@Bmcclory That’s what I was thinking in that application, but when you scale it up to an airstrip, a vehicle would need a jet engine to move around a frictionless surface like a super thin fuel tank.
There have been Saturn V variants exceeding 600 feet in size... might want to tackle that after returning to making and finishing the German aggregat series rockets.
That’s a cool idea. How about you put the islands near the coast of that grassy pocket of land south of the desert across the ocean from the Space Center? It’s right between said desert and the South Pole, giving the islands the right place to be placed into.
@pedro16797... which could be done by modifying the game from within its own environment. That could be done now thanks to Vizzy, eliminating the need to modify the source code.
That’s a pretty fair idea, however that would have to be after there’s enough planets or a planet builder which may give you the option of making the planet able to be mined.
I’m thinking there’s 2 solutions to this problem: a 2 craft and a 3 craft solution:
In the 2 craft solution, one craft can either be in space or on the ground which will serve as the trigger craft. Essentially this craft triggers step 1 and 2 from above, which will activate the launch vehicle’s sequence which will be timed as such that:
•The craft will launch x minutes after the activation program occurs
•The orbital sequence is straightforward: Make a gravity turn which puts in on a ideal trajectory, give it a standard Apoapsis such as 85-150km, and circularize, completing step 3.
-For step 3, however, a special requirement must be met: the Apoapsis or periapsis must be placed specifically in the prograde direction of Luna’s path, at roughly 30-40 degrees to the left of Luna. This will account for the timing mechanism needed to perform a prograde maneuver which will rendezvous with Luna Apollo style, fulfilling step 4.
-And the rest would be pretty straightforward. Just rely on timing of the periapsis and Apoapsis and the altitude of both.
Edit: on the 3 craft solution one craft in orbit would detect the Luna Launch window with some sort of programmable clock. A ground craft (eg. The radar) would store this data and when a spacecraft is on the launchpad it could send a signal to the radar unit which will indicate a craft ready for a lunar trip. Then the radar would receive the data from the satellite in orbit with the launch window and would launch the craft as soon as the conditions (that the craft exists and that a launch window is occurring) are met.
Edit 2: why not one craft? To reduce runtime lag. If all of these tasks were occurring on an actively operating craft (which might or might not be necessary if we can’t transmit information between craft yet) it would be bad on frame rate, as I found out while testing the Droosat launch vehicle which came out recently with 50+ satellites (and of course a monster program!) so outsourcing programs to be pre-run by other craft would simplify the craft actually going to Luna.
@Nethereal You’re right, it may not be that simple, however it’s like throwing a ball at a brick wall expecting it to hit something around a corner: if the developers design the game more strongly around Vizzy to work in this way then instead of directly programming XML which makes modding impossible for mobile, using Vizzy which is programmed by XML to modify a sandbox/game environment which is not directly part of Unity’s IP2LL (or whatever that policy is) would allow a mobile payer to modify the game without modifying the source code, as long as the current solar system isn’t part of the source code itself.
This is one of the most significant developments in this game since it’s creation. You have no idea how important this is. You basically handed a planet builder in Vizzy programming over to the developers on a silver platter, which is one of the most requested features, meaning now mobile devices could make DIY solar systems.
And I’m saying this because this makes the XML files accessible not just directly but through Vizzy, meaning Mobile devices can work with this if it was implemented.
@crowxe Isn’t that a good thing though? If you target the Sun then it would work like the ancient Arabic (namely Islam) method of finding longitude at noon (when the sun is directly above).
@crowxe Regardless the developers said that Vizzy is not complete quite yet, and that’s promising as some critical features such as orbital information would be needed for Vizzy to work on an interplanetary scale. It takes work to program that kind of concept. Also, what about user inputs like a text window?
