@Vedhaspace Not yet, but I'm already looking into implementing that. If you notice in the screenshot it says ~3500 m/s ∆v to reach 100km orbit from the ground, but when I launch the rocket it only drops to ~1200 before it runs out of fuel in a suborbital trajectory. I can account for drag by adding some calculations to the code, but it's complex and relies on information about the crafts shape and size that isn't easy to find using vizzy
@Chtite451SR2 I mean, you're basically defacto leader since you're the most active senior member(although I realize maybe you can't add people to the IAAR page or whatever) given Tweedle's absence.
Also, I came up with a great new logo for IAAR that I wanted to share. It doesn't have to be official or anything, but you'd probably like it
On a side note, OTF-3 should be on this list, although unfortunately, nobody has responded to my requests to join the IAAR. I've been trying to join for a while now, but I wanted to make sure I had a worthwhile craft to join with.
Under part properties, choose a part style(texture) that isn't symmetrical(camouflage is probably best) and set the x and y scales to 1000 or more(to get the smallest texture scale possible) then use the paint tool to choose dulled metal or rust colors for each trim and primary color of the part. Maybe try to use a combination of matte and metallic colors to give the impression of worn/oxydized metal
@NebulaSpaceAgency agreed. Their claims can't be verified without seeing what they're talking about in action. Also, to claim that it's the "most reliable rocket in SR2" without having publicly tested/launched it and comparing the data from other rockets is like Uber claiming to have the "most reliable self-driving car on earth" despite never testing it publicly or comparing it to other self-driving cars
Check all your part connections first. It might take a while because it can be a fairly large list to check, but it could just be something connected to the wrong spot or not connected at all despite appearing to be connected properly. If that's not it, then you want to check part collisions which will probably take about as much time. If collisions are on or off on the wrong part, then it could cause wierd stuff to happen too. If that's still not it, then you might need to redesign the whole thing because the games physics are weird sometimes when you have large and intricate crafts
Assuming that you could somehow reverse the orientation of earth's orbit(to make it retrograde), the simple answer is:
short term: not very much. From a basic physics standpoint, nothing would really change.
Long term: eventually, the gravity from the other planets would cause a harmonic displacement of earth's orbit. Basically, the gravity of Jupiter and the other planets that have a measurable effect on earth's orbit would slowly warp our orbit into a highly eccentric ellipse over the course a millions-billions of years, and eventually earth would crash into something else or get flung out the solar system at escape velocity
@FriendlyFin {nav (position)} will only give you the current crafts position relative to the current SOI. To measure the distance between your current craft and planet/moon that you're orbiting, this works great, but to measure the distance to anything else, you need to use different blocks. There's a {craft (0) (position)} block(it might not look exactly like that, but I know there's a way to ask for the position of a specific craft and it not the same as craft position), and the {planet ()(position)} block. You just type in the name of the craft or planet you want the position from and it'll give you the vectors you need. I'm not exactly sure just how "frame-of-reference" works with the vector calculations though since PCI coordinates are dependent on SOI, so it might not be very accurate without some kind of conversion between vector-spaces...
@FriendlyFin Not exactly like I posted, but you could use the same principle. Unfortunately all of the calculations here are SOI dependent, so if you want to measure the distance to a different body than the current SOI, you'll need another method.
A position vector minus another position vector will give you a third vector that connects the two points which you can then measure the length of. If it's the distance between two planets (or a planet and moon), you probably want to subtract the objects radius from that length to measure the distance between the two objects ground surfaces(as opposed to the center of the bodies).
{(P¹-P²) (length)} - {planet ()(radius)}+{planet ()(radius)}
P¹ and P² are the position vectors of the bodies. {planet ()(position)}
@TweedleAerospace I probably should've done this a while ago but I've been trying to perfect my launch code(still working on it, but it's miles ahead of where it was just 6 months ago). I'd like to join the IAAR and I've finally gotten to the point where I'm confident in the systems I've developed enough to actually ask to join. I don't currently have the craft uploaded, but LV-003 successfully put a satellite in orbit during the OTF-3 test last month using a completely autonomous flight system. If you need me to upload the craft I can, however I'm trying to finish updating my launch code first (I've begun to make the transition from a simple speed/altitude based launch code to a more advanced Keplerian orbital element based launch code, but it takes a while to get just right)
@DareDevilSpaceAgency I like "Spacity" and "Frontier Space"(space is the "final frontier" after all). SpaCITy could potentially stand for "Space Colonization and Investigation Technologies" or something similar to that.
