OFMM Development: Mars Ground Ops

[fireballs619]

The mass:load ratio is fantastic, but will we need it? If these rovers are going to be used as exploration vehicles, I doubt we will need to carry 100 tons with us. Perhaps these would assist in initial base construction, but I think it would be somewhat overkill for exploration. Note: I'm trying to decide on more specific quantification's still.

 

[lennartsmit]

The mass:load ratio is fantastic, but will we need it? If these rovers are going to be used as exploration vehicles, I doubt we will need to carry 100 tons with us. Perhaps these would assist in initial base construction, but I think it would be somewhat overkill for exploration. Note: I'm trying to decide on more specific quantification's still.

That's why I proposed a light-version with a smaller m:l ratio, higher speed and less weight of the vehicle itself. Or we could size down the whole thing by a factor 10 which gives us one ton of vehicle against roughly 10 tonnes of load.

==edit==
Sorry, didn't read your post properly. I didn't know it was also going to be an exploration-rover.

 

[Bj]

500 KG

That's only about the size of a forklift. Though that might be good depending on what this is going to be doing.

It's 21 500kg,

Woh
Good looks, but it might be a little spendy with its weight.

Also, I would say you should have a remote control feature, that can be used such, that either you can command the vehicle by a remote control package while you have the rover in sight (like a RC car), or by making the rover follow another rover.

What about using r-control already supplied with Orbiter, or should it be more limiting..

How about using something like this: Mammoet Kamag

It's not really fast it can carry more then 100 tonnes whilst weighing only 15 tonnes.
That's a mass:load ratio of 1:8! We could make a light version of this with some more speed.

The UCGO container that has just been released can come in very handy for transport for us.
An automated version of this kind of vehicle is already being used in the harbour of Rotterdam.

A light version of this might work, but I have to ask first: if Mars doesn't have any paved roads, how well will a weighted wheeled vehicle work on sand + rocks?

--
As long as we are quantifying objectives, are we planning on carrying cargo, or UMMU or is it supposed to be built for speed?

 

[fireballs619]

That's why I proposed a light-version with a smaller m:l ratio, higher speed and less weight of the vehicle itself. Or we could size down the whole thing by a factor 10 which gives us one ton of vehicle against roughly 10 tonnes of load.

The more I think about it, the more I like it. We would need to factor down, but the overall design is good, but it would need increased speed. Do you know of any site with specs on this thing, or is that pic all you have? If it meets current criteria, it could be a contender. We will see once all quantification's are laid out.

 

[lennartsmit]

A light version of this might work, but I have to ask first: if Mars doesn't have any paved roads, how well will a weighted wheeled vehicle work on sand + rocks?

It won't.

The only thing that would work is some kind of tracked vehicle.
I think this would apply to all vehicles bigger then about 500 kg we intend to use.

---------- Post added at 03:38 ---------- Previous post was at 03:33 ----------

The more I think about it, the more I like it. We would need to factor down, but the overall design is good, but it would need increased speed. Do you know of any site with specs on this thing, or is that pic all you have?

That link in my post wasn't for decoration

I'll post it again for you: Mammoet Kamag

See this for more variants.

---------- Post added at 03:42 ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 ----------

Here's more about the one on the picture: Info

 

[fireballs619]

I want to clarify that I set the 500 kg limit with things along the lines of this in mind. It seems though that we are leaning more towards this type of craft. I would still prefer the former option, as I don't see up doing any activities to far from the base that would require copious amounts of cargo being transported. My vision for the SMEV was a small, lightweight vehicle that could be used to travel out from the base to preform scientific experiments at different locations. For this, we would not require too much cargo, and therefore not a huge load. If we will, however, be requiring cargo transport far from the base, I will raise the Mass limit.

 

[lennartsmit]

This is the manufactures brochure:Producer
The specs are on the last page.

---------- Post added at 03:46 ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 ----------

I want to clarify that I set the 500 kg limit with things along the lines of this in mind. It seems though that we are leaning more towards this type of craft. I would still prefer the former option, as I don't see up doing any activities to far from the base that would require copious amounts of cargo being transported. My vision for the SMEV was a small, lightweight vehicle that could be used to travel out from the base to preform scientific experiments at different locations. For this, we would not require too much cargo, and therefore not a huge load. If we will, however, be requiring cargo transport far from the base, I will raise the Mass limit.