@crowxe This conversation was very interesting, but as for taking several hours for orbital decay to occur, that’s exactly what I did from a 60.2-60.8km orbit. If the flickering does in fact originate from a glitch, it might also be an inaccuracy in the precision which might be related to the glitch as a result of the inability of the orbital mechanics to interpret perfect circles (which you would think would have been considered in the game engine’s design).
@PointBreak
Honestly there’s really no point to considering most of what you can do now is either make that a preflight adjustment where you open them before taking off, or do it while Vizzy is flying the craft for you.
@pedro16797 I’m not a IOS developer but I know for sure you don’t have to modify IOS to make it work like Android. Perhaps a Raspberry Pi could be used as an installer; there was somebody who wanted a Linux port of SR2 but my point is Raspberry Pi is a really important niche. They can be made into a cluster using C++ and a variety of APIs. And if that’s the case then they can be turned into a ARM64 supercomputer that can run X86 and run SR2 via using Wine. One Raspberry pi wouldn’t be enough but a good number of them running different elements of SR2 simultaneously might be an interesting feat. Just speculating on some ideas I’ve come across.
@pedro16797 FWIK (For what I know) it is entirely possible to open the XML files themselves using file manager apps. However in terms of accessing the SR2 app files themselves...it would require the usage of an exterior AND applications which might not only 3 years obselete but completely rendered useless. That doesn’t mean that it’s impossible, though. Considering it’s use of Unity the game can be considered a separate entity to IOS, and considering that C++ gets changed to C# for the Unity engine to be compatible from PC to mobile I wouldn’t doubt that there actually is a layer of integration where the code can be altered. If anything ARM64 would be far easier to make this possible than ARM32 because of the difficulty of running X86 emulators. As for IL2CPP, it’s something that should be studied. Not sure what to think about all that but I still think it would be worth the frustration because I feel it’s a little fun to figure out what could be done that’s “impossible”...
@Insanity Right. But considering that, wouldn’t it make xml mods for iOS possible or is there another layer of problems before that works? Considering I took a look at the XML files for SimpleGalaxy and I find XML right at home after learning HTML, I’m not surprised is it could be made possible.
@KitKart I suspect that too. Mojang created an add on installer for Minecraft, which essentially is similarly sized and with the same kind of sandbox environment, but for very different purposes and premises.
On a side note, I’m not trying to be pushy but since I’m going into computer science anyways I might as well look into the possibility of creating an installer for mods on IOS, because IOS 13 enables some compatibility of storing files on the Files app itself or 3rd party apps (Documents by Readdle as an example) which is the first part of that process. The next step would be either to agree on making an installer in-app (which I’m not sure how Apple would respond) or to create a mod-of-mods of sort that can be installed with an IOS file manager via an exterior computer (like what people had done with Minecraft mods), which could possibly be done as a caveat solution.
@Insanity Agreed. This excerpt from the A9/A10 article on Astronautix made me concerned:
“ Guidance systems of the time were hopelessly inaccurate at the 5000 km range planned for the A9/A10. Therefore it was decided that the A9 would have to be piloted. After cut-off of its engine at 390 km altitude and 3,400 m/s, the A9 would re-enter and begin a long glide to extend the range. The pilot was to be guided by radio beacons on surfaced German submarines in the Atlantic Ocean. After reaching the target the pilot would lock in the target in an optical sight, then eject. Death or internment as a prisoner of war would follow.”
3400m/s at 390km is more than enough speed at that altitude nonetheless 100km to achieve orbit, whereas it was supposed to be intercontinental but still suborbital. Gives you an idea of the difference in that alone.
@plane918273645 Yeah but when you’re constrained to size Nozzle length and size outright can be limiting, so the other variables count especially if you don’t expect to get more than 2500 m/s like making a replica.
Ok ok, I get it. It’s not so hard to tell me that the suggestions go under the feedback page through the FAQ in the other. That’s just bad web design. Not your fault, buddy.
@KitKart checked and the only thing on the top of the page would be “New Post”. That’s what I clicked onto start. There isn’t any “New Suggestion” button for what I can see. I guess this isn’t only for me but for other people, right?
