Also, when starting at sah KTTS is he arpt, and using -entry version, the computer cant find a deorbit solution...
On reentry at an average of 42 AOA, never below 40, I get thermal protection failure at about 2000F and I pitch up to like 40 degrees per second and spin out of control, what did I do wrong this time?
How difficult would it be to model the ISS? Something like a space-aircraft carrier scenario.
Thorsten wrote in Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:35 am:That about is the math you have to encode, and then you have to get it numerically stable.
(You have two objects moving with 8 km/s alongside such that their relative motion is close to zero, but our coordinate system is not the inertial system in which they're moving but co-rotates with Earth since our infrastructure is for a flightsim where we don't need non-rotating inertial reference frames. The rotation is (dependent on latitude) a bit faster than speed of sound, so you need to get all the numbers to some precision and without numerical jitter if you aim at cm/s docking velocities).
Doing a 3d model of the ISS should be easy by comparison.
MAKG wrote:While its true that floating point precision is not infinite, IEEE double precision ought to be completely adequate for guiding an aircraft around the world. I see folks overestimating this effect on a weekly basis.
15 digits (decimal) is quite a lot. If the transformations lose significant precision, that's a fault in the transformations.
Note that I've seen loss of precision occur when using unit vector/rotation matrix and quaternion formalisms, when the normalization is not properly maintained. This is a common error, but it's fixed by enforcing unitarity at every step that might change it (this removes a systematic error and replaces it with a random one, far better).
Johan G wrote in Fri Jul 03, 2015 9:13 am:Is it possible to have the space station more stable in relation to the shuttle by adding it either as a submodel or as an animated object that is "part" of the Space Shuttle?
Just do it like a carrier scenario, with a certain speed and altitude.
In general, this is touching on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrary ... arithmetic and "bignum"
Thorsten wrote in Fri Jul 03, 2015 2:30 pm:So how's the Shuttle (which is constrained by pretty exact orbital dynamics) supposed to reach it then? The Shuttle can't even compensate a velocity error of 20 m/s in orbit - because if you add 20 m/s, you're going up into a new, higher orbit.
Whether it's done in Nasal, xml or C++ is rather irrelevant.
Well, I don't know - but I guess that most people around here (without your kind of hardware), will probably not enjoy/appreciate having to do any Nasal-based docking maneuvers at 8 km/sec given typical Nasal GC induced lag - even if you say, that variable precision is not going to be an issue (which seems in line with MAKG's comments quoted above).
Oh, so in real life, the ISS is actively changing relative position to the shuttle to help get to it?
Thorsten, when I put my plane in the reentry scenario, I expect it to be those 5000 milesbout. I dont expect it to be above the landing site.
Thorsten wrote in Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:42 pm:Usually if you start FG with --airport=XXXX, you expect to be somewhere in the vicinity of XXX, no? Surely being 5000 miles away would not count as even remotely close, and I dare say it'd be counterintuitive that if you specify and airport you're half a world away from it upon init.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests