<NathanKell>
!tell Maxsimal,soundnfury Spaceplane wings appear in that node instead of the following (Prototype Spaceplanes) node because I didn't want to have *four* clones of the pwings, so I stuck with three. Really there should be X-15-rated pwings in the 1959 node, and the true spaceplane wings reserved for the later one. Note that the X-15 was actually *less* heat-resistant than it could have been; the
<Qboid>
NathanKell: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<NathanKell>
NACA design called for studying heat on airframes, so they needed it to be heat-resistant but not *too* heat resistant (see D-558-III http://www.astronautix.com/d/d-558-3.html )
<ProjectThoth>
Rockets don't operate at stoichiometric ratios because it'd melt the engines, right?
<NathanKell>
And for various other reasons, AIUI
<NathanKell>
for example you don't lose much Isp but gain a lot of density by running lean for hydrolox.
<ProjectThoth>
Ah, fair point.
<taniwha>
NathanKell: o/
<NathanKell>
Heya!
<taniwha>
I got myself a thrustmaster hotas+pedals setup the other week. pedals are confusing
<taniwha>
but having analog brake controls is very nice :)
<taniwha>
(confusing, and I think superfluous on my planes (they're usually very yaw stable))
<ProjectThoth>
I got myself a spray bottle at the dollar store for the moth I'm taking care of.
<NathanKell>
taniwha: Heh :)
<taniwha>
also, using an all-moving tail fin doesn't help :P
<ProjectThoth>
His name is Jeffery.
<borntosleep>
Grand Moth P'Thoth
<NathanKell>
That sounds Lovecraftian.
<borntosleep>
my favorite limerics summon great old ones, preferable tsathoggua
<ProjectThoth>
Big ol' Polyphemus moth.
<awang>
s/Grand Moth/Grand Moff
<awang>
NathanKell: got any tips on choosing PEG parameters?
<NathanKell>
Has it changed in the last month?
<awang>
idk, I just started actually using it recently
<NathanKell>
ok
<NathanKell>
what's your LV?
<awang>
Looked at the "edit ascent path" window, wondering if the numbers there are worth tweaking
<awang>
Right now, it's a 60t vehicle with a RD-107 first stage and X-405 second
<NathanKell>
Starting and ending TWRs and burn times?
<awang>
Sending ~1.3t into LEO for a lunar mission
<awang>
Starting is somewhere around 1.4, ending ~8.5, 2m 25s
<awang>
For first stage
<NathanKell>
and second?
<awang>
1.44 starting, 7.05 ending, 2m 33s
<NathanKell>
ok
<NathanKell>
so...you will only be able to go to like a 150km perigee
<NathanKell>
Because PEG requires a continuous burn, no coasting.
<blowfish>
:o NathanKell returns
<NathanKell>
Heya!
<NathanKell>
Yeah, I'm still crunchy but slightly less crunchy.
<awang>
Yep, that's actually what I have set :P
<awang>
Was messing with 160km yesterday, but ended up making the TLI stage slightly heavier so had to decrease parking altitude
<awang>
Tried a more Apollo-esque 185km, didn't make it
<NathanKell>
Yeah, you'll have mad steering losses going to 185km
<NathanKell>
because you have to loft high then burn off all the excess vertical velocity later.
<NathanKell>
So with 1.4...probably something like 10s vertical ascent, and 75 seconds of pitch program at...say 0.75 d/s?
<NathanKell>
maybe even 1d/s
<NathanKell>
Hope you brought good fairings, it's gonna get hot.
<awang>
Oh jeeze
<awang>
That seems... low
<NathanKell>
You're the one with the 5-minutes-to-orbit LV :P
<awang>
I have things set at 10s pitch start, 55s pitch end, 1 deg/s, but I had no idea if that's optimal
<NathanKell>
yeah, that seems pretty good actually
<NathanKell>
is there much of a kick on pitch program end?
<awang>
I just noticed that PEG really wanted to pitch down with the default 0.75 deg/s
<NathanKell>
yeah
<soundnfury>
.
