# ProblemCanadarm2 SSU Scenarios

#### Nikogori

##### Donator
Donator
I have downloaded latest SSU, ISS A to Z and Canadarm2 addon. SSRMS scenarios are included in SSU. However, SSRMS is not attached to anywhere in these scenarios.

In the end, I managed to fix this. I have changed ATTACHED 0:0,Harmony to ATTACHED 1:0,Harmony and it works fine now.

Is there a problem in my SSU installation?
(I have no modding experience so far so I don't know why this works)

#### Urwumpe

##### Not funny anymore
Donator
Is there a problem in my SSU installation?
(I have no modding experience so far so I don't know why this works)

The scenarios could be a bit old and outdated. Can you post the names (including folders) of the scenarios that have this bug?

Donator
Beta Tester

#### Nikogori

##### Donator
Donator
Can you post the names (including folders) of the scenarios that have this bug?

These scn files under SSRMS folder.

#### Donamy

Donator
Beta Tester
I see you're getting ready to recieve Dragon. :thumbup:

#### Nikogori

##### Donator
Donator
I see you're getting ready to recieve Dragon. :thumbup:

Yes! It's almost there

#### Donamy

Donator
Beta Tester
This is the Hover position for dragon watching.

Code:
ARM_SET2 -57.100000 172.700000 -204.000000 157.900000 -112.700000 -7.700000 152.404531

Donator

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
No reason to not file a ticket to fix the scenarios, especially if the fix is already known.

Didn't we also have a STS-100-mission scenario folder about its delivery to the ISS? If not, we should include it into the possible features for the following version.
AFAIK, we never had a STS-100 scenario. Besides, SSRMSD is really separate from SSU.

#### Urwumpe

##### Not funny anymore
Donator
AFAIK, we never had a STS-100 scenario. Besides, SSRMSD is really separate from SSU.

No part of SSU, but deployed with SSU? Heresy!

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
No part of SSU, but deployed with SSU? Heresy!
AFAIK, it can be launched by any compatible launcher given that this is just the SSRMS itself. The Spacelab Logistics Pallet (SLP) is separate from the SSRMS. So as long as a proper SLP is supplied it can be launched by the Shuttle Fleet. It's the same with the Crawler, it doesn't care about the MLP as long it supplies a compatible attachment point.

#### Urwumpe

##### Not funny anymore
Donator
AFAIK, it can be launched by any compatible launcher given that this is just the SSRMS itself. The Spacelab Logistics Pallet (SLP) is separate from the SSRMS. So as long as a proper SLP is supplied it can be launched by the Shuttle Fleet. It's the same with the Crawler, it doesn't care about the MLP as long it supplies a compatible attachment point.

Yes, but thats not really the question. We could deploy the Crawler independent of SSU, just like we could deploy SSRMS independent. But we are still responsible for the add-on and at least need some sort of process for maintaining and deploying it (software-wise).

We could kick it further out of SSU (not releasing it together with SSU) or we could move it closer into SSU. I am more for the latter, because such kind of projects are where our development time went into and we should showcase it.

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Yes, but thats not really the question. We could deploy the Crawler independent of SSU, just like we could deploy SSRMS independent. But we are still responsible for the add-on and at least need some sort of process for maintaining and deploying it (software-wise).

We could kick it further out of SSU (not releasing it together with SSU) or we could move it closer into SSU. I am more for the latter, because such kind of projects are where our development time went into and we should showcase it.
Well, the SSRMS is already an independent add-on: http://www.orbithangar.com/search_quick.php?text=SSRMS&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

Donator

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
No problem. But if its part of the SSU development, we should also include it into the default distribution. Maybe we can also make a "no extras" distribution of SSU in the future.
The only two "extras" that SSU makes us of is OrbiterSound 4.0 and Usonian's Vandenberg AFB 2006. We already have Usonian's permission to fully include it with our release pack. OS 4.0 is fully optional, not having it won't make Orbiter CTD upon loading the SSU scenarios.

#### Urwumpe

##### Not funny anymore
Donator
The only two "extras" that SSU makes us of is OrbiterSound 4.0 and Usonian's Vandenberg AFB 2006. We already have Usonian's permission to fully include it with our release pack. OS 4.0 is fully optional, not having it won't make Orbiter CTD upon loading the SSU scenarios.

Thats no extras like I meant, those are external dependencies and if we can include the VAFB... did we also get permission for derived works?

extras like I mean: Software components, that we developed ourselves, but which are not necessary for playing SSU in a minimal functionality sense (The spine of the add-on). The crawler for example is not needed for a launch campaign, but allows to play the pre-launch-campaign scenarios.

VAFB would also not be needed for a minimal SSU, if its included, it would be an extra as well.

Last edited:

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Thats no extras like I meant, those are external dependencies and if we can include the VAFB... did we also get permission for derived works?
There's no derived works. The only thing changed is replacing Usonian's static SLC-6 (all of the SLCs are built from standard static surface base objects) with ours.

extras like I mean: Software components, that we developed ourselves, but which are not necessary for playing SSU in a minimal functionality sense (The spine of the add-on). The crawler for example is not needed for a launch campaign, but allows to play the pre-launch-campaign scenarios.
Well, I guess the SSRMS and Crawler are pretty much it, unless you have some plans for the VAB.

VAFB would also not be needed for a minimal SSU, if its included, it would be an extra as well.
Well, if we do include it in our release pack, it wouldn't be a requirement anymore. Not any more than SSU itself.

#### Urwumpe

##### Not funny anymore
Donator
There's no derived works. The only thing changed is replacing Usonian's static SLC-6 (all of the SLCs are built from standard static surface base objects) with ours.

I meant are we explicitly permitted by Usonian to also modify his add-on, when we distribute it by including it in SSU? That's important legalese. It also means we can replace parts of the add-on during development (like by your SLC-6) without betraying the intents of Usonian.

Well, I guess the SSRMS and Crawler are pretty much it, unless you have some plans for the VAB.

Well, I still have such plans, I am sure, you also have them. But we need to be realistic about our possibilities what we can develop in reasonable time between two releases.

Well, if we do include it in our release pack, it wouldn't be a requirement anymore. Not any more than SSU itself.

Yes, but then, if we wouldn't have VAFB scenarios, we wouldn't need it in a SSU release - we have some lot of options in our release strategy there. From releasing a big huge distribution to releasing a smaller one with limited scenarios.

Last edited:

#### DaveS

##### Space Shuttle Ultra Project co-developer
Donator
Beta Tester
I meant are we explicitly permitted by Usonian to also modify his add-on when we distribute it by including it in SSU. That's important legalese.
Yes, he made a big point about that his Vandenberg AFB add-on was really meant as a base pack similar to SC3, something for others to build on. That's why all the SLCs are static. Usonian himself added SLC-4E and SLC-4W for the two Titans (II and IV).

Yes, but then, if we wouldn't have VAFB scenarios, we wouldn't need it in a SSU release - we have some lot of options in our release strategy there. From releasing a big huge distribution to releasing a smaller one with limited scenarios.
Well, we could go the SC3/MS2 route, essentially making SSU an "Shuttle Development Kit" (SDK). That would tie nicely into our plans for the Mission Creator/Editor.