Search results

I guess the loss of a degree of freedom is like a mathematical gimbal lock between 2 axes, you lose one axis. BTW in the description above I should have said " in the reached attitude the OM is now 270", not 90 -- since the -Z would be pointing to VV and now needs to come down to -H to satisfy...

I think you are right, the implementation is correct. It took me a while to understand it. What threw me initially was why it rotated at all when the Y parameter was set to 90. But then I realized that for values of Y that are 0 to 89.99, the current omicron reference attitude was in effect...

Thanks GLS, I'll put in some time to digest this. Which document did you find the specification in, is it available anywhere? Cheers, Ilmars

Thanks for looking into this, GLS. Any idea where a copy of the "NASA Guidance and Control Workbook" might be? I've scoured the web and NASA sites, but I can't seem to find anything.

I'm not really concerned about a behaviour fix for the values within the 1/2 degree of 90 or 270. What I am puzzled about is that the X axis is rotatated at all to VV for Y=90 or 270. I would have thought that the yaw behaviour at those limits would be the same around the Z axis, as with the...

Since MSTRAM and I have both been puzzling about the above, I would like to elaborate the description of the issue, in case it isn't clear..... When a body vector of 5 is selected and item 19 is executed with P=0, Y=0, and OM=0, the orbiter's attitude is oriented with +X pointing to the center...

Thanks, I'll try that again as soon as I get a chance. I thought I tried it before and the Right Alt seemed to have the same effect as the Left Alt (moves the view around), but I will check again. The Ctrl + Alt + arrow combination does seem to do a lean, but I was wondering if it was the same...

Thanks for the info. Interestingly, I've never encountered this key on any keyboard I have, though they are all over 5 years old, and North American. Maybe the newer ones have it. In any event, do I get the same lean function with with Ctrl + Alt + arrow, if I do not have the AltGr key? The...

What key(s) are you referring to with "AltGr"? Do you mean the RIGHT Alt key + arrow, or the combination of Ctrl + Alt + arrow? I'm not sure if I am using the correct key combination for the lean that you are referring to. Thanks, Ilmars

Yes, thanks Tommy, I see that now. My confusion was that for some reason I assumed that the trajectory path defined by the ReA continued to be plotted within the scope of the Ant angle, right down to the target. Which, is not the case. Ilmars

After reading the IMFD manual, full version, I finally realized the flaw in my thinking. For some reason I had assumed that the reentry angle continued to be measured from the anticipation angle radial, to the target base. But it is measured from the deorbit burn point to the intersection of...

Thanks, Arthur. I guess I may be trying to oversimplify things. My thoughts were that it might be rather like solving for a missing side of a triangle. If you know the values for 2 of the sides, the other can be derived. But I guess when one factors in all the other issues, such as lift/drag...

Hi Arthur: Yes, I understand that a different RAl yields a different ReA, and that the all the parameters differ depending on the vehicle. But isn't the reentry angle (ReA) a function of the altitude and the anticipation angle? So, if you specify an altitude interface value and a value for the...

Hi: I'm somewhat puzzled by the following 3 reentry parameters: ReA : reentry angle Ant : anticipation angle RAl : atmospheric altitude interface I notice that plugins like BasesyncMFD allow the entry of values for these parameters in an independent and somewhat unrelated manner. I would...

Are the Velocity Vector Indicators, V and -V reversed between Orbiter 2006 and 2010? I've tried following the instructions in most of the tutorials/docs for their use and am getting quite confused when trying to use them in version 2010. There is a playback tutorial in both versions of Orbiter...