<Qboid>
soundnfury: NathanKell left a message for you in #RO [13.10.2017 01:58:30]: "Spaceplane wings appear in that node instead of the following (Prototype Spaceplanes) node because I didn't want to have *four* clones of the pwings, so I stuck with three. Really there should be X-15-rated pwings in the 1959 node, and the true spaceplane wings reserved for the later one. Note that the X-15 was actually *less* he
<Qboid>
at-resistant than it could have been; the"
<NathanKell>
because 5 minutes to orbit means a *very* shallow ascent.
<awang>
I honestly don't remember
<NathanKell>
Or a coast, but PEG can't
<soundnfury>
o/
<NathanKell>
Heya!
* soundnfury
can not into sleep
<awang>
Sorry, I can't help the 5 minutes to orbit... 60t and early engines means short burn times
<awang>
Unless I'm designing things horribly wrong
<awang>
How long of a wait between first and second stages could PEG deal with?
<soundnfury>
NathanKell: the thing that really bugs me about the spaceplane wings is that you can (just) do an orbital spaceplane with tech nodes that all cost <= 25...
<awang>
Well, that and the RD-108 doesn't have a TF config
<soundnfury>
whereas to do a capsule you need to have upgraded the R&D building
<NathanKell>
awang: 2-3 seconds? :P
<awang>
And the LR-101 (or was it 105?) doesn't have enough liftoff thrust
<blowfish>
I've waited 10ish seconds before
<awang>
So had to go with the RD-107
<NathanKell>
soundnfury: Yes, you can. But (as was true in reality) it's a dead end :)
<soundnfury>
NathanKell: okay, fair enough
<soundnfury>
I'll build Dyna-Rod in my career game and not feel bad about it, then :)
<NathanKell>
Like, an orbital X-15 *was* possible (although it surviving reentry was kinda iffy).
<NathanKell>
blowfish: True. And, I mean, awang, you *can* coast a bit, sure, but at the cost of lost delta V (effectively)
<soundnfury>
(I'm in a hurry to get my starting astronauts to orbit before they retire. And yes I know there aren't meant to be starting astronauts, but there still are so far)
<NathanKell>
:)
<NathanKell>
awang: And you're already marginally capable, so...
<blowfish>
RD-108 + X-405 would make a pretty capable early LV I think
<awang>
NathanKell: Marginally capable?
<soundnfury>
hmm, it should be possible to insert a coast phase into PEG, just by having a fake stage with tiny thrust.
<soundnfury>
idk if it would still converge, though
<awang>
blowfish: It's enough for TLI, at least
<awang>
Or I guess. RD-107 appears to be an acceptable substitute
<NathanKell>
awang: I thought you were talking about just barely getting your payload up?
<blowfish>
RD-107 doesn't have the burn time I would want
<NathanKell>
Hmm...now that you've all got me re-enthused >.>
<NathanKell>
time to see how many commits
<NathanKell>
and if my save works
<NathanKell>
anyone know?
<awang>
NathanKell: True... But is 1.3t considered a lot?
<awang>
blowfish: And the RD-108 has effectively unlimited burn time since it's missing TF configs :(
<blowfish>
NathanKell: the last commit to dev on RealismOverhaul was yours...
<awang>
NathanKell: Prepare to be disappointed :P
<NathanKell>
...uh
<NathanKell>
Oh, did miniPap 2.0 occur?
<blowfish>
awang: yes, but to have it lift off the pad on its own it would burn for less time than the real thing
<awang>
blowfish: Ah, that's a good point
<awang>
NathanKell: I think so?
<blowfish>
don't look at me, I've been working on ModuleManager stuff
<ProjectThoth>
Don't look at me, I'm not a dev.
<blowfish>
I would really love to get CobaltWolf's X-405H working in RO though
<blowfish>
pain in trying to work with RO is a large part of my motivation for working on MM though actually
<awang>
blowfish: Huh? Pretty sure I'm using the X-405 right now
<blowfish>
since cutting the time it takes to load without cache makes things a lot easier
<awang>
Unless you're talking about a different one?