@KitKart I’d rather have this post also shown here because the post you redirected me does not appear in the “Suggestions” part of the forum. Not exactly sure what you were trying to get me to do.
@PorkyClown3 Ah yes the long chain of people saying so-and-so rockets are fake because one specific detail was inaccurate. I’m not trying to be rude but it would be nice to work with the ideas even if they’re fake. In fact there’s a good number of diagrams depicting designs that never were constructed, but some were flown one way or another (ie. the Saturn V-2 was based off of one design with a small change to a sensor position onto another stage; was used in Skylab launch.)
Not sure if this’ll be too easy for players, but getting this to work around maneuver nodes so as to do a lunar transfer or target the launch pad so one stage of the craft could return to earth spacex style would make this 100x better. That way players wouldn’t have to multitask, and would be able to consistently get a lunar encounter or even a interplanetary encounter without input. The real challenge of that would be the programming itself, but looking at all the current functions a wait until <condition> Instruction specifies the craft’s properties and not necessarily where it is relative to planets. Even the Apollo space program used computers to program the maneuvers; the people at NASA had to do the calculations and input them into the flight computers.
@Bmcclory That’s what I was thinking in that application, but when you scale it up to an airstrip, a vehicle would need a jet engine to move around a frictionless surface like a super thin fuel tank.
+1 4.9 years agoAutomatic Interplanetary ships here we goooooo!!!!
+1 4.9 years agoThere have been Saturn V variants exceeding 600 feet in size... might want to tackle that after returning to making and finishing the German aggregat series rockets.
+1 4.9 years agoThat’s a cool idea. How about you put the islands near the coast of that grassy pocket of land south of the desert across the ocean from the Space Center? It’s right between said desert and the South Pole, giving the islands the right place to be placed into.
4.9 years agoWhat if I told you
All planes are suborbital. Anything that leaves the ground is suborbital.
4.9 years agoI suppose this might end up being the concept for a Vizzy program for a sandbox, being held separate from Vizzy for crafts.
4.9 years ago@pedro16797... which could be done by modifying the game from within its own environment. That could be done now thanks to Vizzy, eliminating the need to modify the source code.
+1 4.9 years agoThat’s a pretty fair idea, however that would have to be after there’s enough planets or a planet builder which may give you the option of making the planet able to be mined.
4.9 years agoI’m thinking there’s 2 solutions to this problem: a 2 craft and a 3 craft solution:
•The craft will launch x minutes after the activation program occurs
•The orbital sequence is straightforward: Make a gravity turn which puts in on a ideal trajectory, give it a standard Apoapsis such as 85-150km, and circularize, completing step 3.
-For step 3, however, a special requirement must be met: the Apoapsis or periapsis must be placed specifically in the prograde direction of Luna’s path, at roughly 30-40 degrees to the left of Luna. This will account for the timing mechanism needed to perform a prograde maneuver which will rendezvous with Luna Apollo style, fulfilling step 4.
-And the rest would be pretty straightforward. Just rely on timing of the periapsis and Apoapsis and the altitude of both.
Edit: on the 3 craft solution one craft in orbit would detect the Luna Launch window with some sort of programmable clock. A ground craft (eg. The radar) would store this data and when a spacecraft is on the launchpad it could send a signal to the radar unit which will indicate a craft ready for a lunar trip. Then the radar would receive the data from the satellite in orbit with the launch window and would launch the craft as soon as the conditions (that the craft exists and that a launch window is occurring) are met.
Edit 2: why not one craft? To reduce runtime lag. If all of these tasks were occurring on an actively operating craft (which might or might not be necessary if we can’t transmit information between craft yet) it would be bad on frame rate, as I found out while testing the Droosat launch vehicle which came out recently with 50+ satellites (and of course a monster program!) so outsourcing programs to be pre-run by other craft would simplify the craft actually going to Luna.
