Anyway I'm sure my ascent profile isn't the most efficient or graceful, and I couldn't nail a precise orbit if I needed to, but I can do it consistently now where before I would be a meteor every time. I've definitely learned another thing or two in the process which I can now apply to probably any launch in any craft. Thanks for the help!
Hi MetalMania
Although I'm arriving late at this thread - which maybe was a good thing because that way you were able to try for yourself some ascent strategies vs impact on performance (and, as you noted, that is a good way to learn some things) - I would like to write that there is some 'literature' out there about AresI ascent goals / trajectories. That information should be found with a good search on Constellation related pdf available at NTRS (NASA Technical Reports Server -
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/ ) although some care should be taken when reading that information, in particular because there have been several AresI design iterations which, depending of specific configuration assumptions made, do have slightly different trajectory shapes vs timing of ascent events, etc.
On yet another note would like to point to francisdrake's development thread where I have contributed with some AresI ascent notes (
http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=1043) as well have written a few notes on my clearly outdated AresI dev2007 pdf documentation ( [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2770"]NASA AresI SC - 20070107dev[/ame] ).
Only for reference, at the time I made the multistage2.dll AresI dev2007 implementation I was using different 5 seg. SRB specs than the official ones as well was assuming J-2XD, a derrated version of the J-2X (on a much lighter upper stage with ~130t of prop. load).
Since then a lot more information has been made public and I have updated (but not released, at least not yet) the performance implementation to be more similar to latest known AresI iterations (5 seg. SRB specs, full J-2X thrust spec on a heavier dry stage mass with capability to carry ~140t prop, Orion integration, LAS, etc) as well tried to take in account some additional mass related with Thrust Oscillation mitigation options and then tried to study what could be the performance impact of all those changes on AresI, this because, from some months (years) now, that there is little information about a complete and integrated data set regarding AresI numbers... And with all what is happening in the current context (Congress actions, SLS, etc) I suspect that it might take a good while to see such kind of data, if ever.
Another thing that I sometimes still brainstorm about is related with Orion integration (I mean, at external addon level): Constellation conceptual AresI-Orion flights to ISS would require an offloaded Orion SM (with half of the tanks removed) but I can't exactly implement it – not without a few workarounds – if using an Orion powered by a custom 'external' dll (if such dll does not load by default with half of the tanks load). This is why - in order to avoid some of the required workarounds to make that work - that I might include one of my own alternative Orion versions (powered by Vinka's spacecraft.dll)... Other alternative would be if there could exist an Orion dll which would only load the Command Module alone (so that the service module - either powered by generic dlls or by custom dll - or other kind of spacecraft configurations could better integrate such CM). This for AresI-Orion ISS flights, for Exploration Missions could integrate something like francisdrake's nice Orion CEV without having to worry about this kind of stuff.
In any case will share here an incomplete preview of, at least, some of the visual updates that was making for my interpretation of 'real life' AresI. If comparing with the 3D models used on dev2007 version people can see a few changes on the 5 seg. SRB as well on the upper stage thrust structure, tank size, etc, Orion integration, LAS... some material / texture work still missing on this specific (outdated) picture as well some other details missing, such as the upper stage RCS or the LO2/LH2 umbilicals, etc (my apologies for the dark shadow on the Orion adapter / SM area). As far as I'm aware, Francisdrake's CEV-Orion currently online implementation is something in-between my older 'dev2007' and the current dev2010 files on 'simcosmos' archives.
Independently of 'real life' stuff, would like to end by writing that AresI is a challenging and fun vehicle to 'fly' and study in Orbiter Simulator, in particular if starting adding mass to some components and if assuming that the upper stage engine does not meet expected performance levels. Of course that depending of changes made to some assumptions this might require, from the final user, some extra skills (or extra software input!) to optimize the ascent trajectory as much as possible...
One way to make things slightly 'easier' would be to assume an SSME thrust level on the upper stage, like what I'm assuming on NASA VSE SC alternative reality AresI configuration (but that choice comes with some prices: in the case of NASA VSE SC development archives, I'm currently baselining a dual J-2S setup with only 436s vac. ISP instead of an expendable SSME, but that is another story)
António
