Recent content by SiameseCat

I've uploaded a link to OH. It's going through review, so it might not show up for another 24 hours.

Not yet. Are there any objections if I upload the zip file (instead of linking to Sourceforge)? We had problems last time because of the file size, but the download is much smaller this time.

This Addon has been updated; please find the new version here Space Shuttle Ultra is an atttempt to create a realistic simulation of the space shuttle. Some highlights of the new version:     All MEDS displays implemented in CRTMFD     Tunnel Adapter Assembly included     Improved ODS...

Done. Thanks for the reminder; I'd totally forgotten about this until I saw this post while catching up on the SSU dev thread.

I've checked in a clone of the MECOTool util to the SSUWorkbench project. This is meant to be a proof of concept for what can be done with WPF; the MECOTool is defined as a user control, with a separate class to store the data displayed in the controls. The code for the calculations is copied...

I can try to take a look if you check the code in. In C#, I think creating a UserControl is the standard way for grouping controls together into a custom object.

I can reproduce the issue with the OMS/MPS display using the posted scenario. The WT (weight) seems much too low, and as a result the burn time is much shorter than it should be. The attitude control code is working as expected, and the shuttle is in the correct attitude when the burn starts.

The SSRMS is basically a separate addon; the main reason it's in the SSU repo is because the SSRMS code uses some stuff from libUltra, in the SSU codebase. We shouldn't be including any SSRMS stuff in the SSU release.

A default RCS PRI RATE of 2.0 deg/s is way too high. Looking at the DAP tables for STS-134 (https://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/539927main_ORB_OPS_134_F_A_1.pdf), the PRI ROT RATE is usually 0.2 deg/s, or less, with the maximum value being 0.5 deg/s.

It's 0.5 deg/sec, I think. ---------- Post added at 10:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 PM ---------- V3.0 sounds good to me.

I haven't actually tested it, but I had a quick look at the code and everything looks good.

I strongly suspect that the DAP will have issues once we start using a realistic RCS. I think we should wait until after the release to start using realistic thruster positions.

I'd prefer C# to Java, mainly so we don't have to install the JDK (and so users don't need to install the JRE). I also prefer C# to Java as a language, although I don't have particularly strong feelings there. I haven't done much GUI programming in either C# or Java, so I'm not sure if there's a...

I actually prefer Mercurial over Git for that reason; TortoiseHG is really good, better than TortoiseSVN and anything I've seen for Git. I haven't tried Git in Visual Studio, though.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd prefer Mercurial to SVN. ---------- Post added at 10:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 PM ---------- If you haven't used a DVCS (like Mercurial or Git), it works by having a local repository on your computer, as well as external repositories...