@Oscarcarserud simple as compared to a deep simulation with every conceivable variable in atmospheric conditions, orbital perturbations, mechanical inconsistencies, noise, etc, etc. Not simple as in easy.
There's a lot more that can be done using XML if you're on PC. I'm not entirely sure what the advantages are of having script on individual parts other than Vizzy variables are not global. You don't for instance have to have a separate script for a part which requires an input, receiving a value from a main controller and passing it on. That might be useful or it might be pain. I don't know.
@pedro16797 yeah I just figured it was in XML after searching input field and found the SR2 XML guide on github. Had me proper confused there for a while 😅
@pedro16797 Is there a demonstration of this anywhere because I can't see how it's done. Engine parts properties, only element affecting input I can find is the AG and staging. I tried another element, a piston, mapped directly to a variable outside of craft instructions but there wasn't any communication.
Is this a mod?
@Oscarcarserud Not sure I understand all your post but one point, having throttle control per engine, it can't be done. I've tried work arounds with separate chips on sub components but haven't found a way. I can see the potential complexities involved from the development point of view so I think we have accept the limitation.
Edit. Can be done through XML modding.
It's not a huge deal but something to take into account if using translation inputs in a script. I'm tending to use them for jobs other than RCS duties, when RCS is non applicable the inputs are handy as they don't affect anything else. What seems like a logical layout on mobile won't, ahem, translate to PC. Vice versa.
There are no separate bindings for translation. I made a test model with Vizzy using translation inputs to activate beacons alongside RCS nozzles. Just to make sure nothing odd happening from the Vizzy end.
@pedro16797 I was wondering what the distinction was between Broadcast/Recieve and Custom Instructions. So you can broadcast to an infinite loop and the thread that made the call would continue regardles. Calling a custom instruction, the thread 'jumps' to the custom instruction, so the loop would have to be terminated before things could continue. That makes more sense.
@Oscarcarserud Like calling a subroutine that doesn't return a function. Yeah manuals are cool, but the prospect of having to document all this must be terrifying. I wouldn't, they'll work it out.
@pedro16797 well, might have had something to do with me not looking at the low default settings on the windows installation. That and test running a 100 part model. Tried a bigger model with higher settings, yes the truth be told. Anyway surprised it does anything, doesn't usually. Good optimisation on part of the devs.
It's looking really impressive, might even have to break out the old laptop but I don't think it'll manage.. IOS for now. So when's the 1000 page PDF manual coming out? Only kidding (;
@Chtite451SR2 hmmm, someone was preoccupied with the really complicated stuff and overlooked a silly mistake, my guess. Imagine it will get fixed pretty soon.
You can move a camera anywhere, just stick it on something other than the port and move it to it's centered over the port facing out. You can do the same thing with a light which might be more useful, reduce the angle to a minimum and hey presto, almost laser guidance.
Would it be relating to air density? Anything above zero is going to start creating drag. I don't remember what the exact boundary is though I'm guessing about 58Km. Certainly drag doesn't become particularly effective at slowing anything down much above 55Km but that may be down to lack of patience...
@SmurfResearchX ha yeah I tried the thing on a drop release, half the time it just flew up into mothership and ended in one big explosion.
Awesome, glad your project working out. Does your plane/rocket remind you of anything? That's how I come up with names.
@SmurfResearchX I got a ton of air launching prototypes, none of them separate without some 'piloting skills'. I had a look for real life examples of launching off the top, almost none, Lockheed did something in the 60's, abandoned after a handful of attempts, about 50% success rate. Otherwise I saw somewhere the Chinese were planning something but maybe BS. I just think it's probably a mad thing to do, which is why I wanted to try and get it to work. The other big disadvantage is immediately losing control of the mothership on release. I wonder if having 2 pilots carefully working together would make a big difference. Anyway I've kind of nailed it personally, haven't had a disaster since many test flights, it takes some practice.. Hoping I can replicate with Vizzy, that's going to be the final step.
@SmurfResearchX I think maybe the problem with auto pilot is it's getting confused by having the thrust on movable parts, it should work as a plane in atmospheric flight, I guess it kind of works but I'm just fussy. For space I just set time to x10 and it works a treat.
I'm guessing the situation after release is that the released craft finds itself in situation that it wouldn't have been in if not for the mothership. So there's a period of adjustment while it finds its feet.
@SmurfResearchX I think I got away with some complications because both chips are set to plane though not sure that's related. Is this an auto pilot issue? I spent forever changing the settings trying to get auto pilot to work, gave up in the end. Try having the gyro on an AG and switch it off for the drop? See what happens. One thing I learnt when you air launch, the released craft can do crazy things before it settles down.
I found this works without the interstage, as long as everything is dragged out the subassemblies folder and has its own chip, it's regarded as a separate craft, regardless how it's attached.
Oh for a 400 page PDF manual..
@Oscarcarserud For side boosters, external fuel tanks etc you could try using mass as the condition.
4.8 years ago@Oscarcarserud simple as compared to a deep simulation with every conceivable variable in atmospheric conditions, orbital perturbations, mechanical inconsistencies, noise, etc, etc. Not simple as in easy.
4.8 years agoThere's a lot more that can be done using XML if you're on PC. I'm not entirely sure what the advantages are of having script on individual parts other than Vizzy variables are not global. You don't for instance have to have a separate script for a part which requires an input, receiving a value from a main controller and passing it on. That might be useful or it might be pain. I don't know.
https://www.simplerockets.com/c/hBtu97/Basic-PID-Controller-Independent-Form
+1 4.8 years agoI could isolate the PID from what I've been working on.
