAttitude();
}

Cheers
Tschachim
Logged

vrouleau
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 125


View Profile Email
« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2010, 09:11:24 AM »

Ok. When I tested this week-end,the scenario editor didn't report a perfect 0,0,0 as the rate. It is small, but not zero. Does ui.HoldAttitute() have a deadband? Anyways, I'll redo transposition&docking without manual rate 'null'ing. If succefull, can I update the word checklist to remove the references.

BTH, The word checklist are SOOOO good.... Much better the the excel sheets. Using them along with the actual flightplan is amazing

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11fltpln_final_reformat.pdf

Logged
Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 3687


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: September 20, 2010, 09:16:05 AM »

Does ui.HoldAttitute() have a deadband?

Yes, 0.01°, see IU::OrientAxis.
Logged

Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 3687


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 20, 2010, 10:31:08 AM »

BTH, The word checklist are SOOOO good.... Much better the the excel sheets. Using them along with the actual flightplan is amazing

By the way, just out of curiosity, are you talking about the Checklist MFD checklists (Doc\Project Apollo - NASSP\Checklists\CSM Default Checklists.xls) or the "Flighplans" (Doc\Project Apollo - NASSP\Flightplans\...)?
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!