<blowfish>
awang: it's a config on the X-405, but CobaltWolf has an actual model that looks like the real thing
<awang>
Ah, I see
<blowfish>
X-405 was the actual Vanguard engine, X-405H was an upper stage version
<blowfish>
which was built but never flown
<awang>
Looks like I'm misusing the X-405 then
<blowfish>
ehh, I did the same thing
<blowfish>
the 405H doesn't unlock until 1959 and the regular ol' 405 still makes a pretty good 2nd stage
<awang>
Minus the atrocious ignition rate of ~70%
<awang>
>:(
<blowfish>
ah, ignition failures may be a point of balance that needs to be addressed
<awang>
blowfish: ?
<blowfish>
since most of the play testing thus far on the new tech tree has been on builds of TF that had them borked
<blowfish>
I mean, the real ignition rate is the real ignition rate
<blowfish>
but funds rewards, contract timing, etc might have to be adjusted
<awang>
Ah right, the bug hasn't been fixed in the current TF version
<blowfish>
same for that bug where you don't pay entry costs, but I don't think that's been nailed down yet
<awang>
Been playing on most up to date master for too long :(
ProjectThoth has quit [Quit: +++out of cheese error+++]
<NathanKell>
what entry cost bug? I thought I fixed that one
<awang>
blowfish: I'm actually playing on a build of RF that has the RP-0 changes ported to the current 1.3.0 version, and I think I've been paying all the entry costs
<awang>
Don't know if it's RF though
<blowfish>
NathanKell: I thought I was using all the up-to-date DLLs, but it's possible I missed soemthing
<awang>
Bug's been fixed on my end, although by what exactly I don't know, since I like to torture myself with custom-ish builds
<NathanKell>
entry costs are via RF yes
<NathanKell>
blowfish: Ah. Hmm
<NathanKell>
Hopefully next week I can sit down and port what I can to 1.3.
<awang>
NathanKell: I've already done that :D
<NathanKell>
oh, awesome!
<NathanKell>
less work \o/
<awang>
No idea if they're valid
<awang>
And it messes with the history since I cherry-picked instead of doing a proper merge
<awang>
Is that still alright?
<awang>
I mean, they're valid in that they compile and KSP boots/appears to work
<NathanKell>
I'm not fussed :]
<awang>
idk if I introduced an accidental bug
<blowfish>
awang: if it can be merged in a PR it's probably OK
<awang>
Merges not working right was annoying, since I had to compare commits to make sure I wasn't missing anything :(
<awang>
NathanKell: Only thing is that I ported the newCryo branch instead of nextRP0
<awang>
Is that still OK?
<NathanKell>
yep that's fine
<NathanKell>
I don't know what progress Starwaster has made on that
<awang>
I ported the KCT changes to 1.3.0 too
<awang>
But that's not under KSP-RO, so...
<NathanKell>
Ah nice!
<awang>
NathanKell: Also, maybe some kind of bug with proc avionics?
<NathanKell>
Ah. Right yeah probably rsparkyc is still busy?
<awang>
That I don't know
<awang>
PR sent!
<NathanKell>
Woot!
<awang>
KCT changes have been merged
<awang>
NathanKell: Is there a way to get some kind of breakdown as to how much of the rollout costs come from what variable?
<awang>
Also, rollout costs appear to be inconsistent between the VAB and space center
Raidernick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Raidernick has joined #RO
<lamont>
interesting NK returns
<NathanKell>
awang: Sorry, missed.
<NathanKell>
I don't believe there's a way to get a breakdown.
<NathanKell>
As for consistency, I believe it's because the VAB uses the wrong pad level, but I'm not certain
<awang>
At least as far as I remember, the cost quoted in the VAB didn't match the cost for any of the three pads I had, so if it's using the wrong pad level, it isn't picking one of the pads the player actually has
<NathanKell>
I think it's using max level
<NathanKell>
try cheating yourself a max level pad and comparing
<NathanKell>
lamont: Heya!
<lamont>
o/
<lamont>
i’ve also been taking a bit of a KSP vacation
<NathanKell>
Yeah, the team was all here until a few weeks ago, and then I took a week and a half off from everything to see my parents
<NathanKell>
(they were here + it was crunch)
<NathanKell>
I mean it still is crunchy, but lighter.
<blowfish>
makes me wonder what Valve is up to these days...
<blowfish>
I guess we'll fine out soon enough
<NathanKell>
I certainly hope you will! :)
<lamont>
i just got fried on too much calculus of variations and needed a break because KSP was burning me out…
<NathanKell>
Us guys aren't working on Artifact though, in case you were wondering.
<NathanKell>
That at least has been announced
<lamont>
coincidentally though i started pinging a friend at Blue Origin about who he knows that does GNC and he forwarded me to an UFL professor who i fired off a few questions to, hoping that he responds...
<NathanKell>
awesome!
<awang>
NathanKell: I'll try, once I get this accursed lunar flyby/impact/orbit thing working
<NathanKell>
the KSP resource MonoPropellant I mean
<NathanKell>
soundnfury: I'd expect to overheat if I tried that, not enough drag and wing
<soundnfury>
NathanKell: body is mostly empty tankage
<NathanKell>
ah yah
<soundnfury>
and also it's stable at about 40° AoA, which helps :)
<awang>
NathanKell: :( Any idea how hard it would be to have MJ support RF RCS?
<NathanKell>
Don't know offhand
<NathanKell>
I know it's hard enough that sarbian demurrs :P
<NathanKell>
sorry, gotta nomz, o/
NathanKell is now known as NathanKell|AFK
<NathanKell|AFK>
soundnfury: That explains it yes
<Qboid>
NathanKell|AFK: soundnfury left a message for you in #RO [17.09.2017 20:29:55]: "wow, is a mercury-atlas really supposed to cost nearly 200k to roll out‽ yikes."
<soundnfury>
^ was before I discovered the pod was insanely expensive
<NathanKell|AFK>
it's due to the pod not having the mult reset in the kct preset
<NathanKell|AFK>
like the mk1 pod has
<NathanKell|AFK>
all the other things besides mk1pod need that set
<NathanKell|AFK>
ok, realz afk
<soundnfury>
yeah I know, I later just copied the mk1pod's line for the mercury ;)
<soundnfury>
btw one of the quirks of my spaceplane is that there's a portion of the re-entry — from maybe 5km/s down to 2.5km/s — in which roll control is effectively inverted
<soundnfury>
because of weird roll/yaw/roll couplings
Rockwell has joined #RO
<soundnfury>
took me a while to learn how to fly it ;)
<Rockwell>
What engine would you recommend for a Mars ascent vehicle?
<awang>
Rockwell: Isn't Mars's atmosphere thin enough that a vacuum engine would probably work fine?
<awang>
...I think my KSP install may have a memory leak
<awang>
It's currently eating up 25GB of RAM
<awang>
It started closer to 12
<Rockwell>
Yeah, I've been dabbling with Super Draco's for ascent and descent so far, good thrust to weight, multiple restarts, compact, storable fuel, but not the best Isp
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<blowfish>
you probably want something pump-fed
ferram4 has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<Rockwell>
to save on mass from having to use pressurized tanks?
Technicalfool_ is now known as TechnicallyAsleep
<blowfish>
Rockwell: yes - better mass fraction, better Isp
<Rockwell>
Ok, so I just checked out the LR-91 (Titan upper stage engine; aerozine) and the RD-0210 (Proton upper stage engine; UDMH) and the pump fed engines are giving me much better performance, gaining almost 2000 m/s delta-v plus slightly better thrust compared to the super draco cluster with the same tank volume. The only problem is they have just 1 ignition
<Rockwell>
I guess I could make due with 1 ignition, but is there anything similar with multiple ignitions I'm overlooking?
<Rockwell>
Is LOx boil off too severe for use on a Mars mission? There's some kerlox engines with 4-5 ignitions that would be suitable
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has joined #RO
<awang>
I think I remember reading somewhere that LOX is a heck of a lot better than LH2 in terms of boiloff
<awang>
Lasting for a few weeks (or months? don't remember) compared to LH2's hours or days
<awang>
But I doubt it's a good idea for a multi-month Mars mission
<awang>
Unless you got active cooling and/or lots of insulation
<awang>
Also, I don't get RemoteTech
<awang>
I have a 4Mm antenna on my probe
<awang>
Altitude ~600Mm
<awang>
At least according to the RT formula, I should still have connection to Earth through the DSN antennae
<awang>
But I don't
<awang>
What gives?
<awang>
Oh wait
<awang>
Forgot about the 100x omni range part
<awang>
Oops
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
ferram4 has joined #RO
awang has quit [Read error: -0x1: UNKNOWN ERROR CODE (0001)]
awang has joined #RO
<awang>
Woah, since when did KSP have a part overhauls thing?
<awang>
By Porkjet
<awang>
Has that been integrated?
Moistmelon has joined #RO
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
Moistmelon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Moistmelon has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
Moistmelon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
schnobs has joined #RO
<taniwha>
awang: the whole reason porkjet's overhaul is available is because it was NOT integrated
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Majiir has quit [Quit: CUT THE HARDLINES!!]
Snoozee has joined #RO
Snoozee is now known as Majiir
Maxsimal|Work has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
<Probus>
That's awesome awang, taniwha. Makes me sad though.
<taniwha>
Probus: did you see the code link I pasted last night?
<Probus>
No
<Probus>
Ha! I just noticed one of the mods adds "Thanking LinuxGuruGamer" to the opening screen comments. That is hilarious but true.
<taniwha>
right now, it's part of my AdvancedInput mod which, unfortunately, is linux-only for now :(
<taniwha>
(otherwise I'd announce the thing properly)
<taniwha>
(just need a windows person that can do a bit of C/C++ and C# coding to get the joystick support done for windows)
<Probus>
Ask LinuxGuruGamer. (snigger)
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<taniwha>
wow, using "Aim Camera" makes selecting docking ports much easier
awang has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
Wrecker has joined #RO
<Wrecker>
Has anyone had issues with AmpYear or XScience? I just installed both onto my RO/RSS game and when I loaded in it appears to have deleted all of my probe cores
TonyC has joined #RO
TonyC1 has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
Hohman has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.93 [Firefox 56.0.1/20171002220106]]
Senshi has joined #RO
Asymptote has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
Maxsimal|Work has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
Rokker has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
* xShadowx
lights taniwha on fire for making a linux only mod
<xShadowx>
taniwha: oh next need antilock brakes :P
<xShadowx>
if too much braking and tumble starting, auto detect and brake less?
awang has joined #RO
awang_ has joined #RO
awang has quit [Killed (NickServ (GHOST command used by awang_))]
awang_ has quit [Client Quit]
awang has joined #RO
TonyC1 has joined #RO
TonyC has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
Senshi has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
Senshi has joined #RO
<awang>
taniwha: I mean, Porkjet's part overhaul was available back for 1.2.something, so I wasn't sure whether something had changed since then
<awang>
In any case, has Squad indicated whether the overhaul was going to be integrated sooner rather than later?
Maxsimal has joined #RO
<lamont>
Wrecker: I seem to recall AmpYear issues being mentioned, although I haven’t used it myself
<lamont>
Probus: “Cloning LinuxGuruGamer” would be funny, or something about a “LinuxGuruGamer cloning accident”
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
egg|zzz|egg is now known as egg|nomz|egg
wb99999999 has joined #RO
Daz has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Daz has joined #RO
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
blowfish has joined #RO
Maxsimal has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
Rokker has joined #RO
schnobs has joined #RO
Wetmelon has joined #RO
<awang>
Are real-life RCS engines throttleable?
