Space Shuttle Ultra 1.25 Revision B development

[DaveS]

SC, OMS bug is fixed, thanks!

---------- Post added 08-10-2009 at 12:53 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-09-2009 at 08:33 AM ----------

Just a LC-39A update:

After much hard work and alot of research, the RSS Payload Changeout Room(PCR) is nearing completion! This is a huge milestone as work on the RSS is wrapping up.

There's just a few items left on the PCR before it's integrated with the rest of the RSS. Should have something to show tomorrow.

 

[SiameseCat]

I'm working on the crawler now.
DaveS: Do you have a VC mesh for the crawler, or do you want to use the Project Apollo one?

 

[DaveS]

I'm working on the crawler now.
DaveS: Do you have a VC mesh for the crawler, or do you want to use the Project Apollo one?

Can keep the PA VC for now. I'll ask Donamy if he can't do a better one with all the gauges and the Laser Docking System display.

You probably want to take a look at this post to get an idea of what needs to be done on the CT: http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showpost.php?p=44606&postcount=64

 

[SiameseCat]

I think we'll need a new VC mesh; the PA mesh seems to be too wide to fit in the SSU crawler cabs.

 

[DaveS]

I think we'll need a new VC mesh; the PA mesh seems to be too wide to fit in the SSU crawler cabs.

Oh shoot. Will check with Donamy to see if he can't raise the priority of the CT VC mesh work.

---------- Post added 08-19-2009 at 12:59 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-18-2009 at 08:57 AM ----------

SC: How far away are you from checking in something working of the Crawler?

---------- Post added at 01:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:59 AM ----------

I just realized that we need a second attachment point on the MLP, for the SSME and SRB Engine Service Platforms(ESPs). The SSME ESP is already modeled and ready for integration with the MLP.

The ESPs are only removed when they plan to load cryos into the ET which necessitates the use of the SSME exhaust opening.

 

[SiameseCat]

At the moment, I have the crawler operational, using the SSU meshes, but it can't move the MLP/shuttle stack yet. I'm planning to check the crawler code in once I get the MLP attach/detach code working.

 

[DaveS]

At the moment, I have the crawler operational, using the SSU meshes, but it can't move the MLP/shuttle stack yet. I'm planning to check the crawler code in once I get the MLP attach/detach code working.

OK, thanks for the update. Something that's worth adding is the exhaust from the exhaust ducts and the spinning of brake discs on the drive trucks. These spin in relation to the actual speed of the Crawler.

---------- Post added at 10:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 AM ----------

SC: If you want I could check in the current state of the VAB interior which now include the MLP stands in High Bay 1. That way you could use those to get a realistic simulation of the jacking operations of the Crawler/MLP.

 

[SiameseCat]

It might be helpful if you could check the VAB in.

How do you want to handle the ramp leading up to the launch pad? The PA code uses Meshland, but it would also be possible to just calculate the distance from the launchpad and use that to raise/lower the CT.

 

[DaveS]

It might be helpful if you could check the VAB in.

OK. I'll just close out a few areas and then I'll check it in along with STS-114/LF1 Rollout Run 1 scenario. Rollout Run 1 was done on April 6 2005 with first motion at 2:04:36 pm EDT(1804:36 UTC).

How do you want to handle the ramp leading up to the launch pad? The PA code uses Meshland, but it would also be possible to just calculate the distance from the launchpad and use that to raise/lower the CT.

Would the second solution allow the CT to be non-uniformly jacked up when climbing the pad ramp? The back-end of the CT is jacked up while the forward end stays jacked down, this is to keep the MLP/stack level while climbing the pad the ramp.

---------- Post added at 01:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 AM ----------

OK, VAB files and the STS-114 scenario have been checked in.

 

[SiameseCat]

Would the second solution allow the CT to be non-uniformly jacked up when climbing the pad ramp? The back-end of the CT is jacked up while the forward end stays jacked down, this is to keep the MLP/stack level while climbing the pad the ramp.

In theory it would. Using Meshland also causes a noticable framerate slowdown, which this would avoid.

 

[DaveS]

In theory it would. Using Meshland also causes a noticable framerate slowdown, which this would avoid.

Well, then it seems like this would be the way to go then.

---------- Post added 08-22-2009 at 01:37 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-21-2009 at 10:28 AM ----------

SC: IF you want I can check in an updated VAB interior mesh so that you can animate the High Bay doors.

 

[DaveS]

Just tried out the first rev of the CT code and it is working very nicely except for one tiny thing: there's no steering capability! For some reason the steering controls is locked in dead-center which prevents the CT from navigating any turns in the Crawlerway.

 

[DaveS]

The steering works fine for me, so I'm not completely sure what's going on. I'll take a look at the steering code.

Could you post a scenario that works for you, maybe there's something wrong with my scenario?

 

[SiameseCat]

If the LC39 pad vessel is in the scenario, remove it; that should fix the problem. I've been working on the code to simulate the ramp leading to the pad, this broke the steering.

---------- Post added at 08:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:52 PM ----------

Try compiling it now; the steering should work properly. The crawler should also go up the ramp to LC39, instead of jumping to pad height.

 

[DaveS]

Try compiling it now; the steering should work properly. The crawler should also go up the ramp to LC39, instead of jumping to pad height.

Works now! Just need make it so that forward treads doesn't sink into the ramp during the ascent/descent. Also change the "zero" touchdown points ot 0.01 to fix the "blinking" CT mesh issue.

 

[DaveS]

Hmm, a problem with the pad ascent. BTW, don't try to angle the entire CT, just drive trucks. The main-body is supposed to remain entirely level as this what ensures that the MLP/stack is level at all times. I have attached a nice side view of the CT moving up the pad ramp during the rollout of STS-128. Notice how the main-body of the CT is level.

 

[SiameseCat]

Checked in preliminary leveling code. Note that the rear drivetrucks currently become detached from the crawler as it moves up the ramp.

 

[DaveS]

Checked in preliminary leveling code. Note that the rear drivetrucks currently become detached from the crawler as it moves up the ramp.

I didn't see any detachments. Only noticed that the rear drive trucks sunk into the ramp the final 100 m up. BTW, I have separated the MLP stands from the main VAB structure and made them a stand-alone vessel with a XMLP attachment point.

Also corrected the XMLP attachment point in the MLP code. Should I check in the modifications so that you can get to work on the MLP/CT interface?

 

[SiameseCat]

DaveS: I'm hoping to start on the Crawler/MLP interface in a few days, so it would be great if you could check your changes in.

 

[DaveS]

DaveS: I'm hoping to start on the Crawler/MLP interface in a few days, so it would be great if you could check your changes in.

Files have been checked in. I'm still researching the Crawler panels. Will post when I have something.