My suggestion for a unique name follows the naming convention of my own companies: when I first started playing, it was hard to find an original name, and I probably spent about a week going through various names and versions of names. Eventually I settled on Orbital Insertion Technologies since that perfectly described the purpose of the company without including "aerospace" or anything too similar to wither irl companies or people's accounts on the site. Originally(and my old save file still shows it), I abbreviated it to OIT, but that just doesn't have the ring to it that names like SpaceX and iSpace do. Then it dawned on me: Orbit Tech or OrbiTech which quickly lead me to OrbITech as it stands now. It turns out, there used to be an irl company called Orbitech that was in the field of rocket engine manufacturing, but they went out of business in the 90's, so I don't have to worry about people thinking I'm just copying their name like the dozens of "SpaceX" copycats on this site. My other company, the IRS, started off as the International Rocket Surgeons, but I eventually decided to rename it to International Rocket-surgery Syndicate to both differentiate the name and better describe the business without changing the acronym used.
I'm sorry, but I'm confused by this... I understand the basic idea here, but there's a pretty large language barrier that makes it very hard to understand the details of your idea. It's a great concept, don't get me wrong, but I feel like it would be hard to implement like you described, and would be better off as a mod or something
Afaik, yes. You can download various planets, etc and import them into a custom system(not exactly sure how it's done since I've never bothered messing with planet studio. I know, I'm lame, but whatever... I have seen a few collaboration systems like you asked about on here though, so I know it's possible
Yeah, idk what I did, but I set my video to "premiere" on youtube like I normally do, and for some reason when I click on the embed either here or reddit, it says "This event has ended" and doesn't play the video. My dumbass then deleted the video post on this site thinking I could reupload it and try again, but apparently the site still thinks it exists because the link is the same, so it sends me to the "This post may have been deleted/had it's name changed, etc" page and refuses to let me fix it or change it. I guess I could reupload the video to YT, but it was a lot of hassle to upload the video in the first place(using it studio for last minute edits/music)
I meant to get back on this sooner, but here's a quick update:
I spent about an hour looking at your code and messing around with it. I couldn't exactly get it to work just right at the time, especially since I couldn't easily debug the code on an MFD (because I'm just not familiar enough with programming an MFD).
However, I've started working on a new program that uses the same formula for part of it, and I did get that to work just right using a different set of blocks in vizzy. I'll update you with more later, but I'm gonna show you some ways to use vizzy that work better for what you want, and I'll use your own program to do it, but it'll probably take a few days(especially since I'm working on other stuff too)
Also, I do realize that you said you fixed it already, but I still feel like pushing you in the right direction
@plane918273645 I think I get what you're saying. Basically, absolute value tells you the length of a vector, but not it's direction, so it's only useful for certain specific applications where direction doesn't matter.
The resources I'm using specify using the absolute value of a vector, so I'm sure it's okay for my purposes, but I'll definitely be careful about using it for other things.
Also, thanks pointing that out, I really appreciate it
Lol I didn't think of it that way, but thanks for the explanation. I'm slowly working out the math for classical orbital elements to use for launch guidance and such, and I'm learning a lot of this for the first time by doing so. @plane918273645
Really it all depends on the rocket and guidance system used. A typical gravity turn starts within seconds of launch - basically as soon as the rocket is clear of any ground support equipment - to increase stability(lower speed means less drag to counteract and velocity vector changes more quickly) during the "active" portion of the gravity turn(where the rocket uses thrust to turn itself). It doesn't take much turn either (pitch is usually 85-89° at the start) before gravity takes over and the rocket can follow prograde the rest of the way up while still turning(and not using thrust to do so).