+1 4.9 years ago@Nethereal You’re right, it may not be that simple, however it’s like throwing a ball at a brick wall expecting it to hit something around a corner: if the developers design the game more strongly around Vizzy to work in this way then instead of directly programming XML which makes modding impossible for mobile, using Vizzy which is programmed by XML to modify a sandbox/game environment which is not directly part of Unity’s IP2LL (or whatever that policy is) would allow a mobile payer to modify the game without modifying the source code, as long as the current solar system isn’t part of the source code itself.
+1 4.9 years agoThis is one of the most significant developments in this game since it’s creation. You have no idea how important this is. You basically handed a planet builder in Vizzy programming over to the developers on a silver platter, which is one of the most requested features, meaning now mobile devices could make DIY solar systems.
And I’m saying this because this makes the XML files accessible not just directly but through Vizzy, meaning Mobile devices can work with this if it was implemented.
4.9 years ago@crowxe Isn’t that a good thing though? If you target the Sun then it would work like the ancient Arabic (namely Islam) method of finding longitude at noon (when the sun is directly above).
4.9 years ago@crowxe Regardless the developers said that Vizzy is not complete quite yet, and that’s promising as some critical features such as orbital information would be needed for Vizzy to work on an interplanetary scale. It takes work to program that kind of concept. Also, what about user inputs like a text window?
4.9 years ago@crowxe This conversation was very interesting, but as for taking several hours for orbital decay to occur, that’s exactly what I did from a 60.2-60.8km orbit. If the flickering does in fact originate from a glitch, it might also be an inaccuracy in the precision which might be related to the glitch as a result of the inability of the orbital mechanics to interpret perfect circles (which you would think would have been considered in the game engine’s design).
+1 4.9 years ago@PointBreak
4.9 years agoHonestly there’s really no point to considering most of what you can do now is either make that a preflight adjustment where you open them before taking off, or do it while Vizzy is flying the craft for you.
@PointBreak
Great! Now I feel stupid.
4.9 years ago@pedro16797 I’m not a IOS developer but I know for sure you don’t have to modify IOS to make it work like Android. Perhaps a Raspberry Pi could be used as an installer; there was somebody who wanted a Linux port of SR2 but my point is Raspberry Pi is a really important niche. They can be made into a cluster using C++ and a variety of APIs. And if that’s the case then they can be turned into a ARM64 supercomputer that can run X86 and run SR2 via using Wine. One Raspberry pi wouldn’t be enough but a good number of them running different elements of SR2 simultaneously might be an interesting feat. Just speculating on some ideas I’ve come across.
5.0 years ago@pedro16797 FWIK (For what I know) it is entirely possible to open the XML files themselves using file manager apps. However in terms of accessing the SR2 app files themselves...it would require the usage of an exterior AND applications which might not only 3 years obselete but completely rendered useless. That doesn’t mean that it’s impossible, though. Considering it’s use of Unity the game can be considered a separate entity to IOS, and considering that C++ gets changed to C# for the Unity engine to be compatible from PC to mobile I wouldn’t doubt that there actually is a layer of integration where the code can be altered. If anything ARM64 would be far easier to make this possible than ARM32 because of the difficulty of running X86 emulators. As for IL2CPP, it’s something that should be studied. Not sure what to think about all that but I still think it would be worth the frustration because I feel it’s a little fun to figure out what could be done that’s “impossible”...
5.0 years ago@Insanity Right. But considering that, wouldn’t it make xml mods for iOS possible or is there another layer of problems before that works? Considering I took a look at the XML files for SimpleGalaxy and I find XML right at home after learning HTML, I’m not surprised is it could be made possible.
5.0 years ago@PositivePlanes then why can people like @BarsikKT create a link for android for the SimpleGalaxy mod for example?
5.0 years ago@KitKart I suspect that too. Mojang created an add on installer for Minecraft, which essentially is similarly sized and with the same kind of sandbox environment, but for very different purposes and premises.
