SSU Development Thread (2.0 to 3.0)

[Donamy]

I have the mesh 90% updated. I need a list and names, of the parts for the animation order. Also, need to make the model more efficiant, by removing unseen faces, bad vertices and merging some parts. I also made the startrackers seperate from the fuselage mesh, to get rid of the distortion on the nose, but the transparencies for the windows, have to be placed in between the fuselage and trackers. So the transparencies can't be listed at the end of the file. I seem to remember that the animation updater, or what ever it's called, places all transparencies at the end?

 

[SiameseCat]

Both the Release and Debug configurations work for me (also using VS 2013).

 

[Urwumpe]

Both the Release and Debug configurations work for me (also using VS 2013).

Which project files do you use? I had some being from 2010 and some being 2013 after getting a vanilla checkout

 

[GLS]

This might be the wrong time to point this out, but the number 13 doesn't really work in spaceflight

 

[SiameseCat]

Which project files do you use? I had some being from 2010 and some being 2013 after getting a vanilla checkout

I'm using the 2013 files. They should be identical to the 2010 files, except for some settings changes needed to compile on VS 2013.

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm using the 2013 files. They should be identical to the 2010 files, except for some settings changes needed to compile on VS 2013.

I will try again in some hour later... right now I install update 3 for Visual Studio 2013... :facepalm:

---------- Post added at 08:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:18 PM ----------

Hmm, last time I checked it was all working.... give me 1 or 2h to get home and I'll check that

Checked again - the "Atlantis in Orbit" scenario seems to crash after a few minutes, regardless what you do.

Missing mesh ".\Meshes\VandenbergAFB\VAFBtaxiway.msh"

Is there a reference VAFB add-on that must be installed? And if it must be installed... why?

 

[DaveS]

I will try again in some hour later... right now I install update 3 for Visual Studio 2013... :facepalm:

---------- Post added at 08:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:18 PM ----------



Checked again - the "Atlantis in Orbit" scenario seems to crash after a few minutes, regardless what you do.

Missing mesh ".\Meshes\VandenbergAFB\VAFBtaxiway.msh"

Is there a reference VAFB add-on that must be installed? And if it must be installed... why?

This is the Vandenberg AFB add-on in question: [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2380"]VandenbergAFB - 2006[/ame]

If I remember correctly, we do have have Usonian's permisssion to include it in the SSU main package, so I guess we should make it a permanent part of the SSU sources in SVN. And it is required due to the VAFB missions from SLC-6.

And yes, it is mentioned the readme:

Installation:
1. Install Orbiter and other required addons:
OrbiterSound 4.0 (http://orbiter.dansteph.com/index.php?disp=d)
KSC hires tiles (http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5583)
Vandenberg AFB (http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2380)
Spacecraft3 (http://users.swing.be/vinka/) (optional; required only for STS-61G scenarios)

 

[GLS]

Checked again - the "Atlantis in Orbit" scenario seems to crash after a few minutes, regardless what you do.

Missing mesh ".\Meshes\VandenbergAFB\VAFBtaxiway.msh"

Is there a reference VAFB add-on that must be installed? And if it must be installed... why?

Seems to be vandenberg related as the orbit is heading that way.

 

[STS]

[ame="http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2380"]VandenbergAFB - 2006[/ame]

This one I think.

It is not in the documentation or description for SSU 2.0.

Edit: OK, DaveS answered 3 minutes before me...

 

[DaveS]

VandenbergAFB - 2006

This one I think.

It is not in the documentation or description for SSU 2.0.

It is in the readme file, named SSU Readme First.txt. I just downloaded the SSU V2.0 package to confirm this.

 

[Urwumpe]

This is the Vandenberg AFB add-on in question: VandenbergAFB - 2006

If I remember correctly, we do have have Usonian's permisssion to include it in the SSU main package, so I guess we should make it a permanent part of the SSU sources in SVN. And it is required due to the VAFB missions from SLC-6.

And yes, it is mentioned the readme:

OK, we should keep it as external dependency until the next version of Orbiter is out. Then it might be pretty obsolete and would need to be redone anyway. So, no urgency to include it into SSUs distribution now... or does anybody want to do a special "2010" distribution of SSU then?

Must have missed it some time earlier.

 

[SiameseCat]

This is the Vandenberg AFB add-on in question: VandenbergAFB - 2006

If I remember correctly, we do have have Usonian's permisssion to include it in the SSU main package, so I guess we should make it a permanent part of the SSU sources in SVN. And it is required due to the VAFB missions from SLC-6.

And yes, it is mentioned the readme:

I'd prefer to restrict the SSU sources to stuff that we're developing, and leave external addons to be downloaded separately. As long as we make it clear that external addons are required, I'm not sure there's a real benefit to including them as part of SSU.

---------- Post added at 02:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 PM ----------

It is in the readme file, named SSU Readme First.txt. I just downloaded the SSU V2.0 package to confirm this.

We only have a few external dependencies, so it won't hurt to mention VAFB in the Orbithangar description for the next release.

 

[Urwumpe]

I'd prefer to restrict the SSU sources to stuff that we're developing, and leave external addons to be downloaded separately. As long as we make it clear that external addons are required, I'm not sure there's a real benefit to including them as part of SSU.

Same here. still, that it is capable of crashing our test scenarios is more than annoying. We should really make sure that we only include those external dependencies, that we can't do ourself better, because our own curses when creating a test installation will be the curses of the players who want to use it.

 

[DaveS]

Same here. still, that it is capable of crashing our test scenarios is more than annoying. We should really make sure that we only include those external dependencies, that we can't do ourself better, because our own curses when creating a test installation will be the curses of the players who want to use it.

That's just how Orbiter works. It loads whatever the scenario tells it load. In this case, the SSU bases folder includes VAFB. heck it even includes Ellington Field!

 

[Urwumpe]

That's just how Orbiter works. It loads whatever the scenario tells it load. In this case, the SSU bases folder includes VAFB. heck it even includes Ellington Field!

Yes, but Ellington Field does not crash the scenarios. The problem is that our bases folder assumes that VAFB2006 is installed, which it isn't.

How minimal can we make a SSU repository? It would be good if we could reduce SSU to the minimum necessary for the next version of Orbiter and then decide again what we really need there.

We should maybe really have some sort of an installation utility... and if it is just doing some smoke tests verifying that the necessary add-ons have been installed.

 

[DaveS]

Yes, but Ellington Field does not crash the scenarios. The problem is that our bases folder assumes that VAFB2006 is installed, which it isn't.

That's because everything that EFD requires are already included. It's not external to SSU, you get it for free so to say.

How minimal can we make a SSU repository? It would be good if we could reduce SSU to the minimum necessary for the next version of Orbiter and then decide again what we really need there.

I think we'll deal with things like this then. I think more than just the bases will have to be changed, I think we're going to need some deep core changes as well.

 

[Urwumpe]

That's because everything that EFD requires are already included. It's not external to SSU, you get it for free so to say.


I think we'll deal with things like this then. I think more than just the bases will have to be changed, I think we're going to need some deep core changes as well.

Well, as it seems, we will get wind (shouldn't be a big deal for us), a new landing gear model, a unified attachment/docking system, terrain and higher resolution planet textures.

Quite a few changes and I don't want to be messing with too much historic growth in SSU then = Its never bad to ask the question now, if something is really necessary.

If something is essential, we should maybe ask the question if we can make it part of SSU.

If we can't make it part of SSU in a year, we should keep it external.

 

[Donamy]

How about landing gear shock compression ?

 

[Urwumpe]

How about landing gear shock compression ?

Thats the new landing gear model that I mean - it is a major difference to what we can expect right now.

 

[GLS]

I'm sorry to keep bringing this up, but could the vertical tail be made such that this won't be hard to implement in the future? (from the mesh point of view)
Something like making the area around the base of the tail a separate part, and then we can choose which one to use.