<schnobs>
usually not. At least not directly.
<schnobs>
But IIRC they can be fired in short pulses...
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
Makes sense
<awang>
No good way of modeling that in-game, though, right?
<schnobs>
Between put-put-put and pfrrrrrt you should have an effect that is pretty similar to a throttle.
<awang>
lol
<awang>
Love the sound effects :D
<schnobs>
lacking the vocabulary to say it better.
<schnobs>
just btw, any MM heroes around?
<awang>
Not me, unfortunately :(
<awang>
Is MJ's RCS balancer still broken?
<awang>
And if so, is there anything that provides balanced RCS?
<blowfish>
schnobs: after wrangling with the code for a couple of months I think I've gotten a decent understanding of it
<blowfish>
awang: yes, arrange it symmetrically around the CoM :trollface:
<schnobs>
I hope that my problem is a case of simple oversight / stupidity.
<schnobs>
I'm trying to rescale a part (make it shortwer while maintaing girth) and it doesn't quite work.
<blowfish>
it probably uses a MODEL{} node rather than mesh = xxx.mu
<blowfish>
which means that you haven't removed the original model, you've just added a new one
<blowfish>
but then if it already uses a MODEL node then there's not need to create a new one, just set the scale
<blowfish>
(also, a great way to diagnose problems like this is to look at ModuleManager.ConfigCache and find that particular part)
<awang>
blowfish: Gee, I wish :(
<schnobs>
The latter was in vain. I wasn't aware of the model-mesh thing.
<awang>
I could have sworn that once upon a time RCS automatically throttled so that you don't get weird torques/translation
<awang>
But that doesn't appear to be the case any more
<blowfish>
schnobs: ah, I guess that's relevant
<blowfish>
both are valid ways of specifying a model
<schnobs>
So in this case it would be enough to do @MODEL{%scale} ?
<blowfish>
yes
<schnobs>
...restarting ksp...
<schnobs>
wohoo! It works!
<schnobs>
Thanks awang!
<schnobs>
oooops
<schnobs>
blowfish. I meant to thank you.
<blowfish>
heh NP!
<blowfish>
lots of nicks with all lowercase letters here
<awang>
schnobs: :(
<borntosleep>
awang check out apollo rcs modes to get a neat detailed answer to RCS throttle, PWM is the current method, chop on and off at variable rates at a frequency
egg|nomz|egg is now known as egg|zzz|egg
<schnobs>
not being able to tell people apart is a major faux pas. And/or a sign of sleep deprivation.
<schnobs>
Anyway, I've been sitting on that issue for two weeks now -- thanks for pointing out my mistake.
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
<awang>
borntosleep: That's interesting!
<awang>
Rabbit hole ahoyyyyy
<awang>
Just gotta get that into KSP now
<awang>
Although MJ gets a pretty good approximation by hammering opposing RCS on/off
<awang>
Albeit at the cost of ALL your fuel
<borntosleep>
lol yes, MJ needs some easier to tune PID loop control
<schnobs>
the old "use stock SAS" button has gone, sadly.
<schnobs>
used to be a quick way to get to another PID preset -- between MJ and stock SAS, I could control nearly any vessel in any situation.
<ProjectThoth>
awang/borntosleep Re-link?
<awang>
ProjectThoth: idk if it's what borntosleep had in mind, but I found this
<awang>
That must be interesting to listen to from inside the craft
<soundnfury>
you have to make sure your pulse frequency doesn't match any structural resonance modes of your spacecraft
<soundnfury>
which varies as your tanks empty ;)
<awang>
Now we need a mod that can change RCS sounds to correspond to the frequency for a particular throttle
<borntosleep>
50% duty cycle would rattle the ship at 25hz, probably get your teeth grinding :P
<schnobs>
quote:
<schnobs>
When the engine shut off in short pulse duty cycle in that kind of a radiative environment, the oxidizer entered the manifold first because it had gotten a very high vapor pressure relative to the fuel, and it went to the closest cold spot, which was at the chamber wall, and the fuel would come dribbling out.