Basically, any rocket using a gravity turn will fly along a high angle ballistic trajectory through the atmosphere, starting near vertical and ending near horizontal by the time it leaves the atmosphere(60km in game. About 70-100km irl). This is the most efficient approach to orbit because you gain the most altitude as early as possible to decrease drag, but then begin to arc over to a relative horizontal plane to reach orbital velocity asap, all the while not using a drop of fuel beyond the initial couple degrees of turn to accomplish it.
The exact altitude to start would basically be the height of the rocket or launch structures or some small multiple of that height. Alternatively, you could use a velocity as your turn point to ensure that the rocket is moving fast enough to complete the maneuver safely as opposed to waiting for it to reach a certain height even if its at 1m/s. The end of the gravity turn depends on the orbit you want to reach. Basically it should be the final periapsis you want for your orbit, or any value larger than 60km to ensure that you've left the atmosphere by the time you're horizontal
@FriendlyFin You have to make sure that ALL your units match up and that you're performing any necessary conversions. Also, if you're using vizzy, different blocks(or the listed options for each block) display in different units, and some are vectors, degrees, radians, etc so if you don't use the right one or convert properly, it won't work right
Honestly I've been wondering the same, and trying to find a reasonable explanation from someone is like pulling teeth. As far as I know, it's more along the lines of the underlying coding that vizzy is built off of, and it's capable of being very math intensive. Also, according to the tooltip in game, it can be more accurate for time related calculations, especially when used with(as?) an input controller(not sure exactly what they mean by that), which makes sense given the previously stated properties. Otherwise, exactly what it's used for, how to use it, and when to use/not use it have eluded me despite spending a decent amount of time looking it up.
@NEOSTAR Yeah, I use Discord, and have a server just for the IRS(although it's a bit dead these days...). I'll find you a link here in a minute. You can also send me a link to your discord if you want
Interesting... Those are some ambitious goals. Goals that feel close to home. The IRS is looking for more partners in the field of aerospace design and research. We're currently designing and building a number of satellites and probes of all types, and could use some more expertise in the matter. Our main partner, OrbITech, is also a growing launch provider with some experience designing and building launch vehicles and satellites. Would you be interested in working with us?
PS. That engine test stand you made is perfect for what I need. I'm gonna borrow it, but don't worry I'll make sure to credit you when/where ever I use it.
There's lots of good resources on the internet as well as at any decent public library(any books on "control systems/theory" will have an explanation of PID), that can explain it better than me, but I'll still try.
1.) Proportional control is exactly what the name says. The output is always proportional to the input, so the further your desired heading/pitch from your actual heading/pitch("error rate"), the larger reaction your craft will have at a given "P value".
2.) The integral is a measure of the "error" over time, basically meant to recalibrate the proportional over time as it loses accuracy. Unfortunately, that function is more suited to a repetitive manufacturing process than an auto-pilot(in an aircraft, the actual direction of travel isn't necessarily the intended direction of travel, so a PID with >0 integral will try to fix that by increasing/decreasing P in a somewhat random way which causes wobble and loss of control)
3.) Derivative "slows" the proportional as it nears it's target in order to reduce "overshoot". An auto-pilot using proportional only("P control") wouldn't work very well since it would wobble back and forth between two extremes with the desired heading somewhere in the middle. Every time the autopilot corrects the heading, the proportional control pushes it just enough to miss the target and have to start all over again. This is where the derivative comes in: as the "error" goes down, the proportional is also decreased proportionally until the error is either minimum or 0, and vice versa (if error goes up, proportional increases)
All of these have their names rooted in the type of math performed. Proportional is just a proportion, integral is an integral, and derivative is a derivative, so if you understand upper level math(high school/early college) then it should be easy to figure out.
Well, given the current state of things and the track record of Jundroo when it comes to updates, I think it's safe to assume it'll happen well before SLS ever takes to the sky... Basically about 2-6 months depending on how much work goes into making campaign mode(the next update as confirmed by Jundroo).
Agreed. Which is why I've decided to do something about it, however, I'm a bit slow due to obligations elsewhere in my life. I started the IRS with the goal of organizing various designers/builders of stuff that's not just rockets, although it hasn't quite taken off yet. I do have a couple sats I've already made, but not sure if I uploaded them yet(if not, I will asap). My Magellanic 1 release does have one of those sats as it's test payload though. I'm also currently working on a new comsat design that I plan to upload soon. And I've been designing/prototyping a number of other potential payload's to develop in the future.
First, you have to upload the image to a site/app like imgur, reddit, discord, or another image sharing service, then copy the link to the picture from that site/app. Second, you need to have 100+ points for the site to display the image(otherwise it just shows a link, not the actual image).
Little bit of both? Idk, I've played on relatively low tier devices and still had minimal issues with higher part counts. Yeah, the game gets slow, but never enough to make the game unenjoyable. I've also played on higher end devices and can assure you that the game is just well optimized in general, since even ridiculously high settings with high part counts doesn't make much of a difference then
@FriendlyFin I'm pretty sure you can use old usernames or slightly different versions of a username(ie, Ispace instead of iSPACE, or OrbITech001 instead of OrbITech), however, I haven't changed my username or tried to "copy" someone else's username, so I don't know for sure
Honestly, I'm not really sure how all that works here. I think you're correct that you can't use a name that's currently being used, but I think you can reuse old names since some users have switched back to older names they used. You could scroll through the Users tab on the site, but that would take a long time and not be very fun. You could also google search "SimpleRockets.com +(username)" and see if anything pops up there. I understand why you wouldn't want to use the same(or at least too similar) name as someone else, since I've had it happen to me(there's only so many combinations of words that make sense as a name, so similarity is unavoidable, but to actively copy someone else's name is not okay).
I really wish there was an internal search function for stuff like that...
@Zenithspeed I never really thought about checking for structures/etc. What I was thinking was more along the lines of some hidden information either within the orbit itself or in the objects properties themselves(ie, the density, gravity, etc etc)
I think the real mystery is where it came from and how it got there. However, there's been a number of easter eggs found since the new system came out, so it's reasonable to assume that there would be something on T.T. Maybe there is something there, but it's not what you're looking for. And maybe they just haven't gotten around to adding anything there yet... Idk
I mean technically you could just make an MFD with "flag" widget displayed on it. It currently supports Emojis, so just make a label widget with a flag emoji or whatever. Or for custom flags, design them fully using different types of widgets layered just the right way. Also, there's a way to import bitmaps to MFDs so really, anything is possible
I'd suggest doing research on the space shuttle since it had a similarly asymmetric design. The SRBs were lined up with it's overall CoM, but the orbiter and it's main engines were well off the CoM. To make it work, the engines are pointed slightly away from the CoM, effectively pushing back toward the CoM. When you do the math to calculate the total thrust and it's vector of acceleration, if you got the angle right, everything will line up like it's supposed to, however it will be diagonal compared to the rocket's orientation.
@Vedhaspace Not yet, but I'm already looking into implementing that. If you notice in the screenshot it says ~3500 m/s ∆v to reach 100km orbit from the ground, but when I launch the rocket it only drops to ~1200 before it runs out of fuel in a suborbital trajectory. I can account for drag by adding some calculations to the code, but it's complex and relies on information about the crafts shape and size that isn't easy to find using vizzy
2.8 years agoYeah. I've tried to contact him a few times, but no luck so far...
I haven't quite finished the pic yet, but it's basically IAAR stylized like: I∆VR (except with an upside down A instead of V)
+1 2.8 years ago@Chtite451SR2 I mean, you're basically defacto leader since you're the most active senior member(although I realize maybe you can't add people to the IAAR page or whatever) given Tweedle's absence.
Also, I came up with a great new logo for IAAR that I wanted to share. It doesn't have to be official or anything, but you'd probably like it
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 ahhh makes sense. Now I gotta pester @Chtite451SR2 to let me in. 🙃
+1 2.8 years agoFor clarity: ?v is ∆v. For some reason it gets changed to ?v in the post itself, but stays ∆v in the comments 🤷🤦
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 When I go to edit the post it shows ∆v in the text box, but when I submit and look here it shows ?v 🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦
2.8 years ago∆
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 lol idk why it keeps doing that to me...🤦 I actually used that symbol and it still fucked it all up
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 Honestly I think so but I'm not sure. I thought you might have been the next in command lol.
2.8 years agoNice! 😎
On a side note, OTF-3 should be on this list, although unfortunately, nobody has responded to my requests to join the IAAR. I've been trying to join for a while now, but I wanted to make sure I had a worthwhile craft to join with.
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 🧑⚖️ "Exactly!"
2.8 years agoMOAR pistons! And maybe moar rotators lol
2.8 years agoUnder part properties, choose a part style(texture) that isn't symmetrical(camouflage is probably best) and set the x and y scales to 1000 or more(to get the smallest texture scale possible) then use the paint tool to choose dulled metal or rust colors for each trim and primary color of the part. Maybe try to use a combination of matte and metallic colors to give the impression of worn/oxydized metal
+1 2.8 years ago@NebulaSpaceAgency agreed. Their claims can't be verified without seeing what they're talking about in action. Also, to claim that it's the "most reliable rocket in SR2" without having publicly tested/launched it and comparing the data from other rockets is like Uber claiming to have the "most reliable self-driving car on earth" despite never testing it publicly or comparing it to other self-driving cars
+2 2.8 years agoCheck all your part connections first. It might take a while because it can be a fairly large list to check, but it could just be something connected to the wrong spot or not connected at all despite appearing to be connected properly. If that's not it, then you want to check part collisions which will probably take about as much time. If collisions are on or off on the wrong part, then it could cause wierd stuff to happen too. If that's still not it, then you might need to redesign the whole thing because the games physics are weird sometimes when you have large and intricate crafts
+1 2.8 years ago@Chtite451SR2 right! Hopefully we can get this going again soon!
2.8 years agoLol
2.8 years agoAssuming that you could somehow reverse the orientation of earth's orbit(to make it retrograde), the simple answer is:
short term: not very much. From a basic physics standpoint, nothing would really change.
Long term: eventually, the gravity from the other planets would cause a harmonic displacement of earth's orbit. Basically, the gravity of Jupiter and the other planets that have a measurable effect on earth's orbit would slowly warp our orbit into a highly eccentric ellipse over the course a millions-billions of years, and eventually earth would crash into something else or get flung out the solar system at escape velocity
+1 2.8 years ago@Aquaflames4571 yeah, that's what I'm talking about. You need a trust reverser if you don't trust your plain
2.8 years agoI don't trust my jets either... You just gotta continue improving your designs so that one day, you can trust your jets 🥸
+1 2.8 years ago@FriendlyFin {nav (position)} will only give you the current crafts position relative to the current SOI. To measure the distance between your current craft and planet/moon that you're orbiting, this works great, but to measure the distance to anything else, you need to use different blocks. There's a {craft (0) (position)} block(it might not look exactly like that, but I know there's a way to ask for the position of a specific craft and it not the same as craft position), and the {planet ()(position)} block. You just type in the name of the craft or planet you want the position from and it'll give you the vectors you need. I'm not exactly sure just how "frame-of-reference" works with the vector calculations though since PCI coordinates are dependent on SOI, so it might not be very accurate without some kind of conversion between vector-spaces...
2.8 years ago@FriendlyFin Not exactly like I posted, but you could use the same principle. Unfortunately all of the calculations here are SOI dependent, so if you want to measure the distance to a different body than the current SOI, you'll need another method.
A position vector minus another position vector will give you a third vector that connects the two points which you can then measure the length of. If it's the distance between two planets (or a planet and moon), you probably want to subtract the objects radius from that length to measure the distance between the two objects ground surfaces(as opposed to the center of the bodies).
{(P¹-P²) (length)} - {planet ()(radius)}+{planet ()(radius)}
2.8 years agoP¹ and P² are the position vectors of the bodies. {planet ()(position)}
@TweedleAerospace I probably should've done this a while ago but I've been trying to perfect my launch code(still working on it, but it's miles ahead of where it was just 6 months ago). I'd like to join the IAAR and I've finally gotten to the point where I'm confident in the systems I've developed enough to actually ask to join. I don't currently have the craft uploaded, but LV-003 successfully put a satellite in orbit during the OTF-3 test last month using a completely autonomous flight system. If you need me to upload the craft I can, however I'm trying to finish updating my launch code first (I've begun to make the transition from a simple speed/altitude based launch code to a more advanced Keplerian orbital element based launch code, but it takes a while to get just right)
2.8 years ago@DareDevilSpaceAgency I like "Spacity" and "Frontier Space"(space is the "final frontier" after all). SpaCITy could potentially stand for "Space Colonization and Investigation Technologies" or something similar to that.
My suggestion for a unique name follows the naming convention of my own companies: when I first started playing, it was hard to find an original name, and I probably spent about a week going through various names and versions of names. Eventually I settled on Orbital Insertion Technologies since that perfectly described the purpose of the company without including "aerospace" or anything too similar to wither irl companies or people's accounts on the site. Originally(and my old save file still shows it), I abbreviated it to OIT, but that just doesn't have the ring to it that names like SpaceX and iSpace do. Then it dawned on me: Orbit Tech or OrbiTech which quickly lead me to OrbITech as it stands now. It turns out, there used to be an irl company called Orbitech that was in the field of rocket engine manufacturing, but they went out of business in the 90's, so I don't have to worry about people thinking I'm just copying their name like the dozens of "SpaceX" copycats on this site. My other company, the IRS, started off as the International Rocket Surgeons, but I eventually decided to rename it to International Rocket-surgery Syndicate to both differentiate the name and better describe the business without changing the acronym used.
+1 2.8 years agoI'm sorry, but I'm confused by this... I understand the basic idea here, but there's a pretty large language barrier that makes it very hard to understand the details of your idea. It's a great concept, don't get me wrong, but I feel like it would be hard to implement like you described, and would be better off as a mod or something
+1 2.8 years agoAfaik, yes. You can download various planets, etc and import them into a custom system(not exactly sure how it's done since I've never bothered messing with planet studio. I know, I'm lame, but whatever... I have seen a few collaboration systems like you asked about on here though, so I know it's possible
2.8 years ago@Staticalliam7 lol
Yeah, idk what I did, but I set my video to "premiere" on youtube like I normally do, and for some reason when I click on the embed either here or reddit, it says "This event has ended" and doesn't play the video. My dumbass then deleted the video post on this site thinking I could reupload it and try again, but apparently the site still thinks it exists because the link is the same, so it sends me to the "This post may have been deleted/had it's name changed, etc" page and refuses to let me fix it or change it. I guess I could reupload the video to YT, but it was a lot of hassle to upload the video in the first place(using it studio for last minute edits/music)
+1 2.8 years agoI meant to get back on this sooner, but here's a quick update:
I spent about an hour looking at your code and messing around with it. I couldn't exactly get it to work just right at the time, especially since I couldn't easily debug the code on an MFD (because I'm just not familiar enough with programming an MFD).
However, I've started working on a new program that uses the same formula for part of it, and I did get that to work just right using a different set of blocks in vizzy. I'll update you with more later, but I'm gonna show you some ways to use vizzy that work better for what you want, and I'll use your own program to do it, but it'll probably take a few days(especially since I'm working on other stuff too)
Also, I do realize that you said you fixed it already, but I still feel like pushing you in the right direction
2.8 years ago@plane918273645 I think I get what you're saying. Basically, absolute value tells you the length of a vector, but not it's direction, so it's only useful for certain specific applications where direction doesn't matter.
The resources I'm using specify using the absolute value of a vector, so I'm sure it's okay for my purposes, but I'll definitely be careful about using it for other things.
