Meadville Space Center
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 11, 2020, 11:03:19 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Gemini 060615 released!
25068 Posts in 2094 Topics by 2266 Members
Latest Member: twa517
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Meadville Space Center
|-+  Project Apollo - NASSP
| |-+  Project Apollo - NASSP Development
| | |-+  Programming (Moderators: movieman, dseagrav, Swatch, lassombra)
| | | |-+  AGC Prog Reguest....
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: AGC Prog Reguest....  (Read 2932 times)
YJH422
Guest
« on: February 06, 2005, 08:00:42 PM »

Prog request........To the AGC crew.

If possible can we get a basic burn program for the CM AGC?

Basic meaning, just being able put a time in seconds in the AGC and having it fire the main engine
and shut it down after the time is up.

And manually selecting Prograde or Retograde.

I would be willing to right one but, I don`t know how the AGC in the LEM is calling the Autoascent Program.

I`m new to the C++ but it`s fun working with it.

If any of this is not aloud then please say so and I`ll drop it.

~S!
Logged
RMaia
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 33



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 08, 2005, 08:08:06 AM »

After being away for a while, I''m back. Wink

For the next release of the LM ascent auto-pilot, it will have some burning programs (the 40 series) as well as some other additions to the AGC functionality. I am also implementing a generic burn program (P30), where you insert desired DeltaV components and the computer will take care of the burn for you.

In this package, a basic as you said burn program is not included because the real AGC didn't have one like that. You could use P30 when it's implemented in the next autopilot release, although you wouldn't input burn time, instead you would input DeltaV.
Logged

Rodrigo Merce Maia

- Sometimes, simplicity is the best answer to complexity.

Physics is FUN!
Anonymous
Guest
« Reply #2 on: February 08, 2005, 02:36:23 PM »

Thanks for the return RMaia.

Sounds great on what is coming up in next pack.

And copy that on the real CSM AGC not having a burn program like I said.

I was just looking for a better way to do burns instead of using the manual system. Throttle...

Question: From everything a read on this program it is ok to make addon programs to it. As long as is not going to be sold or something.
 
Is that correct?


I ask this because I went ahead and started a generic burn program and also called it Prog30, It works by just putting a time in the AGC for a burn or to start burn at eg. (Ped) for lunar orbiter entry.

Please let me know if this is ok. I not planning on jumping into anyones work here just wanted something to do.

Thanks Again.

~S!
Logged
YJH422
Guest
« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2005, 02:37:54 PM »

OOpsss Forgot to sign in ~S!

Post above is YJH422
Logged
movieman
Moderator
Hero Member
****
Posts: 1710



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2005, 02:59:48 PM »

Well, the main thing is that we're trying to make the AGC simulation as close to the real programs as is sensibly possible... so basically using the Delco manual and writing programs which do similar things which are useful in Orbiter. At some point we may have the real AGC wired in, but that will make the Apollo craft much more complex to fly (e.g. needing to check alignment with stars on a regular basis).
Logged
YJH422
Guest
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2005, 04:37:57 PM »

I`m all for that. Making it as real as possible.

And there has been some excellant work done. Like I said I`m not here
to jump on anyones hard work. My brother and I got into this because we grew up with the Apollo program as I`m sure alot of others have.

We both make our living as pilots and as a hobby program a little
VERY LITTLE mostly play with computers. We have been using the VMC program alot and also are trying to run simulation as close as possible to a real mission.

With one  running the check list  and the other flying it. Either together in one room or by using a Team Speak Server we have running on a fourth system.

We have always had a good time running a simulated NASA, but one problem was having to do alot of manual burns. Or having one person do the timing on a stop watch...LOL  !! Didn`t work to good.

Also just trying to get 50 lines of code to work (burn_ engine) took us
a week, something that you all could do in an hour or less!

If I do any more work it I will let you RM, MM know and will make sure it is inline with DELCO system.

Thanks again for all the great work.

~S!
Logged
RMaia
Project Team Member
Full Member
****
Posts: 33



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2005, 09:38:45 AM »

With me there's no problem if you want to continue working on your program. If you want it the way you proposed, where you input time instead of Velocity, there's no better way to have it than write it yourself.Wink But, if you actually plan on modifying it to mirror the real one, please, fell free to do so. After yours and mine are ready, we can decided which one is best and include it with the "official" AGC. By this, we can make sure that NASSP gets better and better.
Logged

Rodrigo Merce Maia

- Sometimes, simplicity is the best answer to complexity.

Physics is FUN!
YJH422
Guest
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2005, 10:33:44 AM »

The idea is to be real as possible. then the program should use Velocity not time.

I would go with yours RMaia.

~S!
Logged
ghostdog_688
Guest
« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2005, 08:01:29 PM »

I'm a total newb to the AGC - as an 18y/o with hardly any programming experience, understanding what magic you guys pulled to get the AGC into Orbiter is waaay to much for me Happy I think that you should carry on with the timer if you want, but mayb add it in as an optional if possible?
like press in a key function - one you would ever need - to set a 'realism' guage - from nearly an exact duplicate (star navigation, the whol enchilada Very Happy) to a 'semi-pro' (like now).
like,
V88 N00 = normal
V88 N01 = real
V88 N02 = custom settings (some cfg file could define these?)

just an idea. I have no idea how to put it in  :lol:

that's a fair compromise for begginners and realists
Logged
Tschachim
Project Apollo - NASSP
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3700


nassp.sf.net


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2005, 06:39:28 AM »

There is already a topic about complexity levels here: http://www.ibiblio.org/mscorbit/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=46
It's a good idea in my opinion but I don't know if anybody working on it?
Logged

Yogenfrutz
Full Member
***
Posts: 10


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2005, 06:56:03 AM »

Hi all,

Of course,what more realistic what better,but also more complicated.
Think about orbiter newbies who first want to have some fun flying the saturn ,and not getting bored with reading 100's of pages thick books to understand what to do to get the thing up the air.

So always leave a way in there for just manual flying or very basic autopilot commands.

cheers

yogenfrutz
Logged
Pages: [1] 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!