Board index Other Hangar talk

It's No Moon

Talk about (almost) anything, as long as it is no serious FlightGear talk and does not fit in the other subforums.
Forum rules
Please refrain from discussing politics.

It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sat Jul 20, 2019 9:02 am

I mean, even after 50 years of real Apollo-11 flight, virtual USSR could not put virtual man to virtual Moon, while attempts to do so are going trough quite exact simulation of say, banning of Korolev and Gagarin, Glushko denying of making engines for Korolev's N-1 Moon rocket, and his making of Energia/Buran project later instead; while virtual Glushko did not knew much about real Glushko most probably, not saying about others.

I should thank people participated in that experiment maybe. It was quite bitter to me as Flight Gear developer and USSR kid, hoped more technically advanced at median community would solve much easier task at least, but quite interesting to me as social psychologist, who is I am - and was before whole of that story. You know, at science negatve result is result too. In fact, it's sorta fun how people are thinking they other than others, but just the same.

Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby wlbragg » Sat Jul 20, 2019 4:13 pm

Interesting comments. It may have lost some in the translation, but I think I get your feelings about it and I empathize. Even as a kid who grew up during the space race and got to experience the pride of our achievements, I am wishing the world would continue to aggressively pursue space exploration. The current approach the world community exhibits for space exploration is lackluster at best, yet the outcomes are absolutely astonishing. I wish the pace to be much faster so I can experience all the potential achievements in my lifetime.
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
User avatar
wlbragg
 
Posts: 4909
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:31 pm
Location: Kansas (Tornado Alley), USA
Callsign: WC2020
Version: next
OS: Win10/Debain/nVGT640

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sat Jul 20, 2019 6:30 pm

It's totally not about feelings, but of way Open Source community resembles socialistic country. You probably just don't know of Vostok-1 model, discussions of that at forum and development lists at 2011, finalized with topics banning, of relation of EarthView to this, core c++/upper nasal layer discussion related to that, and how Space Shuttle model grew later using Vostok-1 ideas. And of Su-15 model with, again, topics banning, previous MiG-15 model, Gagarin, and real Su-15 with real MiG-15 - most probably.

I do not like word "aggression" at all. Basically, it's road to nowhere.

In fact, people, who do not know history, tends to reproduce that. So, You may just learn it - if not history of USSR, than just that simulator of it history at least. It's not one-to-one copy, but too much of same thing for random coincidence.

Of course, it's possible to account just that simulator case an exception, but there is not Open Source simulators in which You may fly to the Moon yet, but dozens of proprietary ones. While for some reason people forming Open Source society thinks of themselves as of more technically advanced then common people, thus should be interested in realistic spaceflight simulation more than them.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sat Jul 20, 2019 8:18 pm

and how Space Shuttle model grew later using Vostok-1 ideas


Sorry, but that's basically your fantasy.

I did not investigate the Vostok-1 code in any meaningful detail until long after starting with the Shuttle, and if you don't want to claim intellectual property for basic 2-body orbital mechanics (which in it's JSBSim incarnation I indeed copied from Vostok - and then expanded to include the rest of the orbital elements), you'll find that the design of systems etc. is actually quite different - the Shuttle high-level guidance almost exclusively relies on Nasal for starters (and its guidance actually works for a pin-point de-orbit under AP and for high-accuracy rendezvous targeting, quite unlike Vostok-1).

I am quite able to come up with a viable design from scratch. To you falls the honor of having created the first FG spacecraft - kindly don't make claims on other people's work - it doesn't become you.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby wlbragg » Sat Jul 20, 2019 8:58 pm

Wow, I guess I really did get lost in the translation!
I thought you were talking about past RL space agency and societal failures to put space exploration front and center. I had no idea you were dissing something to do with FG and content creation in any fashion. My mistake. I have no time, energy or willingness to go down that rabbit hole. I am here for fun and to create and see and experience other's creations.
Sad really, it always seems to come back to negative thoughts instead of trying to move forward and enjoy the show.
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
User avatar
wlbragg
 
Posts: 4909
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:31 pm
Location: Kansas (Tornado Alley), USA
Callsign: WC2020
Version: next
OS: Win10/Debain/nVGT640

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sat Jul 20, 2019 9:44 pm

I don't care of that simulator since long ago. It does not matter who was in which role really. Matters it did not get to the virtual Moon, as any other Open Source simulator, and roles was quite similar as of

Korolev - who made first manned spaceflight able, but died when his N-1 Moon manned spaceflight project was put under serious question;
Gagarin - who made first spaceflight, but then died at quite strange circumstances, just at moment when it became clear what USSR would not be at Moon first;
and Glushko - who denied to make engine for Korolev's Moon rocket, which put it under serious question lately, but made his own Buran shuttle project later instead. And then, of course, died, at moment of whole USSR collapse, when it became clear what his thing will get same fate as Korolev's Moon rocket finally - it seems that part did't came near at simulation yet.