+1 4.8 years ago@pedro16797 yeah I just figured it was in XML after searching input field and found the SR2 XML guide on github. Had me proper confused there for a while 😅
4.8 years ago@pedro16797 Is there a demonstration of this anywhere because I can't see how it's done. Engine parts properties, only element affecting input I can find is the AG and staging. I tried another element, a piston, mapped directly to a variable outside of craft instructions but there wasn't any communication.
4.8 years agoIs this a mod?
@Oscarcarserud Not sure I understand all your post but one point, having throttle control per engine, it can't be done. I've tried work arounds with separate chips on sub components but haven't found a way. I can see the potential complexities involved from the development point of view so I think we have accept the limitation.
4.8 years agoEdit. Can be done through XML modding.
I made a suggestion. For anyone slightly bothered by this please check it out 🙂
4.8 years agoIt's not a huge deal but something to take into account if using translation inputs in a script. I'm tending to use them for jobs other than RCS duties, when RCS is non applicable the inputs are handy as they don't affect anything else. What seems like a logical layout on mobile won't, ahem, translate to PC. Vice versa.
+1 4.8 years agoThere are no separate bindings for translation. I made a test model with Vizzy using translation inputs to activate beacons alongside RCS nozzles. Just to make sure nothing odd happening from the Vizzy end.
4.8 years agoThought I was going mad for a minute.
+1 4.8 years ago@pedro16797 I was wondering what the distinction was between Broadcast/Recieve and Custom Instructions. So you can broadcast to an infinite loop and the thread that made the call would continue regardles. Calling a custom instruction, the thread 'jumps' to the custom instruction, so the loop would have to be terminated before things could continue. That makes more sense.
4.8 years ago@zzazza doh, thanks. My confusion. I was seeing experimental as a heading and looking for the latest build version. It was late here..
4.8 years ago@crowxe Properties/Beta/Experimental I don't know the code, tried werdna but didn't work.
4.8 years ago@Oscarcarserud Like calling a subroutine that doesn't return a function. Yeah manuals are cool, but the prospect of having to document all this must be terrifying. I wouldn't, they'll work it out.
4.8 years ago@crowxe On Steam.
4.8 years agoFound the experimental branch. Where would I be looking for the access code?
4.8 years ago@pedro16797 well, might have had something to do with me not looking at the low default settings on the windows installation. That and test running a 100 part model. Tried a bigger model with higher settings, yes the truth be told. Anyway surprised it does anything, doesn't usually. Good optimisation on part of the devs.
4.8 years agoOK, An old laptop is still faster than a new Ipad..tssch. Count me in 😎
4.8 years agoIt's looking really impressive, might even have to break out the old laptop but I don't think it'll manage.. IOS for now. So when's the 1000 page PDF manual coming out? Only kidding (;
+1 4.8 years ago@Chtite451SR2 hmmm, someone was preoccupied with the really complicated stuff and overlooked a silly mistake, my guess. Imagine it will get fixed pretty soon.
4.9 years agoYou can move a camera anywhere, just stick it on something other than the port and move it to it's centered over the port facing out. You can do the same thing with a light which might be more useful, reduce the angle to a minimum and hey presto, almost laser guidance.
+1 4.9 years ago1 for 2 and 2 for 1 or something like that..
4.9 years agoWould it be relating to air density? Anything above zero is going to start creating drag. I don't remember what the exact boundary is though I'm guessing about 58Km. Certainly drag doesn't become particularly effective at slowing anything down much above 55Km but that may be down to lack of patience...
4.9 years ago@SmurfResearchX ha yeah I tried the thing on a drop release, half the time it just flew up into mothership and ended in one big explosion.
4.9 years agoAwesome, glad your project working out. Does your plane/rocket remind you of anything? That's how I come up with names.
@SmurfResearchX I got a ton of air launching prototypes, none of them separate without some 'piloting skills'. I had a look for real life examples of launching off the top, almost none, Lockheed did something in the 60's, abandoned after a handful of attempts, about 50% success rate. Otherwise I saw somewhere the Chinese were planning something but maybe BS. I just think it's probably a mad thing to do, which is why I wanted to try and get it to work. The other big disadvantage is immediately losing control of the mothership on release. I wonder if having 2 pilots carefully working together would make a big difference. Anyway I've kind of nailed it personally, haven't had a disaster since many test flights, it takes some practice.. Hoping I can replicate with Vizzy, that's going to be the final step.
4.9 years ago@SmurfResearchX I think maybe the problem with auto pilot is it's getting confused by having the thrust on movable parts, it should work as a plane in atmospheric flight, I guess it kind of works but I'm just fussy. For space I just set time to x10 and it works a treat.
4.9 years agoI'm guessing the situation after release is that the released craft finds itself in situation that it wouldn't have been in if not for the mothership. So there's a period of adjustment while it finds its feet.
@SmurfResearchX That sounds like the culprit, well done.
4.9 years ago@SmurfResearchX Send me a link if you can't figure it out, I'm no expert but you never know I might see something. PS thanks for updoot 🙂
4.9 years ago@SmurfResearchX I think I got away with some complications because both chips are set to plane though not sure that's related. Is this an auto pilot issue? I spent forever changing the settings trying to get auto pilot to work, gave up in the end. Try having the gyro on an AG and switch it off for the drop? See what happens. One thing I learnt when you air launch, the released craft can do crazy things before it settles down.
4.9 years agoI found this works without the interstage, as long as everything is dragged out the subassemblies folder and has its own chip, it's regarded as a separate craft, regardless how it's attached.
4.9 years agoOh for a 400 page PDF manual..
Yep, it working.
4.9 years ago@SmurfResearchX Thanks I'll give it a go.
4.9 years ago