Also, thanks pointing that out, I really appreciate it
2.9 years agoLol I didn't think of it that way, but thanks for the explanation. I'm slowly working out the math for classical orbital elements to use for launch guidance and such, and I'm learning a lot of this for the first time by doing so. @plane918273645
2.9 years agoReally it all depends on the rocket and guidance system used. A typical gravity turn starts within seconds of launch - basically as soon as the rocket is clear of any ground support equipment - to increase stability(lower speed means less drag to counteract and velocity vector changes more quickly) during the "active" portion of the gravity turn(where the rocket uses thrust to turn itself). It doesn't take much turn either (pitch is usually 85-89° at the start) before gravity takes over and the rocket can follow prograde the rest of the way up while still turning(and not using thrust to do so).
Basically, any rocket using a gravity turn will fly along a high angle ballistic trajectory through the atmosphere, starting near vertical and ending near horizontal by the time it leaves the atmosphere(60km in game. About 70-100km irl). This is the most efficient approach to orbit because you gain the most altitude as early as possible to decrease drag, but then begin to arc over to a relative horizontal plane to reach orbital velocity asap, all the while not using a drop of fuel beyond the initial couple degrees of turn to accomplish it.
The exact altitude to start would basically be the height of the rocket or launch structures or some small multiple of that height. Alternatively, you could use a velocity as your turn point to ensure that the rocket is moving fast enough to complete the maneuver safely as opposed to waiting for it to reach a certain height even if its at 1m/s. The end of the gravity turn depends on the orbit you want to reach. Basically it should be the final periapsis you want for your orbit, or any value larger than 60km to ensure that you've left the atmosphere by the time you're horizontal
+4 2.9 years ago@FriendlyFin You have to make sure that ALL your units match up and that you're performing any necessary conversions. Also, if you're using vizzy, different blocks(or the listed options for each block) display in different units, and some are vectors, degrees, radians, etc so if you don't use the right one or convert properly, it won't work right
2.9 years agoDepends on personal preference, but generally it's gonna be m/s(meters per second)
2.9 years agoHonestly I've been wondering the same, and trying to find a reasonable explanation from someone is like pulling teeth. As far as I know, it's more along the lines of the underlying coding that vizzy is built off of, and it's capable of being very math intensive. Also, according to the tooltip in game, it can be more accurate for time related calculations, especially when used with(as?) an input controller(not sure exactly what they mean by that), which makes sense given the previously stated properties. Otherwise, exactly what it's used for, how to use it, and when to use/not use it have eluded me despite spending a decent amount of time looking it up.
2.9 years agoAlright here it is: https://discord.gg/zQnYYyGq
2.9 years ago@NEOSTAR Yeah, I use Discord, and have a server just for the IRS(although it's a bit dead these days...). I'll find you a link here in a minute. You can also send me a link to your discord if you want
2.9 years agoInteresting... Those are some ambitious goals. Goals that feel close to home. The IRS is looking for more partners in the field of aerospace design and research. We're currently designing and building a number of satellites and probes of all types, and could use some more expertise in the matter. Our main partner, OrbITech, is also a growing launch provider with some experience designing and building launch vehicles and satellites. Would you be interested in working with us?
PS. That engine test stand you made is perfect for what I need. I'm gonna borrow it, but don't worry I'll make sure to credit you when/where ever I use it.
+2 2.9 years agoThere's lots of good resources on the internet as well as at any decent public library(any books on "control systems/theory" will have an explanation of PID), that can explain it better than me, but I'll still try.
1.) Proportional control is exactly what the name says. The output is always proportional to the input, so the further your desired heading/pitch from your actual heading/pitch("error rate"), the larger reaction your craft will have at a given "P value".
2.) The integral is a measure of the "error" over time, basically meant to recalibrate the proportional over time as it loses accuracy. Unfortunately, that function is more suited to a repetitive manufacturing process than an auto-pilot(in an aircraft, the actual direction of travel isn't necessarily the intended direction of travel, so a PID with >0 integral will try to fix that by increasing/decreasing P in a somewhat random way which causes wobble and loss of control)
3.) Derivative "slows" the proportional as it nears it's target in order to reduce "overshoot". An auto-pilot using proportional only("P control") wouldn't work very well since it would wobble back and forth between two extremes with the desired heading somewhere in the middle. Every time the autopilot corrects the heading, the proportional control pushes it just enough to miss the target and have to start all over again. This is where the derivative comes in: as the "error" goes down, the proportional is also decreased proportionally until the error is either minimum or 0, and vice versa (if error goes up, proportional increases)
All of these have their names rooted in the type of math performed. Proportional is just a proportion, integral is an integral, and derivative is a derivative, so if you understand upper level math(high school/early college) then it should be easy to figure out.