And I am quite sure what real reason of this is similarity of Open Source as idea and socialism as idea - it goes from same basic point of common property, so produces virtual Stalin just as is.

Try to look beyond Yourself and Your stuff, and You'll get the idea. You are not original with Your stuff really - nor stuff, nor You. It's not about me, nor You, nor anyone else; it's simulation, sketch - both or real things and real relations.

I knew it from beginning, just hoped with modern people from other countries than Russia it would go some better way, proving some bigger and better USSR would make it really. But it did not - instead, I got as close experience of what Korolev and Gagarin really felt but did not told as someone could get without real tragedy. Basically, I do know why USSR did not make it really, with proofs, and You are one of these.

As of fun - well, most funny part goes when someone going someone else's path just don't even wanting to know that other guy.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sun Jul 21, 2019 5:22 am

And I am quite sure what real reason of this is similarity of Open Source as idea and socialism as idea - it goes from same basic point of common property, so produces virtual Stalin just as is.


The simple explanation for FG not simulating a flight to the moon is that it's a flight simulator in the first place, not a space simulator, that the number of people who are interested in spaceflight is far lower than the number of people staying in the atmosphere and that pretty much nobody except you is even remotely interested in going to the moon.

We don't have a simulation of Kon-Tiki either - or of the first transcontinental railway - FG is capable of it, but nobody is interested in doing it.

In other words - nobody bothered to participate in your experiment or accept your stated goals as his own. Your failure to see that this community doesn't have to agree with your interests is sad really -not the lack of a moon landing.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:09 am

As of that theoretically open aircraft simulator, fact is it can't evolve into spacecraft simulator, with a lot of people who would want that - I did not seen them participating at my Vostok-1 much, but seen some of them at other spacecraft project. While really, de-facto open simulator, could.

As of other open spacecraft simulators - these don't exists, while a lot of proprietary spacecraft simulators do.

Matter is Open Source as whole is not at level of human relations first, organizational second, technical third, to make Moon flight. How it goes that way - I do know by own experience, and some of You do. Highest level, achieved by Open Source, is exactly same, as was achieved by USSR with its Buran project; relations, went with this, is basically same which was; for example, socialistic country totally denied what N-1 even was existed in any way - until that country disintegration, which went when absence of evolution made difference between both median citizen level of life and common achievements with other countries obvious.

So, that simulator is nice model of how USSR did't do that.
Last edited by vitos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:23 am

And I am quite sure what real reason of this is similarity of Open Source as idea and socialism as idea - it goes from same basic point of common property, so produces virtual Stalin just as is.


One hardly knows where to start, there's no much wrong here...

OpenSource or GPL is not public domain - which would be 'common property'. My FG work is my intellectual property, no one else's, it just gets licensed for you to use in a certain way. For a number of reasons, not the least the freedom granted by the license, OpenSource also seems to be more successful than socialism as an idea, because it makes it easy to transit from a non-working solution to a working on - if you find a bit of software which doesn't do what you want, you look at the code and fix is as you need it.

Second, there is no similarity between the lack of a FG moon program and the Soviet moon program. The first never existed - it's the equivalent of the Soviet Union saying - oh, let the Americans fly, we don't really want to.

A real Soviet Moon program existed, and plenty of its components were in actual fact developed - alas, the N1 rocket never made it into space, all attempts were lost - and without a carrier, of course the program was doomed.

Now, we can only speculate why the N1 failed - from the information I can access, it seems the program was rushed, underfunded and in fact concepts from different designers were shotgun-married - which is prone to create issues.

Nothing of this actually can happen in the FG environment - since there's no funding, development of anything can't be underfunded, since there's no deadlines there's no rush, and since there's no central authority telling people what to work on, there's no shotgun marriage of different designs - people as a rule work on what they like and see important and as a result are motivated.

Which in fact is your problem in a nutshell - there's no central authority committing FG to a Moon program - and so people just don't do it. Which, again, is very different from how the Soviet Moon program worked, because there were multiple design bureaus committed to Moon flights, they just could not agree upon a common design, hence the shotgun marriage.

It's not that Glushko wasn't interested in Moon flights - he just had a very different Moon rocket in mind and didn't want to work for Korolev's rocket.

So of course when you ignore basically all the quirks of history and compare a never-planned with a not functional Moon program AND cling to the idea that people working on a FG Space Shuttle somehow took resources away that 'rightfully' should have 'belonged' to your Moon project AND throw away the meaning of 'common property' - then you can come up with your weird parallels.