Seems like a good idea because, as you said, we won't be venturing out of the base alot.

 

[fireballs619]

O.K. The specs give me a mass of about 25 000 kg and a load of 60 000 kg. Simplified that would be about 5:12 (m:l), which is really good. If we reduced it down, say by a divisor of 100, we would have 250 kg to 600kg. That could work for our needs. It would of course have to meet the other criteria, and I don't know how versatile this thing is. If we are going to go the smaller, lightweight route, I would recommend against this, on the concern of versatility. Perhaps a similar design is best.

 

[Izack]

Now that I think about it, the Azure doesn't look like it should weight 21 tonnes... 6-7 tonnes maximum based on its size. If it were electric-powered it would need to be lightweight. ANyway, it's a bust, so onwards and upwards.

Why aren't we straying far from the base, exactly? I'm sure there would be interesting geological features to explore, especially if we were landing near a massive geological feature like Valles Marineris or Olympus Mons. Remember, this isn't Apollo, a quick hop there with a tiny ship and a short visit. This is a months-long trip and a year-long operation. There needs to be something to do there, or else it will be a total waste of money.
Also, the mission has to stay interesting to be worthwhile to the pilots. Hangin' out in a big pod for 18 months analysing the same old rocks doesn't seem like a very interesting project. If the OFMM users are going to keep interest in it, a change of scenery once in a while would at least serve to alleviate some boredom.

Speaking of scenery, so far Orbiter's groundside scenery consists entirely of a large flat brown plane on which you project a shadow. I assume meshes can be made of the landing area? (there's already one of Olympus Mons somewhere out there, I think).

 

[fireballs619]

I guess I wasn't thinking in the big picture. There will be expeditions far from base, which could benefit from a somewhat larger SMEV. In this scenario, I favor the Azure over the Kamag, simply because the Kamag is strictly cargo oriented. I was thinking for the longer trips an atmospheric vehicle or sub orbital ship would be used.

 

[Bj]

Now that I think about it, the Azure doesn't look like it should weight 21 tonnes... 6-7 tonnes maximum based on its size. If it were electric-powered it would need to be lightweight. ANyway, it's a bust, so onwards and upwards.

I agree there, just quickly looking through the config's, there doesn't seem to be a place to adjust the mass. I wonder how it figures the weight when its not given in a cfg?

Why aren't we straying far from the base, exactly? I'm sure there would be interesting geological features to explore, especially if we were landing near a massive geological feature like Valles Marineris or Olympus Mons. Remember, this isn't Apollo, a quick hop there with a tiny ship and a short visit. This is a months-long trip and a year-long operation. There needs to be something to do there, or else it will be a total waste of money.

The thing is, if you put a UMMU who is limited to 2hrs of O2, onto a non-pressurized rover you have to get back before O2 runs out. Besides, the UCGO cars willnot run with time accel on. So driving a hour out is a real hour. Not sure about you but I would rather not be just watching the ground move for a hour just to get somewhere. Especially when you can hop skip around in an atmospheric vessel.

Speaking of which, if our rover is electric/pressurized/ has O2, would it be really difficult to simulate needing to recharge/reload O2?

Also, the mission has to stay interesting to be worthwhile to the pilots. Hangin' out in a big pod for 18 months analysing the same old rocks doesn't seem like a very interesting project. If the OFMM users are going to keep interest in it, a change of scenery once in a while would at least serve to alleviate some boredom.

That's what the sub-orbital exploration will be doing, but if you want to change scenery for the whole hab, I suppose we could re-locate the base once or twice. Though would be a massive wast of time if this was for real. Better would be to have a 'main' base and a small little expedition crew (inflatable habs?) that would only temporarily stay out in the 'field.' That would make more sense.

Speaking of scenery, so far Orbiter's groundside scenery consists entirely of a large flat brown plane on which you project a shadow. I assume meshes can be made of the landing area? (there's already one of Olympus Mons somewhere out there, I think).