<schnobs>
<schnobs>
It would freeze right on top of the oxidizer. We would build multiple layers of fuel oxidizer, and then, we would get a run long enough up to really do something. We’d get a really exciting event. I deemed it “pre-unplanned disassembly” at the time.
<ProjectThoth>
What's the purpose of a different duty cycle?
<borntosleep>
throttle
blowfish has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<ProjectThoth>
Throttle?
<schnobs>
Useful if you want to get attitude adjustment down to a hair.
<schnobs>
Also if you want to abuse the engine for a lander.
<awang>
Or balanced attitude adjustments
<awang>
i.e. rotate without translation
<awang>
Or vice-versa
<awang>
>:(
<schnobs>
oh! yes, that too.
<ProjectThoth>
Ohhh.
<awang>
long-duration ballistic transfers really don't go well if you don't have balanced RCS to fine-tune adjustments
<schnobs>
long-duration ballistic transfers?
<schnobs>
(example please)
<awang>
Using Principia
<awang>
Single TLI burn out past lunar orbit into interplanetary space
<awang>
Lots of magic later, end up in a temporary lunar orbit that is pretty easy (and cheap!) to make into a real orbit
<awang>
I might be a little sore about RCS balancing no longer being a thing
<awang>
Might
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: GRAIL!
<egg|zzz|egg>
hiten!
<egg|zzz|egg>
ask UmbralRaptor for more!
<UmbralRaptor>
ping
blowfish has joined #RO
<schnobs>
One thing I didn't like about principia was the 100% accurate prediction.
<UmbralRaptor>
Genesis!
<schnobs>
In the sixties, they sent off a probe in about the right direction and planned for a 50m7s midcourse correction.
<UmbralRaptor>
ISEE-3?
<UmbralRaptor>
Also, Galileo and Cassini did interesting things with moon flybys?
<schnobs>
No need to do that with principia -- even if you're positively slipshod with your transfer, the correction needs to be just a few m/s.
<schnobs>
that is, within the capacities of cold-gas thrusters.
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: well, feel free to give us a design doc for maintaining a prediction ensemble with uncertain initial states,
<schnobs>
The proper thing to do would probably be inaccurate directions. Early controllers being off by half a degree or somesuch.
Asymptote has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: then that's not principia's job, it's mechjeb's
<egg|zzz|egg>
complain to the right people :-p
<schnobs>
So you get your perfect prediction, but can't execute it perfectly no matter how well-balanced your vessel is.
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: also you can't in practice execute things very well in RSS already, RCS only goes so fine
<egg|zzz|egg>
(also 50 m/s sounds big for a translunar TCM, Apollo 8's corrections seem to be < 10 m/s)
<schnobs>
50m/s was mars or venus, not the moon.
<UmbralRaptor>
ensemble… uncertainty…
<UmbralRaptor>
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: but like in practice if you do use RSS+principia that's what you end up doing, burn + TCM
* UmbralRaptor
takes a Feynman path integral of egg|zzz|egg
<schnobs>
And even that number was pulled out of my nose. From fuel supply and ISP, I think the Mariners (either) had a capacity of slightly more than 100m/s. I don't know how much they actually needed.
<egg|zzz|egg>
I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make though; the pattern of burning and then doing a TCM (or more) is what you end up doing if you use RSS, as a natural consequence of non-throttleable engines etc.; this applies with or without principia
<egg|zzz|egg>
!wpn UmbralRaptor
* Qboid
gives UmbralRaptor an involutory classmethod
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
blowfish has joined #RO
<UmbralRaptor>
… classmethod?