But that takes a lot of fact doctoring.

Well - end of history and politics lesson 8)
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:25 am

fact is it can't evolve into spacecraft simulator, with a lot of people who would want that - I did not seen them participating at my Vostok-1 much, but seen some of them at other spacecraft project


*shrugs* There's a really simple explanation for that one - it's quite impossible to collaborate with you since you're unable to compromise in any way - it's your way or nothing, so naturally people move to other projects.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:28 am

Facts are Open Source is not at virtual Moon, while proprietary code is; USSR was't at Moon, while USA was. Both things could, of course, occur without me, if I am wrong personally - but these did't. To someone with brains is a key; for someone without - not.
Last edited by vitos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:36 am

Actually the full Apollo Guidance code is OpenSource (in public domain even).

To those who know the facts, the key looks a tad different. 8)
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:38 am

I've seen real N-1 Moon lander at museum, and even Zonds capsules, really returned from circumlunar trajectory, technically able to fly people - it does not mean some man landed at Moon or bypassed it with similar ones.

In fact, what these flew without people and never achieved manned flight means what by some reason socialism could not allow someone to do that. And I am objective enough to use some quasi open society to simulate this.

You can't blame me - without me there would not be Earth orbit at that simulator at all most probably. From my side I made all I could to make Moon flight, at least at simulation; it just could not occur with socialism. If it could, then it would without me already; and, probably, without that simulator.

If real plane never flew, but crashed all the time, then if You would try to make realistic model of it, then honest model should crash too - and it will. Same with social relations modelled by forums, e-mails, etc - does not matter what some participants of these says, as similar things said people who them impersonating unwillingly and unknowingly. Could You get it?
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: It's No Moon

Postby Thorsten » Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:44 am

You can't blame me - without me there would not be Earth orbit at that simulator at all most probably.


I don't think anyone is, not is anyone trying to down-play your contribution (though you tend to exaggerate it - JSBSim standalone already orbital simulations going - there's even benchmark testing done against NASA code...)

From my side I made all I could to make Moon flight, at least at simulation; it just could not occur with socialism


I was about to end this conversation, but actually this is too interesting to pass up.

You continue to equate OpenSource with socialism. If you do, your perspective makes sense - you've demonstrated a concept, outlined a five year plan with a Moon ship - and now the worker collective vexingly has failed to deliver.

The problem is - OpenSource is about as far from socialism as it gets - it's a free market of ideas, with knowledge and working time as currency. So in fact FG is not a socialist paradise and you're not the party leader providing the vision and we're not the collective of workers - you're just one dude who has an idea, and that idea has to compete with lots of other ideas for the resources, and my project and my idea really is my project and my idea and not common property.

For examples of competition, just look at OpenOffice and LibreOffice - someone has a new idea that's incompatible with how things are run, makes a fork and creates his own thing - the market sorts out which one survives, users drifted more to the one than the other. There's KDE and Gnome, both providing the same functionality with a different idea in mind - there's a market share for both.

To be realized, an idea in this market needs to be convincing so that it attracts enough knowledge and working time to become viable - then it gets done. It helps if the 'funding' is partially secure - if you can convince others you know how to do something and you're investing time yourself, they're more likely to help.

So while you saw yourself in the position of the leader of the socialist party when announcing your space plans, you completely ignored that you're doing it to this free market of ideas - which decided that your idea is not worth the trouble and moved on quickly. But in a market, you would have to constantly advertize your idea and convince people of it, build relationships to that people see mutual benefit, exchange your knowledge against someone else's, collaborate,...

In other words, you have to accept that there's a free market in the first place, that you idea doesn't simply get done because you're the leader or you like it best.

So it would seem that failure to understand what socialism is and what it is not really is at the heart of your issues. Which is a bit ironic really....
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: It's No Moon

Postby vitos » Sun Jul 21, 2019 7:53 am

Most part of socialism - is what tools of production are at common property.

Most part of Open Source - is that code is free, thus could pass by any person.

But if that person put something into code really - efforts, time, money, name it - then person is not satisfied with such perspective, and starts trying to find a way to make code to become non-alienable, thus quasi-opened - not documented, including hidden tricks, etc.

No objectively serious thing could be made by sole man, there is society making it always - someone starts to try to control society, by "divide and rule" principle, and finally it comes to state quite similar of USSR: formally free, but with censorship and secrecy at any valuable point, double-thinking and double-meaning, KGB analogues, and so on, so on.

It's not productive state, You can't get to the Moon with it totally - which is clearly proved by fact whole Open Source did not produced any real spaceflight simulator yet.
Last edited by vitos on Sun Jul 21, 2019 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Next

Return to Hangar talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest