Apollo 11
New member
Not to sound hasty, but how near to release are we, considering the target was for the begining of November, and here in the States (and Texas, more specifically) it is almost December!
SSU V1.25 Release
- Thread starter SiameseCat
- Start date
- Status
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
As soon as we are confident, that it meets some minimal quality standards. We are all aware of the expectations of the community, and it would be pretty damaging, if we release something, that does not work as expected.
If you want to use it, with all bugs and flaws, you need to overcome safeguards: Install compiler, subversion client, checkout, building.
It is sure worth trying. But if you don't think so, you'll need to have patience with us.
If you want to use it, with all bugs and flaws, you need to overcome safeguards: Install compiler, subversion client, checkout, building.
It is sure worth trying. But if you don't think so, you'll need to have patience with us.
BHawthorne
Simpit Builder
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2008
- Messages
- 324
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 18
Will the mid-deck be in 1.25? 
gawinnard
Donator
See the middeck thread
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
I don't know if I can do this before the third january, if nobody claims this task item first, I will implement it this weekend, would be a good thing to get started with SSU after the break.
Guess once you're done with those, you'll focus on the BSMs to fix the SRB separation behaviour?
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
Yes, but I don't think the problem in this case is the BSM behavior. We currently don't use accurate BSM positions possibly, but I think the wrong rotation is actually caused by the aerodynamics.
OK. Currently there's no rotation at all of the boosters and the BSMs seems to have no effect.
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
The BSMs have a lot of effect - we just don't have a initial speed difference to the ET when the booster vessels are created. Most difference to the shuttle stack comes from the BSMs, the rest are aerodynamics and the little acceleration by the SSMEs.
If you can get me the accurate BSM positions and orientations, I can implement these more detailed. If the positions and thrust profile of them is correct, all we can do wrong is aerodynamics.
SiameseCat
Addon Developer
Urwumpe: I'll start work on the OBSS stuff, since you're currently working on the launch bugfixes.
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
Fine for me, I'll concentrate on the SRBs for the next days.
-----Post Added-----
SRB thrust profile is now fixed a bit, but I would like somebody verify if the performance of the SRBs until separation is now still good enough, I think we lost about 30-50 m/s by the fixes as we now longer burn the SRBs completely empty, but more important are the real flight velocities, and I think we are still roughly in the correct range... would be nice if somebody can verify the performance before we release 1.25.
Another one I noticed, goes to all developers: Please check that all textures, you paint on during run-time are marked dynamic (D behind the texture in the mesh file). I fixed a few to improve the biggest bottlenecks, but I likely missed a few.
I recommend we add a "dynamic textures.txt" to the development docs, where we remember these textures.
- Status