+1 5.0 years agoOn a side note, I’m not trying to be pushy but since I’m going into computer science anyways I might as well look into the possibility of creating an installer for mods on IOS, because IOS 13 enables some compatibility of storing files on the Files app itself or 3rd party apps (Documents by Readdle as an example) which is the first part of that process. The next step would be either to agree on making an installer in-app (which I’m not sure how Apple would respond) or to create a mod-of-mods of sort that can be installed with an IOS file manager via an exterior computer (like what people had done with Minecraft mods), which could possibly be done as a caveat solution.
5.0 years ago@Insanity Agreed. This excerpt from the A9/A10 article on Astronautix made me concerned:
“ Guidance systems of the time were hopelessly inaccurate at the 5000 km range planned for the A9/A10. Therefore it was decided that the A9 would have to be piloted. After cut-off of its engine at 390 km altitude and 3,400 m/s, the A9 would re-enter and begin a long glide to extend the range. The pilot was to be guided by radio beacons on surfaced German submarines in the Atlantic Ocean. After reaching the target the pilot would lock in the target in an optical sight, then eject. Death or internment as a prisoner of war would follow.”
3400m/s at 390km is more than enough speed at that altitude nonetheless 100km to achieve orbit, whereas it was supposed to be intercontinental but still suborbital. Gives you an idea of the difference in that alone.
5.0 years ago@Insanity yeah I know. But mobile users have to suffer without the ability to install mods, and by that I mean IOS users.
5.0 years agoHow do you guys out in photos in posts?
5.0 years agoOk. Btw check out my thanksgiving challenge entry!
+1 5.0 years agohttps://www.simplerockets.com/c/XDCzNJ/A-4B-A9-V-2-Manned-Hans-Thanksgiving-Delivery-Vehicle
@plane918273645 Yeah but when you’re constrained to size Nozzle length and size outright can be limiting, so the other variables count especially if you don’t expect to get more than 2500 m/s like making a replica.
+1 5.0 years ago@MarioG no I can’t use any mods at all; I’m an IOS user.
5.0 years agoOk ok, I get it. It’s not so hard to tell me that the suggestions go under the feedback page through the FAQ in the other. That’s just bad web design. Not your fault, buddy.
5.1 years ago@KitKart checked and the only thing on the top of the page would be “New Post”. That’s what I clicked onto start. There isn’t any “New Suggestion” button for what I can see. I guess this isn’t only for me but for other people, right?
5.1 years ago@KitKart
5.1 years agoI’m not seeing anything on the top right. Perhaps it’s a mobile website issue?
@KitKart I’d rather have this post also shown here because the post you redirected me does not appear in the “Suggestions” part of the forum. Not exactly sure what you were trying to get me to do.
5.1 years ago@PorkyClown3 Ah yes the long chain of people saying so-and-so rockets are fake because one specific detail was inaccurate. I’m not trying to be rude but it would be nice to work with the ideas even if they’re fake. In fact there’s a good number of diagrams depicting designs that never were constructed, but some were flown one way or another (ie. the Saturn V-2 was based off of one design with a small change to a sensor position onto another stage; was used in Skylab launch.)
+1 5.1 years ago@PorkyClown3
5.1 years agoWhat exactly is inaccurate about it? Are there any errors you know about? No intention of being picky just want to know.
Not sure if this’ll be too easy for players, but getting this to work around maneuver nodes so as to do a lunar transfer or target the launch pad so one stage of the craft could return to earth spacex style would make this 100x better. That way players wouldn’t have to multitask, and would be able to consistently get a lunar encounter or even a interplanetary encounter without input. The real challenge of that would be the programming itself, but looking at all the current functions a wait until <condition> Instruction specifies the craft’s properties and not necessarily where it is relative to planets. Even the Apollo space program used computers to program the maneuvers; the people at NASA had to do the calculations and input them into the flight computers.
+2 5.1 years ago