+2 2.9 years agoIf you understand the math behind orbital mechanics, then yes, it's possible
2.9 years agoWell, given the current state of things and the track record of Jundroo when it comes to updates, I think it's safe to assume it'll happen well before SLS ever takes to the sky... Basically about 2-6 months depending on how much work goes into making campaign mode(the next update as confirmed by Jundroo).
2.9 years ago@Marssmmm lol alright I did the poll.
2.9 years agoAgreed. Which is why I've decided to do something about it, however, I'm a bit slow due to obligations elsewhere in my life. I started the IRS with the goal of organizing various designers/builders of stuff that's not just rockets, although it hasn't quite taken off yet. I do have a couple sats I've already made, but not sure if I uploaded them yet(if not, I will asap). My Magellanic 1 release does have one of those sats as it's test payload though. I'm also currently working on a new comsat design that I plan to upload soon. And I've been designing/prototyping a number of other potential payload's to develop in the future.
2.9 years agoFirst, you have to upload the image to a site/app like imgur, reddit, discord, or another image sharing service, then copy the link to the picture from that site/app. Second, you need to have 100+ points for the site to display the image(otherwise it just shows a link, not the actual image).
2.9 years agoLittle bit of both? Idk, I've played on relatively low tier devices and still had minimal issues with higher part counts. Yeah, the game gets slow, but never enough to make the game unenjoyable. I've also played on higher end devices and can assure you that the game is just well optimized in general, since even ridiculously high settings with high part counts doesn't make much of a difference then
+1 2.9 years ago@FriendlyFin I'm pretty sure you can use old usernames or slightly different versions of a username(ie, Ispace instead of iSPACE, or OrbITech001 instead of OrbITech), however, I haven't changed my username or tried to "copy" someone else's username, so I don't know for sure
2.9 years agoHonestly, I'm not really sure how all that works here. I think you're correct that you can't use a name that's currently being used, but I think you can reuse old names since some users have switched back to older names they used. You could scroll through the Users tab on the site, but that would take a long time and not be very fun. You could also google search "SimpleRockets.com +(username)" and see if anything pops up there. I understand why you wouldn't want to use the same(or at least too similar) name as someone else, since I've had it happen to me(there's only so many combinations of words that make sense as a name, so similarity is unavoidable, but to actively copy someone else's name is not okay).
I really wish there was an internal search function for stuff like that...
2.9 years ago@Zenithspeed I never really thought about checking for structures/etc. What I was thinking was more along the lines of some hidden information either within the orbit itself or in the objects properties themselves(ie, the density, gravity, etc etc)
2.9 years agoI think the real mystery is where it came from and how it got there. However, there's been a number of easter eggs found since the new system came out, so it's reasonable to assume that there would be something on T.T. Maybe there is something there, but it's not what you're looking for. And maybe they just haven't gotten around to adding anything there yet... Idk
2.9 years agoI mean technically you could just make an MFD with "flag" widget displayed on it. It currently supports Emojis, so just make a label widget with a flag emoji or whatever. Or for custom flags, design them fully using different types of widgets layered just the right way. Also, there's a way to import bitmaps to MFDs so really, anything is possible
2.9 years agoI'd suggest doing research on the space shuttle since it had a similarly asymmetric design. The SRBs were lined up with it's overall CoM, but the orbiter and it's main engines were well off the CoM. To make it work, the engines are pointed slightly away from the CoM, effectively pushing back toward the CoM. When you do the math to calculate the total thrust and it's vector of acceleration, if you got the angle right, everything will line up like it's supposed to, however it will be diagonal compared to the rocket's orientation.
2.9 years ago