<awang>
Oh, one thing I found somewhat annoying about Principia is that MJ's "point prograde" doesn't seem to work
<awang>
Either that or it was so bad with RCS that it ended up pointing in some arbitrary direction
<awang>
But that's not Principia's fault
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: yeah, that's kind of unavoidable
<awang>
Other mods and not taking into account a more general notion of reference frame
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: sometimes the stock point prograde will work but even that is brittle
<egg|zzz|egg>
in any case we certainly can't override mj's stuff, if only for licensing reasons
<awang>
Licensing reasons?
<egg|zzz|egg>
(can't have any MJ or FAR bindings in our code, we're MIT and they're GPL)
<awang>
Ah
<awang>
How are you dealing with the FAR integration then?
<egg|zzz|egg>
we'd need to define some sort of common aerodynamic API above that, have FAR set things in there and us read there, same for MJ; makes communication extremely tricky
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: we're not?
<awang>
I thought you're doing something about managing vessels in-atmosphere?
<schnobs>
egg|zzz|egg: mostly it's a gameplay issue. knowing with high precision where you'll end up doesn't feel right when you're sending your first probes.
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: when ferram4 tears down this line, he's just going to set forces the stock way, which serves as a common API
<schnobs>
But if you want technicalities... I couldn't play RSS/RO/RP-0 in a long time. Last time I did, gimbaling engines & MJ would keep the heading nicely, and shutdown was accurate down to 1/20th of a second (that is, +-1.5m/s if you were pulling 3g at the end of the burn).
<awang>
Ah
<awang>
So you're not dealing with FAR directly
<awang>
Makes sense
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: ok, so then that's the issue, unrelated to principia
<blowfish>
ugh, this is why LGPL
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: if you want inaccuracy in burn timing it's not our job
<awang>
blowfish: But it's LESSER
<awang>
Why would you want an inferior version?
<schnobs>
The later correction was quite small, well within what you can do with cold-gas RCS. no need to bring an anctual engine and hydrazine for the job.
<awang>
:P
<awang>
Does MJ actually perform Principia burns?
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: nope
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: but you can make it point to the node and then you just need to do the timing
<awang>
Right, that's what I've been doing
<egg|zzz|egg>
(still no closed-loop but that's *hard*)
<awang>
I was wondering where the auto-shutdown thing was coming from
<awang>
Hard in what way?
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: now if you want inaccurate predictions it would be somethnig we could do in theory, given infinite staffing; in practing we'll shove it on the infeasible pile
<egg|zzz|egg>
awang: even defining the problem; what do you want to optimize
<schnobs>
egg|zzz|egg: I don't actually expect it to happen.
<awang>
Er, crap
<awang>
brb
<awang>
Sorry
<egg|zzz|egg>
\o
<schnobs>
Just pointing out that while Principia may bring realistic trajectories, it also makes for pretty unrealistic gameplay. I will probably still insist on a proper mariner clone, but i do so in the knowledge that my vessel is overengineered and a lot heavier than it needs to be.
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: but I don't see how that's principia related
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: if your burn timing is too accurate, it's too accurate even without principia
<schnobs>
good point. I never wondered why I got better results in principia than IRL.
<schnobs>
(did I just say IRL?)
<egg|zzz|egg>
yeah I was confused for a moment there
<schnobs>
me too. It *is* getting late for me.
<schnobs>
Can it be that small differences at the SOI boundary have a large effect?
<egg|zzz|egg>
I don't think you can actually get the principia burns to 1/20th second btw, since MJ can't execute them (they're strictly timing-based), and we give the time in 1/10 s
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: not sure what the SOI boundary does in stock, tbh I'd classify any inaccuracies coming from that firmly in the "bug" category :-p
<schnobs>
"works as designed" <- one of the worse insults at my workplace
<egg|zzz|egg>
schnobs: also, if you want a less-accurate shutdown, you can do it strictly timing-based, without looking at map view, that way you have effectively no closed-loop guidance (whereas eyeballing it from map view gives you a sort of closed-loop-through-your-good-judgement)
<egg|zzz|egg>
(and then go back to map view to plan the TCM