Space Shuttle Ultra 1.25 Revision B development

[Urwumpe]

So you need a way to set up each tank with the correct flight. God forbid you fly the wrong ET with a certain mission. Really ?

Actually - yes. Because the masses of the tanks are different, we would in some cases have significant performance losses (running out of fuel before MECO), in other cases just reach orbit with critically low reserves.

 

[DaveS]

Actually - yes. Because the masses of the tanks are different, we would in some cases have significant performance losses (running out of fuel before MECO), in other cases just reach orbit with critically low reserves.

Yes, this becomes especially critical once we decide to implement the Centaur G Prime and simulate the originally planned STS-61G mission. That was heavy enough to require the lightest vehicle in the fleet (Atlantis) as well as 109% on the SSMEs. And plan it to a 3 day mission with just 4 crew members.

 

[Donamy]

I don't see any problems with this. What is your reason for not wanting this or better yet, being so against the implementation of it?

I just don't see the need, most Orbiter users won't care. If someone really wants realism, they will only use the cockpit view and won't even see the difference.

 

[STS]

I just don't see the need, most Orbiter users won't care. If someone really wants realism, they will only use the cockpit view and won't even see the difference.

Negative, sir.

One part is the realism of the internal view during the mission, and other part is to enjoy, in external view, the replay of the mission, and record a video of the mission´s success, featuring the awesome models you guys are developing.

 

[DaveS]

Quick q: on the real orbiter the two star trackers are located in the same X-axis location but the new mesh/current mesh has them in a slight offset in the X-axis which will require some rework of the FWD fuselage. Is this issue important enough to fix or can we live with it?

 

[Urwumpe]

Quick q: on the real orbiter the two star trackers are located in the same X-axis location but the new mesh/current mesh has them in a slight offset in the X-axis which will require some rework of the FWD fuselage. Is this issue important enough to fix or can we live with it?

For now, lets keep it. it isn't accurate, but close.

 

[DaveS]

For now, lets keep it. it isn't accurate, but close.

Managed to fix it, wasn't that big of a job after all.

 

[SiameseCat]

Scenarios with the SSU_VAB vessel don't load because lua51.dll is missing. The Orbiter folder includes lua5.1.dll, but not lua51.dll. Changing the SSU_VAB compilation settings to link to lua5.1 instead of lua51 fixes this problem.

Does anyone know what the difference is between lua51 and lua5.1?

 

[Urwumpe]

Does anyone know what the difference is between lua51 and lua5.1?

Not sure why I had lua51 there, I remember having both files and selecting the more recent version of the library.

 

[DaveS]

Is the VAB even working? I can't tell from the currently checked in code if the Lua code for it is in a operational state right now.

 

[Urwumpe]

Is the VAB even working? I can't tell from the currently checked in code if the Lua code for it is in a operational state right now.

Same here and I coded it last. I think it was still a messy affair. Would need a better development strategy - ASAP.

 

[DaveS]

Same here and I coded it last. I think it was still a messy affair. Would need a better development strategy - ASAP.

Last time the VAB was the subject, I think we opted to go with a 2D panel instead of Lua to control it.

 

[Urwumpe]

Last time the VAB was the subject, I think we opted to go with a 2D panel instead of Lua to control it.

I thought we wanted to do it opposite - because I remember that I wanted 2D panels and Lua in parallel and got only Lua.

Well, file tickets for both.

 

[SiameseCat]

I'll check in the lua lib fix for the moment, and we can sort out the VAB after the next release.

 

[DaveS]

EVA handrails added to the X_O576 and X_O1307 bulkheads along with the EVA winches. Only PLB work left is to add the the X_O1307 bulkhead latch rollers.

 

[SiameseCat]

How is the SSME chamber pressure calculated for the MEDS display? In particular, I'm wondering how the chamber pressure is displayed when the SSMEs are at 104.5%

In SSU, the chamber pressure gets converted to an integer by truncating it, which means that, if the actual pressure is 103.9, it will be displayed as 103 (and if the Pc is 104.5, it will be displayed as 104). Another possibility is to round the value to the nearest int; in this case, if the chamber pressure is 104.51, it will be displayed as 105.

 

[Urwumpe]

How is the SSME chamber pressure calculated for the MEDS display? In particular, I'm wondering how the chamber pressure is displayed when the SSMEs are at 104.5%

In SSU, the chamber pressure gets converted to an integer by truncating it, which means that, if the actual pressure is 103.9, it will be displayed as 103 (and if the Pc is 104.5, it will be displayed as 104). Another possibility is to round the value to the nearest int; in this case, if the chamber pressure is 104.51, it will be displayed as 105.

The chamber pressure is rounded to the next value by the Engine Controller

 

[SiameseCat]

Does anyone have the correct autopilot targets for STS-107? The current values have MECO occurring too early.

 

[DaveS]

Does anyone have the correct autopilot targets for STS-107? The current values have MECO occurring too early.

Historical ascent trajectory events for mission STS-107/OV-102 FLT 28:

Inclination: 39.000°
MECO Ha: 270.4 km
RTHU: Yes
OMS Assist TIG: 000/00:02:14
OMS Assist End: 000/00:03:56

 

[Urwumpe]

Would it be a big distraction from release, to write a launch AP performance report in a text file? Something like: Where was it supposed to go, where it was on MECO, which event triggered MECO, booster separation event... maybe also a few samples from the guidance loop.