Trick is: how do you get the UMMU+cars+vehicles to land on that mesh

 

[Dambuster]

Trick is: how do you get the UMMU+cars+vehicles to land on that mesh

I know one of Artlav's amazing creations is capable of doing this, at least for UCGO.

 

[Bj]

I know one of Artlav's amazing creations is capable of doing this, at least for UCGO.

I see OVP, though I haven't downloaded it yet (downloading now). Does it create mountains and whatever and if it does, does it support UMMU's walking on it?

-A while back I though we where against using this because of Urwumpe's old computer :lol:

Orulex from Artlav last I knew did not exactly work with UMMU. Though this could have changed within the past few months.



New Info:

This could be a bug but UCGO cars seems to not have a different weight per car, that is they all have 211.2kn or about 21,500 kg. It is not dependent on Orbiter version. (first pic 2010, second 2006) Even the lunar rover is 21 tonnes...

Can someone confirm this.

You see a number larger than 211.2kn because that car has cargo on it.





so.. I think instead of developing our own vehicles with the correct weight, we can use this SVTU (Small vehicle Transportation Unit) that I am almost finished with to transport the vessel with the correct weight, and when landed we will deploy and leave the vehicles there. This way, we can use the Azure, lunar(mars) rover, (electric) forklift for our cargo transporting operations.

 

[Urwumpe]

-A while back I though we where against using this because of Urwumpe's old computer :lol:

Thats the new iMac, isn't it?

 

[Voyager]

Have we decided on where we will establish Prometheus (aka the base on Mars where we will be landing.)? If not, I would advise somewhere either near the poles or near Mount Olympus.

 

[Bj]

Thats the new iMac, isn't it?

Nope the new iMac looks like this

How about this old IBM?

Have we decided on where we will establish Prometheus (aka the base on Mars where we will be landing.)? If not, I would advise somewhere either near the poles or near Mount Olympus.

Not exactly

If we land somewhere, its not going to be at the poles, but a little closer to the equator. Somewhere between 25°N and 25°S

I tried OglaClient Beta 10041 it doesn't work for landing detection. Might be kind of disconcerting if you are landing underground, or land above ground.

 

[fireballs619]

Have we decided on where we will establish Prometheus (aka the base on Mars where we will be landing.)? If not, I would advise somewhere either near the poles or near Mount Olympus.

I will be working on finding valid candidates for landing spots in the near future, once we decide what fuel we are using and, subsequently, what material we will be mining for fuel generation. Our landing site must have large amounts of this material at or around it, so we can set up fuel stations. I do think we decided that it would not be near Olympus Mons because of the already present Olympus Base. It is going to be somewhere near the equator as already stated.

 

[Izack]

The thing is, if you put a UMMU who is limited to 2hrs of O2, onto a non-pressurized rover you have to get back before O2 runs out. Besides, the UCGO cars willnot run with time accel on. So driving a hour out is a real hour. Not sure about you but I would rather not be just watching the ground move for a hour just to get somewhere. Especially when you can hop skip around in an atmospheric vessel.

Speaking of which, if our rover is electric/pressurized/ has O2, would it be really difficult to simulate needing to recharge/reload O2?

Good points. Also, since this is Orbiter and not a driving sim, suborbital hops seem like a more logical answer anyway. (Durrr)
If the electricity and O2 were just lumped together, then the default fuel tank could be used for both. Or...do UCGO cars simulate fuel? I've only just started using them yesterday...

 

[Bj]

Or...do UCGO cars simulate fuel? I've only just started using them yesterday...

No not yet but it might be possible to write our own rover that doubles as a UCGO car. It might take a bit of work for that to happen though.

First we would have to ask if we want to simulate fuel/electricity/O2 consumption, if so then we can worry about programming it later.

 

[fireballs619]

If we were to, I think fuel or electricity should be ideal, as both can be produced relatively easily. Perhaps it could run on the same fuel as the stack, or at least a fuel with similar components. If we will be mining fuel for that, we may as well divert a bit and use it for the rovers.